The Elementary Forms

of Relisious Life

a?

41 I
 The Elementary Forms of

PELIGIOUS JJFE
The Elementary Forms of

EMILE DÜRKHEIM
Translated and with an Introduction by
Karen E. Fields

THE
I
F R E E PRESS
NEW YORK LONDON TORONTO SYDNEY TOKYO SINGAPORE
Translation and Introduction copyright © 1995 by Karen E . Fields

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form
or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any
information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the Pub-
lisher.

The Free Press

A Division of Simon & Schuster Inc.
1230 Avenue of the Americas, New York, N.Y. 10020

Printed in the United States of America

printing number
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Dürkheim, Emile, 1858-1917.
[Formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse. English]
The elementary forms of religious life/ Emile Dürkheim;
translated and with an introduction by Karen E . Fields,
p. cm.
Translation of: Les formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse.
Includes index.
ISBN 0-02-907936-5 (hbk.).—ISBN 0-02-907937-3 (pbk.)
II. Title.
GN470.D813 1995
306.6—dc20 94-41128
CIP

This book was originally published as Les Formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse: Le système
totémique en Australie, Paris, F. Alcan, 1912.
The endpaper art in this volume is based on a map that appeared in the French edition.
 CONTENTS

Acknowledgments xiii
Abbreviations xv
Translator's I n t r o d u c t i o n : R e l i g i o n as an E m i n e n d y Social T h i n g xvii

INTRODUCTION
Subject o f the Study:
Religious Sociology and the T h e o r y o f Knowledge 1
I . • M a i n subject o f t h e b o o k : analysis o f t h e simplest k n o w n r e l i g i o n , t o
d e t e r m i n e the e l e m e n t a r y f o r m s o f r e l i g i o u s life. • W h y t h e y are easier t o
arrive at a n d e x p l a i n t h r o u g h p r i m i t i v e r e l i g i o n s . 1

I I . • Secondary subject: o r i g i n o f the f u n d a m e n t a l n o t i o n s o r categories o f

t h o u g h t . • Reasons f o r b e l i e v i n g t h e i r o r i g i n t o be r e l i g i o u s a n d conse-
q u e n t l y social. • H o w a means o f regenerating the t h e o r y o f k n o w l e d g e can
be seen f r o m this p o i n t o f v i e w . 8

B O O K ONE: PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

Chapter O n e : Definition o f Religious P h e n o m e n a
and o f R e l i g i o n 21
T h e usefulness o f a p r e l i m i n a r y d e f i n i t i o n o f r e l i g i o n ; m e t h o d t o be f o l l o w e d
i n a r r i v i n g at that d e f i n i t i o n . • W h y the usual d e f i n i t i o n s s h o u l d be e x a m i n e d
first. 21

I . • R e l i g i o n d e f i n e d b y t h e supernatural a n d the mysterious. • C r i t i c i s m .

T h e idea o f m y s t e r y was n o t present at t h e b e g i n n i n g . 22

I I . • R e l i g i o n d e f i n e d i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e idea o f G o d o r a s p i r i t u a l b e i n g .
R e l i g i o n s w i t h o u t gods. • R i t e s i n deistic religions that i m p l y n o idea o f d e -
ity. 27

I I I . • Search f o r a positive d e f i n i t i o n . • D i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n beliefs a n d rites.

D e f i n i t i o n o f beliefs. • First characteristic: b i p a r t i t e d i v i s i o n o f things i n t o
sacred a n d profane. • D i s t i n g u i s h i n g traits o f that d i v i s i o n . • D e f i n i t i o n o f
rites i n r e l a t i o n t o beliefs. • D e f i n i t i o n o f r e l i g i o n . 33

111
IV Contents

I V • Necessity o f a n o t h e r characteristic t o distinguish m a g i c f r o m r e l i g i o n . •

T h e idea o f C h u r c h . • D o i n d i v i d u a l r e l i g i o n s e x c l u d e t h e idea o f C h u r c h ?
39

Chapter T w o : T h e L e a d i n g Conceptions o f
the E l e m e n t a r y R e l i g i o n : Animism 45
Distinction between animism and naturism

I . • T h e three theses o f a n i m i s m : (1) genesis o f t h e idea o f soul; (2) f o r m a t i o n

o f the idea o f s p i r i t ; (3) t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f the c u l t o f spirits i n t o t h e c u l t o f
v
nature. 45

I I . • C r i t i c i s m o f t h e first thesis: D i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n the ideas o f soul a n d o f

d o u b l e . • D r e a m s d o n o t a c c o u n t f o r the idea o f soul. 52

I I I . • C r i t i c i s m o f t h e second thesis. D e a t h does n o t e x p l a i n the transforma-

t i o n o f the soul i n t o a s p i r i t . • T h e c u l t o f the souls o f the dead is n o t p r i m -
itive. 59

IV. • C r i t i c i s m o f t h e t h i r d thesis. T h e a n t h r o p o m o r p h i c i n s t i n c t . Spencer's

c r i t i c i s m o f i t ; reservations o n this subject. E x a m i n a t i o n o f the facts b y w h i c h
the existence o f that i n s t i n c t is said t o be p r o v e d . • D i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n the
soul a n d the spirits o f nature. R e l i g i o u s a n t h r o p o m o r p h i s m is n o t p r i m i t i v e .
61

V. • C o n c l u s i o n : A n i m i s m reduces r e l i g i o n t o n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n a system o f
hallucinations. 65

Chapter T h r e e : T h e L e a d i n g Conceptions o f the

E l e m e n t a r y R e l i g i o n (Continuation): Naturism 68
R e v i e w o f the theory 68

I . • E x p o s i t i o n o f n a t u r i s m a c c o r d i n g to M a x M u l l e r . 70

I I . • I f the object o f r e l i g i o n is t o express natural forces, t h e n h o w i t c o u l d

have s u r v i v e d is h a r d to see, f o r i t expresses t h e m mistakenly. T h e alleged dis-
t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n r e l i g i o n and m y t h o l o g y . 76

I I I . • N a t u r i s m does n o t e x p l a i n t h e d i v i s i o n o f things i n t o sacred a n d p r o -

fane. 81
Contents v

C h a p t e r F o u r : T o t e m i s m as E l e m e n t a r y R e l i g i o n :
Review of the Question. Method of Treating It 84
I . • B r i e f h i s t o r y o f the q u e s t i o n o f t o t e m i s m . 85

I I . • M e t h o d o l o g i c a l reasons f o r w h i c h the study w i l l be based m a i n l y o n

A u s t r a l i a n t o t e m i s m . • C o n c e r n i n g t h e place t o be g i v e n t o A m e r i c a n e x -
amples. 90

B O O K TWO: T H E E L E M E N T A R Y B E L I E F S
C h a p t e r O n e : T h e P r i n c i p a l T o t e m i c Beliefs:
The Totem as Name and as Emblem 99
I . • D e f i n i t i o n o f the clan. • T h e t o t e m as n a m e o f the clan. • N a t u r e o f t h e
things that serve as totems. • Ways i n w h i c h the t o t e m is acquired. • T h e
t o t e m s o f phratries a n d o f m a r r i a g e classes.

I I . • T h e t o t e m as e m b l e m . • T o t e m i c designs engraved o r sculpted o n o b -

jects, and t a t t o o e d o r p a i n t e d o n bodies.

I I I . • Sacredness o f t h e t o t e m i c e m b l e m . • T h e churingas. • T h e n u r t u n j a . •
T h e w a n i n g a . • C o n v e n t i o n a l nature o f t o t e m i c e m b l e m s .

C h a p t e r T w o : T h e P r i n c i p a l T o t e m i c Beliefs ( C o n t i n u e d ) :
The Totemic Animal and Man 127
I . • Sacredness o f the t o t e m i c animals. • P r o h i b i t i o n against eating a n d k i l l i n g
t h e m and against p i c k i n g t o t e m i c plants. • Various m i t i g a t i o n s o f those p r o -
h i b i t i o n s . • P r o h i b i t i o n s o f contact. • T h e sacredness o f t h e a n i m a l is less p r o -
n o u n c e d t h a n that o f the e m b l e m .

I I . • M a n . • H i s k i n s h i p w i t h the t o t e m i c p l a n t o r a n i m a l . • Various m y t h s e x -
p l a i n i n g that k i n s h i p . • T h e sacredness o f the m a n is m o r e apparent i n c e r t a i n
parts o f t h e b o d y : the b l o o d , the hair, etc. • H o w this q u a l i t y varies w i t h sex
and age. • T o t e m i s m is n e i t h e r a n i m a l n o r p l a n t w o r s h i p .

Chapter T h r e e : T h e P r i n c i p a l T o t e m i c Beliefs ( C o n t i n u e d ) :
The Cosmological System of Totemism and the Notion of Kind 141
I . • Classifications o f things b y clan, phratry, a n d class. 141
VI Contents

I I . • O r i g i n o f the idea o f genus: T h e first classifications o f things take t h e i r

schemes f r o m society. • Differences b e t w e e n the f e e l i n g o f resemblance and
t h e idea o f genus. • W h y that idea is o f social o r i g i n . 145

I I I . • R e l i g i o u s m e a n i n g o f these classifications: A l l things classified w i t h i n a

clan p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e nature o f the t o t e m a n d i n its sacredness. T h e c o s m o -
l o g i c a l system o f t o t e m i s m . • T o t e m i s m as t r i b a l r e l i g i o n . 149

Chapter F o u r : T h e P r i n c i p a l T o t e m i c Beliefs ( E n d ) :
The Individual Totem and the Sexual Totem 158
I . • T h e i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m as first n a m e ; its sacredness. • T h e i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m
as personal e m b l e m . • B o n d s b e t w e e n m a n and his i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m . • L i n k s
w i t h the collective t o t e m . 158

I I . • Totems o f sexual groups. • Resemblances a n d differences b e t w e e n c o l -

lective a n d i n d i v i d u a l totems. • T h e i r t r i b a l character. 166

Chapter Five: O r i g i n s o f These Beliefs

Critical Examination of the Theories 169
I . • T h e o r i e s that d e r i v e t o t e m i s m f r o m an earlier r e l i g i o n : f r o m t h e ancestor
c u l t ( W i l k e n and T y l o r ) ; f r o m the c u l t o f nature (Jevons). • C r i t i c i s m o f these
theories. 170

I I . • T h e o r i e s that derive collective t o t e m i s m f r o m i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m i s m . •

O r i g i n s ascribed b y these theories t o the i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m (Frazer, Boas, H i l l
T o u t ) • I m p r o b a b i l i t y o f these hypotheses. • A r g u m e n t s f o r the p r i o r i t y o f
the collective t o t e m . 174

I I I . • R e c e n t t h e o r y o f Frazer: c o n c e p t i o n a l a n d l o c a l t o t e m i s m . • T h e ques-
t i o n b e g g i n g o n w h i c h i t rests. • T h e religious character o f the t o t e m is d e -
n i e d . • L o c a l t o t e m i s m is n o t p r i m i t i v e . 182

IV. • T h e o r y o f L a n g : t h e t o t e m is m e r e l y a name. • D i f f i c u l t i e s i n e x p l a i n -
i n g the r e l i g i o u s character o f t o t e m i c practices f r o m this p o i n t o f v i e w . 186

V • A l l these theories e x p l a i n t o t e m i s m o n l y b y p o s t u l a t i n g earlier r e l i g i o u s

notions. 188
Contents vn

Chapter Six: O r i g i n s o f T h e s e Beliefs (Continued):

The Notion qfTotemic Principle, or Mana, and the Idea of Force 190
I . • T h e n o t i o n o f force o r t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e . • Its u b i q u i t y . • Its s i m u l t a n e -
ously physical a n d m o r a l character. 190

I I . • S i m i l a r c o n c e p t i o n s i n o t h e r l o w e r societies. • Gods i n Samoa. • W a k a n

o f the S i o u x , o r e n d a o f the I r o q u o i s , m a n a i n Melanesia. • R e l a t i o n s h i p s o f
these n o t i o n s w i t h t o t e m i s m . • A r u n k u l t a o f the A r u n t a . 193

I I I . • T h e l o g i c a l p r i o r i t y o f the n o t i o n o f i m p e r s o n a l force over the v a r i o u s

m y t h i c a l personalities. • R e c e n t theories that t e n d t o accept this p r i o r i t y . 201

IV. • T h e n o t i o n o f r e l i g i o u s force is the p r o t o t y p e o f t h e n o t i o n o f force i n

general. 205

C h a p t e r Seven: O r i g i n s o f These Beliefs (Conclusion):

Origin of the Notion of Totemic Principle, or Mana 207
I . • T h e t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e is t h e clan, b u t t h e clan t h o u g h t o f i n tangible
form. 207

I I . • G e n e r a l reasons society is capable o f arousing t h e sensation o f the sacred

and the d i v i n e . • Society as an i m p e r a t i v e m o r a l p o w e r ; the n o t i o n o f m o r a l
a u t h o r i t y . • S o c i e t y as a force that raises the i n d i v i d u a l above himself. • Facts
p r o v i n g t h a t society creates the sacred. 208

I I I . • Reasons p e c u l i a r t o t h e A u s t r a l i a n societies. • T h e t w o phases t h r o u g h

w h i c h t h e life o f these societies alternately passes: dispersal a n d c o n c e n t r a -
t i o n . • Great c o l l e c t i v e effervescence d u r i n g the p e r i o d s o f c o n c e n t r a t i o n .
Examples. • H o w the r e l i g i o u s idea is b o r n f r o m t h a t effervescence. W h y t h e
collective force was c o n c e i v e d o f i n t o t e m i c f o r m s : T h e t o t e m is the e m b l e m
o f the clan. • E x p l a n a t i o n o f the p r i n c i p a l t o t e m i c beliefs. 216

IV. • R e l i g i o n is n o t a p r o d u c t o f fear. • I t expresses s o m e t h i n g real. • Its f u n -

damental i d e a l i s m . • T h a t i d e a l i s m is a general trait o f c o l l e c t i v e mentality. •
W h y religious forces are e x t e r n a l t o t h e i r substrates. • O n t h e p r i n c i p l e the
part equals the whole. 225

V. • O r i g i n o f t h e n o t i o n o f e m b l e m : use o f emblems, a necessary c o n d i t i o n

o f collective representations. • W h y t h e clan has taken its emblems f r o m t h e
animal a n d p l a n t k i n g d o m s . 231
Vlll Contents

V I . • O n t h e t e n d e n c y o f the p r i m i t i v e t o m e r g e realms a n d classes that w e

distinguish. • O r i g i n s o f those fusions. • H o w t h e y paved t h e w a y f o r scien-
tific explanations. • T h e y d o n o t preclude the t e n d e n c y t o create distinctions
a n d oppositions. 236

Chapter Eight: T h e N o t i o n o f Soul

I . • Analysis o f the n o t i o n o f s o u l i n t h e A u s t r a l i a n societies. 242

I I . • Genesis o f t h a t n o t i o n . • T h e d o c t r i n e o f r e i n c a r n a t i o n a c c o r d i n g t o
Spencer and G i l l e n : I t i m p l i e s that t h e soul is a p o r t i o n o f t h e t o t e m i c p r i n -
ciple. • E x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e facts r e p o r t e d b y S t r e h l o w ; t h e y c o n f i r m the
t o t e m i c nature o f t h e soul. 249

I I I . • G e n e r a l i t y o f the n o t i o n o f r e i n c a r n a t i o n . • E v i d e n c e t o s u p p o r t the
o r i g i n proposed. 259

IV. • T h e antithesis b e t w e e n s o u l a n d b o d y : w h a t is o b j e c t i v e a b o u t i t . R e l a -
tionships b e t w e e n t h e i n d i v i d u a l soul a n d t h e collective soul. • T h e n o t i o n o f
soul is n o t c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y after that o f m a n a . 265

V • H y p o t h e s i s to e x p l a i n the b e l i e f i n life after death. 270

V I . • T h e idea o f soul a n d the idea o f person; i m p e r s o n a l elements o f p e r -

sonality. 272

Chapter N i n e : T h e N o t i o n o f Spirits and G o d s 276

I . • D i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n soul a n d s p i r i t . • T h e souls o f the m y t h i c a l ancestors
are spirits w i t h set f u n c t i o n s . • R e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n the ancestral s p i r i t , t h e i n -
d i v i d u a l soul, a n d t h e i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m . • E x p l a n a t i o n o f the last. • Its s o c i o -
l o g i c a l significance. 276

I I . • Spirits a n d m a g i c . 284

I I I . • C i v i l i z i n g heroes. 286

IV. • H i g h gods. • T h e i r o r i g i n . • T h e i r relationship w i t h t h e t o t e m i c system

as a w h o l e . • T h e i r t r i b a l a n d i n t e r n a t i o n a l character. 288

V. • U n i t y o f the t o t e m i c system. 298

Contents IX

B O O K III: T H E PRINCIPAL MODES

OF R I T U A L C O N D U C T
Chapter O n e : T h e Negative C u l t and Its Functions:
The Ascetic Rites 303
I . • T h e system o f p r o h i b i t i o n s • M a g i c a n d r e l i g i o u s p r o h i b i t i o n s . P r o h i b i -
tions b e t w e e n sacred things o f different k i n d s . P r o h i b i t i o n s b e t w e e n sacred
and profane. • T h e s e last are the basis o f the negative c u l t . • P r i n c i p a l types
o f these p r o h i b i t i o n s ; t h e i r r e d u c t i o n t o t w o basic types. 303

I I . • O b s e r v a n c e o f t h e p r o h i b i t i o n s m o d i f i e s the r e l i g i o u s states o f i n d i v i d u -
als. Cases i n w h i c h that efficacy is especially apparent: ascetic practices. • R e -
l i g i o u s efficacy o f p a i n . • Social f u n c t i o n o f asceticism. 313

I I I . • E x p l a n a t i o n o f t h e system o f p r o h i b i t i o n s : antagonism o f t h e sacred a n d

the profane; contagiousness o f t h e sacred. 321

IV. • Causes o f this contagiousness. • I t c a n n o t be e x p l a i n e d b y the laws o f

the association o f ideas. • I t arises because religious forces are e x t e r n a l t o t h e i r
substrates. L o g i c a l interest o f this p r o p e r t y o f the r e l i g i o u s forces. 325

Chapter T w o : T h e Positive C u l t : The Elements of the Sacrifice 330

T h e I n t i c h i u m a c e r e m o n y i n the tribes o f central Australia. • Various f o r m s
it exhibits. 330

I . • T h e A r u n t a f o r m . • T h e t w o phases. • Analysis o f the first: v i s i t i n g sacred

places, spreading sacred dust, shedding b l o o d , etc., t o b r i n g a b o u t t h e r e p r o -
d u c t i o n o f the t o t e m i c species. 331

I I . • S e c o n d phase: r i t u a l eating o f the t o t e m i c p l a n t o r a n i m a l . 338

I I I . • I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the c e r e m o n y as a w h o l e . • T h e second r i t e consists o f

a c o m m u n i o n m e a l . • R e a s o n f o r that c o m m u n i o n . 340

IV. • T h e rites o f the first phase consist o f offerings. • A n a l o g i e s w i t h s a c r i f i -

cial offerings. • H e n c e the I n t i c h i u m a contains t h e t w o elements o f sacrifice.
• Interest o f these facts for t h e t h e o r y o f sacrifice. 344

V • O n t h e alleged absurdity o f t h e sacrificial offerings. • H o w they are e x -

plained: d e p e n d e n c e o f sacred beings o n t h e i r w o r s h i p p e r s . • E x p l a n a t i o n o f
X Contents

t h e circle i n w h i c h sacrifice seems t o m o v e . • O r i g i n o f t h e p e r i o d i c i t y o f

positive rites. 348

Chapter Three: T h e Positive C u l t (Continuation):

Mimetic Rites and the Principle of Causality 355
I . • N a t u r e o f the m i m e t i c rites. • E x a m p l e s o f ceremonies i n w h i c h t h e y are
used t o ensure the f e r t i l i t y o f the species. 355

I I . • T h e y rest o n this p r i n c i p l e : Like produces like. • T h e e x p l a n a t i o n p r o -

posed b y t h e a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l s c h o o l e x a m i n e d . • W h y an a n i m a l o r p l a n t is
i m i t a t e d . • W h y physical efficacy is ascribed t o these m o v e m e n t s . • F a i t h . •
I n w h a t sense f a i t h is f o u n d e d u p o n experience. • T h e p r i n c i p l e s o f m a g i c
were b o r n i n religion. 360

I I I . • T h e f o r e g o i n g p r i n c i p l e considered as b e i n g a m o n g t h e first statements

o f the p r i n c i p l e o f causality. • Social c o n d i t i o n s o n w h i c h the p r i n c i p l e o f
causality depends. • T h e idea o f i m p e r s o n a l force o r p o w e r is o f social o r i g i n .
• T h e necessity o f the causal j u d g m e n t e x p l a i n e d b y t h e a u t h o r i t y i n h e r e n t
i n social imperatives. 367

Chapter F o u r : T h e Positive C u l t (Continuation):

Representative or Commemorative Rites 374
I . • Representative rites that have physical efficacy. • T h e i r relationships w i t h
t h e ceremonies described previously. • T h e i r i n f l u e n c e is w h o l l y m o r a l . 375

I I . • Representative rites w i t h o u t physical efficacy. • T h e y c o n f i r m the p r e -

c e d i n g results. • T h e recreational aspect o f r e l i g i o n : its i m p o r t a n c e a n d raisons
d'être. • T h e idea o f the feast. 380

I I I . • A m b i g u i t y o f f u n c t i o n i n the various ceremonies studied; t h e y are sub-

stitutes f o r o n e a n o t h e r . • H o w this a m b i g u i t y c o n f i r m s the p r o p o s e d theory.
387

Chapter Five: T h e Piacular Rites and the A m b i g u i t y

o f the N o t i o n o f the Sacred 392
D e f i n i t i o n o f the piacular r i t e . 392

I . • T h e positive rites o f m o u r n i n g . D e s c r i p t i o n o f these rites. 393

I I . • H o w t h e y are e x p l a i n e d . • T h e y are n o t a display o f p r i v a t e feelings. •

N e i t h e r can the m a l i c e ascribed t o t h e soul o f t h e deceased a c c o u n t f o r t h e m .
Contents XI

• T h e y arise from the s p i r i t u a l state i n w h i c h the g r o u p finds itself. • A n a l y -

sis o f that state. H o w i t comes t o an e n d t h r o u g h m o u r n i n g . • Parallel
changes i n the m a n n e r i n w h i c h t h e soul o f t h e deceased is c o n c e i v e d . 400

I I I . • O t h e r piacular rites: f o l l o w i n g p u b l i c m o u r n i n g , an insufficient harvest,

a d r o u g h t , o r t h e s o u t h e r n lights. • R a r i t y o f these rites i n Australia. • H o w
they are e x p l a i n e d . 406

I V • T h e t w o f o r m s o f t h e sacred: p u r e and i m p u r e . • T h e i r a n t a g o n i s m . •
T h e i r k i n s h i p . • A m b i g u i t y o f t h e n o t i o n o f t h e sacred. • E x p l a n a t i o n o f t h a t
a m b i g u i t y . • A l l the rites have this character. 412

CONCLUSION
To w h a t e x t e n t t h e results o b t a i n e d can be generalized. 418

I . • R e l i g i o n rests o n an e x p e r i e n c e t h a t is w e l l - f o u n d e d b u t n o t p r i v i l e g e d .
• Necessity o f a science t o get at the reality that is t h e f o u n d a t i o n o f this e x -
perience. • W h a t that reality is: h u m a n g r o u p i n g s . • H u m a n m e a n i n g o f r e -
l i g i o n . • O n t h e o b j e c t i o n that opposes the ideal society t o t h e real one. •
H o w the i n d i v i d u a l i s m a n d the c o s m o p o l i t a n i s m o f r e l i g i o n are e x p l a i n e d i n
this theory. 419

I I . • W h a t is eternal a b o u t r e l i g i o n . • O n t h e c o n f l i c t b e t w e e n r e l i g i o n a n d
science; i t affects o n l y the speculative f u n c t i o n o f r e l i g i o n . • W h a t t h e des-
t i n y o f t h a t f u n c t i o n seems t o be. 429

I I I . • H o w can society be a source o f l o g i c a l — t h a t is t o say, c o n c e p t u a l —

t h o u g h t ? D e f i n i t i o n o f t h e concept: n o t the same as t h e general idea; char-
acterized b y its i m p e r s o n a l i t y a n d its c o m m u n i c a b i l i t y . • I t has a c o l l e c t i v e
o r i g i n . • Analysis o f its c o n t e n t testifies i n t h e same way. • C o l l e c t i v e r e p r e -
sentations as t y p e - n o t i o n s i n w h i c h i n d i v i d u a l s share. • O n the o b j e c t i o n t h a t
they w o u l d be i m p e r s o n a l o n l y i f t h e y w e r e t r u e . • C o n c e p t u a l t h o u g h t is
contemporaneous w i t h humanity. 433

IV. • H o w the categories express social things. • T h e category par excellence

is the c o n c e p t o f totality, w h i c h can be suggested o n l y b y society. • W h y t h e
relationships expressed b y the categories c o u l d b e c o m e conscious o n l y i n s o -
ciety. • Society is n o t an alogical b e i n g . • H o w the categories t e n d t o b e c o m e
detached f r o m g e o g r a p h i c a l l y d e f i n e d g r o u p i n g s . • T h e u n i t y o f science, o n
the one h a n d , a n d o f r e l i g i o n a n d m o r a l i t y , o n t h e other. • H o w society ac-
Xll Contents

c o u n t s f o r that u n i t y . • E x p l a n a t i o n o f the role ascribed t o society: its creative

p o w e r . • I m p a c t o f s o c i o l o g y u p o n t h e science o f m a n . 440

Index 449
 ACKNOWLED GMENTS

I n p r e p a r i n g this translation I have i n c u r r e d m a n y debts: t o the W b o d r o w

W i l s o n I n t e r n a t i o n a l C e n t e r f o r a semester-long fellowship, the c o n g e n i a l
effervescence o f its staff a n d c o m m u n i t y o f scholars, a n d f o r the q u i e t o f m y
t u r r e t office i n t h e S m i t h s o n i a n I n s t i t u t i o n ; t o the U n i v e r s i t y o f R o c h e s t e r
for research s u p p o r t , b o t h i n dollars a n d i n t h e k i n d s h a r i n g b y specialists i n
m a n y fields that is t h e heart o f organic solidarity—classicist K a t h r y n A r ¬
getsinger, German Studies scholar Patricia Herminghouse, historians
W i l l i a m J. M c G r a t h a n d M o r r i s A . Pierce, I n d o l o g i s t D o u g l a s R . B r o o k s ,
philosophers Lewis W. Beck, Deborah M o d r a k , and George Dennis
O ' B r i e n , p s y c h o l o g i s t C r a i g R . Barclay, a n d m o s t o f all F r e n c h scholar A n -
d r é e D o u c h i n , w h o read m y t e x t alongside D u r k h e i m ' s l i n e b y l i n e a n d p r o -
v i d e d detailed c r i t i q u e ; t o colleagues e l s e w h e r e — K a r e n M c C a r t h y B r o w n ,
Jay D e m e r a t h , A l e x a n d r e Derczansky, Barbara J. Fields, T e r r y F. G o d l o v e ,
Gila H a y i m , W i n s t o n A.James, R o b e r t Jay, R o b e r t A l u n Jones, E d w a r d K a p -
lan, D o u g l a s A . K i b b e e , V a l e n t i n Y . M u d i m b e , James T . R i c h a r d s o n , Jan
Vansina, Loi'e W a c q u a n t , a n d R o b e r t Paul W o l f f , f o r c l a r i f y i n g c o r r e s p o n -
dence; t o librarians Z d e n e k D a v i d and U r s u l a H e i n e n a n d t o research assis-
tants N a f i z Aksehirioglu, A n t o n i a Balosz, Chad Birely, Lloyd Brown,
Stephen M o n t o , and Samuel T y l o r , f o r help w i t h notes a n d references at the
various stages o f a l o n g project; t o C h a r l e t t e W . H e n r y a n d Lela Sims-
Gissendaner, staff o f the F r e d e r i c k Douglass Institute for African and
A f r i c a n - A m e r i c a n Studies, f o r practical solutions t o the practical p r o b l e m s o f
p r e p a r i n g a m a n u s c r i p t ; t o B r u c e N i c h o l s , C e l i a K n i g h t , and others o f the
Free Press e d i t o r i a l staff f o r t h e i r p a i n s t a k i n g a t t e n t i o n t o the text's several
languages.
I o w e especially large debts t o Ayala G a b r i e l , m y colleague a n d f r i e n d ,
w i t h w h o m I spent m a n y h o u r s o f c l a r i f y i n g conversation a b o u t r e l i g i o n a n d
m u c h else; a n d t o Moussa Bagate, m y husband, w h o shared his general a n d
scientifically specialized k n o w l e d g e o f F r e n c h , a n d w h o shared, p e r i o d .

Xlll
 ABBREVIATIONS

AA American Anthropologist

AAAS Australasian A s s o c i a t i o n f o r t h e A d v a n c e m e n t o f Science

AMNH Memoirs of the American Museum of Natural History

APS Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society

ArA Archaeologia Americana

AS Année sociologique

BAAS B r i t i s h A s s o c i a t i o n f o r the A d v a n c e m e n t o f Science

(Reports)

BAE Reports of the Bureau of American Ethnology

CJ Cambrian Journal

CNAE Contributions to North American Ethnology

FR Fortnightly Review

HLCAPS Transactions of the Historical and Literary Committee of the

American Philosophical Society

JA Journal asiatique

JAI Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and

Ireland

QGJ Queensland Geographical Journal

RAM Records of the Australian Museum

RCI Revue coloniale internationale

RHR Revue de l'histoire des religions

RIS Revista italiana di sociologia

R M M Revue de morale et de métaphysique

R N M Report of the U.S. National Museum

RP Revue philosophique

RSC Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada

RSI Report of the Smithsonian Institution

RSNSW Journal and Proceedings of the Royal Society of New South Wales

XV
XVI Abbreviations

RSSA Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia

RSV Transactions and Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria

TICHR Transactions of the Third International Congress for the History of

Religions

VGJ Victorian Geographical Journal

ZE Zeitschrift für Ethnologie

ZV Zeitschrift für Völkerpsychologie

ZDP Zeitschrift für Deutsche Philologie

 TRANSLATOR'S I N T R O D U C T I O N :

RELIGION AS A N EMINENTLY
SOCIAL THING

[ W ] h a t I ask o f t h e free t h i n k e r is t h a t he s h o u l d c o n f r o n t
r e l i g i o n i n t h e same m e n t a l state as the believer. . . . [ H ] e
w h o does n o t b r i n g t o t h e study o f r e l i g i o n a sort o f r e l i -
gious s e n t i m e n t c a n n o t speak a b o u t i t ! H e is l i k e a b l i n d
m a n t r y i n g t o talk a b o u t c o l o u r .

N o w I shall address the free believer. . . . W i t h o u t g o i n g so

far as t o disbelieve the f o r m u l a w e believe i n , w e m u s t f o r -
get i t p r o v i s i o n a l l y , reserving t h e r i g h t t o r e t u r n t o i t later.
H a v i n g o n c e escaped from this tyranny, w e are n o l o n g e r i n
danger o f p e r p e t r a t i n g t h e e r r o r a n d injustice i n t o w h i c h
c e r t a i n believers have fallen w h o have called m y w a y o f i n -
t e r p r e t i n g r e l i g i o n basically i r r e l i g i o u s . T h e r e c a n n o t be a
r a t i o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f r e l i g i o n w h i c h is f u n d a m e n t a l l y i r -
r e l i g i o u s ; an i r r e l i g i o u s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f r e l i g i o n w o u l d be
an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w h i c h d e n i e d the p h e n o m e n o n i t was t r y -
1
i n g to explain.
Emile D u r k h e i m (1858-1917)

Easily t h e m o s t s t r i k i n g feature o f E m i l e D u r k h e i m ' s 1912 masterpiece, Les

Formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse, is his insistence that r e l i g i o n s are f o u n d e d
o n and express " t h e real." T h e m o s t casual s k i m t h r o u g h the b o o k ' s v e r y first
pages—even t h r o u g h t h e C o n t e n t s — w i l l reveal that insistence. A n d i t is
c o n t i n u a l l y present, l i k e a heartbeat. A t the same t i m e , however, as a reader
m i g h t w e l l m u t t e r , t h e m o s t s t r i k i n g feature o f r e l i g i o n s is that t h e y are full t o
o v e r f l o w i n g w i t h spectacular i m p r o b a b i l i t i e s . As i f a n t i c i p a t i n g that t h o u g h t ,
D u r k h e i m challenges i t from the start: " T h e r e are n o r e l i g i o n s that are false."
M o r e t h a n that: " I f [ r e l i g i o n ] h a d n o t b e e n g r o u n d e d i n the nature o f t h i n g s ,
i n those v e r y t h i n g s i t w o u l d have m e t resistance t h a t i t c o u l d n o t have o v e r -

xvu
XV111 Translator's Introduction

2
come." A hostile r e v i e w e r w r i t i n g i n the American Anthropologist said flady
that D ü r k h e i m s "search f o r a reality u n d e r l y i n g r e l i g i o n does n o t seem t o
3
rest o n a firm l o g i c a l basis." J u d g m e n t a b o u t the l o g i c o f that search belongs
to readers o f D u r k h e i m ' s greatest b o o k , w h i c h I offer i n its first f u l l retrans-
4
l a t i o n since Joseph W a r d Swain's, i n 1 9 1 5 .
To gauge D u r k h e i m ' s c l a i m a b o u t t h e roots o f r e l i g i o n i n " t h e real," i t
w i l l be necessary t o f o l l o w an a r g u m e n t that is provocative t h r o u g h a n d
t h r o u g h . Pressing that c l a i m t o its v e r y l i m i t , D ü r k h e i m announces that his
case i n p o i n t w i l l b e the t o t e m i c r e l i g i o n s o f Australia, w i t h totemism's j a r -
r i n g i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f h u m a n beings a n d animals o r p l a n t s — o n its face, to
readers i n 1912, a n y t h i n g b u t a religious m i l i e u w i t h a n y t h i n g l i k e credible
roots i n the real a n d , to some o f t h e m , n o t even a r e l i g i o u s m i l i e u . Au con-
traire, cautions D ü r k h e i m . T o t e m i s m qualifies as a r e l i g i o n ; f u r t h e r m o r e , all
r e l i g i o n s are " t r u e after t h e i r o w n fashion," and a l l , i n c l u d i n g t o t e m i s m , m e e t
5
"needs" (besoins) t h a t are part and parcel o f h u m a n l i f e . T h e n o r n o w , a n y -
o n e e n c o u n t e r i n g t h e first pages o f Formes f o r the first t i m e m u s t w o n d e r
straightaway w h a t h e intends b y " t h e real," o r b y "needs" b u i l t i n t o the h u -
m a n m a k e u p that r e l i g i o n fulfills. H e r e are claims l i k e l y t o d r a w the r e l i -
g i o u s l y c o m m i t t e d a n d the r e l i g i o u s l y u n c o m m i t t e d t o t h e edge o f t h e i r
seats. F r o m the start, i t is clear that t h e questions D ü r k h e i m has set h i m s e l f
a b o u t r e l i g i o n c o n c e r n t h e nature o f h u m a n life a n d t h e nature o f " t h e real."
( F r o m n o w o n I d r o p t h e q u o t a t i o n marks a r o u n d t h e phrase, n o t i n g that
p a r t o f D u r k h e i m ' s agenda i n Formes is t o a p p l y his c o n c e p t i o n o f the real to
all social f o r m s o f existence. Philosophers i n D u r k h e i m ' s m i l i e u w e r e r e -
w o r k i n g the o l d p o l a r i t y o f appearance versus essence, as h a n d l e d b y I m -
m a n u e l K a n t . W e c a n flash f o r w a r d t o E d m u n d Husserl, a n d again, regarding
t h e social w o r l d specifically, f r o m Husserl t o A l f r e d Schutz.)
I t is equally clear f r o m t h e start that received ideas offer D ü r k h e i m f e w
i n t e l l e c t u a l p a r k benches a l o n g the r o u t e t o w a r d the answers. T h e o p e n i n g
chapters ( B o o k O n e ) define r e l i g i o n a n d t o t e m i s m . T h e y t h e n d e m o l i s h t w o
earlier families o f t h e o r y , a n i m i s m a n d n a t u r i s m , c e r t a i n o f w h o s e received
ideas a b o u t w h a t is f u n d a m e n t a l t o r e l i g i o n still have a c e r t a i n c u r r e n c y — f o r
example, naturism's thesis that r e l i g i o n arises f r o m h u m a n awe before the
g r a n d e u r o f t h e n a t u r a l w o r l d . G o n e there and t h e n (to many, m a d d e n i n g l y )
is r e l i g i o n as " u l t i m a t e c o n c e r n " a n d as e n c o u n t e r w i t h a p o w e r transcend-
6
i n g the h u m a n , o r w i t h " t h e h o l y . " T h e m i d d l e chapters ( B o o k T w o ) sys-
tematically e x a m i n e w h a t D ü r k h e i m calls représentations collectives: shared
m e n t a l constructs w i t h t h e h e l p o f w h i c h , he argues, h u m a n beings c o l l e c -
t i v e l y v i e w themselves, each other, a n d t h e n a t u r a l w o r l d . H a v i n g a d o p t e d
t o t e m i s m as an especially c h a l l e n g i n g system o f collective representations,
Translator's Introduction XIX

D ü r k h e i m develops a t h e o r y o f h o w society constitutes itself, o n e t h a t is s i -

m u l t a n e o u s l y (and i n his view, necessarily) a t h e o r y o f h o w h u m a n m e n t a l -
i t y constitutes itself. T h a t t h e o r y , i n t u r n , encloses another, a b o u t those
" u n i f i e d systems" o f représentations c o n c e r n i n g nature a n d h u m a n i t y that r e -
l i g i o n s always c o n t a i n .
T h e f i n a l chapters ( B o o k T h r e e ) deal w i t h f o r m s o f collective c o n d u c t
that can be t h o u g h t o f as c o l l e c t i v e representations i n a c t i o n a n d , at the same
t i m e , as a c t i o n that makes c o l l e c t i v e representations real i n i n d i v i d u a l m i n d s .
H e r e are echoes o f M a r x , i n The German Ideology, w h e r e reality is above a l l
done: "Consciousness can never be a n y t h i n g else t h a n conscious existence."
As t h o u g h h e a r i n g that echo, D ü r k h e i m cautions against u n d e r s t a n d i n g his
7
t h o u g h t as " m e r e l y a r e f u r n i s h m e n t o f h i s t o r i c a l m a t e r i a l i s m . " I n fact, his
c o m m o n g r o u n d w i t h M a r x o n t h e subject o f r e l i g i o n is far f r o m n e g l i g i b l e
and yet far f r o m t o t a l . F o r D ü r k h e i m , r e l i g i o n s exist because h u m a n beings
exist o n l y as social beings a n d i n a h u m a n l y shaped w o r l d . R e l i g i o n is " a n
8
e m i n e n t l y social t h i n g . "
I n t h e Australians' w o r l d , as w e c o m e t o k n o w i t t h r o u g h Formes, t o have
the clan n a m e K a n g a r o o is n o t m e r e l y t o postulate a n a m a z i n g i n n e r b o n d o f
shared essence w i t h animals, w h o s e i n h e r e n t distinctness f r o m h u m a n s is o b -
v i o u s . I t is also t o postulate a j u s t as a m a z i n g i n n e r b o n d o f shared essence
w i t h o t h e r h u m a n s , b y s h a r i n g a name. H u m a n i n d i v i d u a l s are i n h e r e n t l y
distinct f r o m o n e another, a n d so the p o t e n t i a l f o r m u t u a l l y r e c o g n i z e d i d e n -
t i t y is far f r o m o b v i o u s . O n this subject, the early c r i t i c a l v o i c e is u n a m a z e d ,
setding f o r w e l l - w o r n p a r k benches o f t h o u g h t : " T h e e x p e r i e n c e o f all times
and places teaches t h a t the r a p p o r t o f t h e individual, as such, w i t h the religious
9
object is o f p r i m e i m p o r t a n c e i n religious situations." B u t D ü r k h e i m s chal-
lenge i n Formes is t o detect questions, n o t self-evidences, i n phrases l i k e
" i n d i v i d u a l , as such," " r e l i g i o u s object," a n d " r e l i g i o u s s i t u a t i o n . " H i s e x p e -
d i t i o n goes t o a place w h e r e " [ t ] h e kangaroo is o n l y an a n i m a l l i k e any o t h e r ;
b u t , f o r t h e K a n g a r o o p e o p l e , i t has w i t h i n itself a p r i n c i p l e t h a t sets i t apart
f r o m o t h e r beings, a n d this p r i n c i p l e o n l y exists i n a n d t h r o u g h the m i n d s o f
those w h o t h i n k o f i t . " O n that e x p e d i t i o n , " i n a p h i l o s o p h i c a l sense, t h e
10
same is t r u e o f any t h i n g ; f o r t h i n g s exist o n l y t h r o u g h r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . "
B y many, usually benchless, routes t h r o u g h A u s t r a l i a n ethnography,
D ü r k h e i m b r i n g s us t o w h a t he intends b y the real that h u m a n beings i n g e n -
eral c o m e t o k n o w t h r o u g h t h e d i s t i n c t i v e l y h u m a n means o f k n o w i n g .
T h o s e means b e g i n , h e argues, w i t h h u m a n sociability. Society is the f o r m i n
w h i c h nature p r o d u c e d h u m a n k i n d , a n d r e l i g i o n is reason's first harbor. I n
Formes, w e m e e t the m i n d as a c o l l e c t i v e p r o d u c t a n d science as an o f f s p r i n g
o f r e l i g i o n . I n those v e r y processes o f abstraction that enabled the A u s t r a l i a n
XX Translator's Introduction

t o i m a g i n e w h o he was b y i m a g i n i n g his relationship w i t h o t h e r Australians

a n d w i t h the n a t u r a l w o r l d , w e m e e t the b e g i n n i n g o f abstract t h o u g h t . A n d
w e m e e t the c o n c e p t , ours v i a the social treasury o f language, d e f i n e d as "a
11
b e a m t h a t lights, penetrates, a n d t r a n s f o r m s " sensation. D ü r k h e i m s query-
i n g o f t h e Australians a n d t h e i r totems is thus t h e p o i n t o f departure f o r his
investigation i n t o distinctive traits o f h u m a n k i n d : reason, i d e n t i t y , and c o m -
m u n i t y — t h r e e subjects that w e t e n d n e i t h e r t o place u n d e r the h e a d i n g " r e -
l i g i o n " n o r t o treat together. F e w p e o p l e today w o u l d e n d a sentence that
begins, " R e l i g i o n is . . ." i n t h e w a y he does: " . . . above all, a system o f ideas
b y w h i c h m e n i m a g i n e t h e society o f w h i c h t h e y are m e m b e r s a n d t h e o b -
1 2
scure yet i n t i m a t e relations t h e y have w i t h i t . "
I f D ü r k h e i m s sustained insistence o n r e l i g i o n s ' basis i n the real is the
m o s t s t r i k i n g feature of Formes, his provocative, s h a r p - w i t t e d m o d e o f e x p o -
13
s i t i o n comes a close s e c o n d . A n d i f the b o o k has a heartbeat a b o u t t h e n a -
t u r e o f the real, i t has a r h e t o r i c a l b o d y b u i l t t o subvert received n o t i o n s . A s
h e admits i n the I n t r o d u c t i o n , some readers w e r e b o u n d t o find his approach
1 4
"unorthodox." H e chose t o e x p l o r e h u g e questions a b o u t h u m a n k i n d i n
general v i a t h e s t o n e - t o o l - u s i n g specificity o f A b o r i g i n a l Australia, a n d his
a r g u m e n t moves i n ways that c o u l d n o t fail t o scandalize m a n y readers, o n
v a r i o u s g r o u n d s . W e can b e g i n t o feel t h e specific t e x t u r e o f scandale i f w e
consider a n o t h e r h o s t i l e reviewer's o b s e r v a t i o n a b o u t the academically o r -
t h o d o x v i e w o f t o t e m i s m , i n a l o n g article t i d e d " D o g m a t i c A t h e i s m i n the
S o c i o l o g y o f R e l i g i o n . " T h e r e w e l e a r n that t o t e m i s m , "[a]s c u r r e n t l y t a u g h t
i n A n g l i c a n universities, . . . appeared t o fit w i t h the p r o v i d e n t i a l m i s s i o n o f
15
t h e Jews and the p o s s i b i l i t y o f C h r i s t i a n r e v e l a t i o n . " I n o t h e r w o r d s , some
scholars dealt w i t h t o t e m i s m b y m a k i n g i t i n t o a " C h r i s t i a n i t y i n e m b r y o . "
B e i n g b o r n and reared a J e w a n d t h e son o f a r a b b i , D ü r k h e i m lacked the
nearsightedness t h a t made t o t e m i s m as e m b r y o n i c C h r i s t i a n i t y seem a n e c -
essary lens. W h a t is m o r e , he doubtless h a d n o i n v e s t m e n t i n preserving h i g h
e v o l u t i o n a r y r a n k f o r any r e l i g i o n at all. A s a y o u n g m a n , he had rejected r e -
l i g i o u s c o m m i t m e n t o u t r i g h t , a fact t o w h i c h t h e article's n e o n title alludes.
F o r the scholars referred t o and addressed i n t h a t article, i n any case,
t o t e m i s m was a n y t h i n g b u t w e l l adapted t o s h o w i n g religion's roots i n the
real. I t c o u l d be relegated t o t h e category o f m a g i c , as the c r i t i c p o i n t s o u t
that H e r b e r t Spencer d i d ( w h i c h D ü r k h e i m disputed, since that a m o u n t e d t o
16
disconnecting i t f r o m the real). O r i t c o u l d be adapted t o that r o l e i f i m a g -
i n e d w i t h a n a r r o w o n i t , p o i n t i n g f o r w a r d i n an e v o l u t i o n i s t sense t o r e l i -
gions w h o s e c o n n e c t i o n s w i t h the real seemed a p r i o r i m o r e credible t h a n
totemism's. B u t there s t o o d D ü r k h e i m , f i r i n g a r g u m e n t i n t w o directions:
c l a i m i n g that r e l i g i o n w o u l d n o t have s u r v i v e d i f i t h a d n o t b e e n g r o u n d e d
Translator's Introduction XXI

i n t h e real a n d c l a i m i n g t o study r e l i g i o n i n general b y j u x t a p o s i n g the a l -

legedly lowest a n d highest. F o r m a n y reasons, i n that unself-consciously self-
satisfied era, Formes m u s t have b e e n a shocker. L o o k i n g back, the F r e n c h
sociologist R a y m o n d A r o n described the i m m e d i a t e r e a c t i o n t o i t i n France
as violent. B e i n g h i g h l y sophisticated, D ü r k h e i m n o d o u b t e x p e c t e d that.
N o t i c e t h e r h e t o r i c a l sandpits i n the q u o t a t i o n s I used as an e p i g r a p h ,
taken f r o m e x t e m p o r a n e o u s remarks he m a d e i n 1914 t o the U n i o n o f Free
T h i n k e r s a n d Free Believers. N o w p i c t u r e the sinuous r o a d to be traveled i n
any a t t e m p t to represent h i m i n a comprehensive p o r t r a i t as t h e great c o n -
t r i b u t o r t o e m p i r i c a l science that he was.
Dürkheims commentators have o f t e n expressed dismay about the
r h e t o r i c a l m o d e i n w h i c h Formes is w r i t t e n . D o m i n i c k L a C a p r a spoke o f an
"oceanic f o r m o f discourse" i n a t e x t " w h i c h has h a d the p o w e r t o allure a n d
1 7
repel at the same t i m e . " Steven Lukes w r o t e o f D ü r k h e i m s style that i t " o f -
ten tends t o caricature his t h o u g h t : he o f t e n expressed his ideas i n an e x t r e m e
1 8
or figurative m a n n e r . " 1 i m a g i n e that T a l c o t t Parsons was reacting i n part t o
some o f those v e r y qualities w h e n h e c l a i m e d , essentially, t h a t i n Formes
D ü r k h e i m was f e e l i n g his w a y uneasily b e t w e e n the naivete o f p o s i t i v i s m a n d
19
s o m e t h i n g far s m a r t e r . R a y m o n d A r o n d i s l i k e d t h e b o o k , said so i n n o u n -
certain terms ( i n c l u d i n g the t e r m " i m p i e t y " ) , a n d professed t o be so unsure
i n his u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f i t t h a t he deliberately i n c l u d e d l o n g sections o f v e r -
2 0
b a t i m q u o t a t i o n , t o enable m o r e s y m p a t h e t i c readers t o d o better t h a n h e .
I w i l l n o t t a r r y over those w h o , f i n d i n g the posture o f Formes e n i g m a t i c , r e -
spond b y c h a r a c t e r i z i n g the b o o k as m y s t i c a l , metaphysical, a n d even t h e o -
logical, charges that m u s t m a k e D ü r k h e i m ' s soul shake its head. I f i t is t r u e
that he rejected n o t o n l y r e l i g i o n b u t also his family's i n t e n t i o n f o r h i m t o
become a r a b b i , i n his father's a n d grandfather's footsteps, he m u s t have p a i d
full fare f o r a secular voyage t h r o u g h the mysteries a n d c o m m o n p l a c e s o f
21
life. As far as I a m c o n c e r n e d , i t is sufficient t o say that D ü r k h e i m was e x -
p e r i m e n t i n g w i t h ideas that deeply m a t t e r e d t o h i m , a n d there is every rea-
son t o i m a g i n e that he o f t e n r a n u p against the expressive l i m i t s o f his
m e d i u m . U p against those same l i m i t s , n o less a s o c i o l o g i c a l t h e o r i s t t h a n
22
Talcott Parsons used t h e u n s e t t l i n g t e r m " n o n e m p i r i c a l r e a l i t y . "
D ü r k h e i m s r h e t o r i c is o f t e n r e m a r k e d u p o n b u t generally n o t b u i l t i n t o
2 3
the systematic c o m m e n t a r y a b o u t h i m . T r a d i t i o n a l accounts usually stop at
saying s o c i o l o g y was a n e w science at t h e t u r n o f t h e century, D ü r k h e i m o n e
o f those b a t t l i n g t o define a tenable v e r s i o n o f its subject m a t t e r a n d m e t h o d ,
and his m o d e (alas) p o l e m i c a l . B u t i f p o l e m i c i n the m i d s t o f d e v e l o p i n g
s o m e t h i n g n e w is s t i g m a t i z e d as a n t i t h e t i c a l t o systematic t h o u g h t , t h e n t h e
very n o t i o n o f systematic t h o u g h t is i m p o v e r i s h e d . Left u n i m a g i n e d is t h e
XXII Translator's Introduction

sense o f absorbing puzzles t o be solved a n d a l i v i n g sense o f i n s p i r a t i o n b e -

fore i t becomes "system." I t is easy t o see a calculated p o l e m i c a l edge i n D u r -
k h e i m ' s Suicide, w h e r e he tackles as a s o c i o l o g i c a l puzzle an act t h a t received
n o t i o n s even today h o l d t o be quintessentially i n d i v i d u a l . O f t e n n o t i c e d as
w e l l is t h e s i n e w y a r g u m e n t t o be e x p e c t e d o f a p h i l o s o p h i c a l l y t r a i n e d p r o d -
u c t o f t h e E c o l e n ó r m a l e s u p é r i e u r e , France's crime de la crime i n h i g h e r e d u -
c a t i o n . B u t s e l d o m i m a g i n e d is w h a t m u s t have b e e n the h i g h h u m o r o f
w o r k i n g against received ideas a n d t o w a r d f u n d a m e n t a l t r u t h . T o miss those
features is t o miss t h e freshness o f the w o r k he d i d , at t h e t i m e he was d o i n g
i t : g o n e is t h e sense o f e x p e r i m e n t a n d e x c i t e m e n t he shared w i t h the m a n y
talented students h e t a u g h t at the S o r b o n n e , a n d w i t h t h e scholars w h o
j o i n e d h i m i n creating t h e celebrated j o u r n a l Annie sociologique; g o n e t o o is
his w i t o n the page. I f those elements are missed, Formes is b y the same stroke
u p l i f t e d as a classic a n d d o w n g r a d e d t o a t o m e .
D u r k h e i m breathed t h e air o f t u r n - o f - t h e - c e n t u r y Paris, a place that
fizzed w i t h e x p e r i m e n t s i n artistic representation, and a t i m e w h e n p h i l o s o -
phy, science, a n d art existed i n n o t h i n g l i k e today's i s o l a t i o n f r o m o n e a n -
24
other. Picasso p a i n t e d his Demoiselles d Avignon i n 1907, l a u n c h i n g c u b i s m
and, t h e r e w i t h , a n e w v o c a b u l a r y f o r the art o f t h e n e w century. I t m a y t u r n
o u t that i l l u m i n a t i n g c o n n e c t i o n s can be d r a w n b e t w e e n D u r k h e i m ' s trans-
gressing the b o u n d a r i e s b e t w e e n " p r i m i t i v e " a n d " c i v i l i z e d " i n the search f o r
a v o c a b u l a r y suited t o c o m p r e h e n d i n g , a n d t h e n representing, the real, and
Picasso's o w n e n c o u n t e r s w i t h those same boundaries as he r e c o n c e i v e d p e r -
spective. T o give a t t e n t i o n t o D u r k h e i m ' s r h e t o r i c a l leaps is n o t to s h o w
w h e r e he fell s h o r t as a systematic t h i n k e r ; i t is t o a m p l i f y his v o i c e and hear
h i m better. I n Formes, o n e o f his tasks is t o s h o w h o w a kangaroo can be, at
o n e a n d the same t i m e , a p o w e r f u l sacred b e i n g , a m a n o r w o m a n , a n d j u s t a
k a n g a r o o — a l l i n t h e real. H i s r h e t o r i c a l tactics i n representing these barely
representable t h i n g s are i n themselves i n t e r e s t i n g t o observe. T h a t they have
succeeded i n some w a y accounts f o r the book's capacity over the years t o
m o t i v a t e f r u i t f u l e m p i r i c a l w o r k i n a range o f fields.

ANATOMY OF A CLASSIC
As a classic i n the s o c i o l o g y a n d a n t h r o p o l o g y o f r e l i g i o n , Formes is w i d e l y
m e n t i o n e d a n d characterized, i f n o t so w i d e l y read. M y p u r p o s e i n u n d e r -
t a k i n g a n e w translation is t o re-present D u r k h e i m ' s ideas a b o u t w h a t he
called the " r e l i g i o u s nature o f m a n " i n the E n g l i s h o f o u r o w n day w h i l e r e n -
d e r i n g D u r k h e i m ' s F r e n c h as f a i t h f u l l y as I can. I have u n d e r t a k e n this n e w
Translator's Introduction XXlll

translation at a t i m e w h e n t h e serious study o f r e l i g i o n has finally b e g u n t o

r e t u r n to center stage i n o u r c u l t u r e , after an u n f o r t u n a t e hiatus o f m a n y
decades. M y h o p e is that this b o o k w i l l b e m o r e w i d e l y read and studied, a n d
not o n l y b y sociologists and anthropologists o r scholars o f r e l i g i o n . A m e r i -
can p o s t m o d e r n i s t theorizers o f discursive practices a n d representations will
25
recognize t h r o u g h Formes the D u r k h e i m i a n p e d i g r e e o f M i c h e l F o u c a u l t .
Psychologists w i l l repeatedly glimpse o l d a n d n o t - s o - o l d ways o f t h i n k i n g
about p h e n o m e n a that the scientific study o f m e m o r y , identity, language, and
i n t e l l i g e n c e m u s t be able t o a c c o u n t for. Philosophers w i l l f i n d o l d p r o b l e m s
26
interestingly t a c k l e d , i f n o t necessarily s o l v e d .
My hope for a broadened readership raises a larger q u e s t i o n , about
Formes i n p a r t i c u l a r a n d the genus "classic" t o w h i c h i t belongs: W h y read
classics? O f late, that q u e s t i o n and s u n d r y answers t o i t have f r a m e d a s o m e -
times p o i s o n o u s debate over w h i c h ancestors s h o u l d be so h o n o r e d i n m e m -
ory. T h i s c o n v e r s a t i o n is largely i m p e r s o n a l , as s h o r t o n " I ' s " as i t is l o n g o n
i m p e r s o n a l , p u r i t a n i c a l " s h o u l d s " ; i t is o u t s p o k e n a b o u t d i s c i p l i n e b u t i n a r -
ticulate a b o u t i n d i v i d u a l pleasure, a n d m u t e as the grave a b o u t e x c i t e m e n t .
L i k e b r o c c o l i , classics are said t o b e g o o d f o r one, even i f s w a l l o w e d u n w i l l -
ingly. M y v i e w is that dead ancestors s h o u l d stay dead t o us unless pleasure
and e x c i t e m e n t c o m e f r o m g e t t i n g t o k n o w t h e m . W h i l e i n the m i d s t o f this
project, I heard W y n t o n Marsalis, the v i r t u o s o classical a n d j a z z t r u m p e t e r ,
tell a c a u t i o n a r y tale o f honesty a b o u t the p o i n t o f classics a n d a b o u t the
w o r k i n v o l v e d i n translating t h e m f o r n e w audiences. H i s i n t r o d u c t i o n t o
some n e w settings o f o l d w o r k b y D u k e E l l i n g t o n b r o u g h t o u t p r o b l e m s that
b o t h b e d e v i l such w o r k a n d inspire its p r o d u c t .
To b e g i n w i t h , Marsalis said, he was unenthusiastic a b o u t E l l i n g t o n . H i s
friend, the c h o r e o g r a p h e r G a r t h Fagan, i n v i t e d h i m t o see a rehearsal p e r -
formance set t o a n o l d piece b y E l l i n g t o n . A p e r i o d piece, Marsalis t h o u g h t .
"That's j u s t s o m e b o r i n g o l d b a l l r o o m music. I k n o w I should w a n t t o hear i t
but I d o n ' t . " B u t Fagan pressed, sure a b o u t his r e n d e r i n g . Marsalis w e n t , a n d
t h e n reconsidered: " E v e r y b o d y said E l l i n g t o n was great. B u t w h a t m a d e h i m
so great? N o b o d y said. W e l l , that n i g h t , I u n d e r s t o o d . " H e , i n t u r n , t r u m -
peted some " o l d b a l l r o o m m u s i c " t o us, his audience. As Fagan h a d i n t e r -
preted t o Marsalis, so Marsalis i n t e r p r e t e d t o his o w n audience, w h o w e r e
i n v i t e d t o discover E l l i n g t o n ' s greatness, p a r t l y t h r o u g h t h e o r i g i n a l w o r k i t -
self b u t also w i t h Marsalis present as a "translator," w i t h all the c o m p l e x i t i e s
that i m p l i e s . I t was Marsalis's " t r a n s l a t i o n " that gave us access t o the greatness
o f some o u t - o f - s t y l e music, a n d i r r e m e d i a b l y so, f o r w e h a d n o access t o t h e
music except b y h e a r i n g s o m e o n e render i t i n s o u n d (unless w e d e c i d e d t o
experience the m u s i c b y sight, f r o m E l l i n g t o n ' s page). N o t w o renderings
XXIV Translator's Introduction

c o u l d be the same. N o n e c o u l d be exactly w h a t E l l i n g t o n m e a n t . W e c a n n o t

k n o w exactly w h a t h e m e a n t . T h e o n l y c e r t a i n t y was that r e n d e r i n g the m u -
sic freed i t t o w i n t h e audience over, o r n o t to.
B u t w h a t is t r u e a b o u t music that begins its p u b l i c life w i t h p o p u l a r a u -
diences is n o t t r u e a b o u t the h i g h c u l t u r e o f o l d b o o k s . W h e n t h a t seems at
stake, t h e answer t o the q u e s t i o n , " W h y read classics?" t o o o f t e n hides b e -
h i n d t h e busy b o r e d o m o f Ecclesiastes: " T h a t w h i c h has b e e n d o n e is that
w h i c h shall be done." I t h i n k o t h e r w i s e . E v e r y classic s h o u l d be free t o w i n
t h e r i g h t t o b e read again w i t h pleasure, n o t j u s t to be set t o l a b o r as a cap-
tive servant o f t r a d i t i o n , t r a p p e d i n t h e h i g h b r o w e d storage o f a m u s e u m dis-
play. T h e case f o r s t u d y i n g o l d w o r k s n o w needs t o be made n o w , p a r t l y
t h r o u g h the m a n n e r o f t h e i r presentation. I f the classics really are g o o d
e n o u g h t o keep r e a d i n g , i n spite o f t h e i r age a n d flaws, t h e n t h e y are due the
respect o f b e i n g a l l o w e d t o w i n t h e i r audience over. "Because t h e y are clas-
sics" a m o u n t s to saying, "Because they are there." A n d that is the u n h a p p y
fate o f captives i n those Smithsonians o f t h e m i n d that college r e a d i n g lists
can be, o n p e r m a n e n t e x h i b i t i o n t o pedants, connoisseurs, and c r a n k y tourists,
i n d i s c r i m i n a t e l y . E v e r y s c h o o l c h i l d learns that M o u n t Everest was scaled
"because i t was t h e r e " a n d can u n d e r s t a n d from a distance w h a t makes i t
"great." B u t the superlatives a b o u t great b o o k s are n o t the same. T o k n o w
there, as a character o f Z o r a N e a l e H u r s t o n says, y o u have t o go there. I have
taken i t t o be m y task, i n retranslating this classic, n o t o n l y t o m a k e the w a y
straight t o g o there b u t t o say w h y g o there at a l l .
I r e c o m m e n d this classic i n s o c i o l o g y f o r r e a d i n g today, even t h o u g h the
e t h n o g r a p h y is o u t d a t e d , and the o u t l o o k u p o n gender q u a i n t , because i t p r e -
sents t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o e n c o u n t e r a d a z z l i n g l y c o m p l e x s o u l w h o s e b u r d e n
o f life animates the w o r k . I t is this same b u r d e n that animates great art. Formes
has n o t o n l y the steady b r i l l i a n c e o f a classic b u t also a c e r t a i n incandescence.
I t is l i k e a v i r t u o s o p e r f o r m a n c e that is b u i l t u p o n b u t leaps b e y o n d the t e c h -
n i c a l l i m i t s o f the artist's discipline, b e y o n d the safe s t r i v i n g m e r e l y to h i t the
c o r r e c t notes, i n t o a felt reality o f elemental t r u t h . T o read i t is to witness such
a p e r f o r m a n c e . T h e i l l u m i n a t i o n s are p u b l i c , t h e p e r f o r m a n c e personal.
D u r k h e i m is usually r e m e m b e r e d as t h e no-nonsense advocate o f science
27
positive—"positive s c i e n c e " — i n t h e study o f social life, as a m a n w h o set
o u t t o rescue social science f r o m u n d i s c i p l i n e d subjectivity, f r o m p h i l o s o p h -
ical a r g u m e n t that delicately m i n u e t t e d w i t h facts o r t o u c h e d t h e m n o t at all,
from parochial sentimentality, a n d f r o m t h e naive i n d i v i d u a l i s m s o f his t i m e .
B u t t h e a r g u m e n t of Formes is m a r k e d l y personal i n b o t h r h e t o r i c a l style a n d
scientific substance, revealing a m a n w h o was far m o r e t h a n the hard-nosed
o p p o n e n t o f the second-rate a n d t h e s e n t i m e n t a l i n social science ( a l t h o u g h
Translator's Introduction xxv

he was t h a t t o o ) . W e hear the heartbeat o f Formes i n D u r k h e i m ' s s t u n n i n g

t h e m e t h r o u g h o u t : that religious life (la vie religieuse) b o t h expresses a n d c o n -
structs t h e l o g i c a l life (la vie logique) o f h u m a n k i n d . W e hear i t i n t h e auda-
cious c l a i m he makes, ostensibly as a secondary issue b u t i n fact t h r o u g h o u t
the b o o k , that t h e e l e m e n t a l categories i n w h i c h w e t h i n k — t i m e , space,
n u m b e r , cause, class, person, t o t a l i t y — h a v e t h e i r o r i g i n s i n r e l i g i o u s life.
I t is g r i p p i n g drama t o see h o w a m a n o f science positive c o u l d possibly
make such claims, h o w he c o u l d g o a b o u t a r g u i n g t h e m i n an era w h e n s c i -
ence seemed t o b e d i s m e m b e r i n g r e l i g i o n , a n d m o s t o f all, w h y such a m a n
w o u l d ever choose t o . T h i s drama is g r i p p i n g f o r us still: T h e dispute b e -
t w e e n science a n d r e l i g i o n is at least as l o u d n o w as i t was i n his t i m e . I n t h e
b o o k , D u r k h e i m ' s feet seem at o n e m o m e n t t o be o n the solid g r o u n d o f i m -
mensely d e t a i l e d scientific o b s e r v a t i o n a n d at the n e x t o n the h i g h w i r e o f
faith. B u t whose? H i s A b o r i g i n a l A u s t r a l i a n subjects'? H i s c o n t e m p o r a r i e s ' ?
H i s o w n ? Ours? W e keep l i s t e n i n g i n o r d e r t o f i n d o u t w h i c h i t is, w h e n , i n
w h a t , and i n w h a t capacity. People sleepwalk even i n t h e c o m p a n y o f t h e
p o w e r f u l , i f t h e y are u n i n t e r e s t i n g m e n a n d w o m e n o f s h a l l o w d i l e m m a s .
D ü r k h e i m was an i n t e r e s t i n g m a n , because he h a d t h e capacity t o sustain t h e
m a n i f o l d i n t e r n a l t e n s i o n o f his o w n ideas, a n d because he h a d a d i l e m m a
and a subject capable o f e a r n i n g p r o l o n g e d a t t e n t i o n .
R e l i g i o n still arouses passionate interest, a n d passion t o o . I f i t is an o p i u m
o f the oppressed, i t is n o t o n l y t h e o p i u m t h a t puts p e o p l e t o sleep b u t also
the one t h a t makes l e g i o n s o f p e o p l e g o t o great lengths t o get t h e i r o w n
dose o f i t . I f r e l i g i o n is i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h scientific r a t i o n a l i t y and secular
p o l i t i c a l life, those conflicts are p u b l i c a n d active ones, n o t the passive w i t h -
e r i n g away i n t o self-evident defeat that observers o f r i g h t a n d left l o n g i m a g -
ined. D o o m has n o t f o l l o w e d from religion's d e m o n s t r a t e d setbacks i n
describing nature. I n d e e d , o n e c a n n o t describe today's w o r l d w i t h o u t t h e
collective identities t h a t r e l i g i o n s sustain: q u i e d y w o r s h i p p i n g churches i n
some places, churches m i l i t a n t i n others. R e l i g i o n is the steady, d a y - i n - d a y -
out reality o f m i l l i o n s , t h e i r r o u t i n e framework o f everyday activity, t h e i r
calm c e r t a i n t y o f life a n d its steady, b u t sometimes r a c i n g , pulse.
I n 1979, w e w a t c h e d as c r o w d s s h o u t i n g "Allahu Akbar!"—"God is
great!"—destroyed t h e I r a n i a n m o n a r c h y a n d consecrated R u h o l l a h K h o -
m e i n i as I m a m . I n 1 9 8 9 , w e saw t h e reconsecration o f t h e People's H o u s e o f
C u l t u r e i n V i l n i u s as the C a t h e d r a l o f V i l n i u s , the r e p l a c e m e n t there o f St.
Casimirs bones after some f o r t y years, a n d t h e n t h e d i g n i f i e d f i l i n g past o f
Lithuanians r e c o n s t i t u t i n g themselves as a r e l i g i o u s l y a n d e t h n i c a l l y d e f i n e d
nation-state. A n d w h o w o u l d have t h o u g h t i n 1912 that, three generations
later i n A m e r i c a , r e l i g i o n w o u l d b e a h o t b u t t o n p o l i t i c a l t o p i c , the object o f
XXVI Translator's Introduction

u n d i g n i f i e d e x c i t e m e n t , the locus o f dispute over w h e r e t h e a u t h o r i t a t i v e

28
designation o f w h e r e r i g h t c o n d u c t lies a n d must l i e ? As a scholar a n d
teacher, I advocate t h e d i g n i f i e d e x c i t e m e n t o f s t u d y i n g r e l i g i o n w i t h d i s c i -
p l i n e — a n d D ü r k h e i m s s h u t t l i n g b e t w e e n science positive a n d the h i g h w i r e o f
faith exemplifies a sort o f discipline that w e can cultivate.
Yet discipline c a n n o t be the w h o l e p o i n t . W o r k s o f genius u l t i m a t e l y are
disrespected b y b e i n g t o u t e d as mere calisthenics f o r t h e m i n d . T h e y are d i -
m i n i s h e d t o the e x t e n t that, l i k e aids t o physical exercise, t h e y b e c o m e tools
fitted t o k n o w n tasks, captive servants o f m e n t a l " t r a i n i n g " i n the s c h o o l years.
T h e i m p r o v i s a t i o n a l h i g h - w i r e m o d e o f the u n e x p e c t e d is lost thereby and,
w i t h i t , the special w o r k and w o r t h o f genius. I n the e n d , Formes w o u l d n o t
be w o r t h reading again a n d again i f all i t d i d was h e l p us cultivate i n t e l l e c t u a l
discipline i n o u r attempts t o understand w h a t w e call " r e l i g i o n . " I n fact i t does
m u c h m o r e . I n this sometimes sober, sometimes h i g h - w i r e , e x p l o r a t i o n o f
w h a t he calls " t h e r e l i g i o u s nature o f m a n , " D ü r k h e i m carries his readers b e -
y o n d o r d i n a r y ideas a b o u t w h a t r e l i g i o n is and does. W e m e e t t h e m a n w h o
c o u l d say, t o the sober assent o f believers d o w n t h e ages, that " t h e m a n w h o
has c o m m u n e d w i t h his g o d . . . 15 stronger" 29
b u t w h o c o u l d also say, t o the
boisterous dissent o f t r u e believers d o w n the ages, " T h e r e are n o r e l i g i o n s that
are false." W e m e e t the m a n w h o said b o t h — a n d i n a w o r k of science positive.

A N ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE SOUL

L i t t l e is k n o w n a b o u t D ü r k h e i m s personal life. I w i l l n o t repeat the tidbits
here b u t instead refer readers t o W . S. F. Pickering's a n d Steven Lukes's c o m -
pilations o f w h a t is k n o w n , a n d p o r t r a y t h e m a n as w e m e e t h i m i n B o o k
O n e , C h a p t e r 2, i n his m o d e o f v i r t u o s o p l a y — a n d display. T h e r e , i n the
posture o f d e m o l i s h i n g m i s t a k e n t h e o r y , he takes u p o n e o f r e l i g i o n s ' ele-
m e n t a l représentations collectives. I propose t h a t w e m a k e o u r acquaintance w i t h
h i m b y o b s e r v i n g h o w h e acquaints us w i t h t h e great n i n e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y
scholar o f r e l i g i o n , E d w a r d B u r n e t t T y l o r .
T y l o r p u t f o r w a r d a v e r y i n f l u e n t i a l t h e o r y a b o u t the o r i g i n o f an idea
that a great m a n y peoples have d e v e l o p e d and v a r i o u s l y c o n c e i v e d o f as a s i n -
3 0
gular t h i n g (the o r a soul), o r y e t as a generic substance (soul, p e r i o d ) , i m -
m o r t a l yet sometimes susceptible t o a n n i h i l a t i o n , attached t o persons yet
m i g r a t o r y despite such attachments, i n t i m a t e l y k n o w n y e t almost impossible
t o describe, personal y e t transmissible t o objects a n d animals, ethereal yet
p o w e r f u l , a n d m u c h else, b u t above all c o n c e i v e d as m y s t e r i o u s , c o n t r a d i c -
tory, a n d h a r d t o conceive. I n t r o d u c i n g us t o T y l o r , t h e m a n o f science positive
i n t r o d u c e s us t o t h e idea o f s o u l . I n C h a p t e r 8, D ü r k h e i m returns t o s o u l at
Translator's Introduction xxvn

l e n g t h , i n a h a u n t i n g l y b e a u t i f u l c o n s t r u c t i o n o f h o w h u m a n beings i n the
full d i g n i t y o f reason m i g h t have c o m e t o postulate t h e idea o f s o u l i n order
to t h e o r i z e aspects o f t h e real. I n his v i e w , those h u m a n beings w e r e n o t , l i k e
St. A u g u s t i n e , able t o "believe precisely because i t was absurd." H e t r a i n e d
his heavy r h e t o r i c a l guns against scholars w h o s e l o g i c entailed that t h e y must
have b e e n able t o d o so.
B y D ü r k h e i m ' s day, comparative studies o n r e l i g i o n had l o n g since r e -
vealed that soul, as a concept, is t o be f o u n d v i r t u a l l y w h e r e v e r r e l i g i o n is
f o u n d . T h e q u e s t i o n scholars asked themselves was w h y such an i n h e r e n d y
confusing idea came t o be such a widespread idea, even i n societies n o t h i n g
like those o f the Australians. T h e existence o f i n d i v i d u a l souls had t o be ac-
c o m m o d a t e d even i n the society i n h a b i t e d b y Descartes. A n d e v e r y w h e r e , ac-
c o m m o d a t i n g t h e i r existence l e d t o questions a b o u t w h e r e they m i g h t reside
and about t h e i r relationship t o those residences. Readers w h o r e m e m b e r t h e i r
Descartes ( w h o , o f course, was at D ü r k h e i m s i n t e l l e c t u a l fingertips a n d those
o f his readers) w i l l r e m e m b e r that, via his Cogito, ergo sum, the m i n d / b o d y d u -
alism, hence the s o u l / b o d y d u a l i s m , was r o o t e d i n his search f o r that w h i c h
c a n n o t be d o u b t e d . Bear i n m i n d , t o o , that Descartes c o n c e i v e d o f a m e -
chanics t h a t h e l d f o r all things t h a t possessed " e x t e n s i o n " — b u t n o t f o r G o d
or soul, w h o s e existence i n the real i n c l u d e d n e i t h e r e x t e n s i o n n o r s u b o r d i -
n a t i o n t o the laws o f mechanics. Speculating a b o u t the soul's l o c a l i z a t i o n ,
Descartes postulated that i t resides i n the (still mysterious) p i n e a l gland.
D ü r k h e i m addressed the m a t t e r o f l o c a l i z a t i o n differently. Free f r o m t h e
h o t b r e a t h o f t h e I n q u i s i t i o n , as Descartes (1596—1650) was n o t , a n d freed
also b y his i n t e r p r e t i v e use o f e x o t i c materials, D ü r k h e i m repeated t h e s o l u -
tions his A u s t r a l i a n subjects gave the same e m p i r i c a l p r o b l e m — f o r example,
i n m a n y rituals, n o t a b l y those c o n d u c t e d i n the m i d s t a n d a f t e r m a t h o f
m o u r n i n g . T h e practicalities o f r i t u a l d o i n g l o c a l i z e d the s o u l i n c e r t a i n o r -
gans a n d i n the b l o o d , w h i c h w e r e t h e r e b y revealed, i n his phrase, as " t h e
31
soul i t s e l f seen f r o m o u t s i d e " (a f o r m u l a t i o n that m a y have suggested t o
3 2
D ü r k h e i m s audience c e r t a i n p h i l o s o p h e r s o f a n t i q u i t y ) . T h e Australians'
urge t o localize t h e s o u l set t h e m beside n o t o n l y t h e C a t h o l i c Descartes b u t
33
also the pagan Empedocles a n d t h e Jewish w r i t e r s o f L e v i t i c u s and
D e u t e r o n o m y ( w h o m D ü r k h e i m cites), all s o l v i n g i t rather m o r e l i k e t h e
Australians t h a n l i k e Descartes. B y Tylor's m o r e secularized day, the q u e s t i o n
was n o t m e r e l y w h e r e the s o u l m i g h t b e b u t a m o r e radical o n e that w o u l d
surely have p r o v o k e d the I n q u i s i t i o n i n t o a c t i o n : w h y p e o p l e ever imagined
any such t h i n g . T y l o r h e l d t h a t t h e idea arose f r o m t h e universal b u t i n d i v i d -
ual e x p e r i e n c e o f d r e a m i n g . F o r T y l o r , d r e a m i n g posed a t h e o r e t i c a l p r o b l e m
that nagged n i g h t l y at earliest h u m a n i t y ' s consciousness u n t i l i t was solved
XXV111 Translator's Introduction

w i t h t h e i n v e n t i o n o f a d o u b l e , o r a soul. D e m o l i s h i n g this a r g u m e n t was the

D ü r k h e i m w h o h a d already p r o n o u n c e d r e l i g i o u s ideas t o be g r o u n d e d i n
a n d t o express the real. T h e s o l u t i o n T y l o r i m p u t e d t o " p r i m i t i v e s " failed
that test.
A f t e r r e v i e w i n g the m e r i t s o f T y l o r s enterprise, D ü r k h e i m proceeded t o
carry o u t an i n t e l l e c t u a l death o f a thousand cuts. A c c o r d i n g t o Tylor, the idea
o f the soul, o r d o u b l e , e x p l a i n e d ecstasy, catalepsy, apoplexy, and f a i n t i n g ; i l l -
nesses a n d health, g o o d f o r t u n e , b a d f o r t u n e , special abilities, o r a n y t h i n g else
that departed slightly from the o r d i n a r y ; a n d o n d o w n an e x p a n d i n g list ap-
p l i e d t o an e x p a n d i n g p o p u l a t i o n o f souls. T h u s d i d an idea o f great i m p o r t
for religions e v e r y w h e r e c o m e t o e x p l a i n e v e r y t h i n g . T h u s d i d t h e p o w e r o f
souls increase. A n d thus d i d T y l o r s p r i m i t i v e m a n , h a v i n g c o m e u p w i t h the
concept o f soul to solve a m e r e l y speculative p r o b l e m , finally e n d u p as "a cap-
3 4
tive i n this i m a g i n a r y w o r l d , even t h o u g h he is its creator and m o d e l . " Here
is D ü r k h e i m s coup de grace: " E v e n i f the hypothesis o f the d o u b l e c o u l d satis-
f a c t o r i l y e x p l a i n all d r e a m i n g , a n d all d r e a m i n g c o u l d be explained i n n o o t h e r
way, o n e w o u l d still have t o say w h y m a n t r i e d t o e x p l a i n i t at all. . . . [HJabit
35
easily puts c u r i o s i t y t o sleep." I n d e e d , even i f c u r i o s i t y h a d b e e n awake,
d r e a m i n g w o u l d n o t b y any stretch have posed the m o s t o b v i o u s p r o b l e m :
" T h e r e was s o m e t h i n g i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e i n the fact that a l u m i n o u s disc o f
such small diameter c o u l d be adequate to l i g h t t h e E a r t h — a n d yet, centuries
w e n t b y before h u m a n i t y t h o u g h t o f r e s o l v i n g that c o n t r a d i c t i o n . " So, w h y
s h o u l d h u m a n i t y , especially T y l o r s m a t e r i a l l y hard-pressed p r i m i t i v e h u m a n -
ity, have invented an idea fundamental t o v i r t u a l l y all religions, i n order t o solve
the n i g h t t i m e puzzle o f d r e a m i n g , a t r i v i a l puzzle b y c o m p a r i s o n w i t h the o n e
they bypassed i n t h e l i g h t o f day? D ü r k h e i m t h e n moves o n t o stiletto H e r b e r t
Spencer's amendments t o T y l o r s theory. H e ends o n his p o i n t about the real:

In the end, religion is only a dream, systematized and lived but without
foundation in the real. . . . Indeed, whether, in such conditions, the term
"science of religions" can be used without impropriety is questionable. . . .
What sort of a science is it whose principal discovery is to make the very
36
object it treats disappear?

R e t u r n i n g i n C h a p t e r 8 t o treat the idea o f soul a c c o r d i n g t o his o w n

p r i n c i p l e a b o u t t h e roots o f r e l i g i o n i n t h e real, D u r k h e i m gives his a r g u -
m e n t a s t r i k i n g e n d a n d t h e n a still m o r e s t r i k i n g coda. T h e idea o f soul, he
concludes, actually was n e e d e d t o solve a p r o b l e m that the d a y t i m e course o f
social life forced h u m a n reason t o c o n f r o n t : the indisputable reality that there
Translator's Introduction xxix

is death, yet c o m m u n i t i e s live o n , a n d there is b i r t h : " I n s u m , b e l i e f i n the

i m m o r t a l i t y o f souls is the o n l y w a y m a n is able t o c o m p r e h e n d a fact that
37
cannot fail t o attract his a t t e n t i o n : the p e r p e t u i t y o f the group's l i f e . " So-
cially, he argued, i t s t o o d f o r that c o l l e c t i v e life; i n d i v i d u a l i z e d , i t s t o o d f o r
the social part o f every h u m a n b e i n g , the h u m a n (as d i s t i n c t f r o m the animal)
part. I t is at o n c e a discrete b e i n g a n d an ethereal substance, at o n c e i n d i v i d -
38
ual par excellence and yet s o c i a l .
I n the coda, D ü r k h e i m ' s evocations o f L e i b n i z a n d K a n t b e g i n far f r o m
ethnography, b u t close t o us. U s i n g t h e i r ideas, he r e m i n d s us that soul, h o w -
ever slippery as a concept, is s o m e t h i n g h u m a n k i n d has c o m e t o k n o w v e r y
w e l l f r o m o u r e x p e r i e n c e o f the real: " T h e idea o f s o u l l o n g was, and i n part
39
still is, the m o s t universally h e l d f o r m o f the idea o f p e r s o n a l i t y . " A t the
very end, therefore, w e a r r i v e at t h e n o t i o n o f soul as an u t t e r l y indispensable
d a y t i m e c o n c e p t b y w h i c h h u m a n k i n d has expressed a v i v i d sense o f " p e r -
s o n " characterized b y discreteness a n d yet b y c o n t i n u i t y t h r o u g h t i m e . D e -
spite the analytical prickliness f o r science positive o f this reality, t o call its reality
4 0
" n o n e m p i r i c a l " w o u l d be o d d . A f t e r a l l , w e d o n o t o r d i n a r i l y have s o m e -
t h i n g n o n e m p i r i c a l i n m i n d w h e n w e t h i n k o f " p e r s o n " as a physical b o d y
plus s o m e t h i n g m o r e . A t the same t i m e , h o w e v e r , t o tackle the s o u l as an e m -
p i r i c a l m a t t e r is alive w i t h difficulties. Perhaps f o r this reason, D ü r k h e i m s at-
t e m p t t o set study o f i t i n t o the frame o f e m p i r i c a l scholarship has b e e n
almost c o m p l e t e l y i g n o r e d . So far as I a m aware, t h e o n l y recent scholarship
that puts t o use D ü r k h e i m s elegant r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f s o u l o n secular t e r r a i n
4
o f t h e real is M i c h e l Foucault's, i n Discipline and Punish. ^
I suspect that this r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f the s o u l f r o m the r a w m a t e r i a l o f real
experience takes us close t o the i n t u i t i o n a l sources o f D ü r k h e i m s w o r k o n r e -
l i g i o n . I suddenly felt those sources nearby m e one h o t A u g u s t a f t e r n o o n as I
c o n t e n d e d w i t h the chapter o n m o u r n i n g rites ( B o o k T h r e e , C h a p t e r 5 ) ,
w h i c h is f u l l o f evidence from Australia about sin, the soul, a n d the things that
happen t o o r are d o n e about b o t h . A t o n e p o i n t , the Book of Common Prayer
phrase "remission o f s i n " suddenly came u n b i d d e n from depths o f the heard
but d i m l y u n d e r s t o o d formulas o f m y o w n c h u r c h g o i n g c h i l d h o o d . I t came t o
m e i n a flash that D ü r k h e i m ' s m i n d m u s t have h a d strata o f the same sort. C o n -
sider the Modeh, a prayer o f thanks said from early c h i l d h o o d every m o r n i n g ,
even before w a s h i n g , b y means o f w h i c h Jews t h a n k G o d f o r the r e t u r n o f the
4 2
soul after its departure each n i g h t . I suspect that, o n an i n h e r e n d y elusive
topic like soul, D ü r k h e i m s o w n personal archaeology, available consciously
and unconsciously, enabled h i m t o e n c o u n t e r religious n o t i o n s o t h e r t h a n as
"a b l i n d m a n t r y i n g t o talk about c o l o u r . " C o n s i d e r this from D ü r k h e i m :
XXX Translator's Introduction

The soul is not merely distinct from its physical envelope, as the inside is
from the outside. . . . [Ijt elicits in some degree those feelings that are
everywhere reserved for that which is divine. If it is not made into a god, it
is seen at least as a spark of the divinity. This fundamental characteristic
would be inexplicable if the idea of the soul was no more than a prescien-
tific solution to the problem of dreams. Since there is nothing in dreaming
that can awaken religious emotion, the same must be true of the cause that
accounts for dreaming. However, if the soul is a bit of divine substance, it
43
represents something within us that is other than ourselves.

N o w consider this passage b y a J e w i s h a u t h o r i t y o f o u r o w n day:

To be sure, the world as a whole may be viewed as a divine manifestation,

but the world remains as something else than God, while the soul of man,
in its depths, may be considered a part of God. . . . [W]e speak of only an
aspect of God, or of a divine spark, as constituting the essence of the inner
44
life of man. . . . Every soul is thus a fragment of the divine light.

N o t to belabor a p o i n t that c a n n o t be d e v e l o p e d here, l e t m e i n v i t e f u r -

t h e r study b y n o t i n g t h a t D u r k h e i m analyzes A u s t r a l i a n n o t i o n s such as
t r a n s m i g r a t i o n a n d an o r i g i n a l f u n d o f souls a n d that t h e passage j u s t q u o t e d
f r o m goes o n t o t a l k a b o u t Knesset Israel, " t h e p o o l i n w h i c h all t h e souls i n
the w o r l d are c o n t a i n e d as a single essence." I f D u r k h e i m ' s personal e x p e r i -
ence is p a r t o f Formes i n this w a y a n d i f religion's roots i n t h e real p r e o c c u p y
h i m , as I have s h o w n t h e y d o , t h e n w e m u s t take v e r y seriously his remarks
addressed t o "free believers" a b o u t t h e injustice o f a n a t h e m a t i z i n g Formes as
" i r r e l i g i ó n . " T o m a k e this p o i n t , however, is n o t t o l a u n c h a silly search f o r
correspondences b e t w e e n D u r k h e i m ' s r e l i g i o u s u p b r i n g i n g a n d his t h e o r i z -
4 5
ing. R a t h e r , j u s t as m y o w n understandings o f r e l i g i o n c o u l d u n p r e d i c t a b l y
mediate m y a t t e m p t t o u n d e r s t a n d D u r k h e i m , so t o o m u s t his o w n early r e -
l i g i o u s e x p e r i e n c e have g i v e n h i m an u n a v o i d a b l e — a n d yet i n v a l u a b l e —
d o o r i n t o the subject o f this w o r k .
I n j u s t i f y i n g his m e t h o d o l o g i c a l c h o i c e o f s t u d y i n g t o t e m i s m as a useful
lens t h r o u g h w h i c h t o study r e l i g i o n i n general, D u r k h e i m observes that
46
sometimes " n a t u r e spontaneously makes s i m p l i f i c a t i o n s . " Analogously, I
suggest, D u r k h e i m ' s o w n e x p e r i e n c e p r o v i d e d a "spontaneous s i m p l i f i c a -
t i o n " that enabled h i m t o m o v e the t o p i c o f r e l i g i o n away f r o m its capacity
(or its confused a n d c o n f u s i n g incapacity) t o give an a c c o u n t o f t h e n a t u r a l
w o r l d , b u t instead t o explore, and e x p l o r e p r o f o u n d l y , its capacity t o deliver
a h u m a n l y shaped w o r l d t o that v e r y w o r l d ' s h u m a n shapers. A s he says i n the
C o n c l u s i o n , "[DJebates o n t h e t o p i c o f r e l i g i o n m o s t o f t e n t u r n a r o u n d and
Translator's Introduction XXXI

about o n the q u e s t i o n o f w h e t h e r r e l i g i o n can o r c a n n o t be r e c o n c i l e d w i t h

science. . . . B u t the b e l i e v e r s — t h e m e n w h o , l i v i n g a r e l i g i o u s life, have a
direct sense o f w h a t r e l i g i o n is made of-—object that, i n terms o f t h e i r day-
to-day experience, this w a y o f seeing does n o t r i n g true. . . . Its t r u e f u n c t i o n
47
is t o m a k e us act a n d t o help us l i v e . "
This once-practicing m e m b e r o f a tightly k n i t religious c o m m u n i t y w h o
abandoned r e l i g i o n , b u t w h o s e scientific w o r k was e n r i c h e d b y the fact that
certain core i n t u i t i o n s o f r e l i g i o n d i d n o t a b a n d o n h i m , k n e w an o f f - t h e -
m a r k t h e o r y o f r e l i g i o n w h e n he saw one. I t is n o surprise t o find h i m s c o r n -
ful o f w r i t e r s w h o t h i n k t h e y have u n d o n e r e l i g i o n m e r e l y b y d e b u n k i n g its
account o f nature. T o m i x a m e t a p h o r , the h u m a n K a n g a r o o clan m e m b e r s
we v i e w t h r o u g h his lens h a d b i g g e r t h e o r e t i c a l fish t o f r y t h a n the kangaroos
leaping a r o u n d t h e m . A n d so i t w i l l n o t be D ü r k h e i m w h o discovers a m o n g
the Australians " t h e t h o r o u g h g o i n g i d i o c y " that some authors ascribed t o
48
"primitives." I t w i l l be D ü r k h e i m w h o again a n d again refutes that d i s c o v -
ery, o u t o f those same authors' o w n evidence.
But f o r m y o w n chance e n c o u n t e r w i t h a p r o b l e m o f translation, I
w o u l d n o t have guessed the c o m p l e x strata that u n d e r l i e Formes. M o s t c o m -
mentators w a l k b a c k a n d f o r t h o n the g r o u n d d i r e c t l y above t h e m . W . S. F.
P i c k e r i n g a n d L e w i s A . Coser at least p o i n t o u t t h a t those layers are d o w n
4 9
there a n d are i m p o r t a n t . B u t consider A l v i n G o u l d n e r s s t u n n i n g charac-
50
t e r i z a t i o n o f D ü r k h e i m s t h o u g h t as "Catholic o r g a n i c i s m . " A n d Aron, in
his magisterial c o m p a r a t i v e p o r t r a i t u r e o f n i n e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y masters, paints
D ü r k h e i m first, i g n o r i n g t h e q u e s t i o n o f r e l i g i o u s b a c k g r o u n d altogether
u n t i l he arrives at his second p o r t r a i t , o f M a x W e b e r , a great sociologist o f re-
l i g i o n w h o , he observes, " b e l o n g [ e d ] t o a p r o f o u n d l y r e l i g i o u s f a m i l y ( a l -
51
though probably a nonbeliever himself)." B u t i t is W e b e r w h o called
h i m s e l f r e l i g i o u s l y " u n m u s i c a l , " w h i l e D ü r k h e i m t o l d an audience that he
was n o t b l i n d t o r e l i g i o n s ' c o l o r . I n general, I f o u n d l i t t l e c o n f i r m a t i o n f o r
m y o w n sense that D u r k h e i m ' s r e l i g i o u s b a c k g r o u n d m a t t e r e d i n w h a t he
5 2
said and w r o t e . S o m e w r i t e r s apparently believe t h a t t r u t h can be a r r i v e d at
f r o m n o w h e r e i n particular, o r f r o m e v e r y w h e r e at once, a n d that the person
is irrelevant. I n t h e case o f testing hypotheses, that v i e w is doubdess c o r r e c t .
I n t h e case o f genius, however, i t is self-contradictory. Creative genius is b y
its nature i n d i v i d u a l , a n d its sources are quintessentially personal.
XXX11 Translator's Introduction

INDIVIDUAL MINDS A N D YET COLLECTIVE

CONSCIOUSNESS: SOME KEY ARGUMENTS
I N FORMES
O r d i n a r i l y m y task w o u l d n o w b e t o render an a c c o u n t o f D ü r k h e i m s i n t e l -
lectual w o r l d : the influences h e i n h e r i t e d a n d passed o n , the debates he
w a g e d w i t h his c o n t e m p o r a r i e s , the understandings h e t o o k f o r g r a n t e d b u t
that w e c a n n o t — i n short, a w o r l d o f texts i n t o w h i c h Formes fits. T h e r e is,
o f course, such a w o r l d , b u t u n d e r s t a n d i n g i t can b e left f o r later w i t h o u t i m -
mediate loss t o u n d e r s t a n d i n g the central arguments o f Formes. O n e set o f
questions t o be d e l v e d i n t o elsewhere w o u l d c e r t a i n l y be D u r k h e i m ' s c o n -
versations w i t h K a n t , a b o u t t h e p r o b l e m o f k n o w l e d g e a n d a b o u t m o r a l
o b l i g a t i o n , w h i c h m e r i t s a k i n d o f a t t e n t i o n that his t r a d i t i o n a l audience o f
sociologists a n d a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s has i n general n o t g i v e n i t ; a n d so does his
dialogue w i t h A u g u s t e C o m t e , a p h i l o s o p h e r n o w r e m e m b e r e d b y m o s t o f
us o n l y via t w o o r three c a n n e d characterizations—academic s o u n d bites, so
53
to speak. A n o t h e r w o u l d be t h e book's r e l a t i o n t o the versions o f p s y c h o l -
o g y that represented the state o f the art i n E u r o p e at the t u r n o f this c e n -
5 4
tury. Finally, there is a w h o l e set o f questions that are p e r e n n i a l and that
have t h e same rewards as p l a y i n g scales: w h e t h e r Formes (like D u r k h e i m ' s
55
w o r k generally) is o r is n o t a h i s t o r i c a l — a n d , i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h that, does
o r does n o t b e l o n g t o the miscellany o f t h e o r e t i c a l n o t i o n s that came t o be
56
called f u n c t i o n a l i s m . I leave all those questions aside f o r n o w .
I n o t e b u t leave aside controversies a b o u t the use D ü r k h e i m made o f the
A u s t r a l i a n e t h n o g r a p h y available i n his t i m e (and, t o a lesser e x t e n t , N a t i v e
A m e r i c a n a n d others), o n the g r o u n d s that even f u r i o u s a n d e m o t i o n a l aca-
d e m i c debates o f t h e past are n o t always r i v e t i n g , o r especially e n l i g h t e n i n g ,
i n the present. T h i s is n o t t o say that the e t h n o g r a p h i c details can safely be
s k i p p e d . As w e l e a r n r i g h t f r o m t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n , D ü r k h e i m intends that his
o w n r o u t e t h r o u g h t h e A u s t r a l i a n e t h n o g r a p h y s h o u l d lead t o " m a n i n g e n -
e r a l " — a n d " m o r e especially," h e says, "present-day m a n , f o r there is n o n e
o t h e r that w e have a greater interest i n k n o w i n g w e l l . " T o t e m i s m seemed t o
h i m a usefully s i m p l i f y i n g case that w o u l d reveal " t h e r e l i g i o u s nature o f
57
m a n . . . a f u n d a m e n t a l a n d p e r m a n e n t aspect o f h u m a n i t y . " So a l t h o u g h
Formes displays his grasp o f t h e ethnographies o n t o t e m i s m that w e r e avail-
able t o h i m , i t is far less an investigation o f h o w o r w h y h u m a n beings c o m e
t o i m a g i n e themselves as plants o r animals t h a n an i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f h o w t h e y
c o m e t o i m a g i n e themselves as h u m a n beings. Since the fact j u m p s o f f the
page that t o t e m i c c o m m u n i t i e s m u s t be i m a g i n e d , t h e i r study enables us t o
Translator's Introduction xxxin

grasp the same fact i n r e l a t i o n t o o u r o w n : T o exist at a l l , all c o m m u n i t i e s

must be i m a g i n e d . W h a t his i n t e l l e c t u a l descendant B e n e d i c t A n d e r s o n has
so w e l l s h o w n f o r large-scale t w e n t i e t h - c e n t u r y a n t i c o l o n i a l n a t i o n a l i s m is
5 8
also t r u e o f any face-to-face c o m m u n i t y and o f t h e smallest A u s t r a l i a n c l a n .
B u t clearly, n o o n e today s h o u l d read Formes i f he o r she is o n l y interested i n
59
the r e l i g i o n s o f A u s t r a l i a .
Finally, I w i l l n o t repeat here w h a t nearly three generations o f c r i t i q u e
have b y n o w s h o w n i n great detail about w h e r e He t h e shortcomings of Formes
and o f D u r k h e i m ' s w o r k m o r e generally. I cannot d o better t h a n Steven Lukes s
6 0
intellectual b i o g r a p h y o f D u r k h e i m , R o b e r t Nisbet's analysis o f his t h o u g h t
61
i n its intellectual c o n t e x t , o r W S. F. Pickering's close study o f his sociology
6 2
of religion, t o name o n l y three q u i t e different studies o u t o f a l o n g and often
distinguished list. I make n o a t t e m p t here t o r e v i e w the vast and g r o w i n g l i t e r -
ature. I n a d d i t i o n , since I have made i t m y task t o s h o w w h y the b o o k can still
be read w i t h e x c i t e m e n t , I bypass m a n y difficulties and l e g i t i m a t e qualifica-
tions. Instead, I focus o n key bits a n d pieces o f D u r k h e i m ' s a r g u m e n t that are
still i m m e d i a t e l y provocative, and that m o v e t h r o u g h the w o r l d as canned char-
acterizations o f the b o o k , part o f an intellectual w o r l d about D u r k h e i m ' s s o c i -
o l o g y o f r e l i g i o n . A f t e r b r i e f l y c o n s i d e r i n g the elements o f his famous b u t
contested d e f i n i t i o n o f r e l i g i o n , let us t u r n t o three such t r a d i t i o n a l academic
sound bites, each o f w h i c h has always i m p l i e d p o t e n t i a l l y hostile queries: D u r -
63
kheim's " e q u a t i o n " o f r e l i g i o n and society, o r G o d a n d society, his use o f c o l -
lective concepts, and, foremost a m o n g those, his sacred/profane d i c h o t o m y .
T h i s w o r l d about D u r k h e i m contains a g o o d deal o f d i s t o r t i o n , i n p a r t
the legacy o f Joseph W a r d Swain's m o n u m e n t a l 1915 translation. D i s t o r t i o n s
arise n o t o n l y f r o m inaccuracies i n Swain's translating, b u t also from t h e c h a l -
lenges o f an E n g l i s h t e x t that discourages readers from t a c k l i n g Formes u n d e r
t h e i r o w n i n t e l l e c t u a l steam. Its d i f f i c u l t E n g l i s h invites reliance o n i n t e r p r e -
tational clues f r o m various "trots." I f w e f o l l o w the o u t - o f - c o n t e x t bites t o
t h e i r i n t e l l e c t u a l places i n Formes itself, h o w e v e r , w e g a i n keys t o the b o o k as
a w h o l e . S o m e o f the m o s t persistendy t r o u b l e s o m e o f those bites are f o u n d
i n B o o k T w o , C h a p t e r 7. T h e r e , t h e ideas o f t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e a n d force are
d e r i v e d as o u t p u t s o f collective life, that is, as o u t p u t s o f t h e mechanisms b y
w h i c h c o l l e c t i v e life is p r o d u c e d . I f those ideas d i d n o t exist, t h e y o r s o m e -
t h i n g q u i t e l i k e t h e m w o u l d have t o be i n v e n t e d . I w i l l t u r n t o this c e n t r a l l y
i m p o r t a n t chapter o f Formes after e x a m i n i n g D u r k h e i m ' s m a n n e r o f d e f i n i n g
his overall subject.
XXXIV Translator's Introduction

Religion Denned
D ü r k h e i m defines r e l i g i o n i n B o o k O n e , C h a p t e r 1:

A religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred

things, that is to say, things set apart and forbidden—beliefs and practices
which unite into one single moral community called a Church, all those
64
who adhere to them.

Bear three points i n m i n d . First, r e l i g i o n is n o t d e f i n e d i n terms o f a n y t h i n g

that w o u l d t u r n a m a n of science positive away f r o m observable p h e n o m e n a , or
the real—not d i v i n i t y , the o t h e r w o r l d l y , the miraculous, o r the supernatural.
Second, the phrase " u n i f i e d system" postulates that religious beliefs and rites
are n o t hodgepodges b u t are i n t e r n a l l y ordered. T h i r d , the objects o f those
rites a n d beliefs acquire t h e i r religious status as sacred, o r "set apart and f o r -
b i d d e n , " as a result o f j o i n t a c t i o n b y people w h o set t h e m apart a n d w h o , by
the same stroke, constitute themselves a " m o r a l c o m m u n i t y " o r "a C h u r c h . "
O n c e again, t h e n , r e l i g i o n is social, social, social. I n a d d i t i o n , the " m o r a l " i n
the t e r m " m o r a l c o m m u n i t y " specifies that the groups are n o t hodgepodges
either b u t are made u p o f individuals w h o have m u t u a l l y recognized and rec-
ognizable identities that set t h e m , c o g n i t i v e l y a n d n o r m a t i v e l y , o n shared
h u m a n t e r r a i n . H e n c e , the q u a l i t y o f sacredness exists i n the real, and its cre-
a t i o n is the observable p r o d u c t o f collective d o i n g . H e r e is one reason that
D ü r k h e i m f o u n d i t attractive t o handle rites analytically as b e i n g p r i o r t o b e -
65
liefs.
T h i s d e f i n i t i o n foreshadows the o r g a n i z a t i o n of Formes as a w h o l e . B o o k
T w o examines t o t e m i c beliefs insofar as t h e y seem t o h i m j o i n t l y t o c o n s t i -
t u t e a " u n i f i e d system" o f core beliefs; at t h e same t i m e i t associates those b e -
liefs w i t h o n e k i n d o f m o r a l c o m m u n i t y , w h i c h D ü r k h e i m calls "social
66
o r g a n i z a t i o n based o n clans." B o o k T h r e e examines those beliefs as t h e y are
b e i n g c o l l e c t i v e l y done, e n t e r i n g the real t h r o u g h the p e r f o r m a n c e o f rites. I t
makes an analytical d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n t w o m o m e n t s o f r i t u a l d o i n g that
t y p i c a l l y o c c u r simultaneously o n t h e g r o u n d : d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , o r d o i n g that
creates the sacredness o f p e o p l e o r things (negative rites, characterized b y set-
t i n g apart people a n d things, t h r o u g h the various procedures described), a n d
i n t e g r a t i o n , o r d o i n g that takes place a m i d already sanctified p e o p l e o r things
(positive rites, characterized b y the b r i n g i n g together o f sanctified things and
67
people, again b y v a r i o u s p r o c e d u r e s ) .
Translator's Introduction xxxv

The God/Society Equation

V i r t u a l l y everyone w h o has e n c o u n t e r e d Formes is stopped dead w h e n D ü r k -
h e i m says, "Is i t n o t that the g o d a n d the society are o n e a n d the same?" F r o m
this passage has fallen the nugget that b y " e q u a t i n g " the g o d w i t h the society,
D ü r k h e i m "reduces" the g o d t o the society (sometimes revealingly s h o r t -
handed as G o d , capital " G , " and society). M a n y discussions about the i n t e r -
p r e t a t i o n o f Formes converge here, at his famous " e q u a t i o n . " N o w , i f w e go t o
the actual statement i n the actual a r g u m e n t , w e recover a fact that is sometimes
lost sight of: D ü r k h e i m s question i n that chapter is h o w i t comes about that
rationally c o n s t i t u t e d Australians ascribe p o w e r t o t o t e m i c beings and i n d e e d
t o s y m b o l i c representations o f t h e m . As usual, he seeks t o f i n d the basis o f that
i n the real. H i s p r o b l e m is n o t w h o , w h a t , o r h o w great t h e g o d is b u t h o w a
science o f r e l i g i o n can t u r n its b e a m o f l i g h t o n the religious object w i t h o u t
" m a k i n g i t disappear." T h e a r g u m e n t s u r r o u n d i n g t h e n u g g e t w i l l clarify:

[The totem] expresses and symbolizes two different kinds of things. From
one point of view, it is the outward and visible form of what I have called
the totemic principle or god; and from another, it is also the symbol of a
particular society that is called the clan. It is the flag of the clan, the sign by
which each clan is distinguished from the others, the visible mark of its dis-
tinctiveness, and a mark that is borne by everything that in any way belongs
to the clan: men, animals, and things. Thus if the totem is the symbol of both
the god and the society, is this not because the god and the society are one and the
same? H o w could the emblem of the group have taken the form of that
quasi-divinity if the group and the divinity were two distinct realities? Thus
the god of the clan, the totemic principle, can be none other than the clan
itself, but the clan transfigured and imagined in the physical form of the
68
plant or animal that serves as totem.

D u r k h e i m ' s q u e s t i o n a n d his answer have t e n d e d t o b r i n g o u t c u r i o u s l y t h e -

o l o g i c a l anxieties and reticences.
6 9
Suppose he h a d c o m m i t t e d a " r e d u c t i o n . " W o u l d i t m e a n that some
necessary t h i n g is lost? I f so, w h a t ? F o r c e r t a i n believers, t h e answer o b v i o u s l y
is that G o d , capital " G , " is lost (and so is " t h e g o d , " i f w e have i n m i n d b e -
lievers e c u m e n i c a l e n o u g h t o battle f o r the pagan Greeks' Zeus, say, o r f o r
those aspects o f t h e e m p e r o r o f m i d - t w e n t i e t h - c e n t u r y Japanese that w e n t
b e y o n d the o r d i n a r i l y h u m a n ) . B u t w h o is G o d t h a t secular social scientists
7 0
s h o u l d take n o t e o f h i m ? F o r secular social scientists, o r f o r m e n a n d
w o m e n o f science positive, r e l i g i o n c a n n o t be altered b y s u b t r a c t i n g a super-
natural b e i n g f r o m i t . T h e i r m e t h o d s b e g i n f r o m u n b e l i e f (professionally,
XXXVI Translator's Introduction

n o t necessarily i n t e r m s o f personal c o n v i c t i o n ) i n a n y t h i n g that c a n n o t i n

p r i n c i p l e be observed b y anyone w h o uses those m e t h o d s . T h r o u g h those
m e t h o d s o f o b s e r v a t i o n , p e o p l e w i t h G o d l o o k exactly the same as p e o p l e
7 1
without God. N o supernatural r e a l m o r b e i n g is available t o a ( m e t h o d -
o l o g i c a l l y ) u n b e l i e v i n g social scientist, w h o can c l a i m access o n l y t o nature,
n o t t o supernature. T o a believer, o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , i t is unclear that anyone
else's supernatural r e a l m is available. So unless s o c i o l o g y m u s t be made c o n -
sonant w i t h t h e o l o g y , n o t h i n g necessary is lost. A reader n o w w o n d e r i n g
w h e t h e r the i n t e g r i t y o f t h e o l o g y is t h e r e b y c o m p r o m i s e d has a r r i v e d o n the
fascinating a n d a m b i g u o u s s p i r i t u a l t e r r i t o r y p r o m i s e d b y the quotations
f r o m D u r k h e i m w i t h w h i c h I began this I n t r o d u c t i o n . T h e r e is n o n e e d t o
resolve the q u e s t i o n . T o keep i t o p e n is t o keep pace w i t h an agile g u i d e t o
this t e r r i t o r y .
If, alternatively, w e asked w h a t necessary t h i n g m u s t be k e p t o r added,
some w o u l d argue that n o t G o d o r gods b u t belief o r i e n t e d t o h i m o r her, o r
7 2
t o t h e m , m u s t be i n c l u d e d . F o r D u r k h e i m , h o w e v e r , r e l i g i o n was "a f u n -
d a m e n t a l and p e r m a n e n t aspect o f h u m a n i t y , " t h o u g h gods w e r e n o t a f u n -
d a m e n t a l a n d p e r m a n e n t aspect o f r e l i g i o n . I t thus f o l l o w e d that n e i t h e r gods
themselves n o r beliefs a b o u t gods c o u l d be essential. W h a t i f w e disagreed,
insisting that observed b e l i e v i n g was essential, c o n t e n d i n g s o m e t h i n g l i k e this:
I f gods and t h e supernatural c a n n o t be observed b y scientific means, a c t i o n
o r i e n t e d t o t h e m o r presupposing b e l i e f i n t h e m can be. B u t i f o n l y b e l i e f
i n supernatural beings is the v i c t i m , t h e n D u r k h e i m has a p o w e r f u l r e p l y :
N o t h i n g durable is lost, for w h a t is m o r e f l e e t i n g o r h a r d t o observe t h a n
subjective belief? W h a t is m o r e o p e n t o d e r a i l m e n t , f r o m o n e m o m e n t t o the
n e x t , w h i m s i c a l l y o r i n the c o l d l i g h t o f observable fact (recall those v e r y
things w h o s e "resistance" r e l i g i o n s " c o u l d n o t have o v e r c o m e " ) ? A n d b e -
sides, f r o m t h e s t a n d p o i n t o f t h e social scientist, believers i n gods l o o k e x -
actly t h e same as unbelievers i n g o d s — a n d exactly t h e same as people w i t h
beliefs i n o r a b o u t o t h e r t h i n g s . T h e subjective is n o h a n d i e r t h a n the super-
natural, and b u t s l i g h t l y m o r e accessible. I n those t e r m s , w e can b e g i n t o see
t h e advantage i n D u r k h e i m ' s c h o i c e o f o b s e r v i n g r e l i g i o u s ideas (représenta-
tions, t h e subject o f B o o k T w o ) as b e i n g (observably) done (as attitudes rituelles,
t h e subject o f B o o k T h r e e ) a n d , hence, w h y even his e x p o s i t i o n o f the ideas
( B o o k T w o ) resorts t o s l o w - m o t i o n , set-piece d e p i c t i o n s o f t o t e m i c rites,
g i v i n g t h e m an almost y o u - a r e - t h e r e vividness.
As a w a y o u t o f the p r e d i c a m e n t o f e v a p o r a t i n g t o o l s , i t m i g h t be t e m p t -
i n g t o accept b e l i e f as g i v e n , t a k i n g u p t h e W . I . Thomases' famous s o c i o -
l o g i c a l c r u t c h : W h a t e v e r is b e l i e v e d i n as real is real i n its consequences. B u t
t o regard b e l i e f as a s i m p l e g i v e n is also t o s k i r t t h e o b v i o u s q u e s t i o n o f h o w
Translator's Introduction xxxvn

people c o m e t o treat s o m e t h i n g as real that t o the u n b e l i e v i n g o n l o o k e r c a n -

n o t be. T h e w o r l d o f r e l i g i o n is f u l l o f i m p r o b a b l e things: C h r i s t i a n s ' I m -
maculate C o n c e p t i o n o r t h e i r life f r o m death; Aztecs' sunrises caused b y
h u m a n sacrifices; L i t h u a n i a n s ' g a i n i n g w e l l - b e i n g f r o m the bones o f St.
C a s i m i r ; Australians' black m e n w h o are also w h i t e cockatoos. A n d as D ü r k -
h e i m h i m s e l f p o i n t s o u t , deadpan, p e o p l e l o o k m o s t l i k e relatives and friends,
73
n o t l i k e plants o r a n i m a l s . " R e a l i n its consequences" q u i c k l y wears t h i n .
W h i c h consequences? W h a t reality? I f t h e faithful are t h o u g h t o f as r a t i o n a l l y
c o n s t i t u t e d h u m a n beings, w h a t w o u l d cause t h e m t o fly i n t h e face o f w h a t
they can observe f r o m m o m e n t t o m o m e n t and year after year? A n d is o u r
u n d e r s t a n d i n g advanced i f w e assume t h e r e l i g i o u s f a i t h f u l o f all ages m e r e l y
to be p e o p l e w h o can be s o l d t h e B r o o k l y n B r i d g e , n o t j u s t o n c e b u t over
and over again? U l t i m a t e l y , t h e n , t o leave b e l i e f u n e x a m i n e d is t o g a i n a
mentally incompetent human.
H e n c e , o n c e again, D ü r k h e i m s p o i n t a b o u t t h e real holds i m p o r t a n c e : A
h u m a n i n s t i t u t i o n that endures m u s t necessarily be f o u n d e d o n s o m e t h i n g that
anyone, n o t j u s t those certifiably afflicted w i t h " t h o r o u g h g o i n g idiocy," can
accept as b e i n g really r e a l — n o t j u s t "believed i n " as real a n d n o t j u s t p a t r o n -
ized as "believed i n . " T h e w h o l e o f B o o k O n e spectacularly demolishes t h e o -
ries o f r e l i g i o n t h a t w a n t t o be scientific b u t w h o s e l o g i c i m p l i e s that religion's
objects are unreal, and its subjects eternally o p e n t o b e i n g sold the B r o o k l y n
7 4
Bridge. H o w t h e objects o f r e l i g i o n can be real f o r a secular social scientist is
the q u e s t i o n D ü r k h e i m asks his reader t o explore w i t h h i m . H i s p o i n t is n o t t o
d i m i n i s h G o d b u t t o lift i n t o v i e w the reality o f G o d w o r s h i p p e d , the reality
o f the experience o f G o d , a n d the r a t i o n a l i t y o f those w h o experience G o d .
T h e C h a p t e r 7 academic s o u n d b i t e j u s t p i c k e d apart belongs t o an e x -
t e n d e d a r g u m e n t establishing that " r e l i g i o u s forces are real forces," n o t m e r e
figments o f m y t h i c o r m y s t i c belief. I f w e b e g i n again, n o t at t h a t m e m o r a b l e
s h o w - s t o p p i n g l i n e a b o u t the g o d a n d t h e society as b e i n g o n e b u t i n its i n -
tellectual c o n t e x t w i t h i n Formes, w e n e e d n o t h o p a r o u n d t o a v o i d t r e a d i n g
o n the t h e o l o g i c a l a n d metaphysical feet o f social researchers a n d t h e i r s u b -
jects. T o start, a l l w e have t o d o is concede t h a t sometimes the objects o f r e -
l i g i o n strain the sense o f w h a t is real b u t d o n o t necessarily lose the adherent
for that reason. (Besides, f o r D ü r k h e i m , the v e r y w a r p a n d w o o f o f r e l i g i o n s
7 5
is s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n reality "as t h e senses s h o w i t t o h i m . " A n d yet
w i t h o u t this h u m a n i m a g i n i n g b e y o n d reality as t h e senses s h o w i t , science
w o u l d be impossible.) R e l i g i o u s c o n c e p t i o n s that d o strain c r e d u l i t y pose t h e
question D ü r k h e i m tries t o answer. H i s r e l i g i o u s h u m a n is capable o f n o t i c -
i n g religion's e m p i r i c a l discrepancies. E v e n i f i t was t r u e , as L a C a p r a has ( I
t h i n k , m i s t a k e n l y ) suggested, that D ü r k h e i m is o n a " T h o m i s t " m i s s i o n o f
XXXVU1 Translator's Introduction

r e c o n c i l i n g f a i t h w i t h reason, h e w o u l d be d o i n g so precisely because i t is b e -

76
l i e v i n g that is i n h e r e n t l y p r o b l e m a t i c f o r t h e f a i t h f u l . D o i n g , o n the o t h e r
h a n d , is n o t ; hence, yet a n o t h e r r o u t e t o t h e p r i o r i t y D ü r k h e i m gives t o rites
over beliefs a n d its usefulness as a w a y o f t h i n k i n g a b o u t t h e persistence o f
77
beliefs that are nonsensical o n t h e i r f a c e . B u t n o t o n l y that: Since w e speak
o f " T h o m i s m , " let us r e m e m b e r that T h o m a s A q u i n a s came centuries after
Jesus's personal f r i e n d T h o m a s , w h o m the sophisticated faithful o f a n t i q u i t y
7 8
passed d o w n the ages as an eternal f i g m e n t o f r e l i g i o u s life: d o u b t . I f reli-
g i o n c o u l d exist only o n c o n d i t i o n o f b e i n g b e l i e v e d o r even believable, its
life w o u l d have h a d n u m b e r e d days, speedily exhausted.
T h e l i n e a b o u t the g o d a n d t h e society as o n e and t h e same can be
t h o u g h t about i n yet a n o t h e r way. C o n s i d e r the r e l i g i o u s w o r l d i n t o w h i c h
G o d , o r " t h e g o d , " sent t h e T e n C o m m a n d m e n t s ( E x o d u s 2 0 ) . N o t e that the
first five c o n c e r n t h e relationship o f humans t o G o d , a n d t h e second five,
that o f h u m a n s t o o n e another. F u r t h e r m o r e , the passage contains n o i n v i t a -
t i o n t o regard e i t h e r set as h a v i n g a different o r h i g h e r status t h a n t h e other,
as b e i n g o b l i g a t o r y i n a w a y that the o t h e r is n o t — o r , f o r t h a t matter, as b e -
i n g separately c o n c e i v e d . I n terms o f t h a t t h e o l o g i c a l w o r l d , the c o n c e p t i o n s
o f the g o d a n d o f t h e society are inseparable. T o say that " t h e g o d a n d the so-
c i e t y are o n e a n d t h e same" is n o t necessarily t o say any m o r e t h a n G o d d i d ,
speaking t h r o u g h Moses. I t seems t o m e that Formes t h r o u g h o u t has that
w o r l d i n v i e w . I f t h e p o i n t j u s t m a d e is at all c o n t e n t i o u s , and I have n o
d o u b t i t is, t h e n t h e contentiousness itself gives a p o i n t t o D ü r k h e i m s strat-
egy i n c h o o s i n g an e x o t i c case.

The Case for a Simplifying Case

L e t us n o w n o t i c e h o w D ü r k h e i m prepares the t o o l o f using an e x o t i c case
t o simplify. First, h e assumes t h e Australians t o be r a t i o n a l l y c o n s t i t u t e d h u -
mans, as are t h e i r Parisian c o n t e m p o r a r i e s . T h e r e is n o q u e s t i o n o f one's b e -
i n g c i v i l i z e d a n d t h e o t h e r n o t , o r o f t h e t w o groups' h a v i n g different m e n t a l
c o n s t i t u t i o n s . H e presumes the Australians t o h o l d the same t i d e o f " m a n " as
Parisians do, a n d i n t h e same r i g h t . " M a n is m a n o n l y because he is c i v i l i z e d , "
79
he says. T h e r e f o r e Australia is as g o o d a place as any o t h e r f o r s t u d y i n g " t h e
religious nature o f m a n , " a n d i t has an advantage: Small-scale, s t o n e - t o o l -
using societies w e r e " s i m p l e " a n d thus p e r m i t t e d a degree o f c l a r i t y a n d
distinctness i n t h i n k i n g that France d i d n o t . Formes exemplifies a single
w e l l - c o n d u c t e d e x p e r i m e n t w h o s e results m a y be p u t f o r w a r d as h o l d i n g f o r
all cases that can be s h o w n t o be o f the same k i n d . F u r t h e r m o r e , as C o m t e
Translator's Introduction xxxix

80
had said, " T h e simplest p h e n o m e n a are the m o s t g e n e r a l . " Boiled down
to its c o n s t i t u e n t elements, r e l i g i o n i n A u s t r a l i a is r e l i g i o n a n y w h e r e else.
Second, i n u s i n g e t h n o g r a p h y t o study r e l i g i o n , D u r k h e i m follows ex-
actly a p r o c e d u r e others h a d used i n a t t a c k i n g r e l i g i o n : t a k i n g e x o t i c facts t o
expose r e l i g i o n universally as d e l u s i o n , f a b r i c a t i o n , a n d the like. W h a t is
d e l u s i o n a n d so o n i n r e l i g i o n a m o n g the n a k e d " X ' s " is also d e l u s i o n a n d
so o n i n r e l i g i o n a m o n g t h e w e l l - c o v e r e d consumers o f haute couture. B u t
he t h e n stands t h a t p r o c e d u r e o n its head, m a k i n g A u s t r a l i a serve as a s i m -
ple and, b y t h e same stroke, a t o u g h case f o r religion's roots i n t h e real.
D e m o n s t r a t i n g t h e t o u g h case w i l l c a r r y the easier one: W h a t is t r u e for t h e
t u r n - o f - t h e - c e n t u r y A u s t r a l i a n w i l l t h e n be t r u e f o r the t u r n - o f - t h e - c e n t u r y
81
Parisian.
D u r k h e i m uses t h e same r h e t o r i c a l tactic i n a r g u i n g the reality o f " r e l i -
gious forces": t a k i n g t h e idea of tnana o r t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e as t h e t r u l y t o u g h
case. W h a t is s h o w n t o be t r u e o f the less credible real w i l l be established f o r
the m o r e c r e d i b l e o n e . B e f o r e s h o w i n g h o w this t o u g h case also simplifies,
however, I b r i e f l y digress, f o r there is o n e c r i t i c i s m against D u r k h e i m ' s use o f
e t h n o g r a p h y t h a t can derail us i f bypassed. D u r k h e i m was w r o n g , i t is said,
to i m a g i n e that the societies a n d r e l i g i o n s o f Australia w e r e " s i m p l e . " T h e i r
ideas w e r e as elaborate o r sophisticated as anyone else's, a n d since those ideas
were as m u c h subject t o h i s t o r i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t a n d change as anyone else's,
he h a d a m i s t a k e n fantasy (shared w i t h others i n his t i m e ) that Australia's
s t o n e - t o o l users preserved i n p r i m i t i v e f o r m w h a t m u s t have existed at t h e
82
d a w n o f h u m a n i t y . A l t h o u g h he d i d n o t i n fact t h i n k t h a t , such c r i t i c i s m s
are nevertheless p a r t l y v a l i d . Yet s i m p l i c i t y is n o t o n l y a w a y o f characteriz-
i n g (or s t i g m a t i z i n g ) things b u t also a w a y o f setting p r o b l e m s w i t h c l a r i t y —
for e x a m p l e , physicists' c a l c u l a t i n g g r a v i t a t i o n a l force u n d e r the (never t r u e )
assumption o f a perfect v a c u u m . Since w e easily u n d e r s t a n d w h y i t is useful
to s i m p l i f y b y assuming away the atmosphere, w e can easily set aside as i r r e l -
83
evant someone's insistence that i t is really t h e r e . Similarly, rather t h a n settle
for t h e generous discovery that l i t d e a b o u t t h e Australians was simple, w e d o
8 4
better t o i m a g i n e w h a t m i g h t have b e e n c o m p l i c a t i n g a b o u t the F r e n c h .
W h a t m i g h t D u r k h e i m have t h o u g h t s i m p l i f y i n g a b o u t l o o k i n g as far
afield f r o m France as he d i d t o investigate " t h e r e l i g i o u s nature o f m a n " ?
O n e answer surely was t h e u n c o n t r o l l a b l y vague, h a l f - f o r m u l a t e d n o t i o n s
that are characteristic o f t h e familiar. ( T h i n k back t o m y c o n t e n t i o u s state-
m e n t a b o u t t h e T e n C o m m a n d m e n t s . ) I f the d i s c i p l i n e o f e t h n o g r a p h i c
study is t o u n c o v e r w h a t is f a m i l i a r i n t h e strange, i t is also t o u n c o v e r w h a t
is strange a b o u t the familiar. F r o m that angle, things Europeans vaguely
" k n o w " a b o u t t h e " p o w e r o f G o d " l o o k strange e n o u g h t o m a k e t h e e x o t i c
xl Translator's Introduction

case of mana a usefully s i m p l i f y i n g place t o b e g i n . W h y is i t , f o r example, that

f r o m w i t h i n t h e J u d e o - C h r i s t i a n t r a d i t i o n , even f o r t h o r o u g h l y secular p e o -
ple, i t is s o m e h o w less t r o u b l e s o m e t o speak a b o u t " t h e p o w e r o f G o d " and
m e a n a transcendental d e i t y t h a n t o use the same phrase i n respect t o a p h y s -
ical object? T o b o r r o w Parsons's phrase again, b o t h d e i t y a n d mana s h o u l d
p r o b a b l y be classified together, as " n o n e m p i r i c a l reality." Yet s o m e h o w , f o r
n o l o g i c a l reason, kfeeb l i k e a different m a t t e r t o speak o f a transcendent d e -
i t y t h a n t o speak o f mana, the t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e , o r someplace i n the real
w h e r e objects speak w i t h lips o f w o o d a n d smite f r o m p a i n t e d pedestals (and
inversely, w h e r e lips a n d s m i t i n g hands o f flesh are alleged t o be o n l y h u m a n
i n appearance b u t s u p e r h u m a n i n essence).
T h i n k o f h o w w e read the e n c o u n t e r b e t w e e n the ancient Israelites a n d
t h e i r enemies, the p e o p l e o f A s h d o d , w h o b u i l t a t o w e r i n g g o d w i t h feet o f
clay. T h a t phrase "feet o f c l a y " contains i n itself, and takes as g i v e n , a c o m -
p l i c a t e d and c o m p l i c a t i n g discourse a b o u t o b v i o u s l y m i s p l a c e d (as opposed
t o w e l l - p l a c e d ) f a i t h . A n d consider this: I t is a transcendent G o d w h o s e e x -
istence a l o n g t r a d i t i o n i n W e s t e r n p h i l o s o p h y attempts t o prove rationally,
w h i l e l i v i n g w i t h t h e c u l t u r a l l y g i v e n safety net t h a t the failure o f p r o o f n e e d
85
n o t i m p o s e t h e c o n c l u s i o n that that G o d does n o t i n fact e x i s t . I f I am right
a b o u t w h a t w e " k n o w " c u l t u r a l l y a b o u t t h e " p o w e r o f G o d , " even the m o s t
secular a m o n g us, i n contrast t o the ideas D ü r k h e i m explores (mana, kwoth,
orenda, etc.), I have j u s t t u r n e d u p the v o l u m e o f o u r o w n half-heard c u l t u r a l
M u z a k , as i t w e r e , o f an especially t r o u b l e s o m e case f o r the real. W h y s h o u l d
this be so? F o r the same reason that an " e q u a t i o n " o f society a n d G o d s h o u l d
be t r o u b l e s o m e f o r social scientists supposedly o p e r a t i n g n o n t h e o l o g i c a l l y . A
m o r a l e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e m a t e r i a l perfect v a c u u m was called for.

Conscience Collective
Mana, D ü r k h e i m says, is the " q u a s i - d i v i n e p r i n c i p l e " i m m a n e n t i n things
that gives p o w e r to c e r t a i n plants o r animals, and to representations of them. B e -
fore t a c k l i n g i t , he r e m i n d s his reader ( i n the last paragraph o f the p r e c e d i n g
chapter) that C o m t e , i n c a l l i n g t h e idea o f force metaphysical, a n d m e t a -
physics t h e direct descendant o f theology, h a d already i m p l i e d that the idea
o f force began i n r e l i g i o n , f r o m w h i c h i t was b o r r o w e d first b y p h i l o s o p h y
a n d later b y science. B u t C o m t e m i s t a k e n l y c o n c l u d e d that, because o f this
ancestry, the idea o f force h a d n o objective c o u n t e r p a r t i n reality and thus
w o u l d eventually disappear f r o m science. T o the c o n t r a r y , h o w e v e r , the c o n -
cept o f force was alive a n d w e l l i n t h e m o d e r n science o f D ü r k h e i m s day.
I n fact, the E n g l i s h t e r m " v e c t o r " ( w h i c h appeared i n E n g l i s h i n 1867) e n -
Translator's Introduction xli

tered F r e n c h (vecteur) i n 1899, a n d D ü r k h e i m used the t e r m "resultant" (a

vector sum) to m e a n a social s u m o f i n d i v i d u a l forces. T h e r e f o r e , i n contrast
to C o m t e , D ü r k h e i m " w i l l s h o w . . . that r e l i g i o u s forces are real, n o m a t t e r
how i m p e r f e c t t h e symbols w i t h w h o s e help t h e y w e r e c o n c e i v e d of. F r o m
86
this i t w i l l f o l l o w that t h e same is t r u e f o r the c o n c e p t o f force i n g e n e r a l . "
T h e reality o f r e l i g i o u s forces is t o be f o u n d i n the real e x p e r i e n c e o f
social life, a c c o r d i n g t o D ü r k h e i m . Just as, i n the case o f soul, p s y c h o l o g y
sought a physical basis f o r w h a t h u m a n k i n d h a d l o n g since discovered i n so-
cial life, so t o o force. C o n t r a r y t o w h a t C o m t e a n t i c i p a t e d , b y t h e e n d o f t h e
n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y , t h e idea o f force h a d c o m p l e t e d its transit f r o m r e l i g i o n ,
to metaphysics, t o science positive. T o appreciate D ü r k h e i m ' s c o n t e x t , n o t e that
c u t t i n g - e d g e w o r k o n t h e f u n d a m e n t a l forces was b e i n g d o n e n o farther
away t h a n t h e laboratories o f M a r i e a n d P i e r r e C u r i e . F r o m 1906 o n , M m e .
C u r i e c o n t i n u e d h e r w o r k o n r a d i o a c t i v i t y as a professor at t h e S o r b o n n e .
D u r k h e i m ' s a c c o u n t o f rites is m e a n t t o seize the idea o f force at its " b i r t h , "
as he says. H e f o u n d t h e b i r t h o f t h a t idea i n rites, at m o m e n t s o f collective
effervescence, w h e n h u m a n beings feel themselves t r a n s f o r m e d , a n d are i n fact
t r a n s f o r m e d , t h r o u g h r i t u a l d o i n g . A force e x p e r i e n c e d as e x t e r n a l t o each
i n d i v i d u a l is the agent o f t h a t t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , b u t the force itself is created b y
the fact o f assembling a n d t e m p o r a r i l y l i v i n g a c o l l e c t i v e life that transports
individuals b e y o n d themselves. T h o s e m o m e n t s h e conveys i n a set piece
drawn from ethnographic description.
D u r k h e i m ' s set piece opens w i t h the practical occupations o f life sus-
pended, the v a h d i t y o f o r d i n a r y rules a d j o u r n e d , people dressed a n d p a i n t e d t o
resemble o n e another a n d the a n i m a l o r plant b y w h i c h they name t h e i r shared
identity, the objects a r o u n d t h e m " u n i f o r m e d " i n the same way, the w h o l e
t a k i n g place u n d e r a n i g h t sky, the scene d o t t e d w i t h firelight, a n d frenzy—a
collective effervescence. Swept away, the participants experience a force e x t e r n a l
to t h e m , w h i c h seems t o be m o v i n g t h e m , a n d b y w h i c h t h e i r v e r y nature is
transformed. T h e y experience themselves as grander t h a n at o r d i n a r y times;
they d o things t h e y w o u l d n o t d o at o t h e r times; they feel, and at that m o m e n t
really are, j o i n e d w i t h each o t h e r a n d w i t h the t o t e m i c b e i n g . T h e y c o m e t o
experience themselves as sharing o n e and the same essence—with the t o t e m i c
animal, w i t h its representation, and w i t h each other. I n a d d i t i o n , since a s y m -
b o l i c representation o f the t o t e m i c b e i n g stands at the center o f things, the real
p o w e r generated i n the assembly comes t o be t h o u g h t o f as residing i n the
t o t e m i c object itself. Symbols o f the t o t e m i c object e x t e n d the effects o f the
effervescence i n t o life after the assembly is dispersed. Seen o n objects, and s o m e -
times o n bodies, t o t e m i c representations o f various k i n d s w i l l f i l l the role o f
w h a t w o u l d be called today a secondary s t i m u l u s — a r e m i n d e r that reactivates
xlii Translator's Introduction

8 7
the i n i t i a l feelings, a l t h o u g h m o r e d i m l y . Since the t r a n s f o r m a t i o n cannot be
d o n e o n c e a n d f o r all and fades despite the s y m b o l i c reminders, i t must p e r i -
odically be r e d o n e — h e n c e , the cyclically repetitive p e r f o r m a n c e o f rites.
T h r o u g h real e x p e r i e n c e , t h e n , t h e participants c o m e t o ascribe p o w e r
to sacred objects, t h a t p o w e r h a v i n g n o t h i n g t o d o w i t h the physical charac-
teristics o f those objects. I t is also t h r o u g h real e x p e r i e n c e t h a t t h e y arrive at
the c o n c e p t o f force, b u t the real experience t h e y have is t h a t o f h u m a n b e -
ings assembled—or t o use D u r k h e i m ' s abstract f o r m u l a t i o n , that o f society's
" c o n c e n t r a t i n g " o r " p u l l i n g itself t o g e t h e r " a n d thus b e c o m i n g a u n i t y i n
t h e real. T h i s d e p i c t i o n w i l l n o d o u b t seem c o n t r i v e d a n d m e c h a n i c a l at
first glance a n d o n that a c c o u n t m a y t e m p t d i s c o u n t i n g , u n t i l t h e h i s t o r i c a l
m e m o r y i t activates i n us b r i n g s us t o s i m i l a r events t h a t w e ourselves k n o w
operated mechanically—uniformed, firelit, n i g h t t i m e effervescences o f the
Nazis o r the K u K l u x K l a n , w i t h i n d i v i d u a l s l e d to i m p u t e t o themselves
88
shared i n b o r n essences a n d fabulous c o l l e c t i v e i d e n t i t i e s , w i t h symbolic re-
m i n d e r s shaping everyday life afterward, a n d w i t h i n d i v i d u a l d o u b t i n large
p a r t n o t r e q u i r i n g physical v i o l e n c e t o be o v e r c o m e . T h e m e c h a n i s m i t s e l f is
n e i t h e r g o o d n o r e v i l . I f D u r k h e i m is r i g h t that i t is universal, t h e n w e
s h o u l d expect t o find i t , a n d d o find i t , f r o m t a t t o o e d street gangs t o the Sal-
v a t i o n A r m y , from t h e habits o f the c o n v e n t t o those o f t h e exclusive c l u b .
I n a l l cases an o u t c o m e o f j o i n t d o i n g , the real that comes i n t o b e i n g i n
t h e r i t e , as D u r k h e i m describes i t , is i n d e p e n d e n t o f ( b u t n o t necessarily e x -
clusive o f ) i n d i v i d u a l belief. T h e p o w e r felt is real, a n d is felt n o t o n l y i n the
physical b e i n g o f h u m a n k i n d b u t also i n its m e n t a l b e i n g — h u m a n k i n d ' s con-
science collective, that is, i n b o t h " c o n s c i e n c e " and "consciousness." Besides, its
reality can be d r a m a t i c a l l y t r a n s f o r m i n g . D u r i n g the e x a l t a t i o n o f the F r e n c h
R e v o l u t i o n , f o r e x a m p l e , " [ w ] e see the m o s t m e d i o c r e o r harmless b o u r -
89
geois t r a n s f o r m e d . . . i n t o a h e r o o r a n e x e c u t i o n e r . " I n u n d r a m a t i c times,
i t is u n d r a m a t i c a l l y t r a n s f o r m i n g , as D u r k h e i m says a f e w sentences later:

There is virtually no instant o f our lives i n w h i c h a certain rush o f energy

fails to come to us from outside ourselves. I n all kinds o f acts that express
the understanding, esteem, and affection o f his neighbor, there is a lift that
9 0
the man w h o does his duty feels, usually w i t h o u t being aware o f i t .

W h a t creates the t r a n s f o r m a t i o n is a p r o d u c t o f t h o u g h t , b u t t h o u g h t that

c a n n o t be a c c o m m o d a t e d b y o u r usual v o c a b u l a r y o f m e r e i n d i v i d u a l s '
t h i n k i n g . I t exists o n l y i n the m i n d ; b u t i f i t exists i n o n l y o n e m i n d , i t does
n o t b e l o n g t o w h a t can be e x p e r i e n c e d by any and everyone as the real. W e ar-
r i v e b y this r o u t e at D u r k h e i m ' s superficially t r o u b l e s o m e t e r m pensée collec-
Translator's Introduction xliii

five, " c o l l e c t i v e t h o u g h t . " I t is i n collective t h o u g h t , b u i l t i n t o the e x p e r i e n c e

o f social life, t h a t t h e idea o f a d i v i n i t y to w h i c h h u m a n beings are s u b o r d i -
nate gains its f o o t h o l d i n t h e real.
Y e t — a n d this is a b i g " y e t " — f a r f r o m erasing the t h o u g h t o f i n d i v i d u a l s ,
collective t h o u g h t is f o u n d n o w h e r e else. T h r o u g h o u t C h a p t e r 7 a n d i n d e e d
the w h o l e o f Formes, w e f i n d statements such as this, p e r i o d i c a l l y inserted
w i t h teacherly r e p e t i t i o n :

[B]ecause society can exist only i n and by means o f individual minds, i t

must enter i n t o us and become organized w i t h i n us. That force thus be-
comes an integral part o f our being and, by the same stroke, uplifts i t and
91
brings i t to maturity.

[L]ike any other society, the clan can only live i n and by means o f the i n d i -
vidual consciousnesses o f w h i c h i t is made. Thus, insofar as religious force
is conceived o f as embodied i n the totemic emblem, i t seems to be exter-
nal to individuals and endowed w i t h a k i n d o f transcendence; and yet from
another standpoint, and like the clan i t symbolizes, i t can be made real only
92
w i t h i n and by t h e m . "

D ü r k h e i m has n o t postulated some outside m i n d h o v e r i n g i n the h u m a n

m i d s t . H e is s t r i v i n g c o n c e p t u a l l y t o represent aspects o f t h e real that are
readily observable b u t that c a n n o t possibly be there t o observe o r represent at
all, i f the l o n e i n d i v i d u a l is o u r c o n c e p t u a l u n i t . T o see those aspects o f t h e
real, let us t u r n n o w t o sacredness, an e x t r a o r d i n a r y q u a l i t y that o r d i n a r y
objects acquire o n l y w i t h i n m o r a l c o m m u n i t i e s . Sacredness is e m i n e n t l y a
représentation collective, e m i n e n d y a feature of pensée a n d conscience collectives. A s
a q u a l i t y o f t h i n g s — o r , rather, as D ü r k h e i m insists, a q u a l i t y superadded t o
things—sacredness can c o m e t o be its real self o n l y w i t h i n the d o m a i n o f c o l -
lective consciousness (that is, i n t h e d o m a i n o f conscience and o f conscious-
ness). Sacredness is an aspect o f the real that exists o n l y i n the m i n d b u t c a n n o t
9 3
possibly exist as the real i n o n l y o n e m i n d .

The Sacred/Profane Dichotomy

O v e r t h e years, i t has p r o v e d easy t o m a k e heavier w e a t h e r t h a n n e e d be o f
b o t h le sacré a n d la conscience collective. W . E . H . Stanner's careful and respect-
ful article o n Formes called the sacred/profane d i c h o t o m y "unusable except
94
at the cost o f u n d u e interference w i t h the facts o f o b s e r v a t i o n . " T r y as he
m i g h t i n his f i e l d w o r k , he said, he c o u l d n o t f i n d i t . I f there is i n fact n o t h -
i n g a b o u t the idea that connects us w i t h o u r o w n sense o f the real i n a w a y
xliv Translator's Introduction

that i l l u m i n a t e s i t , t h e n D ü r k h e i m w o u l d r i g h d y be p a t r o n i z e d as t h e w r i t e r
o f a classic f r e i g h t e d w i t h intractable concepts, t o be suffered t h r o u g h and
f o r g o t t e n . B u t this classic suggests m o r e i n t e r e s t i n g m e n t a l a c t i v i t y t h a n the
exercise i n v o l v e d i n l o g i c a l l y dissecting the t e r m "sacred" itself. I n any case,
95
Lukes has already s h o w n i n detail its l o g i c a l r o u g h surfaces. T h e sacred
p o i n t s t o aspects o f the real that w e r e doubdess a m a z i n g t o D ü r k h e i m , a n d
t h a t are still there i n the social w o r l d t o amaze us.
C o n s i d e r first t h e b i b l i c a l e x a m p l e o f t h e H o l y A r k . R e a d i n g at E x o d u s
25, w e see i t b e i n g m a d e t o exact specifications ( t w o carved c h e r u b i m o n top,
the tablets inside, etc.), u s i n g materials c o l l e c t e d f r o m the c o m m u n i t y a n d
m a n u f a c t u r e d i n f u l l v i e w o f all those present (and subsequendy, all readers o f
the B i b l e ) . Thousands o f years a n d miles f r o m that b i b l i c a l scene, w e f i n d v e r y
p o w e r f u l sacred objects called churingas i n the same state: " [ E ] v e n a m o n g the
A r u n t a , there are churingas that are made b y the elders o f the g r o u p , w i t h the
96
full knowledge o f and i n full v i e w o f everyone." W h a t e v e r is added t o m a k e
those objects' sacredness is, l i k e soul, real b u t w i t h o u t extension. J e w i s h t r a -
d i t i o n w o n d e r f u l l y presents that feature b y saying o f the A r k that even t h o u g h
its dimensions w e r e k n o w n , i t " m i r a c u l o u s l y o c c u p i e d n o space i n the H o l y
9 7
of Holies." T h e real, yet n o n p h y s i c a l , characteristic w e can observe i n b o t h
cases c a n n o t be the feature, o r the creature, o f an i n d i v i d u a l m i n d . I n b o t h
cases, t h e physical characteristics o f t h e things c a n n o t possibly disclose w h a t
t h e y are i n the real. I n D ü r k h e i m s w o r d s , " T h e sensations that the physical
w o r l d evokes i n us c a n n o t , b y d e f i n i t i o n , c o n t a i n a n y t h i n g that goes b e y o n d
that w o r l d . F r o m s o m e t h i n g t a n g i b l e o n e can o n l y m a k e s o m e t h i n g tangible;
98
f r o m e x t e n d e d substance o n e c a n n o t m a k e u n e x t e n d e d substance."
A t t h e same t i m e , b o t h objects' n o n p h y s i c a l reality is available t o the i n -
d i v i d u a l m i n d o n l y as i t participates i n m i n d b o t h inside a n d outside itself.
A n d because sacredness originates as i t does, i t is i n h e r e n d y i m p e r m a n e n t
a n d so m u s t b e a d d e d t o t h e object again a n d again, j u s t as i t was o r i g i n a l l y :
b y collective h u m a n d o i n g . Equally, because sacredness originates as i t does,
there necessarily is n o u n i f y i n g characteristic that is shared b y e v e r y t h i n g des-
i g n a t e d as sacré, n o a l l - p u r p o s e key t o p r e o r d a i n the o u t c o m e o f f i e l d w o r k .
" T h i n g s so disparate cannot f o r m a class [the sacred] unless a class can be
99
m a r k e d b y a p r o p e r t y , its absence, and its c o n t r a r y , " Stanner w r o t e . B y
t h i n k i n g i n such t e r m s , h e created f o r h i m s e l f t h e u n - D u r k h e i m i a n n i g h t -
m a r e I w i l l n o w i n d i c a t e b y m o v i n g f r o m the A r k t o o t h e r examples: A y a -
t o l l a h K h o m e i n i , t h e bones o f St. C a s i m i r , the louse, a n d M t . Sinai.
R e m e m b e r the t u m u l t u o u s a r r i v a l i n 1979 o f R u h o l l a h K h o m e i n i at
T e h r a n a i r p o r t , w i t h a m i l l i o n p e o p l e c r o w d i n g t o w e l c o m e h i m . D u r i n g the
e v e n i n g news, the effervescence o f t h a t m o m e n t c o u l d be felt w o r l d w i d e r e -
Translator's Introduction xlv

gardless o f language a n d i n every h o u s e h o l d o f secularized A m e r i c a . D e s p i t e

the haze o f T V distance, t h e v o c a l flatness o f T V correspondents, dissonant
s h o u t i n g i n a language m o s t A m e r i c a n s d o n o t understand, a n d r i t u a l ges-
tures specific t o the m o r a l c o m m u n i t y K h o m e i n i shared w i t h the c r o w d ,
every v i e w e r witnessed the elevation o f K h o m e i n i t o sacredness. B e f o r e o u r
eyes, K h o m e i n i became s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n w h a t he h a d b e e n as he left
Paris o n l y h o u r s before. T h a t K h o m e i n i ' s e l e v a t i o n was attached t o a p a r t i c -
ular m o r a l c o m m u n i t y was e v i d e n c e d straightaway. H e h a d p u t o n sacredness
there, b u t n o t e v e r y w h e r e — a m o r a l distance m a r k e d i n A m e r i c a b y c o n t i n u -
i n g t o call " A y a t o l l a h " a m a n w h o h a d gained, there, a h i g h e r t i d e , " I m a m , "
b y a c c l a m a t i o n . W h a t was d o n e c o u l d o n l y have b e e n d o n e w i t h i n a g r o u p
o f assembled f a i t h f u l a n d c o u l d n o t be u n d o n e b y i n d i v i d u a l d o u b t o r u n b e -
lief. I t was the real t o anyone g o i n g t o I r a n t h e n , n o m a t t e r w h e r e t h e y w e r e
c o m i n g from. L i k e t h e A r k , K h o m e i n i ' s h u m a n measurements w e r e k n o w n
and the same as before; t h e beard, the t u r b a n , a n d the robes l o o k e d exactly
as before, b u t t h e m a n was n o t t h e same as before. W h a t was added b e l o n g e d
t o the real, b u t i t t o o k u p n o space.
W e have also witnessed the inverse process, i n w h i c h the o t h e r c r u c i a l
t e r m , m o r a l c o m m u n i t y , is created. I n 1989, leaders o f a n e w l y i n d e p e n d e n t
t e r r i t o r y o f L i t h u a n i a r e t u r n e d relics said t o be t h e bones o f St. C a s i m i r t o
the People's H o u s e o f C u l t u r e , w h i c h they r e c o n s t i t u t e d a n d reconsecrated
as the C a t h e d r a l o f V i l n i u s . L i t h u a n i a n s f i l e d t h r o u g h the n e w cathedral
and past t h e bones, participants i n t h e b i r t h o f a n a t i o n . I n this e x a m p l e ,
the sanctification preceded, a n d was a t o o l i n , t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a n e w
m o r a l c o m m u n i t y , n o w added t o (or superadded t o ) t h e already e x i s t i n g
physical t e r r i t o r y , p o p u l a t i o n , a n d apparatus o f statehood. T o the possible
o b j e c t i o n that such c o m m u n i t y "always existed," t h e answer w e find i n t h e
d o i n g is t h e l a t e - t w e n t i e t h - c e n t u r y revival o f o l d bones; the answer w e find
i n Formes is that n o t h i n g t h a t m u s t be i m a g i n e d "always exists," b u t m u s t b e
c o n t i n u a l l y r e - i m a g i n e d t h r o u g h h u m a n d o i n g . T h i s is j u s t as t r u e o f m o r a l
c o m m u n i t y as i t is o f sacred objects. B y the selfsame process, those d r y bones
1 0 0
w e r e made to l i v e again as the sacred objects t h e y o n c e h a d b e e n . They
were resurrected i n p o s t c o m m u n i s t L i t h u a n i a a n d r e h a b i l i t a t e d f r o m t h e i r
l o w l y state f o r f o r t y years as the dusty trove o f the r e a c t i o n a r y a n d t h e super-
stitious. T h e k n o w n physical characteristics a n d p o p u l a t i o n o f L i t h u a n i a
were the same as before, b u t the m o r a l c o m m u n i t y was n o t . W h a t was added
was o b j e c t i v e l y real, b u t i t t o o k u p n o space. I m a g i n e the c o n f u s i o n m a n y
A m e r i c a n s w o u l d feel i f asked t o pay t h e i r respects t o t h e bones.
Sacredness is n o t a q u a l i t y i n h e r e n t i n c e r t a i n objects, n o r is i t available
to the u n a i d e d senses o f j u s t any i n d i v i d u a l h u m a n observer. I t is a q u a l i t y
xlvi Translator's Introduction

that objects acquire w h e n t h e y are, i n the phrase f r o m D u r k h e i m ' s d e f i n i t i o n ,

"set apart a n d f o r b i d d e n . " T h e y are m a d e sacred b y groups o f people w h o set
t h e m apart and keep t h e m b o u n d e d b y specific actions; t h e y r e m a i n sacred
o n l y so l o n g as g r o u p s c o n t i n u e t o d o this. H u m a n s a c t i n g c o l l e c t i v e l y m a k e
a n d remake this q u a l i t y o f sacredness b u t t h e n e n c o u n t e r i t after t h e fact as i f
i t had always b e e n b u i l t i n t o objects a n d was ready-made. I n t h e r e l i g i o u s v o -
cabulary used w i t h i n c o m m u n i t i e s o f f a i t h , those things that have b e e n sanc-
t i f i e d , "set apart a n d f o r b i d d e n , " are i n t r i n s i c a l l y " h o l y " — a n d have always
been. I n the t e c h n i c a l v o c a b u l a r y d e v e l o p e d i n Formes, t h e y are "sacred"—
1 0 1
b u t made so b y d o i n g . T h e same process can m a k e a m a n o r w o m a n , a
piece o f c l o t h , a lizard, a tree, an idea o r p r i n c i p l e ( a n y t h i n g , i n c l u d i n g e x -
c r e m e n t , w h i c h D ü r k h e i m slides i n t o a f o o t n o t e ) i n t o a sacred t h i n g a n d the
m a n d a t o r y r e c i p i e n t o f elaborated deference. D ü r k h e i m makes this p o i n t
over a n d over again, h a m m e r i n g i t h o m e o n e last t i m e i n B o o k T h r e e , C h a p -
ter 2. T h e r e w e c o m e u p o n r i t u a l celebrations that center o n , o f all things,
t h e louse.
Sacredness is n o t m e r e l y a set o f p e c u l i a r relationships b e t w e e n people
a n d c e r t a i n designated objects. T h e v e r y act that constitutes those peculiar
relationships also relates a designated g r o u p o f p e o p l e t o o n e a n o t h e r a n d sets
t h e m apart from others t o w h o m t h e y are n o t b o u n d and w h o d o n o t have
t h e same relationship t o designated physical objects. T u r n the Thomases' f o r -
m u l a a r o u n d : W h a t e v e r is o b v i o u s l y real, g i v e n its o b v i o u s l y real conse-
quences, tends to b e accepted as real. W h a t e v e r p o w e r t h e y acquire, a n d i t
can be q u i t e considerable, is real p o w e r . N o t i c e that there is n o q u e s t i o n o f
d e b u n k i n g native beliefs a b o u t that p o w e r as i m a g i n a r y . T o d o so w o u l d be
t h e same as saying t h a t social life itself is m e r e l y i m a g i n a r y a n d society itself
changeable m e r e l y b y an i m p u l s e t o change one's m i n d . So far as sacred o b -
jects are c o n c e r n e d , t h e q u e s t i o n is h o w t o describe a n d explicate the nature
o f that p o w e r , w h i c h D ü r k h e i m posits as real.
" P o w e r " i n w h a t sense a n d " r e a l " i n w h a t sense m a y be observed i n the
f o l l o w i n g passage f r o m E x o d u s (19), w h e n M o u n t Sinai" evolves b y a set o f
h u m a n actions i n t o a place w h e r e the p o w e r o f G o d m a y " b r e a k f o r t h u p o n "
t h e p e o p l e a n d destroy t h e m :

And the Lord said unto Moses, G o unto the people, and sanctify them to
day and to morrow, and let them wash their clothes. . . . And thou shalt set
bounds unto the people round about saying, Take heed to yourselves, that
ye go not up into the mount, or touch the border of it: whosoever toucheth
the mount shall be surely put to death. There shall not an hand touch it, but
he shall surely be stoned, or shot through; whether it be beast or man, it shall
Translator's Introduction xlvii

not live. . . . And Moses went down from the mount unto the people, and
sanctified the people; and they washed their clothes. (Exodus 19:10, 12, 13)

Remember b y w h a t agency transgressors w o u l d be "stoned" or "shot

t h r o u g h . " As t h e p e o p l e d i d t h e i r part, t h e m o u n t a i n d i d its o w n , a n d b y the
" t h i r d d a y " o f God's i n s t r u c t i o n s t o Moses, i t h a d b e c o m e e n v e l o p e d i n
smoke a n d i t q u a k e d .

And the Lord said unto Moses, G o down, charge the people, lest they break
through unto the Lord to gaze, and many of them perish. . . . A n d Moses
said unto the Lord, The people cannot come up to mount Sinai: for thou
chargedst us, saying, Set bounds about the mount and sanctify it. (Exodus
19:21, 23)

N o t i c e that the b i b l i c a l t e x t explains natural p o w e r i n natural terms ( w h o -

ever violates the sacredness o f the m o u n t a i n w i l l be "stoned," "shot t h r o u g h , "
or "surely p u t t o death") b u t that the p o w e r o f the m o u n t a i n is n o t thereby
explained away. T h e B i b l e w r i t e r s presumably c o u l d see w h a t w e d o i n w h a t
they themselves w r o t e q u i t e m a t t e r - o f - f a c d y yet w i t h o u t d i m i n i s h i n g the real
p o w e r o f t h e i r G o d . I t came t o b e the case that w h o e v e r w e n t u p i n t o t h e
m o u n t a i n , apart f r o m Moses a n d A a r o n , w o u l d surely die. I t h i n k this is w h a t
D u r k h e i m f o u n d remarkable about the n a t u r a l means b y w h i c h sacred objects
m o v e above a n d beyond—really above and really b e y o n d — t h e i r natural o r d i -
nariness a n d a b o u t h o w the people w h o exert those natural means thereafter
m o v e i n a n d o u t o f awareness o f h o w w h a t was d o n e was d o n e . I n o t h e r
w o r d s , " M a n makes G o d , " as M a r x w r o t e , b u t n o t i n any w a y he pleases.
A n o b j e c t such as that m o u n t a i n moves above and b e y o n d its n a t u r a l
ordinariness i n this w a y o n l y w i t h i n t h e a m b i t o f a conscience collective—col-
lective conscience n o r m a t i v e l y , i n c o n d u c t , a n d collective consciousness c o g -
nitively, i n t h o u g h t . T h e t w o are n o t separate. Conscience collective is t h e
achievement o f m i n d that transfigures the real w o r l d a n d makes i t a shared
w o r l d that is i n fact the real w o r l d as k n o w n a n d k n o w a b l e b y some g r o u p ,
some m o r a l c o m m u n i t y . I t w o u l d n o t be o b v i o u s t o an i g n o r a n t f o r e i g n
passerby h o w M o u n t Sinai was different from o t h e r m o u n t a i n s . H e m i g h t
w e l l c l i m b i t w i t h his shoes o n , travel its slopes at w i l l , and, caught i n this
p r o f a n a t i o n , m i g h t b e "shot t h r o u g h . " Readers m a y recognize this i g n o r a n t
passerby as the sort favored b y o l d - f a s h i o n e d m o v i e s o f c o l o n i z a t i o n , i n
w h i c h t h e c o l o n i a l officer i n his p i t h h e l m e t a n d shorts steps o n t h e sacred
spot o r shoots t h e sacred a n i m a l f o r a d r a w i n g - r o o m trophy, and t o w h o m
k n o w l e d g e a b o u t t h e real p o w e r o f t h e o r d i n a r y - s e e m i n g object arrives s i -
xlviii Translator's Introduction

m u l t a n e o u s l y w i t h a real native r i s i n g , u n w i t t i n g l y detonated. T h e c o m -

monsense approach that w o u l d be satisfied w i t h t h i n k i n g a b o u t the p o w e r o f
t h e spot o r the a n i m a l as m e r e l y i m a g i n a r y , m e r e l y an a m a z i n g f i g m e n t o f s u -
p e r s t i t i o n ablaze i n each i n d i v i d u a l native m i n d b u t i n n o colonialist's, seems
1 0 2
an unnecessarily r o u n d a b o u t r o u t e t o grasping t h e real events that f o l l o w .
S o m e years ago, as I was t e a c h i n g Formes t o an especially responsive
g r o u p , m y students d e m a n d e d that w e see as a class Stephen Spielberg's (and
H a r r i s o n Ford's) first-rate adventure m o v i e , Raiders of the Lost Ark. T h e story
t u r n s o n i g n o r a n t passersby, g o o d guys and b a d guys, engaged i n archaeolog-
ical excavation i n a race t o acquire the p o w e r o f t h e A r k as a k i n d o f u l t i m a t e
w e a p o n . W i t h a sophistication that t h r i l l e d t h e i r teacher, m y students p r o -
n o u n c e d j u d g m e n t o n Raiders's ark: T h e real A r k was a far m o r e interesting
object t h a n the fantasy one because i t h a d a c o m p l e x h u m a n nature. T h e A r k ' s
p o w e r i n h e r e d i n its sacredness, and its sacredness was a feature o f its collective
life. B u t w h a t is t r u e o f sacred objects is also t r u e o f the transcendent beings
that c o m m u n i c a t e w i t h h u m a n k i n d . S t r i p away t h e c o l l e c t i v i t y that makes sa-
credness real, a n d y o u are left w i t h w h a t i n d i v i d u a l s can manage, a c t i n g alone:
Freud's patients w i t h the o d d b a l l reverences f o r animals that occasioned t h e i r
1 0 3
g o i n g t o the d o c t o r , the bag lady o u t o f w h o s e m o u t h Jehovah G o d speaks
incessantly i n the u n k n o w n t o n g u e , t h e i n n o c u o u s b o u r g e o i s w h o secretes
l i v i n g a n d dead things i n a hideous p r i v a t e shrine. S t r i p away sacredness as a
feature o f that m a d d e n i n g D u r k h e i m i a n reality pensée collective, a n d y o u have
n o t a c o l l e c t i v e l y k n o w a b l e w o r l d at all b u t a w h o l e set o f p r o b l e m s about
h o w this o r that p e r s o n c o u l d leap t o b e l i e v i n g this o r that strange t h i n g . Y o u r
hands are t i e d t o d o a n y t h i n g o t h e r t h a n suspend disbelief about the o n t o l o g -
ical claims f o r w h a t e v e r i t is, i n c a n t the f o r m u l a a b o u t things believed i n as real
as real i n t h e i r consequences, h u m o r the believer, o r j u s t believe the claims.
T h e real A r k was w h a t i t was b y v i r t u e o f w h a t D u r k h e i m calls " m o r a l "
o r " i d e a l " forces, t h a t is, collective h u m a n forces. D e p e n d i n g o n its life w i t h i n
some g i v e n c o l l e c t i v i t y , a n y t h i n g can b e c o m e t h e c o n t a i n e r o f such forces,
n o t j u s t a w o o d e n b o x m a d e i n a c e r t a i n way. B u t l i k e the fantasizers o f the
m o v i e , some theorists have i m a g i n e d the process t o be o t h e r w i s e , b e g i n n i n g
s o m e h o w i n t h e i n h e r e n t g r a n d e u r o f the o b j e c t (the naturists' mistake) o r i n
the i n h e r e n t c o n f u s i o n o f the believer's m i n d (the animists' mistake). A n y o n e
w h o t h i n k s e i t h e r w a y w i l l miss D u r k h e i m ' s p o i n t that the same h u m a n ca-
pacities that m a k e society possible m a k e w h a t D u r k h e i m calls la vie religieuse
1 0 4
inevitable. T h e t r u t h o f t h e m i n d is i n the f i c t i o n s that, v i a conscience collec-
tive, c o n s t r u c t t h e real. I f there is ever t o be a general t h e o r y o f the m i n d that
can be r e d u c e d t o specific capacities o f t h e b r a i n , o r an " a r t i f i c i a l i n t e l l i -
g e n c e " w h o s e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n s a n d c o m b i n a t i o n s have a n y t h i n g l i k e the
Translator's Introduction xlix

c o m p l e x i t y o f w h a t w e observe i n even c o m m o n p l a c e acts a n d facts o f h u -

m a n life, t h e n the t h e o r y o f t h e b r a i n s p e r c e p t u a l capacity m u s t i n c l u d e
things l i k e the collective representation that makes i t possible f o r a m a n , a
m o u n t a i n , a b o x o f bones, o r a louse t o be p e r c e i v e d as themselves o n e m o -
m e n t a n d as themselves-plus, the n e x t .

Religious Life in Seemingly Nonreligious Life

D ü r k h e i m sums u p w h a t makes la vie religieuse i n e v i t a b l e :

[I]n all its aspects and at every m o m e n t o f its history, social life is only pos-
sible thanks to a vast symbolism. The physical emblems and figurative rep-
resentations w i t h w h i c h I have been especially concerned i n the present
105
study are one f o r m o f it, but there are a good many others."

W i t h that s u m m i n g u p , he suggests t h a t w e c o u l d a p p l y the same analysis i n

domains r e m o t e f r o m a n y t h i n g w e c o u l d call " r e l i g i o u s " — p o l i t i c s certainly,
from w h i c h D ü r k h e i m draws some o f his o w n examples, a n d status orders o f
various k i n d s ( t h i n k o f the n o t i o n " b l u e b l o o d , " a racialized s h o r t h a n d f o r t h e
"set apart a n d f o r b i d d e n " qualities o f West E u r o p e a n aristocrats, a n d w h i t e
106
bones f o r those o f Russia, as opposed t o the b l a c k bones o f Russian s e r f s ) .
A l l such p h e n o m e n a seem the m o r e o u t l a n d i s h , a n d the m o r e d i s t i n c t from
reason, t h e f u r t h e r t h e y seem t o b e f r o m o u r o w n e x p e r i e n c e o f the real. B u t
the b u r d e n o f D u r k h e i m ' s a r g u m e n t is that t h e y are n o t t o be separated f r o m
h u m a n reason, i n f u l l o p e r a t i o n — h e n c e , from us. T o w a r d the e n d o f C h a p -
ter 7, he uncovers t h e roots o f scientific abstraction i n t h e same processes o f
abstraction that m a k e c o l l e c t i v e i d e n t i t i e s possible. T h e r e f o r e , i t is n o m o r e
remarkable that a m a n s h o u l d i n t o t e m i c observances manage t o a f f i r m his
k i n s h i p w i t h a w h i t e c o c k a t o o (despite physical dissimilarities) t h a n t h a t
he s h o u l d manage t o a f f i r m his k i n s h i p w i t h m e n a n d w o m e n o f t h e
W h i t e C o c k a t o o clan (for, again, i t is physical dissimilarities that m u s t b e
overcome).. B o t h i n v o l v e abstraction, b y w h i c h invisible qualities are added to
w h a t is visible, f o r there is n o o t h e r r o u t e t o u n i f y i n g t h e discrete i n d i v i d u -
alities that o u r sensory e x p e r i e n c e gives us. T h a t t h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h this is
d o n e m a y be c r u d e is beside the p o i n t :

The great service that religions have rendered to thought is to have c o n -

structed a first representation o f what the relations o f kinship between things
might be. Given the conditions i n w h i c h i t was tried, that enterprise could
obviously lead only to makeshift results. B u t then, are the results o f any such
1 Translator's Introduction

enterprise ever definitive, and must it not be taken up again and again? Fur-
thermore, it was less important to succeed than to dare. What was essential
was not to let the mind be dominated by what appears to the senses, but in-
stead to teach the mind to dominate it and to join together what the senses
put asunder. As soon as man became aware that internal connections exist
107
between things, science and philosophy became possible.

T h a t w h i c h makes la vie religieuse inevitable also links o u r ways o f k n o w i n g

c o m m u n i t y a n d i d e n t i t y w i t h o u r ways o f k n o w i n g the natural w o r l d . S o u l
was needed t o account theoretically f o r aspects o f o u r h u m a n experience, a n d
e m p i r i c a l needs localized i t i n selected parts o f natural bodies. T h e experience
o f force arose first i n h u m a n relations, b u t i t was f o u n d again i n nature, i n r e -
lations a m o n g things. B y so d o i n g , D ü r k h e i m says, h u m a n k i n d made r o o m f o r
nature i n society, i m a g i n i n g i t o n the m o d e l p r o v i d e d b y schemes f o r o r d e r i n g
collective life. B u t b y the same stroke, the w a y nature's order was i m a g i n e d i n
t u r n became consequential for h u m a n order. L i k e the Australians, all h u m a n
beings acquire a w o r l d o f nature, as i f i t was the w o r l d o f nature, k n o w l e d g e o f
w h i c h is m e d i a t e d b y relations w i t h h u m a n contemporaries. A l t h o u g h that real
w o r l d varies from place t o place and f r o m o n e historical e p o c h t o another, t h e
fact that i t is consequential f o r the w a y humans live i n c o m m o n does n o t vary.
T h i n k i n g t h r o u g h w h a t those c o n n e c t i o n s still m e a n is o n e o f the i n t e l -
lectual demands that D ü r k h e i m 's e x p e d i t i o n i n Formes leads us t o c o n f r o n t . I t
is n o t t r u e that science is consequential o n l y for those w h o d o science. E a r l y
i n this century, the Russian p h i l o s o p h e r L e v Shestov contrasted t h e w a y a
c h i l d learned that ghosts d o n o t exist b u t at the same t i m e was " g i v e n reliable
i n f o r m a t i o n , the i m p l a u s i b i l i t y o f w h i c h surpasses absolutely every fib ever
t o l d . . . that t h e e a r t h is n o t motionless, as t h e evidence indicates, that the S u n
does n o t revolve a r o u n d the E a r t h , that the sky is n o t a solid, that the h o r i z o n
1 0 8
is o n l y an o p t i c a l i l l u s i o n a n d so o n . " O n c e that child's v i e w was the w o r l d
o f nature, as adult h u m a n beings k n e w i t . T h a t k n o w l e d g e , i n t u r n , was c o n -
sequential f o r t h e i r relations to o n e another. F o r the k i n d o f reason that Formes
draws a t t e n t i o n to, i t was o b v i o u s straightaway that Copernicus's discovery af-
fected n o t o n l y ideas o f the relationships heavenly bodies have t o one another
b u t ideas o f relationships a m o n g earthly, h u m a n bodies, a c o n n e c t i o n that the
I n q u i s i t i o n d i d n o t fail t o n o t i c e . C o s m o l o g y was n o t i m a g i n e d i n i s o l a t i o n
from morality. N o t t h e n , b u t also n o t n o w : O u r o w n recent debates i n A m e r -
ica today over c r e a t i o n science a n d e v o l u t i o n t u r n o n questions o f h o w c i t i -
zens s h o u l d b e t a u g h t m o r a l l y (and legally) t o regard and relate t o o n e another.
C r e a t i o n i s m dresses itself i n the f o r m s o f scientific discourse, i f n o t t h e i r spirit;
e v o l u t i o n i s m sheds t h e open-endedness o f scientific discourse and reclothes
Translator's Introduction li

itself as h a r d nuggets o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y c o r r e c t scientific c o n t e n t f o r s c h o o l -

children's unexperimental c o n s u m p t i o n . T h e heat o n b o t h sides points to the
dual aspect o f conscience collective—normative and cognitive—to w h i c h D u r k -
heim's i n t e l l e c t u a l l y d e m a n d i n g e x p e d i t i o n takes us.
T h a t e x p e d i t i o n is m o r a l l y d e m a n d i n g as w e l l , i f w e reflect o n f u r t h e r i m -
plications o f its discoveries. T h e passage I j u s t q u o t e d seems t o ennoble r e l i -
g i o n as the source o f quintessentially h u m a n achievements. B u t l i k e every
o t h e r h u m a n achievement, its m e c h a n i s m can t u r n i n m o r e t h a n o n e way. I f
D u r k h e i m ' s analysis is r i g h t , i t suggests that this century's monstrosities i n c o l -
lective life arise n o t from aberrations i n h u m a n reason b u t from w h a t is f u n -
damental t o i t . T h a t analysis also leads t o a d i s t u r b i n g suggestion: that t h e
o r d i n a r y h u m a n agents w h o serve as r a w m a t e r i a l f o r e x t r a o r d i n a r y abusers o f
h u m a n d i g n i t y are, i n vast m a j o r i t y , the n o r m a l a n d the socially responsible—
n o t deviants, sociopaths, o r the crazy. I t suggests, finally, that the h u m a n n a -
ture o n w h i c h w e depend, o u r social nature, is o u r u p l i f t and o u r d o w n f a l l .
T h e o n l y e x i t from this d i l e m m a appears t o be i n d i v i d u a l i s m . B u t the i n c o m -
p a t i b i l i t y o f i n d i v i d u a l i s t assumptions w i t h h u m a n nature as it can be observed in
the real world was c h i e f a m o n g D u r k h e i m ' s discoveries i n Formes and t h r o u g h -
o u t his w o r k . W h a t w e see, t h r o u g h his theoretical lens o f conscience collective, is
present i n a social w o r l d o f the real that c a n n o t be a r r i v e d at w i t h n o t i o n s o f
i n d i v i d u a l conscience, alone. W e see that Socrates' individualistic preference f o r
the c u p o f h e m l o c k over i n t e l l e c t u a l c o n f o r m i t y has appealed d o w n the ages
precisely because, i n that respect, he was n o t h u m a n i n the sense w e can o b -
serve day i n a n d day o u t — i n social life as e m p i r i c a l l y available t o us. T h e r e , w e
see i n d i v i d u a l d o u b t , i n h e r e n d y present, and w e see h o w d o u b t is o v e r c o m e .
T h u s , i n the e n d , there is a deep and tragic tension i n D u r k h e i m ' s discoveries.

FORMES I N FRENCH AND I N ENGLISH

A n e w translation n e e d n o t be the occasion t o d e n y the m e r i t o f an o l d o n e .
Joseph W a r d S w a i n gave Formes m o n u m e n t a l life i n E n g l i s h t o generations o f
scholars, and that life i n E n g l i s h has b e e n r i c h l y p r o d u c t i v e . N o one w i t h a f u l l
understanding o f w h a t translating Formes demands even n o w s h o u l d d o a n y -
t h i n g b u t salute D r . Swain's achievement. I r e - d o that w o r k n o w w i t h the b e n -
efit o f the use I have made o f the b o o k , i n E n g l i s h a n d i n F r e n c h . T h a t use itself
has benefited from almost n i n e t y years o f c r i t i q u e , t h e availability o f specialized
readings and field applications b y some o f the great anthropologists (Claude
L é v i - S t r a u s s , E . E . Evans-Pritchard, a n d B r o n i s l a w M a l i n o w s k i , t o name o n l y
three), various E n g l i s h translations o f D u r k h e i m ' s o t h e r w o r k , a n d g o o d p a r t i a l
retranslations of Formes itself. These are aids that S w a i n d i d n o t have. A l t h o u g h
Iii Translator's Introduction

m y m a i n purposes are b o t h t o re-present Formes i n i d i o m a t i c E n g l i s h and c o r -

rect Swain's inaccuracies, I differ w i t h S w a i n w i t h o u t immodesty. T h e a c c u -
racy o f m a n y passages cannot be i m p r o v e d u p o n . I n d e e d , the v e r y alienness o f
Swain's E n g l i s h , to o u r ears, is i n a sense faithful t o D ü r k h e i m , w h o s e ideas are
n o t i d i o m a t i c t o E n g l i s h speakers—and ultimately, o f course, there is n o sub-
stitute f o r reading a w o r k i n its native language. W h a t e v e r its aims, translation
requires scholarly, interpretive, a n d stylistic j u d g m e n t s at m a n y levels.
Readable E n g l i s h has b e e n m y g o a l t h r o u g h o u t . T o this e n d , I have c h o -
sen resonant E n g l i s h equivalents w h e n e v e r I c o u l d — f o r example, " o u t w a r d
a n d v i s i b l e " f o r externel et visible, a n d " n e i g h b o r " f o r semblable, i n cases w h e r e
r e l i g i o u s resonance seems i m p o r t a n t . ( C o m p a r e " T h o u shalt love t h y n e i g h -
b o r as t h y s e l f " ) T o t h e same e n d , I have replaced F r e n c h w i t h E n g l i s h w o r d
order, d i v i d i n g o r m o v i n g D u r k h e i m ' s frequent parenthetical insertions ac-
c o r d i n g l y , a n d I have n o t hesitated t o change t h e p u n c t u a t i o n and d i v i s i o n
i n t o paragraphs, i f s u c h changes seemed t o m e to i m p r o v e the text's c l a r i t y i n
E n g l i s h o r its accessibility t o a w e l l - e d u c a t e d reader. I have, i n a d d i t i o n , r e -
peated t h e subject i n those new, s h o r t e n e d , sentences—grammatical gender
a n d verb endings are n o t signposts i n E n g l i s h f o r w h a t goes w i t h w h a t . F u r -
t h e r m o r e , I have d o n e w h a t e v e r I h a d t o i n t h e service o f g o o d E n g l i s h style,
a v o i d i n g d o u b l e genitives and m u l t i p l e uses o f " i t " w i t h m u l t i p l e antecedents
(besetting sins i n the o l d e r w o r k ) .
I n the service o f future scholarly w o r k , I have also checked, supple-
m e n t e d , and i n some instances c o r r e c t e d as m a n y o f the o r i g i n a l footnotes as
I c o u l d , abbreviating the j o u r n a l tides differendy t h a n D ü r k h e i m d i d and
b r a c k e t i n g the n e w i n f o r m a t i o n i n D u r k h e i m ' s footnotes. I n m a n y cases, I d i d
n o t change those v e r y short paragraphs, sometimes o n l y a sentence l o n g , that
D ü r k h e i m used m o r e o r less as section headings. W h e r e I d i d make changes
i n structure, t h e y are n o t m a r k e d , to a v o i d r i d d l i n g the text. I n any case, w e
still have Joseph W a r d Swain's t e x t , w h i c h makes f e w concessions t o readable
E n g l i s h and can serve as a r o u g h - a n d - r e a d y c h e c k for readers w h o d o n o t
w i s h to tackle the F r e n c h . I n t h e i r h i g h - q u a l i t y p a r t i a l retranslation of Formes,
109
P i c k e r i n g and R e d d i n g deliberately keep t h e o r i g i n a l s t r u c t u r e . I have d e -
c i d e d differendy. M y o w n a i m , besides accuracy, is r e m o v a l o f structural a n d
stylistic i m p e d i m e n t s t o e n c o u n t e r i n g the b o o k as the e x c i t i n g read t h a t I
consider i t to be.
A sample passage w i l l illustrate m y changes. I n t h e I n t r o d u c t i o n , D ü r -
k h e i m draws an analogy t o m a k e his p o i n t a b o u t s t u d y i n g t h e simplest case
available, i n order t o u n c o v e r t h e f u n d a m e n t a l sources o f r e l i g i o u s life. H i s
o w n enterprise is l i k e that o f a d o c t o r seeking t o u n c o v e r the cause o f a d e l u -
Translator's Introduction liii

sion. T h e F r e n c h passage seems r e m i n i s c e n t o f F r e u d ; Swain's E n g l i s h passage

does n o t ; m i n e recovers t h e resemblance t o F r e u d . H e r e is Swain's passage:

I n order to understand a hallucination perfectly, and give i t its most appro-

priate treatment, a physician must k n o w its original point o f departure.
N o w this event is proportionately easier to find i f he can observe i t near its
beginnings. T h e longer the disease is allowed to develop, the more it evades
observation [au contraire, plus on laisse à la maladie le temps de se développer, plus
il se dérobe à l'observation]; that is because all sorts o f interpretations have i n -
tervened as i t advanced, w h i c h tend to force the original state into the
background [qui tendent a refouler dans l'inconscient l'état originel], and across
110
w h i c h it is sometimes difficult to find the initial o n e .

N o w consider t h e same passage as i t appears i n the n e w translation:

To understand a delusion properly and to be able to apply the most appro-

priate treatment, the doctor needs to k n o w what its point o f departure was.
That event is more easily detected the nearer to its beginning the delusion
can be observed. Conversely, the longer the sickness is left to develop, the
more that original point o f departure slips out o f view. This is so because all
sorts o f interpretations have intervened along the way, and the tendency o f
those interpretations is to repress the original state into the unconscious and
to replace i t w i t h other states through w h i c h the original one is sometimes
not easy to detect.

I t is the p o i n t o f departure o f an illness ( n o t t h e illness itself) t h a t is screened

f r o m v i e w . T h a t , plus the terms "repress" a n d " u n c o n s c i o u s , " instead o f
" f o r c e " a n d " b a c k g r o u n d , " a l l o w the n e w passage t o s o u n d r e m i n i s c e n t o f
Freud. I p r o b a b l y have n o t u n c o v e r e d a m i s s i n g l i n k b e t w e e n D ü r k h e i m a n d
Freud; Steven Lukes's exhaustive research t u r n e d u p " n o e v i d e n c e " that
1 1 1
D ü r k h e i m k n e w o f Freud's w o r k . O n the o t h e r h a n d , there is g o o d reason
to t h i n k D ü r k h e i m k n e w o f the celebrated w o r k b e i n g d o n e i n the 1880s at
the H ô p i t a l S a l p ê t r i è r e i n Paris b y J e a n - M a r t i n C h a r c o t , Freud's predecessor
i n t h e study o f hysteria, a n d o f t h e h u g e controversy a b o u t t h a t w o r k i n t h e
1 1 2
mid-1890s. So f o r n o w , w e can be tantalized. Present i n the passage is t h e
n o t i o n that t o d a y w e t e r m "screen m e m o r i e s , " w h i c h is generally c r e d i t e d t o
1 1 3
Freud, n o t C h a r c o t . T h e p l o t thickens w h e n w e realize that F r e u d c e r -
tainly k n e w o f a n d c i t e d D ü r k h e i m s w o r k ( i n c l u d i n g Formes) i n his 1912 p a -
1 1 4
per, " T h e R e t u r n o f T o t e m i s m i n C h i l d h o o d . " I n this way, c o r r e c t i n g
Swain's inaccuracies can a d d nuance t o a scholarly q u e s t i o n .
liv Translator's Introduction

M y goal, t h o u g h , was n o t m e r e l y t o c o r r e c t Swain's w o r k . I t a c k l e d the

1 1 5
French originals w i t h an eye t o the difficulties I have w r e s t l e d w i t h a n d t o
the characteristic p r o b l e m s I have f o u n d i n t e a c h i n g this w o r k t o A m e r i c a n
students. F o r those reasons, I d i d n o t settle for m e r e l y l i t e r a l renderings. I f a
literal translation c o n v e y e d n o t h i n g d e f i n i t e i n E n g l i s h , I sought a clearer a l -
ternative. O f course, the search f o r expressive equivalents has its l i m i t s . R e -
g a r d i n g t h e phrase solution de continuité, m y colleague A n d r é e D o u c h i n t o l d
1 1 6
m e , "Let's face i t . T h a t phrase goes back t o 1 3 1 4 . " She m e a n t there are
things a b o u t that phrase, l i t e r a l l y " d i s s o l u t i o n o f c o n t i n u i t y , " that c a n n o t be
naturalized. T r y n a t u r a l i z i n g this i l l u s t r a t i o n f r o m the Petit Robert, q u o t i n g
V i c t o r H u g o , " B e t w e e n present a n d future, there is solution de continuité."
H e n c e , a l t h o u g h t h e translator's responsibility is to m o v e D u r k h e i m ' s t e x t
l i n g u i s t i c a l l y t o w a r d the reader, p a r t o f the reader's o w n r e s p o n s i b i l i t y is to
1 1 7
move intellectually toward D ü r k h e i m . S t i l l , i t does n o t f o l l o w that the
E n g l i s h i t s e l f must s o u n d alien. L i t e r a l equivalents o f t h e w o r d s a n d m o s t o f
t h e syntax are t o b e f o u n d i n S w a i n . B u t as I have j u s t s h o w n , literalness is n o
guarantee against a l l mistakes.
M o r e o v e r , to b e literal is n o t necessarily t o be faithful. D u r k h e i m ' s l a n -
guage was precise a n d scholarly, to b e sure, b u t his t e x t reads w e l l i n F r e n c h .
As a r u l e , his sentences d o n o t force a calisthenics o f d e c i p h e r m e n t u p o n the
reader. N o r d o they assail the reader's ear w i t h u g l y r h y t h m s , rhymes, a n d as-
sonances o r w i t h images that clash. I have t r i e d n o t t o l e t Formes read less w e l l
i n E n g l i s h t h a n i t does i n F r e n c h . I have also t r i e d as m u c h as possible t o r e n -
der a feature o f D u r k h e i m ' s personal style that can be lost i n translation that is
n o t literal e n o u g h : the m e t a p h o r i c a l c o n t e n t i n his w o r d choices. D ü r k h e i m ,
the w o r k m a n l i k e scientist, deliberately avoided l i t e r a r y nights i n scientific
w r i t i n g , b u t he sometimes t h o u g h t i n p o e t i c ways. H i s w o r d choices p u s h a
w h o l e w o r l d o f images i n t o t h e t e x t , a n d I have t r i e d t o keep that w o r l d i n
the n e w E n g l i s h Formes. D u r k h e i m ' s images give us i n s i g h t i n t o his m o d e o f
t h i n k i n g and thus i n t o some o f the i n t u i t i v e leaps that m o b i l i z e d his w o r k .
Still, the notes i n t h e m i n d o f the creative genius are n o t available t o be played
b y his interpreter. E v e n w h e n t h e translator's search f o r equivalents is w e l l i n -
f o r m e d and resolute, the results stand at a distance f r o m the o r i g i n a l t e x t .
E v e r y t r a n s l a t i o n is a r e c o n s t r u c t i o n . M a n y w o r d s and t u r n s o f phrase
have n o exact equivalents b e t w e e n o n e language a n d another. O f t e n the same
is t r u e even o f w o r d s that m o v e b o d i l y . C o n s i d e r the F r e n c h w o r d s opinion
a n d attitude. D u r k h e i m ' s opinion c o u l d have b e e n rendered as " p u b l i c o p i n -
i o n , " i f that t e r m h a d n o t c o m e t o m e a n discrete bits o f m e n t a l m a t e r i a l t o be
d r a w n f r o m i n d i v i d u a l m i n d s b y pollsters a n d measured as t o t h e i r frequency
Translator's Introduction lv

o f o c c u r r e n c e . T h a t m e a n i n g o f " p u b l i c o p i n i o n " carries us t o t h e d i a m e t r i -

118
cal opposite o f w h a t D ü r k h e i m m e a n t b y représentation collective. I n a simi-
lar v e i n , i t is n o w h a r d t o extract " a t t i t u d e " f r o m the m i n d — t h e senses o f
" d o i n g " o r " c o n d u c t " are n o l o n g e r o n its surface. T o dramatize the F r e n c h
t e r m , as w e l l as a n o l d e r E n g l i s h sense, consider the painted attitudes o f Jesus's
disciples i n The Last Supper. N o w consider " v i r t u e , " w h i c h n o l o n g e r has
some o f the meanings that are present i n D ü r k h e i m s vertu. Just as, i n the
K i n g James B i b l e , the salt can lose its savor, so a m e d i c i n e o r m a g i c a l o b j e c t
c o u l d lose its v i r t u e ( o r v i r t u e s ) , m e a n i n g its m a t e r i a l potency, as w e l l as t h e
m o r a l m e a n i n g e v i d e n t i n t h e phrase "a m a n o f v i r t u e , " o r the c u r i o u s l y d i f -
ferent o n e i f w e shift gender. I n t h e t e x t , vertu goes w i t h o t h e r w o r d s , efficace
and efficacité, w h o s e E n g l i s h equivalents are o l d i s h b u t w h o s e m o r e m o d e r n -
s o u n d i n g equivalents seem o u t o f place. H e n c e : T h e potency o f t h e c h e m i c a l
called fluoxetine h y d r o c h l o r i d e makes Prozac effective, b u t t h e virtues i n b l o o d
s p r i n k l e d o n the sacred r o c k m a k e the Intichiuma rites efficacious.
I n some instances, D u r k h e i m ' s m e a n i n g a n d o u r o w n everyday one i n t e r -
sect b u t t h e n diverge so far that o u r o w n familiar w o r d becomes strange t o us.
O n e such w o r d is " m o r a l . " I n Formes, moral is often s y n o n y m o u s w i t h "social,"
1 1 9
very nearly the inverse o f w h a t w e usually m e a n b y " m o r a l . " Its m o s t i m -
p o r t a n t a n t o n y m is n o t " i m m o r a l , " as w e m i g h t t h i n k , b u t " m a t e r i a l , " " t a n g i -
ble," and "physical." Consequently, " m o r a l " is real b u t n o t m a t e r i a l . " G o o d "
is often n o t its s y n o n y m ; together w i t h "social," " s p i r i t u a l " and " m e n t a l " o f -
ten are. " I n d i v i d u a l " stands w i t h the a n t o n y m s o f " m o r a l , " because D u r k -
heim's " i n d i v i d u a l " denotes the body, its drives a n d appetites, its sensory
apparatus—in s h o r t , o u r b o d i l y b e i n g considered as distinct from o u r h u m a n
b e i n g . T h e " s o c i a l " is the source from w h i c h comes t h e h u m a n i z i n g discipline
o f the " i n d i v i d u a l " that creates the "person." H e n c e , the f o l l o w i n g d i s t i n c t i o n
b e t w e e n " i n d i v i d u a l " a n d " p e r s o n " : " O u r sensations are i n t h e i r essence i n -
d i v i d u a l . B u t the m o r e emancipated w e are from the senses, and the m o r e ca-
120
pable w e are o f t h i n k i n g and a c t i n g conceptually, the m o r e w e are p e r s o n s . "
N o t o n l y is " m o r a l " n o t necessarily " g o o d " ; i t is o f t e n n o t even o n the
same t e r r a i n as abstract j u d g m e n t s o f " g o o d " a n d "bad." F o r D ü r k h e i m ,
121
those j u d g m e n t s can b e m a d e o n l y i n p a r t i c u l a r social s e t t i n g s . W h a t is
" m o r a l " is " s o c i a l " ; b o t h v a r y w i t h t i m e a n d place. A c c o r d i n g l y , the d o m a i n
o f the " m o r a l " is n o t p r i v a t e , w i t h its o r i g i n i n some m y s t e r i o u s s o m e w h e r e
i n the depths o f t h e physical i n d i v i d u a l , as o u r c o m m o n s e n s e usage suggests.
Clearly, b y that p o i n t , w e are o n g r o u n d q u i t e alien t o o u r o w n . O n D u r k -
heim's g r o u n d , there can be n o f u l l - f l e d g e d p e r s o n s t a n d i n g apart from the
" m o r a l , " as i n s t i t u t e d i n some h i s t o r i c a l l y g i v e n social setting. T h u s , whereas
lvi Translator's Introduction

i n o u r o w n h a b i t u a l w a y o f t h i n k i n g , that w h i c h is best i n us stands apart

f r o m t h e social, i n D u r k h e i m ' s i t is that, precisely, w h i c h is at w a r w i t h o u r
1 2 2
humanity. F o r D u r k h e i m , w h a t stands apart is a b e i n g that is n o m o r e t h a n
t h e body, and all t h a t the b o d y t o w s a l o n g w i t h i t : T h e b r a i n is there b u t n o t
w h a t w e recognize as t h i n k i n g ; m o v e m e n t is there b u t n o t w h a t w e r e c o g -
nize as h u m a n d o i n g . T h e m e r e co-presence o f m a n y such bodies is j u s t that,
a m e r e co-presence, as l a c k i n g i n m u t u a l l y recognizable i d e n t i t y as so m a n y
potatoes i n a sack. W i t h n o t h i n g b u t the m e r e l y physical a n d m a t e r i a l c o l -
l e c t i o n o f " i n d i v i d u a l s , " there is n e i t h e r reason n o r i d e n t i t y n o r c o m m u n i t y .
T h e r e is n o language a n d n o k i n s h i p ; there are age differences b u t n o gener-
ations; there are sex differences b u t n o genders.
U n l i k e morale, w h i c h can b r o a d e n a l o n g w i t h its place i n a distinctive sys-
t e m o f t h o u g h t , the t e r m culte n a r r o w s i n A m e r i c a n E n g l i s h . A l t h o u g h " c u l t "
o n c e m e a n t "a system o f religious w o r s h i p , especially w i t h reference t o its rites
and ceremonies," i t n o w has a pejorative c o n n o t a t i o n that gives an o d d r i n g t o
such sentences as these o f D u r k h e i m : " B u t feasts a n d r i t e s — i n a w o r d , the
1 2 3
cult—are n o t t h e w h o l e o f r e l i g i o n . " Again: " A l t h o u g h i n principle derived
f r o m the beliefs, the c u l t nevertheless reacts u p o n t h e m , a n d t h e m y t h is often
1 2 4
m o d e l e d o n the r i t e so as t o account f o r i t . . . . " " C u l t " n o w connotes n o t
j u s t feasts and rites b u t excessive and perhaps obsessive ones, attached t o b e -
125
liefs assumed t o be o u d a n d i s h . F o r that reason, used w i t h o u t w a r n i n g today,
i t can plant i n the A m e r i c a n reader's m i n d a different attitude t o w a r d the
t o t e m i c cults t h a n D u r k h e i m had. I d e c i d e d nevertheless, t o retain " c u l t " i n
most contexts, f o r this reason: I f i t is d r o p p e d i n favor o f terms l i k e " w o r s h i p "
and "practice," w h i c h sometimes w i l l do, D u r k h e i m ' s o w n use o f le culte
decouples f r o m t h e cognate t e r m " c u l t u r e . " B u t that w i l l n o t d o at all.
D u r k h e i m ' s o w n f o r m i d a b l e e x p l o r a t i o n o f religious beliefs and r i t e s — o f
représentations collectives, and conscience collective, that is, o f shared ways o f t h i n k i n g
and acting—was seminal t o the vast t w e n t i e t h - c e n t u r y e x p l o r a t i o n o f "culture."
D i f f e r e n t p r o b l e m s arise w i t h t h e use o f "essential," w h i c h is nearly, b u t
n o t entirely, s y n o n y m o u s i n E n g l i s h and F r e n c h . I n b o t h , i t means " f u n d a -
m e n t a l " a n d "necessary"; b u t i n A m e r i c a today, i f I q u o t e D u r k h e i m as h a v -
i n g called r e l i g i o n " a n essential a n d p e r m a n e n t aspect o f h u m a n i t y , " he m a y
seem t o be saying t h a t r e l i g i o n is "indispensable" and, possibly, a d v o c a t i n g i t .
Some readers m i g h t expect a case f o r prayer i n schools t o f o l l o w o r o t h e r r e -
suscitations o f o l d - t i m e r e l i g i o n i n t h e p u b l i c r e a l m . B u t w h e n D u r k h e i m
calls r e l i g i o n an "essentiel et permanent" aspect o f h u m a n i t y , h e means n o such
t h i n g . H i s use o f a similar phrase, " i n t e g r a l a n d p e r m a n e n t , " t o describe so-
ciety, b r i n g s o u t w h a t he does m e a n : S o c i e t y "arouses i n us a w h o l e w o r l d o f
Translator's Introduction lvii

ideas a n d feelings that express i t b u t at the same t i m e are an integral and per-
126
manent part o f o u r s e l v e s . " A t h i r d phrase, d e s c r i b i n g conscience collective,
w o r k s similarly: " B e i n g outside a n d above i n d i v i d u a l a n d l o c a l c o n t i n g e n -
cies, c o l l e c t i v e consciousness sees things o n l y i n t h e i r p e r m a n e n t a n d f u n d a -
127
mental aspect." Therefore, noting D ü r k h e i m s own substitutions of
" i n t e g r a l " and " f u n d a m e n t a l " f o r "essential," t r e a t i n g t h e three s y n o n y -
mously, a n d t a k i n g i n t o a c c o u n t subde differences o f shading i n different
contexts o f use, I have sometimes r e n d e r e d essentiel as "essential" b u t far m o r e
128
often as " f u n d a m e n t a l " o r " b a s i c . " T h e s e are, unavoidably, choices. T h a t
v i r t u a l l y every o n e c o u l d have b e e n m a d e o t h e r w i s e inserts t h e translator's
o w n response t o the t e x t i n t o w h a t c a n n o t h e l p b u t appear t o be w h a t i t c a n -
n o t possibly be: t h e o r i g i n a l t e x t "itself," o n l y p u t i n t o E n g l i s h .
Now, finally, three smaller matters o f c h o i c e n e e d t o be n o t e d here; o t h -
ers w i l l appear i n f o o t n o t e s , as t h e y c o m e u p i n the t e x t . First, n o w that w e
have a n i m a t e d cartoons, the w o r d "animate," as a verb, has a c e r t a i n i n c o n -
g r u o u s h u m o r . B u t i n Formes, " a n i m a t e " goes w i t h t h e q u i t e serious ideas o f
" s o u l " a n d " s p i r i t . " F o r o n e reason o r another, t h o u g h , t h e alternatives are
j u s t as h a r d t o n a t u r a l i z e — o r t h e y are h u m o r o u s as w e l l : " q u i c k e n " (as i n
" t h e q u i c k a n d t h e dead"), " e n l i v e n , " " v i v i f y , " " v i t a l i z e . " Since w e have T y -
l o r a n d " a n i m i s t " t h e o r y , I k e p t "animate." T h e n e x t m a t t e r concerns senti-
ment, w h i c h i n today's A m e r i c a n E n g l i s h strongly c o n n o t e s a f e e l i n g that is
said (as o n a H a l l m a r k card) o r at least f o r m u l a t e d (sentiment against i n t e r -
v e n i n g m i l i t a r i l y ) . I n F r e n c h , i t o f t e n means d i r e c t " f e e l i n g , " o r "awareness"
rather t h a n t h e i r f o r m u l i z e d versions. I n E n g l i s h , w e c a n n o t say, " I have the
s e n t i m e n t that i t w i l l r a i n . " I d r o p p e d Swain's " s e n t i m e n t " almost e v e r y -
w h e r e . Finally, se représenter means t o "present t o the m i n d " — i n o t h e r w o r d s ,
to " c o n c e i v e " o r " i m a g i n e . " T r a n s l a t i n g literally, o n e can a r r i v e at "represent
to oneself," a n d t h a t can mislead. I n m y first r e a d i n g o f Swain's, " R e l i g i o n is,
above all, a system o f ideas b y w h i c h m e n represent to themselves t h e society o f
w h i c h t h e y are m e m b e r s , " I p i c t u r e d t h e m c r e a t i n g emblems. W r o n g .
B u t left u n t o u c h e d are c e r t a i n famous set phrases that after e i g h t y - p l u s
years I feel c a n n o t be e x t r i c a t e d from D u r k h e i m ' s life i n E n g l i s h w i t h o u t d o -
i n g v i o l e n c e t o t h a t l i f e — f o r e x a m p l e , Swain's r e n d e r i n g o f D u r k h e i m ' s c e l -
ebrated d e f i n i t i o n o f r e l i g i o n a n d his m a r v e l o u s phrase " t h o r o u g h g o i n g
i d i o c y " f o r illogique foncière, a b r i l l i a n d y n o n l i t e r a l r e n d e r i n g that captures n o t
o n l y D u r k h e i m ' s sense b u t also his a t t i t u d e t o w a r d c e r t a i n accounts o f a sup-
posed mentalité primitive t o w h i c h l o g i c is u t t e r l y alien.
Sometimes t h e p r o b l e m o f equivalents lies at a different level from terms
and phrases o r structure. T h e r e is n o serviceable A m e r i c a n equivalent
Iviii Translator's Introduction

f o r D u r k h e i m ' s n i n e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y F r e n c h and academic m o d e o f expres-

sion, even i n m o s t scholarly w r i t i n g . Therefore, paradoxically, the search f o r
equivalence l e d m e t o one change that may at first seem radical. W h a t , for e x -
ample, c o u l d be o u r i d i o m a t i c equivalent t o D u r k h e i m ' s e d i t o r i a l " w e " ?
M i c h a e l Gane recounts a p a r o d y b y M a u r i c e R o c h e that b r i n g s o u t part o f
1 2 9
the p r o b l e m . I n i t , a hapless lecturer, s l e e p w a l k i n g annually t h r o u g h D u r k -
heim's classic The Rules of Sociological Method, collides w i t h a w i d e - a w a k e u n -
dergraduate. T h e student refuses t o grant a n y t h i n g , n o t least D u r k h e i m ' s
" w e , " the v e r y first w o r d i n that t e x t , as i t is i n Formes. T h e student brings the
class to a halt b y d e m a n d i n g t o k n o w w h o precisely " w e " are. W h a t is m o r e ,
he refuses t o cooperate w h e n w h a t he calls an a u t h o r i t a r i a n v o i c e addresses
h i m w i t h the " w e " that apparendy means " y o u a n d I " : I t was u n e a r n e d c o m -
m o n ground.
I t o o stumble over the e d i t o r i a l " w e " i n the existing E n g l i s h translations.
I n D u r k h e i m ' s day, i t was the s i m p l y the modest, objective v o i c e o f academic
130
o r scientific w r i t i n g (as i t is still i n the preferred r h e t o r i c o f some d i s c i p l i n e s ) .
As such, that modest, objective " w e " f o r m a l l y gestured t o w a r d a scientific c o l -
131
l e c t i v i t y standing b e h i n d every published w o r k , despite solo a u t h o r s h i p .
132
Nonetheless, i t is m e r e l y a r h e t o r i c a l d e v i c e . So t o render the t e x t i n an E n -
glish r h e t o r i c that does n o t d r a w the w r o n g sort o f a t t e n t i o n t o itself, w e have
substituted " I " for " w e , " except w h e n " w e " seems i n c o n t e x t t o m e a n " y o u
a n d I , " i n c l u d i n g the reader. W e have, however, retained the first-person plural
i n the m a n y statements D ü r k h e i m makes about the behavior o f h u m a n beings
generally, i n c l u d i n g b o t h h i m s e l f a n d the reader, o r i n reference to h i m s e l f as a
m e m b e r o f a g r o u p that excludes the reader. W e have shifted t o the e d i t o r i a l
" w e " t o illustrate o u r p o i n t about h o w the t e x t sounds w i t h o u t o u r effort, i n
retranslating, t o reconstruct the p l a i n - s o u n d i n g n e u t r a l i t y o f the o r i g i n a l .
W e have n o t changed the t e x t i n o n e respect that m a y disconcert some
readers: homme is translated as " m a n " o r " m a n k i n d . " " H u m a n b e i n g " renders
être humain; a n d "person," personne. T h i s translation does n o t t r y t o reconstruct
D u r k h e i m ' s gender vocabulary o r his o u d o o k . D u r k h e i m ' s homme, " m a n , " i n -
cludes " w o m a n , " at least some o f the t i m e ; b u t nowadays w e insist o n saying
" h u m a n b e i n g " o r " p e r s o n " all o f the t i m e . I n Formes, however, " p e r s o n " (as
used i n everyday speech) w i l l n o t w o r k . W h y not? W e q u o t e D ü r k h e i m : " T h e
t w o terms [person a n d i n d i v i d u a l ] are b y n o means s y n o n y m o u s . I n a sense,
133
they oppose m o r e t h a n they i m p l y o n e a n o t h e r . " Besides, w h i l e D ü r k h e i m
is a theorist o f social c o n d u c t , considered globally and e m b r a c i n g all h u m a n
beings, i t w o u l d be an abuse t o m a r k this b y i n s e r t i n g a m o d e r n t e r m i n o l o g y
that achieves this embrace b y means o f linguistic affirmative a c t i o n — i n our
Translator's Introduction lix

o w n t i m e , and for us (a p r o n o u n w h i c h f r o m n o w o n does n o t designate an

e d i t o r i a l " w e , " b u t is m e a n t t o i n c l u d e m e and the reader). Our o w n usage i m -
plies the (ideally) inclusive gender conventions that b e l o n g to o u r o w n day;
D ü r k h e i m s i m p l i e s the q u i t e different gender conventions o f his o w n .
T h e s e c o n v e n t i o n s are i m p l i c i t i n all his w r i t i n g , a n d sometimes t h e y are
e x p l i c i t . L i k e m a n y o f his c o n t e m p o r a r i e s , he b e l i e v e d w o m a n ' s b r a i n a n d
m e n t a l capacity t o be smaller t h a n man's. M u c h t o take issue w i t h f o l l o w e d
f r o m that belief. A l t h o u g h t h e t e m p t a t i o n arises t o i m p r o v e u p o n the elegant
o l d f u r n i t u r e t h a t is Formes, I have resisted i t . T o give i n w o u l d a m o u n t t o
D ü r k h e i m s p o s t h u m o u s " r e c o n s t r u c t i o n " b y m e , i n a different and u n a c -
ceptable sense. I c a n n o t be i n the business o f r e h a b i l i t a t i n g D ü r k h e i m s u n -
e n l i g h t e n e d attitudes a b o u t w o m e n . I f sufficient t o sink h i m forever, t h e y
s h o u l d be a l l o w e d to. R e c o n s t r u c t i o n o n this a c c o u n t is d o u b l y u n a c c e p t -
able, because i t w o u l d p r o f o u n d l y alter D u r k h e i m ' s m e a n i n g as that m e a n i n g
can be o b j e c t i v e l y k n o w n f r o m t h e passage j u s t c i t e d , a n d at t h e same t i m e
i n t r o d u c e a deep i l l o g i c i n t o the b o o k as a w h o l e . T h e a r g u m e n t is c o n -
structed u s i n g evidence f r o m rituals t h a t D ü r k h e i m imagines as h a v i n g h a d
almost exclusively male p a r t i c i p a t i o n . W h e n D ü r k h e i m says "he," r e f e r r i n g
134
to an A u s t r a l i a n o r t o a deity, that is m o s t o f t e n w h a t he l i t e r a l l y m e a n s .
M o r e o v e r , c o n d u c t i n g repairs w o u l d displace c e r t a i n possible c r i t i q u e s .
For example, N a n c y Jay, a f e m i n i s t sociologist o f r e l i g i o n , a r g u e d that i n s o -
far as exclusively male rituals p r o v i d e t h e e m p i r i c a l f o u n d a t i o n f o r D u r k -
heim's social a c c o u n t o f reason, i t c o m m i t s h i m t o o n e o f t w o anomalous
conclusions: W o m e n c a n n o t reason, w h i c h is false, o r w o m e n ' s a b i l i t y t o rea-
1 3 5
son w o u l d r e q u i r e a separate t h e o r y . Additionally, reconstructing D u r k -
heim's gender outlook would conceal the sense i n w h i c h his grand
oppositions b e t w e e n sacred a n d profane, social a n d i n d i v i d u a l , m i n d a n d
body, person a n d i n d i v i d u a l , m o r a l and m a t e r i a l , are l a t e n t l y a n o p p o s i t i o n
136
b e t w e e n male a n d f e m a l e . Surely i t m u s t be the g o a l o f translation t o leave
i n t a c t the i n t e r n a l tensions o f the o r i g i n a l t e x t — i n this case, the l i m i t s o f t h e
b o l d l y universalistic a r g u m e n t , s t u n n i n g f o r its t i m e , that t h e b o o k attempts.
R e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f elegant o l d f u r n i t u r e m u s t n o t m e a n sanding away char-
acteristic features o f its o r i g i n a l design.
Swain's o w n r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f D u r k h e i m ' s F r e n c h title as " T h e E l e m e n -
tary F o r m s o f t h e R e l i g i o u s L i f e " n o w carries the patina o f respectable age.
T h i s t i d e has b e c o m e so m u c h p a r t o f the b o o k ' s life i n E n g l i s h that, except
i n the d e l e t i o n o f o n e "the," I have n o t changed i t . B u t I w o u l d have p r e -
ferred the t e r m " e l e m e n t a l , " even t h o u g h élémentaire expresses b o t h . T h e
question is n o t r i g h t o r w r o n g translation b u t t h e scope each alternative
lx Translator's Introduction

leaves f o r r i g h t o r w r o n g u n d e r s t a n d i n g . O n t h e o n e h a n d , " e l e m e n t a r y "

w i l l d o i n some respects; t h i n k o f the c o n c e p t " e l e m e n t a r y particles," d e f i n e d
as b e i n g the smallest a n d m o s t f u n d a m e n t a l particles k n o w n . O n the o t h e r
h a n d , i n d a y - t o - d a y usage, " e l e m e n t a r y " has a d i m i n u t i v e a n d vaguely dis-
missive c o n n o t a t i o n a n d sets u p the same p o t e n t i a l p r o b l e m f o r some readers
as " s i m p l e . " C o n s i d e r S h e r l o c k Holmes's " E l e m e n t a r y , m y dear W a t s o n , " o r
consider the charge, " Y o u j u s t d o n ' t seem t o get t h e m o s t elementary p o i n t s , "
w h i c h means the easiest o r simplest—addressed b y a scold t o a d i m w i t .
D u r k h e i m means " s i m p l e s t " as w e l l , b u t ( i n a d d i t i o n t o the o t h e r considera-
t i o n s already referred to) he means i t as p a r t i c l e physicists m e a n i t , scientists
w h o assuredly m e a n things that challenge t h e i n t e l l e c t . H e seeks t o e x p l o r e
b u i l d i n g b l o c k s o f h u m a n social life, as physicists e x p l o r e b u i l d i n g b l o c k s o f
matter. " E l e m e n t a r y " is suitable o n l y i f used i n a restricted sense that is n o t
altogether Sir A r t h u r C o n a n D o y l e ' s a n d n o t at all t h e scold's. I n a sense,
D u r k h e i m was a t t e m p t i n g i n his study w h a t the C u r i e s w e r e a t t e m p t i n g i n
t h e i r labs.
D u r k h e i m s " s i m p l e s t " f o r m s are indispensably p a r t o f the m o s t c o m -
p l e x . A l t e r n a t i v e l y , t h e y can be t h o u g h t o f as atoms a n d c o m p a r e d t o the
c h e m i c a l substances that m a k e u p t h e p e r i o d i c chart, the elements. The
formes that he discovers i n this p a r t i c u l a r study are the elements t o be f o u n d
i n the m a k e u p o f t h e r e l i g i o n s he t h o u g h t o f as m o r e complexes o r as " h i g h e r "
i n an e v o l u t i o n a r y sense. D u r k h e i m is interested i n "a f u n d a m e n t a l and p e r -
m a n e n t " aspect o f h u m a n i t y a n d i n its "ever-present source," w h i c h can be
discerned i f studied i n w h a t he takes t o be its elemental f o r m s . W h a t e v e r those
137
f o r m s are (and I n o w paraphrase a p h y s i c i s t ) , t h e y have an u n d e r l y i n g i d e n -
t i t y that persists despite unceasing change a n d limitless diversity. M o r e o v e r , as
i n the physicist's search f o r e l e m e n t a r y particles, t h e q u e s t i o n o f c h r o n o l o g i -
cal o r i g i n s is related and yet separable. So i f w e understand the phrase formes
élémentaires i n that way, w e need n o t get b o g g e d d o w n , as some have, i n the
n o t i o n that D u r k h e i m made t h e e r r o r o f t h i n k i n g t o t e m i s m b r o u g h t h i m t o
o r i g i n s i n a c h r o n o l o g i c a l sense. Instead, w e can take h i m at his w o r d .
W h e t h e r he was r i g h t o r w r o n g a b o u t t h i n k i n g this o r a b o u t t h i n k i n g
t h a t the study o f Australians c o u l d possibly y i e l d u p r e l i g i o n i n elemental f o r m
are v a l i d b u t separate questions. W h a t is i m p o r t a n t is t o grasp t h e scientific
e x p l o r a t i o n that D u r k h e i m a t t e m p t e d . T h e b u r d e n o f t h e b o o k as a w h o l e is
that an aspect o f h u m a n i t y ' s " f u n d a m e n t a l and p e r m a n e n t " nature is t o be
f o u n d i n h u m a n i t y ' s social nature. A n d that h u m a n , social nature is n o t h i n g
o t h e r t h a n its vie religieuse. T o s h o w us w h a t is i n c l u d e d i n this vie religieuse r e -
quires t h e f u l l l e n g t h o f a l o n g b o o k . W e can already say that this n o t i o n goes
far b e y o n d w h a t p e o p l e d o specifically as c h u r c h m e n o r - w o m e n .
Translator's Introduction lxi

A c c o r d i n g l y , the n e w t i t l e rejects Swain's r e n d e r i n g "the r e l i g i o u s life." I f

taken as an u n f o r t u n a t e artifact o f l i t e r a l translation, the phrase "the r e l i g i o u s
l i f e " furnishes D u r k h e i m w i t h a v o i c e i n a h e a v i l y accented a n d game b u t
c l u m s y use o f E n g l i s h . I t is as i f he offered a Gallic s h r u g t o an i n t e l l e c t u a l l y
s w a m p e d A m e r i c a n u n d e r g r a d u a t e a n d said t o h i m , " A s w e t e l l i n France,
'c'est la vie'—that's t h e l i f e ' ! " W e l l , Non. T h e d e f i n i t e article d e f i n i t e l y does
n o t b e l o n g there. B u t w h a t a b o u t the E n g l i s h phrase " r e l i g i o u s life," w h i c h
suggests a life apart? F r o m t h e a r g u m e n t o f t h e p r e c e d i n g paragraph, i t is o b -
v i o u s that the b o o k is n o t a b o u t monasteries o r r e l i g i o u s v i r t u o s i , o r a b o u t
beliefs a n d practices sealed o f f w i t h i n a separate sphere o f h u m a n life
u n i q u e l y t h e i r o w n . I n o u r o w n day, " r e l i g i o u s l i f e " connotes an exclusively
i n w a r d a n d p r i v a t e sphere—but t h e s e v e n t e e n t h - c e n t u r y w o r l d that was h o s -
tile t o P i l g r i m s and Puritans d i d n o t , a n d the w o r l d o f Formes does n o t .
T h i n k b a c k t o t h e w a y D u r k h e i m answered those w h o believe the f u n c t i o n
o f r e l i g i o n is t o offer a t h e o r y o f the w o r l d : " I t s t r u e f u n c t i o n is t o m a k e us
act and t o h e l p us live."
Finally, I t h i n k D u r k h e i m does m e a n "the e l e m e n t a l f o r m s . " H e offers
his study based o n A u s t r a l i a n ethnographies as a "single, w e l l - c o n d u c t e d e x -
p e r i m e n t . " I t is v e r y clear, f r o m t h e first page, that a l t h o u g h based u p o n o b -
servations i n A b o r i g i n a l A u s t r a l i a n societies, he intends his findings t o reveal
the f u n d a m e n t a l b u i l d i n g b l o c k s o f all r e l i g i o n , its ever-present source a n d
natural resource i n the m e n t a l i t y , a n d i n the reality, o f h u m a n k i n d . W h a t e v e r
is i n theirs is i n his a n d i n ours.
K a r e n E . Fields
Rochester, N e w Y o r k
O c t o b e r 1994

NOTES
1. Emile Durkheim, "Contribution to discussion 'Religious Sentiment at the
Present Time,' " reproduced in W. S. F. Pickering, Durkheim on Religion:A Se-
lection of Readings with Bibliographies, London, Roudedge, 1975, p. 184, which
includes new translations by Pickering and Jacqueline Redding.
2. Introduction, p. 2.
3. A. A. Goldenweiser, "Emile Durkheim—Les Formes élémentaires de la vie re-
ligieuse:Le Système totémique en Australie, 1912," originally published in American
Anthropologist 17, 1915, reproduced in Peter Hamilton, ed., Emile Durkheim:
Critical Assessments, London and N e w York, Routledge, 1990, 3:240.
4. Durkheim published three other major books during his lifetime: The Divi-
sion of Labor in Society (1893), The Rules of Sociological Method (1895), and Sui-
bcii Translator's Introduction

cide (1897). For a comprehensive bibliography of his work, see W. S. F. Pick-

ering, Durkheim's Sociology of Religion: Themes and Theories, London, Routledge
& Kegan Paul, 1984, pp. 535-543.
5. Introduction, pp. 2-3.
6. I refer to Paul Tillich's (1955) essay "Religion" in Mark Van Dören, ed., Man's
Right to Knowledge and the Free UseThereof, New York, Columbia, 1955, and to
Rudolf Otto s (1917) book Das Heilige, translated in 1923 as The Idea of the
Holy: An Inquiry into the Non-rational Factor in the Idea of the Divine and Its Rela-
tion to the Rational, John W. Harvey, trans., London, Oxford, 1923.
7. P. 426.
8. P. 9.
9. Goldenweiser, "Emile Dürkheim," p. 218. M y italics.
10. P. 349 and n. 55.
11. P. 437. One of the many delights of Formes is to encounter the nineteenth-
century philologists, whose explorations of how language shapes reality (in
the Vedas, twenty Sanskrit words for "sky") remain important even today. See
p. 75.
12. P. 227.
13. Here I am talking about rhetorical features of the text. O n its characteristic
logical features, Steven Lukes has written a comprehensive analysis: Emile Dürk-
heim: His Life and Work, A Historical and Critical Study, London, Penguin, 1973.
14. D ü r k h e i m used the word paradoxale, which literally means "against doctrine,"
but the everyday meaning of its English counterpart waters down into mere
strangeness.
15. Gaston Richard, originally published in Revue d'histoire et de philosophie re¬
ligieuse (1923), reproduced in Pickering, Dürkheim on Religion. Pickering and
Redding explain that they substituted "English" for Pochard's own term
"Anglican." I imagine he said what he meant.
16. Not being grounded in the real, magic did not survive, except as entertain-
ment. Here, briefly, is the threefold analytical distinction that Dürkheim
makes: (1) religion is social, built on communities, whereas magical practices
are individual, linking a practitioner and a client; (2) religion builds on altru-
ism, and magic on individual utility; and (3) given the previous two points,
religion works in the real, whereas magic does not, because religion works
morally rather than materially, that is, on human minds operating collectively
rather than on things. See pp. 41—42, pp. 360, 363. M y own example: It has
turned out that gold cannot be made from baser metals, but paper money can
be made to be as good as gold.
17. Dominick LaCapra, Emile Dürkheim: Sociologist and Philosopher, Chicago, U n i -
versity of Chicago Press, 1972.
18. Lukes, Emile Dürkheim, p. 4.
19. Talcott Parsons, The Structure of Social Action, New York, Free Press, 1968
[1937], 1:421-429.
Translator's Introduction lxiii

20. Raymond Aron, Main Currents of Sociological Thought, Middlesex, England,

Penguin, 1967, 2:66-68.
21. I say this in full awareness of Mordecai Kaplans embrace of Formes as an in-
tellectual foundation for Reconstructionist Judaism and even though Kaplan's
student, the well-known popularizer Harold Kushner, uses somewhat
Durkheimian formulations. See To Life! A Celebration of Jewish Being and
Thinking, Boston, Little, Brown, 1993, esp. chap. 3.
22. Parsons, Structure of Social Action, p. 421.
23. But see a splendid article by Patricia Cormack, " The Rules of Sociological Method:
The Paradox of Dürkheims Manifesto," Theory and Society, forthcoming.
24. Judith Ryan provides an illuminating account of the links joining physics, psy-
chology, philosophy, painting, and literature in The Vanishing Subject: Early Psy-
chology and Literary Modernism, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1991.
25. According to Frank Pearce, The Radical Dürkheim, London, Unwin, 1989, p.
3, Foucault did not usually acknowledge his debt to Dürkheim. However, ac-
cording to Stuart Hall, he did indeed. Discussion following a paper, " C o n -
structing the Black Subject." Presented at the conference Race Matters: U.S.
Terrain, Princeton University, April 29, 1994.
26. See Terry F. Godlove, Religion, Interpretation, and Diversity of Belief: The Frame-
work Model from Kant to Dürkheim to Davidson, Cambridge, Cambridge U n i -
versity Press, 1989.
27. In this context, "empirical science" will do, but I retain the French phrase, so
that the dense tangle of meanings can be unraveled by the reader according to
context. T h e following statement by Auguste Comte can serve as a guide:
"Considered first in its oldest and commonest sense, the word 'positive' des-
ignates the real as opposed to the chimerical. In this respect, it well suits the new
philosophical spirit, the mark of which is its constant dedication to research
that is accessible to our intelligence, to the permanent exclusion of the impen-
etrable mysteries with which it was occupied in its infancy." See André L a -
lande, Vocabulaire technique et critique de la philosophie, Paris, F. Alcan, 1926, p. 597.
28. O n this point, see the papers collected in Said A . Arjomand, ed., The Political
Dimensions of Religion, Albany, State University of New York Press, 1993.
29. P. 419.
30. Dürkheim titled his chapter on soul La Notion d'âme—"the idea of soul"—
but he could have said La Notion de l'âme—"the idea of the soul."
31. P. 262.
32. A n 1894 publication, a classic almost instantly, launched modern research on
the early Greek idea of the soul: E . Rhode, Seelencult und Unsterblichkeitsglaube
der Griechen, 2 vols., Freiburg, Leipzig, and Tübingen, which appeared in
English as Psyche: The Cult of Souls and Belief in Immortality among the Greeks,
W. B. Hillis, trans., London, 1925, cited by Jan Bremmer, The Early Greek
Concept of the Soul, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press, 1983, p. 6.
33. Empedocles was one of the early Greek philosophers who thought (like the
lxiv Translator's Introduction

Australians) that the soul resides in the blood. And consider this: In Homer,
the soul leaves the body via wounds. See Bremmer, Early Greek Concept, pp.
3, 15, which also brings out the multifariousness of that concept. For helpful
conversation and references, I am indebted to my colleagues Lewis W. Beck,
Deborah Modrak, and George Dennis O'Brien.
34. P. 49.
35. P. 54.
36. Pp. 65, 66, 67.
37. P. 271.
38. This argument also lays the foundation for an argument (made in Bk. I l l ,
chap. 3, esp. p. 368) against the claim that the concept "cause" can be derived
from the individual experience of willing.
39. P. 368.
40. To get a sense of what is involved, work through the intricate diagram in
Craig Barclay, "Autobiographical Remembering: Creating Personal Culture,"
in M . A. Conway, D. C . Rubin, and W. Wagenaar, eds., Theoretical Perspectives
on Autobiographical Memory, Netherlands, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1992,
esp. p. 2.
41. Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish:The Birth of the Prison, Alan Sheridan,
trans., N e w York, Vintage, 1979, pp. 23ff.
42. For conversation and references on this and many of the points that follow, I
am indebted to my colleague Ayala Gabriel.
43. P. 265.
44. Adin Steinsaltz, The Thirteen Petalled Rose: A Discourse on the Essence ofJewish
Existence and Belief, Yehuda Hanegbi, trans., N e w York, Basic Books, 1980,
pp. 51-52.
45. N o r does the fact that a powerful abstract notion is to be found in religious
tradition by any means make its use suggest residual believerhood.
46. P. 8.
47. P. 419.
48. P. 177. This chapter especially, including its footnotes, has many dry rejoinders.
49. Pickering, Durkheim's Sociology of Religion, p. xxiv; Lewis A. Coser, Masters of
Sociological Thought: Ideas in Historical and Social Context, N e w York, Harcourt,
1971, pp. 162-163.
50. Quoted from Gouldner's The Coming Crisis of Western Sociology in a valuable
discussion of Durkheim by Peter Ekeh: Social Exchange Theory:The Two Tradi-
tions, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1974, p. 12.
51. Aron, Main Currents, pp. 13—14.
52. Stjepan G . Mestrovic formulated the question properly in his Emile Durkheim
and the Reformation of Sociology, Totowa, NJ, R o w m a n & Littlefield, 1987, p.
19. There is also a speculative, Freudianized article by J. C . Filloux, "Il ne faut
pas oublier que je suis fils de rabbin," Revue française de sociologie 17, no. 2,
1976, pp. 259-266.
Translator's Introduction Ixv

53. For fascinating suggestions about the relationships between Comte s historical
epistemology of science and modern writers, see Johan Heilbron, "Auguste
Comte and Modern Epistemology," Sociological Theory 8, no. 2, Fall 1990, pp.
152—162. Full-scale analysis of D ü r k h e i m s work by professional philosophers
has been relatively rare. But see, in addition to Godlove, Religion, Interpretation,
and Diversity, Warren Schmaus, Durkheim's Philosophy of Science and the Sociology
of Knowledge: Creating an Intellectual Niche, Chicago, University of Chicago
Press, 1994.
54. Robert Bellah has disposed of the myths that Dürkheim was antipsychological
and that he thought a sociology wholly independent of psychology was possi-
ble. Robert N . Bellah, Emile Dürkheim on Morality and Society, Chicago, U n i -
versity of Chicago Press, 1973, pp. xx—xxi. And see Ryan, Vanishing Subject, for
an excellent introduction to early psychology and its entrance into the con-
sciousness of educated turn-of-the-century West European and American au-
diences. Ryan, however, excludes psychoanalysis. See also John Kerr, A Most
Dangerous Method: The Story ofJung, Freud, and Sabina Spielrein, New York, V i n -
tage Books, 1993, pp. 27—29. Kerr's Introduction provides a sense of the milieu
in which Dürkheim discussed phenomena such as transmigration of souls and
metempsychosis. For a time, investigations into spiritualism were not sharply
distinguished from what would later be designated specifically as scientific
work.
55. With his characteristic acuteness but without lasting effect on subsequent
commentary, Talcott Parsons pointed out that the absence of a theory of so-
cial change does not render a theory ahistorical. Structure of Social Action, 1:450
56. But see Parsons's brilliant 1937 synthesis, which revealed how ambiguous the
relationship of Formes is to functionalism (Structure of Social Action, esp.
1:441—450), and Pickering, Durkheim's Sociology of Religion, pp. 88—89,
300—317—both of which read Formes rather differently than I have done here.
57. P. 1.
58. Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread
of Nationalism, London, Verson, 1983.
59. For a crisply made case of why not, see Lukes, Emile Dürkheim, pp. 477-479.
For early ethnographers' criticisms of the work that emerged almost immedi-
ately, see A . A. Goldenweiser, "Review of Les Formes élémentaires de la vie re-
ligieux: Le Système totémique en Australie" (originally published in 1915), in
Peter Hamilton, ed., Emile Dürkheim: Critical Assessments, London and N e w
York, Routledge, 1990, 3:238-252; and another review (published in 1913),
reproduced in Pickering, Dürkheim on Religion, pp. 205—208.
60. Lukes, Emile Dürkheim.
61. Robert Nisbet, The Sociology of Emile Dürkheim, N e w York, Oxford, 1974.
62. Pickering, Durkheim's Sociology of Religion.
63. Although many readers have arrived at this under their own steam, scholarly
sources include Mary Douglas's view on "the Durkheimian premise that soci-
lxvi Translator's Introduction

ety and God can be equated." Mary Douglas, Natural Symbols: Explorations in
Cosmology, London, Barrie andRockliff, 1970, quoted by Pickering, Durkheim's
Sociology of Religion (whose discussion, pp. 227—241, provides a learned analysis
and many useful references). See also Aran's very strong statement in Main Cur-
rents: "It seems to me absolutely inconceivable to define the essence of religion
in terms of the worship which the individual pledges to the group, for in my
eyes the essence of impiety is precisely the worship of the social order. To sug-
gest that the object of the religious feelings is society transfigured is not to save
but to degrade that human reality which sociology seeks to understand" (p. 68).
64. P. 44. Le Petit Robert quotes this definition to illustrate the term système in the
sense of "a structured set of abstract things."
65. H e is thought to have been influenced in this direction by his reading of
Robertson Smith's Lectures on the Religion of the Semites (Pickering, Durkheim's
Sociology of Religion, p. 63). But readers who hear echoes of historical materi-
alism in this movement from deed to idea are referred to, pp. 385ff. There
Durkheim talks about the elaboration of rites in a way that brings to mind the
later Marxist use of "relative autonomy," to discuss the elaboration of beliefs.
66. A main argument of Bk. I, Chap. 4, esp. p. 93. It sometimes goes unnoticed
that Durkheim points out precisely those traits of the clan that make its co-
herence improbable: no stable authority, not based on well-defined territory
or common residence, not necessarily consanguineous, and virtually no util-
itarian functions. Cf., p. 234.
67. This formulation is drawn from Nancy Jay, ThroughoutYour Generations Forever:
Sacrifice, Religion, and Paternity, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1992,
pp. 17-19.
68. P. 208. My italics. The French reads as follows: [Le totem] exprime et symbolise
deux sortes de choses différentes. D'une part, il est la forme extérieure et sensible de ce que
nous avons appelé le principe ou le dieu totémique. Mais d'un autre côté, il est aussi le
symbole de cette société déterminée qu 'on appelé le clan. C'en est le drapeau; c'est le signe
par lequel chaque clan se distingue des autres, la marque visible de sa personnalité, mar-
que que porte tout ce qui fait partie du clan à un titre quelconque, hommes, bêtes et choses.
Si donc il est, à la fois, le symbole du dieu et de la société, n'est-ce pas que le dieu et la
société ne font qu'un? Comment l'emblème du groupe aurait-il pu devenir la figure de
cette quasi divinité, si le groupe et la divinité étaient deux réalités distinctes? Le dieu dit
clan, le principe totémique, ne peut donc être autre chose que le clan lui-même, mais hy-
postasié et représenté aux imaginations sous les espèces sensibles du végétal ou de l'ani-
mal qui sert de totem.
69. The controverted "reduction" of God to society can be taken in at least two
senses: simplifying something complex to the point of distorting it, or restat-
ing something in different but equivalent terms (e.g., 2/6 = 1/3). T h e fact that
both in this context imply diminishment reveals the theological strata of the
controversy. (A third sense, the theory of explanation, is not at issue.) If God is
Translator's Introduction lxvii

in the definition of religion, keeping theological and nontheological things

aloft is like juggling rubber balls and wooden Indian clubs at the same time.
70. The reader who is prepared to jump to conclusions about what the Dürkheim
whom we saw addressing "free believers" was prepared to say about G o d
should turn now to p. 15, and reflect on the nicety of this statement about
man's social being, which "represents within us the highest reality in the in-
tellectual and moral realm that is knowable through observation: I mean society."
My italics.
71. In these terms, I miss the point of laboring to protect God's separateness, as in
the following passage of Pickerings (Dürkheims Sociology of Religion, p. 235):
"The danger is always to jump the parallel [society is to its members as G o d
is to the faithful] and make the two concepts or realities identical, or at least
to suggest that one is the other. Critics claim that Dürkheim makes such a
step, but they disregard all caution. . . . Dürkheim is much more careful, and
nowhere does he take the final and irrevocable step."
72. For a carefully reasoned statement of this view, see Melford E . Spiro, " R e l i -
gion: Problems of Definition and Explanation," in Michael Banton, ed., An-
thropological Approaches to the Study of Religion, London, Tavistock, 1966.
73. P. 172.
74. See, for example, p. 77, on naturism: "It is not by praying to them, celebrat-
ing them in feasts and sacrifices, and imposing fasts and privations on himself
that he could have prevented them from harming him or obliged them to
serve his purposes. Such procedures could have succeeded only on very rare
occasions—miraculously, so to speak. I f the point of religion was to give us a
representation of the world that would guide us in our dealings with it, then
religion was in no position to fulfill its function, and all peoples would not
have been slow to notice that fact: Failures, infinitely more common than
successes, would have notified them very quickly that they were on the
wrong path; and religion, constantly shaken by these constant disappoint-
ments, would have been unable to last."
75. P. 239.
76. Dürkheim not only denies that reconciliation is possible but also dismisses
that argument along those lines as beside the point. Pp. 419—43Iff. See L a -
Capra, Emile Dürkheim, p. 289.
77. See Jay, Throughout Your Generations, pp. 30—40, where we encounter an in-
structive example of beliefs that could not exist if, to exist, they had to be
merely believable—for example, male priests disguised as pregnant women and
conducting blood sacrifices. Jay argues that unilineal descent through fathers is
publicly done through blood sacrificial rites, in rites that are often explicitly
formulated as transcending birth from mothers. It is precisely through partici-
pation in those rites that (a counterfactual) one-sided descent is collectively es-
tablished as real.
lxviii Translator's Introduction

78. To any reader who imagines doubt as the exclusive intellectual property of re-
cent times or of cultures near our own, I recommend a spectacular article by
Claude Lévi-Strauss, D ü r k h e i m s direct intellectual descendant: "The Sor-
cerer and His Magic," in Structural Anthropology, Garden City, N Y , Doubleday,
1967 [1963].
79. P. 214. D ü r k h e i m does not make the assumption that the rational capacity of
man differs from race to race or from time to time. For him, humanity is one.
For a statement of the opposite assumption, see Lucien Lévy-Bruhl, Les Fonc-
tions mentales dans les sociétés inférieures, Paris, Alcan, 1910, which Dürkheim
disputes throughout Formes.
80. This remark by Comte appears in the Petit Robert, to illustrate one sense of the
word simple.
81. Cormack, "Rules of Sociological Method," has pointed out that this strategy
is akin to that used by the ancient Greek rhetoricians, especially the sophists.
82. He repeats this point in criticizing concepts like "primitive" and "savage," and
elsewhere. See his side criticism of Frazer, for example, p. 183, and the dis-
tinction between origins and elements that he takes for granted throughout,
for example, p. 55.
83. See D ü r k h e i m s rationale for simplifying in order to reduce differences and
variations to a minimum (pp. 5-7). Note also that he opens the first chapter
of Book One with the observation that even the simplest religions known are
of very great complexity (p. 45).
84. One sometimes hears the simplistic consideration that Dürkheim might have
found exotic cases expedient at a time in France when religion was a hot but-
ton issue, and the anti-Semitism exposed in the Dreyfus Affair might have
made it still hotter for Dürkheim. But then, what would we make of the fact
that an international legion of scholars accorded totemism general theoretical
interest? See Claude Lévi-Strauss, Totemism, Rodney Needham, trans., Bos-
ton, Beacon Press, 1963.
85. Peter Berger drew out some of these implications of Formes by devising the
concept of "plausibility structures," communities whose everyday life takes
for granted religious definitions of reality. See The Sacred Canopy, Garden City,
N Y , Doubleday, 1967, pp. 16, 46, 156.
86. P. 206.
87. Psychologist Craig Barclay tells me that the scheme Dürkheim lays out is more
or less the classical paradigm of conditioned response. Little has been written
about how closely Dürkheim followed developments in psychology. Lukes's
footnotes indicate that Dürkheim read Wilhelm Wundt through the 1880s and
1890s, and it is clear in Formes that he closely read the work of William James,
whose Principles of Psychology appeared in French translation in 1910. Besides,
James (according to Ryan, Vanishing Subject, pp. 12, 17) disseminated and re-
ceived ideas, on and from both sides of the Atlantic, even as he developed his
Translator's Introduction lxix

own, and his earliest publications in France appeared in a journal edited by

D ü r k h e i m s teacher, Charles Renouvier.
88. See Trudier Harris, Exorcising Blackness: Historical and Literary Lynching and
Burning Rituals, Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 1984, on the passage
of such effervescences into American literary art; Albert Speer, Inside the Tliird
Reich: Memoirs, N e w York, Macmillan, 1970, the self-aware artist of buildings
and Nazi effervescences; and Marcel Mauss, D ü r k h e i m s younger collaborator
who lived to see the Nazis' effervescences and then saw how "many large mod-
ern societies" could be "hypnotized like Australians are by their dances, and
set in motion like a children's roundabout." Quoted in Lukes, Entile Dürk-
heim, p. 338n.
89. P. 213.
90. Ibid.
91. P. 211.
92. P. 223.
93. Cf. the classically instructive but (I believe) mistaken view of Parsons, Struc-
ture of Social Action, pp. 442ff. Parsons objected to D ü r k h e i m s pensée and con-
science collectives as reified "group mind" concepts. But actually, I think, not
only the mind but also the senses are not fully accounted for if conceived of
in their individual aspects alone. Consider what the neurologist Oliver Sacks
tells us about "Virgil," blind from early childhood, who through surgery
forty-five years later regained the physical capacity to see. But, not having
"spent a lifetime learning to see," he did not regain the seen world of his con-
temporaries—a condition for which neurologists have the interesting term
"agnostic." See Oliver Sacks, An Anthropologist on Mars: Seven Paradoxical Tales,
N e w York, Knopf, 1995, pp. 108-151, esp. pp. 114-115.
94. Approvingly quoted by Lukes, Emile Dürkheim, p. 25.
95. See ibid., pp. 25-26.
96. P. 122.
97. Alan Unterman, Dictionary of Jewish Lore and Legend, London, Thames and
Hudson, 1991, p. 25.
98. P. 226. Here is a glaring mistake by Joseph Ward Swain, who for l'étendu and
l'inétendu wrote, respectively, "heard" and "not heard" (as if Dürkheim had
written l'entendu and Vinentendu), thereby making the connection to
Descartes disappear and also the logic that joins this chapter with the one i m -
mediately following, on the idea of soul. The 1975 translation by Pickering
and Redding (Dürkheim on Religion, p. 134) renders étendu and inétendu as if
the difference was a matter of size: "The impressions made on us by the phys-
ical world cannot, by definition, embody anything which transcends this
world. T h e tangible can only be made into the tangible; the vast cannot be
made into the minute." M y italics.
99. Lukes, Emile Dürkheim, p. 26.
lxx Translator's Introduction

100. I have no access to the evolving representations, but even at this distance, stand-
ing only within the argument of Formes, I venture to predict that, by now, the
bones were not preserved by human beings but preserved themselves, were
not dusted off by human hands but resurrected themselves, that in so doing
they towed upward with them on the rope of miracle the eternal Lithuanian
nation-state, and that, for some among Lithuanians sons and daughters, they
have acquired exceptional virtues.
101. After defining sacre, Durkheim sometimes uses the term saint, without saying
how the two are related. I speculate that the shifting has to do, at least in part,
with the problem sacred objects posed for Durkheim's written representation.
If "holy" is used to render saint, there is a risk of sliding over into religious ac-
tors' point of view, where religious objects are intrinsically holy. But at the
same time, given in French was a fixed phrase incorporating the term saint:
L'arche sainte specifically denotes the Holy Ark but is also equivalent to "sacred
cow." The term saint is more frequent in Book III than elsewhere, four of
whose five chapters are about ritual conduct regarding things that have already
been sanctified (but are, from the actors' standpoint, intrinsically holy). As the
context shifts, the same object comes into view as different at different mo-
ments, one during the process of sanctification, the other after the process of
sanctification is complete. To be represented was not only changing time, and
not only changing viewpoints, but also the changing fundamental nature of
the object itself. I speculate that, for Durkheim, the two terms were some-
times synonymous and sometimes not.
102. A serviceable concept of "believing" need imply no more than this. In three
studies about colonial settings, I have shown how British rulers came to ac-
cept witchcraft and prophetic dreaming as real and how supernatural utter-
ance by millenarian prophets forced real-world colonial police into action.
See "Political Contingencies of Witchcraft in Colonial Central Africa: C u l -
ture and the State in Marxist Theory," Canadian Journal of African Studies 16,
no. 3, December 1982; Revival and Rebellion in Colonial Central Africa, Prince-
ton, Princeton University Press, 1985; " I Had a Dream: Dreams and Visions
upon the Political Landscape of Waking Life," Etnofoor 4, no. 2, 1991.
103. See the articles Freud published in 1913 as Totem and Taboo. D o not overlook
his footnote references to Durkheim's work, including Formes.
104. In one place, Durkheim uses the term "fiction" but spins it: There is a reality
that gains religious expression only through imaginative transfiguration (p. 385).
105. P. 223.
106. See Peter Kolchin, Unfree Labor: American Slavery and Russian Serfdom, C a m -
bridge, Harvard University Press, 1987, pp. 170-191, quoted in Barbara
Jeanne Fields, "Slavery, Race, and Ideology in the United States of America,"
New Left Review, no. 181, May-June 1990, pp. 95-118, an exploration of rea-
son, identity, and community deployed within the socially constructed frame-
work of quasi-biological race.
Translator's Introduction lxxi

107. P. 239.
108. Quoted by Czeslaw Milosz, The Witness of Poetry, Cambridge, Harvard U n i -
versity Press, 1983, p. 42.
109. Pickering, Dürkheim on Religion, pp. ix, 102—166.
110. P. 19 in Swain translation; pp. 6—7 in present one.
111. Lukes, Emile Dürkheim, p. 433n.
112. See Kerr, A Most Dangerous Method, pp. 27-29.
113. O n this point I am indebted to my colleague William J. McGrath, author
of Freud's Discovery of Psychoanalysis: The Politics of Hysteria, Ithaca, N Y ,
Cornell University Press, 1986. Personal communication, February 20,
1994. McGrath confirms the absence of correspondence between the two
men.
114. In Totem and Taboo: Some Points of Agreement Between the Mental Lives of Sav-
ages and Neurotics, New York, Norton, 1952, pp. 100—161. In addition, Mes-
trovic, Emile Dürkheim, p. 109, has pointed out a striking kinship of approach
to magic as early as the 1907 paper, "Obsessive Acts and Religious Practices,"
in which Freud describes the obsessional neurosis as a "privatized religious
system."
115. M y heart nearly stopped when, two years into the project and working from
the first edition, I found something in the Bibliothèque nationale called a sec-
ond, "revised" edition of Formes, published in 1921. Why or under what i n -
spiration (Dürkheim having been dead since 1917) proved impossible to
discover. Comparison showed that this "revision" contains many typograph-
ical errors not present in the first. The current Presses Universitaires de
France paperback is based on that second edition.
116. Looking for something abstract, I queried various colleagues as to the possi-
bility of its having a technical meaning in some body of philosophical work
but turned up nothing. What I found in the Petit Robert was horrifyingly lit-
eral: fourteenth-century surgeons coined the term.
117. Robert Alun Jones and Douglas Kibbee have argued this point quite cogently
in "Dürkheim in Translation: Dürkheim and Translation," a paper presented
at the conference Humanistic Dilemmas: Translation in the Humanities and
Social Sciences, State University of N e w York at Binghamton, September
27-28, 1991.
118. See his "Représentations individuelles et représentations collectives," RMM,
6, 1898.
119. O n this point, see Nisbet, Sociology of Emile Dürkheim, p. 187, and the clear
discussion of D ü r k h e i m on morality that follows. Note as well Dürkheim 's
contrast of "moral" and "physical" at p. 192.
120. P. 275.
121. O n this point, see D ü r k h e i m s famous discussion of crime in The Rules of So-
ciological Method.
122. Mestrovic, Emile Dürkheim, makes a good case that this view is common i n -
lxxii Translator's Introduction

tellectual ground between D ü r k h e i m and Freud (in Civilization and Its Dis-
contents). D ü r k h e i m s "individual" would parallel Freud's "es," which entered
English as "id."
123. P. 430. M y italics.
124. P. 99.
125. In fact, survey research has shown that the term "cult" in this pejorative sense
has become sufficiently potent not only to color the response in America
to those "new" religious movements that are called "cults," but indeed to in-
fluence legal proceedings—so much so that a strong case has been made
for abandoning the term altogether in serious scholarship. See James T.
Richardson, "Definitions of Cult: From Sociological-Technical to Popular-
Negative," Review of Religious Research 34, no. 4, June 1993, who also surveys
the evolution of the term's scholarly usages in the twentieth century. I am
indebted to Dr. Richardson for sharing with me various references on this
terrain of contested words.
126. P. 226. M y italics.
127. P. 445.
128. Dürkheim brings out this nuance on p. 5. "Everything is boiled down to
what is absolutely indispensable, to that without which there would be no
religion. But the indispensable is also the fundamental [essentiel], in other
words, that which it is above all important for us to know."
129. Michael Gane, On Dürkheims Rules of Sociological Method, London, R o u t -
ledge, 1989, p. 9.
130. However, Claude Lévi-Strauss has given unsettling philosophical reasons for
referring to himself in the third person or as "we": "Throughout these pages,
the 'we' the author has deliberately adhered to has not been meant simply as
an expression of diffidence. . . . I f there is one conviction that has been inti-
mately borne upon the author of this work during twenty years devoted to
the study of m y t h s . . . it is that the solidity of the self, the major preoccupa-
tion of the whole of Western philosophy, does not withstand persistent appli-
cation to the same object, which comes to pervade it through and through
and to imbue it with an experiential awareness of its own unreality" (p. 625).
I am indebted to the philosopher V. Y. Mudimbe for this reference and for in-
structive correspondence on several issues.
131. D ü r k h e i m s scientific collectivity included distinguished researchers in their
own right, such as Marcel Mauss and Henri Hubert, whose works he contin-
ually cites.
132. See the discussion on this issue by John and Doreen Weightman, translators of
Claude Lévi-Strauss 's The Naked Man: Introduction to a Science of Mythology, vol.
4, New York, Harper & Row, 1981 [1971], p. 625.
133. P. 274-275.
134. Women come up explicitly, however, in various contexts—for example, male
Translator's Introduction lxxiii

initiation rites (in which they are designated as profane), observances regard-
ing maternal totems, and, occasionally, female mythical messages.
135. Nancy Jay, "Gender and Dichotomy," Feminist Studies 7, no. 1, pp. 38-56.
136. Jay, ThroughoutYour Generations, p. 136.
137. Leon Lederman, The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Ques-
tion?, Boston, Houghton Mifflin, 1993, p. 34.
 The Elementary Forms of

T^ELIGIOUS JJFE
 INTRODUCTION
I
I propose i n this b o o k t o study the simplest a n d m o s t p r i m i t i v e r e l i g i o n that
is k n o w n at present, t o discover its p r i n c i p l e s a n d a t t e m p t an e x p l a n a t i o n o f
i t . A r e l i g i o u s system is said t o be the m o s t p r i m i t i v e that is available f o r o b -
servation w h e n i t meets the t w o f o l l o w i n g c o n d i t i o n s : First, i t m u s t be f o u n d
1
i n societies the s i m p l i c i t y o f w h o s e o r g a n i z a t i o n is n o w h e r e exceeded; sec-
o n d , i t m u s t be explainable w i t h o u t the i n t r o d u c t i o n o f any e l e m e n t f r o m a
predecessor r e l i g i o n .
I w i l l m a k e every effort t o describe the o r g a n i z a t i o n o f this system w i t h
all the care and p r e c i s i o n that an e t h n o g r a p h e r o r a h i s t o r i a n w o u l d b r i n g t o
the task. B u t m y task w i l l n o t stop at d e s c r i p t i o n . S o c i o l o g y sets itself differ-
ent p r o b l e m s f r o m those o f h i s t o r y o r ethnography. I t does n o t seek t o b e -
c o m e a c q u a i n t e d w i t h b y g o n e f o r m s o f c i v i l i z a t i o n f o r the sole purpose o f
b e i n g a c q u a i n t e d w i t h a n d r e c o n s t r u c t i n g t h e m . Instead, l i k e any positive
science, * its p u r p o s e above all is t o e x p l a i n a present reality that is near t o us
a n d thus capable o f affecting o u r ideas a n d actions. T h a t reality is m a n . M o r e
especially, i t is present-day m a n , f o r there is n o n e o t h e r that w e have a greater
interest i n k n o w i n g w e l l . T h e r e f o r e , m y study o f a v e r y archaic r e l i g i o n w i l l
n o t be f o r the sheer pleasure o f r e c o u n t i n g the bizarre and the eccentric. I
have made a v e r y archaic r e l i g i o n the subject o f m y research because i t seems
better suited t h a n any o t h e r t o h e l p us c o m p r e h e n d the r e l i g i o u s nature o f
m a n , that is, t o reveal a f u n d a m e n t a l a n d p e r m a n e n t aspect o f h u m a n i t y .
T h i s p r o p o s i t i o n is b o u n d t o p r o v o k e s t r o n g o b j e c t i o n s . I t m a y be
t h o u g h t strange that, t o a r r i v e at an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f present-day h u m a n i t y ,
w e s h o u l d have t o t u r n away f r o m i t so as t o travel b a c k t o the b e g i n n i n g o f
history. I n the m a t t e r at h a n d , that p r o c e d u r e seems especially u n o r t h o d o x .
R e l i g i o n s are h e l d t o be o f u n e q u a l value a n d standing; i t is c o m m o n l y said
that n o t all c o n t a i n t h e same measure o f t r u t h . T h u s i t w o u l d seem that t h e
h i g h e r f o r m s o f r e l i g i o u s t h o u g h t c a n n o t be c o m p a r e d w i t h the l o w e r w i t h -

*Here, knowledge (science) acquired by means of systematic observation. This use of the term positive is
indebted to Auguste Comte (1798—1857) who postulated a human evolution from the theological to meta-
physical to positive epochs. The complexities of the term positive in general, and in Comtes use of it, are
examined by André Lalande, Dictionnaire technique de la philosophie, Paris, F. Alcan, 1923, pp. 595-600.
T will call those societies and the men of those societies primitive in the same sense. This term cer-
tainly lacks precision, but it is hard to avoid; if care is taken to specify its meaning, however, it can safely
be used.

1
2 Introduction

out b r i n g i n g t h e h i g h e r forms d o w n t o t h e l o w e r level. T o grant that the

c r u d e cults o f A u s t r a l i a n tribes m i g h t help us u n d e r s t a n d C h r i s t i a n i t y , for ex-
ample, is t o assume—is i t n o t ? — t h a t C h r i s t i a n i t y proceeds f r o m the same
mentality, i n o t h e r w o r d s , that i t is made u p o f the same superstitions and
rests o n the same errors. T h e t h e o r e t i c a l i m p o r t a n c e sometimes accorded to
p r i m i t i v e religions c o u l d therefore be taken as evidence o f a systematic irre¬
l i g i o n that i n v a l i d a t e d the results o f research b y p r e j u d g i n g t h e m .
I need n o t go i n t o the question here w h e t h e r scholars can be f o u n d w h o
w e r e g u i l t y o f this a n d w h o have made h i s t o r y and the e t h n o g r a p h y o f r e l i -
g i o n a means o f m a k i n g w a r against r e l i g i o n . I n any event, such c o u l d n o t pos-
sibly be a sociologist's p o i n t o f view. I n d e e d , i t is a fundamental postulate o f
sociology that a h u m a n i n s t i t u t i o n cannot rest u p o n e r r o r and falsehood. I f i t
d i d , i t c o u l d n o t endure. I f i t h a d n o t been g r o u n d e d i n the nature o f things,
i n those v e r y things i t w o u l d have m e t resistance that i t c o u l d n o t have over-
c o m e . Therefore, w h e n I approach the study o f p r i m i t i v e religions, i t is w i t h
the certainty that they are g r o u n d e d i n and express the real. I n the course o f
the analyses and discussions that follow, w e w i l l see this p r i n c i p l e c o m i n g u p
again a n d again. W h a t I c r i t i c i z e i n the schools I part c o m p a n y w i t h is p r e -
cisely that they have failed t o recognize i t . N o d o u b t , w h e n all w e d o is c o n -
sider the formulas literally, these religious beliefs and practices appear
disconcerting, and o u r i n c l i n a t i o n m i g h t be t o w r i t e t h e m o f f t o some sort o f
i n b o r n aberration. B u t w e must k n o w h o w t o reach beneath the s y m b o l t o
grasp the reality i t represents and that gives the s y m b o l its t r u e m e a n i n g . T h e
most bizarre o r barbarous rites a n d the strangest m y t h s translate some h u m a n
need and some aspect o f life, w h e t h e r social o r i n d i v i d u a l . T h e reasons the
faithful settle f o r i n j u s t i f y i n g those rites and m y t h s m a y be mistaken, and m o s t
often are; b u t the t r u e reasons exist nonetheless, a n d i t is the business o f sci-
ence t o u n c o v e r t h e m .
Fundamentally, t h e n , there are n o religions that are false. A l l are t r u e af-
ter t h e i r o w n fashion: A l l f u l f i l l g i v e n c o n d i t i o n s o f h u m a n existence, t h o u g h
i n different ways. G r a n t e d , i t is n o t impossible t o r a n k t h e m hierarchically.
S o m e can be said t o be s u p e r i o r t o others, i n the sense that they b r i n g h i g h e r
m e n t a l faculties i n t o play, that t h e y are r i c h e r i n ideas a n d feelings, that they
c o n t a i n p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y m o r e concepts t h a n sensations a n d images, and
that t h e y are m o r e elaborately systematized. B u t the greater c o m p l e x i t y
and h i g h e r ideal c o n t e n t , h o w e v e r real, are n o t sufficient t o place the c o r r e -
s p o n d i n g religions i n t o separate genera. A l l are equally r e l i g i o u s , j u s t as all
l i v i n g beings are e q u a l l y l i v i n g beings, f r o m the h u m b l e s t plastid t o m a n . I f I
address m y s e l f t o p r i m i t i v e r e l i g i o n s , t h e n , i t is n o t w i t h any u l t e r i o r m o t i v e
o f disparaging r e l i g i o n i n general: T h e s e religions are t o be respected n o less
Introduction 3

t h a n the others. T h e y f u l f i l l t h e same needs, play the same role, a n d p r o c e e d

f r o m the same causes; therefore, t h e y can serve j u s t as w e l l t o elucidate the
nature o f r e l i g i o u s life and, i t f o l l o w s , t o solve the p r o b l e m I w i s h t o treat.
Still, w h y give t h e m a k i n d o f p r i o r i t y ? W h y choose t h e m i n preference t o
others as the subject o f m y study? T h i s choice is solely f o r reasons o f m e t h o d .
First o f all, w e c a n n o t a r r i v e at an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f the m o s t m o d e r n r e -
l i g i o n s w i t h o u t t r a c i n g h i s t o r i c a l l y the m a n n e r i n w h i c h t h e y have gradually
taken shape. I n d e e d , h i s t o r y is the o n l y m e t h o d o f e x p l a n a t o r y analysis that
can be a p p l i e d t o t h e m . H i s t o r y alone enables us t o break d o w n an i n s t i t u -
t i o n i n t o its c o m p o n e n t parts, because i t shows those parts t o us as they are
b o r n i n t i m e , o n e after the other. Second, b y s i t u a t i n g each part o f the i n s t i -
t u t i o n w i t h i n t h e t o t a l i t y o f circumstances i n w h i c h i t was b o r n , h i s t o r y puts
i n t o o u r hands t h e o n l y tools w e have f o r i d e n t i f y i n g the causes that have
b r o u g h t i t i n t o b e i n g . T h u s , w h e n e v e r w e set o u t t o e x p l a i n s o m e t h i n g h u -
m a n at a specific m o m e n t i n t i m e — b e i t a r e l i g i o u s belief, a m o r a l r u l e , a
legal p r i n c i p l e , a n aesthetic t e c h n i q u e , o r an e c o n o m i c s y s t e m — w e m u s t b e -
g i n b y g o i n g b a c k t o its simplest a n d m o s t p r i m i t i v e f o r m . W e m u s t seek t o
a c c o u n t f o r the features that define i t at that p e r i o d o f its existence a n d t h e n
s h o w h o w i t has g r a d u a l l y d e v e l o p e d , g a i n e d i n c o m p l e x i t y , a n d become
w h a t i t is at the m o m e n t u n d e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n .
I t is easy t o see h o w i m p o r t a n t the d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f the i n i t i a l starting
p o i n t is f o r this series o f progressive explanations. A cartesian p r i n c i p l e h a d i t
that the first l i n k takes precedence i n the c h a i n o f scientific t r u t h s . T o be sure,
i t is o u t o f the q u e s t i o n t o base the science o f religions o n a n o t i o n elaborated
i n t h e cartesian m a n n e r — t h a t is, a l o g i c a l c o n c e p t , p u r e possibility c o n -
structed solely b y force o f intellect. W h a t w e m u s t find is a concrete reality
that h i s t o r i c a l a n d e t h n o g r a p h i c o b s e r v a t i o n alone can reveal t o us. B u t i f that
p r i m a r y c o n c e p t i o n m u s t be a r r i v e d at b y o t h e r m e t h o d s , the fact remains
that i t is destined t o have an i m p o r t a n t i n f l u e n c e o n all the subsequent p r o p o -
sitions that science establishes. B i o l o g i c a l e v o l u t i o n was c o n c e i v e d altogether
differently f r o m t h e m o m e n t the existence o f u n i c e l l u l a r organisms was d i s -
covered. L i k e w i s e , the particulars o f religious facts are e x p l a i n e d d i f f e r e n d y i f
n a t u r i s m is placed at the b e g i n n i n g o f religious e v o l u t i o n t h a n i f a n i m i s m , o r
some o t h e r f o r m , is placed there. I n d e e d , even the m o s t specialized scholars
must choose a hypothesis a n d take t h e i r i n s p i r a t i o n f r o m i t i f t h e y w a n t t o t r y
t o a c c o u n t f o r t h e facts they analyze—unless they m e a n t o c o n f i n e t h e m -
selves t o a task o f pure e r u d i t i o n . W i l l y - n i l l y , the questions t h e y ask take t h e
f o l l o w i n g f o r m : W h a t has caused n a t u r i s m o r a n i m i s m t o take o n such a n d
such a p a r t i c u l a r aspect here o r there, a n d t o be e n r i c h e d o r i m p o v e r i s h e d i n
such and such a way? Since t a k i n g a p o s i t i o n o n the i n i t i a l p r o b l e m is u n -
4 Introduction

avoidable, a n d since the s o l u t i o n g i v e n w i l l affect the science as a w h o l e , the

p r o b l e m is best c o n f r o n t e d at the outset. T h i s is w h a t I propose t o do.
Besides, apart f r o m those i n d i r e c t consequences, the study o f p r i m i t i v e
religions i n itself has i m m e d i a t e interest o f the first i m p o r t a n c e .
I f i t is useful t o k n o w w h a t a g i v e n r e l i g i o n consists of; i t is far m o r e i m -
p o r t a n t t o e x a m i n e w h a t r e l i g i o n is i n general. T h i s is a p r o b l e m that has a l -
ways i n t r i g u e d p h i l o s o p h e r s , a n d n o t w i t h o u t reason: I t is o f interest t o all
h u m a n i t y . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , the m e t h o d philosophers o r d i n a r i l y use t o solve i t
is p u r e l y o n e o f dialectic: A l l t h e y d o is analyze the idea t h e y have o f r e l i g i o n ,
even i f t h e y have t o illustrate t h e results o f that m e n t a l analysis w i t h examples
borrowed from those r e l i g i o n s that best suit t h e i r m o d e l . B u t w h i l e this
m e t h o d m u s t be a b a n d o n e d , the p r o b l e m o f d e f i n i t i o n remains; a n d p h i l o s -
ophy's great service has b e e n t o prevent i t f r o m b e i n g settled o n c e a n d f o r
a l l * b y the disdain o f t h e savants. T h e p r o b l e m can i n fact b e approached i n
a n o t h e r way. Since all r e l i g i o n s m a y be c o m p a r e d , all b e i n g species w i t h i n
t h e same genus, s o m e elements are o f necessity c o m m o n t o t h e m all. B y that
I m e a n n o t o n l y t h e o u t w a r d a n d visible features that t h e y all equally e x h i b i t
a n d that m a k e i t possible t o define r e l i g i o n i n a p r o v i s i o n a l w a y at t h e b e g i n -
n i n g o f research. T h e discovery o f these apparent signs is relatively easy, f o r
the o b s e r v a t i o n r e q u i r e d does n o t g o b e y o n d the surface o f things. B u t these
e x t e r n a l resemblances presuppose deeper ones. A t the f o u n d a t i o n o f all sys-
tems o f b e l i e f a n d all cults, there m u s t necessarily be a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f f u n -
d a m e n t a l representations a n d modes o f r i t u a l c o n d u c t ^ that, despite the
diversity o f f o r m s t h a t the o n e a n d t h e o t h e r m a y have taken o n , have the
same objective m e a n i n g e v e r y w h e r e a n d e v e r y w h e r e f u l f i l l t h e same f u n c -
tions. I t is these e n d u r i n g elements that c o n s t i t u t e w h a t is eternal a n d h u m a n
i n r e l i g i o n . T h e y are the w h o l e objective c o n t e n t o f the idea that is expressed
w h e n religion i n general is s p o k e n of.
H o w , t h e n , can those elements be uncovered?
Surely i t is n o t b y o b s e r v i n g the c o m p l e x r e l i g i o n s that have arisen i n the
course o f history. E a c h o f those r e l i g i o n s is f o r m e d from such a v a r i e t y o f e l -
ements that i t is v e r y h a r d t o d i s t i n g u i s h w h a t is secondary t o t h e m f r o m
w h a t is p r i m a r y , a n d w h a t is essential f r o m w h a t is accessory. S i m p l y consider
religions l i k e those o f E g y p t , I n d i a , o r classical a n t i q u i t y ! E a c h is a dense t a n -
gle o f m a n y cults t h a t can v a r y a c c o r d i n g t o localities, temples, generations,
dynasties, invasions, a n d so o n . P o p u l a r superstitions i n t e r m i n g l e i n t h e m
w i t h the m o s t sophisticated dogmas. N e i t h e r r e l i g i o u s t h i n k i n g n o r r e l i g i o u s

* Swain rendered Durkheim's prescrit as "suppressed," as if he had written proscrit.

^Attitudes rituelles. On this phrase, see below, p. 301n.
Introduction 5

practice is shared equally a m o n g the mass o f the faithful. T h e beliefs as w e l l

as the rites are t a k e n i n different ways, d e p e n d i n g o n m e n , m i l i e u x , and c i r -
cumstances. H e r e i t is priests, there m o n k s , elsewhere the laity; here, mystics
and rationalists, theologians a n d prophets, a n d so o n . U n d e r such c o n d i t i o n s ,
it is d i f f i c u l t t o perceive w h a t m i g h t be c o m m o n t o all. I t is i n d e e d possible
t o f i n d ways o f s t u d y i n g some p a r t i c u l a r p h e n o m e n o n f r u i t f u l l y — s u c h as
p r o p h e t i s m , m o n a s t i c i s m , o r the m y s t e r i e s — t h r o u g h o n e o r a n o t h e r o f those
systems i n w h i c h i t is especially w e l l d e v e l o p e d . B u t h o w can o n e f i n d t h e
c o m m o n basis o f r e l i g i o u s life u n d e r the l u x u r i a n t v e g e t a t i o n that g r o w s over
it? H o w can o n e f i n d the f u n d a m e n t a l states characteristic o f the r e l i g i o u s
m e n t a l i t y i n general t h r o u g h the clash o f theologies, the variations o f r i t u a l ,
the m u l t i p l i c i t y o f g r o u p i n g s , a n d the diversity o f individuals?
T h e case is altogether different i n the l o w e r societies. T h e lesser d e v e l -
o p m e n t o f i n d i v i d u a l i t y , t h e smaller scale o f the g r o u p , a n d t h e h o m o g e n e i t y
o f e x t e r n a l circumstances all c o n t r i b u t e t o r e d u c i n g the differences a n d v a r i -
ations t o a m i n i m u m . T h e g r o u p regularly produces an i n t e l l e c t u a l a n d m o r a l
u n i f o r m i t y o f w h i c h w e find o n l y rare examples i n the m o r e advanced s o c i -
eties. E v e r y t h i n g is c o m m o n t o everyone. T h e m o v e m e n t s are stereotyped;
everyone executes the same ones i n t h e same circumstances; a n d this c o n f o r -
m i t y o f c o n d u c t m e r e l y translates that o f t h o u g h t . Since all the conscious-
nesses are p u l l e d a l o n g i n the same c u r r e n t , the i n d i v i d u a l t y p e v i r t u a l l y
c o n f o u n d s i t s e l f w i t h the generic type. A t the same t i m e that all is u n i f o r m ,
all is simple. W h a t c o u l d b e m o r e basic t h a n those m y t h s c o m p o s e d o f a s i n -
gle t h e m e , repeated endlessly, o r t h a n those rites c o m p o s e d o f a small n u m -
ber o f m o v e m e n t s , repeated u n t i l the participants can d o n o m o r e . N e i t h e r
the p o p u l a r n o r the p r i e s t l y i m a g i n a t i o n has yet h a d the t i m e o r the means t o
refine a n d t r a n s f o r m t h e basic m a t e r i a l o f ideas a n d r e l i g i o u s practices; r e -
d u c e d t o essentials, that m a t e r i a l spontaneously presents itself t o e x a m i n a -
t i o n , a n d d i s c o v e r i n g i t calls f o r o n l y a m i n i m a l effort. Inessential, secondary,
2
a n d l u x u r i o u s d e v e l o p m e n t s have n o t yet c o m e t o h i d e w h a t is p r i m a r y .
E v e r y t h i n g is b o i l e d d o w n t o w h a t is absolutely indispensable, t o that w i t h -
o u t w h i c h there w o u l d be n o r e l i g i o n . B u t the indispensable is also the f u n -
d a m e n t a l , i n o t h e r w o r d s , that w h i c h i t is above all i m p o r t a n t f o r us t o k n o w .
T h u s , p r i m i t i v e civilizations are p r i m e cases because t h e y are s i m p l e
cases. T h i s is w h y , a m o n g all the orders o f facts, the observations o f e t h n o g -

2
This is not to say, of course, that primitive cults do not go beyond bare essentials. Quite the contrary,
as we will see, religious beliefs and practices that do not have narrowly utilitarian aims are found in every
religion (Bk.III, chap.4, §2). This nonutilitarian richness is indispensable to religious life, and of its very
essence. But it is by far less well developed in the lower religions than in the others, and this fact will put
us in a better position to determine its raison d'être.
6 Introduction

raphers have often b e e n veritable revelations that have b r e a t h e d n e w lite i n t o

the study o f h u m a n i n s t i t u t i o n s . Before the m i d d l e o f the n i n e t e e n t h century,
for example, i t was generally believed that the father was the essential ele-
m e n t o f the f a m i l y ; i t was n o t even i m a g i n a b l e that there c o u l d be a family
o r g a n i z a t i o n o f w h i c h paternal p o w e r was n o t the keystone. Bachofen's dis-
c o v e r y t o p p l e d that o l d n o t i o n . U n t i l q u i t e recent times, i t was t h o u g h t o b -
v i o u s that the m o r a l and legal relations that c o n s t i t u t e k i n s h i p w e r e o n l y
another aspect o f the p h y s i o l o g i c a l relations that result f r o m shared descent.
B a c h o f e n and his successors, M c L e n n a n , M o r g a n , a n d m a n y others, were
still o p e r a t i n g u n d e r the i n f l u e n c e o f that p r e c o n c e p t i o n . B u t , q u i t e the c o n -
trary, w e have k n o w n ever since w e became a c q u a i n t e d w i t h the nature ot
the p r i m i t i v e clan that k i n s h i p c a n n o t be d e f i n e d b y c o m m o n b l o o d . * T o re-
t u r n t o r e l i g i o n s : E x c l u s i v e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f the r e l i g i o u s f o r m s that are the
m o s t familiar t o us l o n g l e d us t o believe that the idea o f g o d was character-
istic o f all that is r e l i g i o u s . T h e r e l i g i o n I w i l l study b e l o w is largely a stranger
to any n o t i o n o f d i v i n i t y . I n i t , the forces t o w h i c h the rites are addressed dif-
fer greatly f r o m those that are o f p a r a m o u n t i m p o r t a n c e i n o u r m o d e r n r e l i -
gions, and yet they w i l l help us t o understand o u r m o d e r n r e l i g i o n s better.
N o t h i n g is m o r e unjust, therefore, t h a n the disdain w i t h w h i c h t o o m a n y
historians still regard ethnographers' w o r k . I n p o i n t o f fact, e t h n o g r a p h y has
o f t e n b r o u g h t a b o u t the m o s t fertile r e v o l u t i o n s i n the various branches o f
sociology. F o r the same reason, m o r e o v e r , t h e discovery o f u n i c e l l u l a r crea-
tures, w h i c h I n o t e d earlier, t r a n s f o r m e d the idea o f life that was w i d e l y h e l d .
Since life is d o w n t o its f u n d a m e n t a l features a m o n g v e r y s i m p l e beings,
those features m a y be less easily misread.
B u t p r i m i t i v e r e l i g i o n s d o n o t m e r e l y a l l o w us t o isolate the c o n s t i t u e n t
elements o f r e l i g i o n ; t h e i r great advantage is also t h a t t h e y a i d i n its explana-
t i o n . Because the facts are simpler, the relations b e t w e e n t h e m are m o r e ap-
parent. T h e reasons m e n i n v o k e t o e x p l a i n t h e i r actions t o themselves have
n o t yet b e e n r e f i n e d a n d r e v a m p e d b y sophisticated t h o u g h t : T h e y are closer
and m o r e a k i n t o t h e motives that caused those actions. T o u n d e r s t a n d a
d e l u s i o n p r o p e r l y a n d t o b e able t o a p p l y the m o s t appropriate treatment, the
d o c t o r needs t o k n o w w h a t its p o i n t o f departure was. T h a t event is the m o r e
easily detected the nearer t o its b e g i n n i n g s t h e d e l u s i o n can b e observed.

*Jacob Johann Bachofen (1815—1887) postulated the existence of matriliny (reckoning descent
through the female line) and matriarchy or mother right, a stage he envisaged as standing between prim-
itive promiscuity and patriarchy. Ethnographic study worldwide has borne out the first and discredited the
second. Like Bachofen. John Ferguson McLennan (1827-1881) and Lewis Henry Morgan (1818—1881)
were lawyers interested in the rules that govern family and property. Among other achievements, Morgan
pioneered the study of kin statuses distinct from blood relationship; McLennan is credited with having
drawn attention to totemism. See below, Bk.I. chap.4, p. 85.
Introduction 1

Conversely, the l o n g e r a sickness is left t o develop, the m o r e that o r i g i n a l

p o i n t o f departure slips o u t o f v i e w . T h i s is so because all sorts o f i n t e r p r e t a -
tions have i n t e r v e n e d a l o n g the way, a n d the t e n d e n c y o f those i n t e r p r e t a -
tions is t o repress the o r i g i n a l state i n t o the unconscious and t o replace i t
w i t h o t h e r states t h r o u g h w h i c h the o r i g i n a l o n e is sometimes n o t easy to
detect. T h e distance b e t w e e n a systematized d e l u s i o n and the first i m p r e s -
sions that gave b i r t h t o i t is o f t e n considerable. T h e same applies t o religious
t h o u g h t . As i t progresses historically, the causes that called i t i n t o existence,
t h o u g h still at w o r k , are seen n o m o r e except t h r o u g h a vast system o f dis-
t o r t i n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . T h e p o p u l a r m y t h o l o g i e s a n d the subtle theologies
have d o n e t h e i r w o r k : T h e y have o v e r l a i d the o r i g i n a l feelings w i t h v e r y d i f -
ferent ones that, a l t h o u g h s t e m m i n g f r o m p r i m i t i v e feelings o f w h i c h t h e y
are the elaborated f o r m , nevertheless a l l o w t h e i r t r u e nature t o s h o w o n l y i n
part. T h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l distance b e t w e e n t h e cause a n d the effect, a n d b e -
t w e e n the apparent cause a n d the effective cause, has b e c o m e w i d e r a n d
m o r e d i f f i c u l t f o r t h e m i n d t o o v e r c o m e . T h e r e m a i n d e r o f this w o r k w i l l be
an i l l u s t r a t i o n a n d a test o f this m e t h o d o l o g i c a l p o i n t . W e w i l l see h o w , i n the
p r i m i t i v e r e l i g i o n s , the r e l i g i o u s p h e n o m e n o n still carries the visible i m p r i n t
o f its o r i g i n s . I t w o u l d have b e e n m u c h m o r e d i f f i c u l t f o r us t o infer those
o r i g i n s b y c o n s i d e r i n g m o r e d e v e l o p e d r e l i g i o n s alone.
T h u s , the study I u n d e r t a k e is a w a y o f t a k i n g u p again t h e o l d p r o b l e m
o f the o r i g i n o f r e l i g i o n s but under new conditions. G r a n t e d , i f b y o r i g i n o n e
means an absolute first b e g i n n i n g , there is n o t h i n g scientific a b o u t the ques-
t i o n , a n d i t m u s t be resolutely set aside. T h e r e is n o radical instant w h e n
r e l i g i o n began t o exist, a n d the p o i n t is n o t t o find a r o u n d a b o u t w a y o f c o n -
v e y i n g ourselves there i n t h o u g h t . L i k e every o t h e r h u m a n i n s t i t u t i o n , r e l i -
g i o n begins n o w h e r e . So all speculations i n this genre are r i g h t l y discredited;
they can consist o f o n l y subjective a n d a r b i t r a r y c o n s t r u c t i o n s without
checks o f any sort. T h e p r o b l e m I pose is altogether different. I w o u l d l i k e t o
find a means o f d i s c e r n i n g the ever-present causes o n w h i c h the m o s t basic
f o r m s o f religious t h o u g h t a n d practice d e p e n d . F o r t h e reasons j u s t set f o r t h ,
the causes are m o r e easily observable i f the societies i n w h i c h they are o b -
3
served are less c o m p l e x . T h a t is w h y I seek t o get closer t o the o r i g i n s . T h e
reason is n o t that I ascribe special v i r t u e s t o t h e l o w e r r e l i g i o n s . Q u i t e the
contrary, t h e y are c r u d e a n d r u d i m e n t a r y ; so there can be n o q u e s t i o n o f
m a k i n g t h e m o u t t o be m o d e l s o f some sort, w h i c h t h e later r e l i g i o n s w o u l d

3
It will be seen that I give the word "origins," like the word "primitive," an entirely relative sense. I
do not mean by it an absolute beginning but the simplest social state known at present—the state beyond
which it is at present impossible for us to go. When I speak about origins and the beginnings of history
or religious thought, this is the sense in which those phrases must be understood.
8 Introduction

o n l y have h a d t o reproduce. B u t t h e i r v e r y l a c k o f e l a b o r a t i o n makes t h e m

instructive, f o r i n this w a y t h e y b e c o m e useful e x p e r i m e n t s i n w h i c h the facts
and the relations a m o n g facts are easier t o detect. T o u n c o v e r the laws o f the
p h e n o m e n a he studies, t h e physicist seeks t o s i m p l i f y those p h e n o m e n a and
to r i d t h e m o f t h e i r secondary characteristics. I n the case o f i n s t i t u t i o n s , na-
t u r e spontaneously makes s i m p l i f i c a t i o n s o f the same k i n d at the b e g i n n i n g
o f history. I w i s h o n l y t o p u t those s i m p l i f i c a t i o n s t o g o o d use. Doubtless, I
w i l l be able t o o b t a i n o n l y v e r y e l e m e n t a r y facts b y this m e t h o d . W h e n I
have a c c o u n t e d for t h e m , t o the e x t e n t this w i l l be possible, the novelties o f
all k i n d s that have b e e n p r o d u c e d i n t h e course o f e v o l u t i o n w i l l still n o t be
e x p l a i n e d . B u t a l t h o u g h I w o u l d n o t d r e a m o f d e n y i n g the i m p o r t a n c e o f the
p r o b l e m s such novelties pose, I t h i n k those p r o b l e m s b e n e f i t b y b e i n g treated
at the p r o p e r time, and there is g o o d reason n o t t o tackle t h e m u n t i l after
those w h o s e study I have u n d e r t a k e n .

II
M y research is n o t solely o f interest t o the science o f religions. T h e r e is an as-
pect o f every r e l i g i o n that transcends the r e a l m o f specifically r e l i g i o u s ideas.
T h r o u g h i t , t h e study o f r e l i g i o u s p h e n o m e n a provides a means o f r e v i s i t i n g
p r o b l e m s that u n t i l n o w have b e e n debated o n l y a m o n g p h i l o s o p h e r s .
I t has l o n g b e e n k n o w n that the first systems o f representations that m a n
made o f the w o r l d a n d h i m s e l f w e r e o f religious o r i g i n . T h e r e is n o r e l i g i o n
that is n o t b o t h a c o s m o l o g y and a speculation a b o u t the d i v i n e . I f p h i l o s o p h y
a n d the sciences w e r e b o r n i n r e l i g i o n , i t is because r e l i g i o n itself began b y
serving as science a n d philosophy. F u r t h e r , and less o f t e n n o t e d , r e l i g i o n has
n o t m e r e l y e n r i c h e d a h u m a n i n t e l l e c t already f o r m e d b u t i n fact has h e l p e d
to f o r m i t . M e n o w e t o r e l i g i o n n o t o n l y the c o n t e n t o f t h e i r k n o w l e d g e , i n
significant part, b u t also the f o r m i n w h i c h that k n o w l e d g e is elaborated.
A t the r o o t o f o u r j u d g m e n t s , there are c e r t a i n f u n d a m e n t a l n o t i o n s that
d o m i n a t e o u r e n t i r e i n t e l l e c t u a l life. I t is these ideas that philosophers, b e -
g i n n i n g w i t h A r i s t o t l e , have called the categories o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g : n o t i o n s
4
o f t i m e , space, n u m b e r , cause, substance, personality. * T h e y c o r r e s p o n d t o

*Usually referred to in Kantian circles as the "categories of understanding" or the "categories of the
understanding" technically these are called "pure concepts of understanding"—that is, concepts, or rules
for organizing the variety of sense perceptions, that lie ready in the mind and are brought into play by our
efforts to make sense of our sensations. For clarifying correspondence on these points, I thank Professor
Robert Paul Wolff.
4
I call time and space categories because there is no difference between the role these notions play in
intellectual life and that which falls to notions of kind and cause. (See on this point [Octave] Hamelin, Es-
sai sur les éléments principaux de la représentation, Paris, Alcan [1907], pp. 63, 76.)
Introduction 9

the m o s t universal properties o f things. T h e y are l i k e solid frames that c o n -

fine t h o u g h t . T h o u g h t does n o t seem t o be able t o break o u t o f t h e m w i t h -
o u t d e s t r o y i n g itself, since i t seems w e c a n n o t t h i n k o f objects that are n o t i n
t i m e o r space, t h a t c a n n o t be c o u n t e d , a n d so f o r t h . T h e o t h e r ideas are c o n -
t i n g e n t a n d c h a n g i n g , and w e can conceive o f a m a n , a society, o r an e p o c h
that lacks t h e m ; b u t these f u n d a m e n t a l n o t i o n s seem t o us as almost insepa-
rable f r o m the n o r m a l f u n c t i o n i n g o f the i n t e l l e c t . T h e y are, as i t were, the
skeleton o f t h o u g h t . N o w , w h e n o n e analyzes p r i m i t i v e religious beliefs m e -
thodically, o n e n a t u r a l l y finds the p r i n c i p a l categories a m o n g t h e m . T h e y are
b o r n i n a n d f r o m r e l i g i o n ; t h e y are a p r o d u c t o f r e l i g i o u s t h o u g h t . T h i s is a
p o i n t that I w i l l m a k e again a n d again i n the course o f this b o o k .
E v e n n o w t h a t p o i n t has a c e r t a i n interest o f its o w n , b u t here is w h a t
gives i t its t r u e significance.
T h e general c o n c l u s i o n o f the chapters t o f o l l o w is that r e l i g i o n is an
e m i n e n t l y social t h i n g . R e l i g i o u s representations are collective representa-
tions that express collective realities; rites are ways o f a c t i n g that are b o r n
o n l y i n the m i d s t o f assembled groups a n d w h o s e p u r p o s e is t o evoke, m a i n -
t a i n , o r recreate c e r t a i n m e n t a l states o f those groups. B u t i f the categories are
o f religious o r i g i n , t h e n they m u s t participate i n * w h a t is c o m m o n t o all r e -
l i g i o n : T h e y , t o o , m u s t be social things, p r o d u c t s o f c o l l e c t i v e t h o u g h t . A t
the v e r y least—since w i t h o u r present u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f these matters, r a d i -
cal and exclusive theses are t o be guarded against—it is l e g i t i m a t e t o say that
they are r i c h i n social elements.
T h i s , i t m u s t be added, is s o m e t h i n g o n e can b e g i n t o see even n o w f o r
c e r t a i n o f the categories. F o r example, w h a t i f o n e t r i e d t o i m a g i n e w h a t the
n o t i o n o f t i m e w o u l d be i n the absence o f the m e t h o d s w e use t o d i v i d e ,
measure, a n d express i t w i t h objective signs, a t i m e that was n o t a succession
o f years, m o n t h s , weeks, days, a n d hours? I t w o u l d be nearly impossible t o
conceive of. W e can conceive o f t i m e o n l y i f w e differentiate b e t w e e n m o -
ments. N o w , w h a t is the o r i g i n o f t h a t differentiation? U n d o u b t e d l y , states o f
consciousness t h a t w e have already e x p e r i e n c e d can be r e p r o d u c e d i n us
i n the same o r d e r i n w h i c h they o r i g i n a l l y o c c u r r e d ; and, i n this way, bits o f
o u r past b e c o m e i m m e d i a t e again, even w h i l e spontaneously d i s t i n g u i s h i n g
themselves f r o m t h e present. B u t h o w e v e r i m p o r t a n t this d i s t i n c t i o n m i g h t

*The phrase "participate in," which occurs frequently, has usually not been replaced with simpler pos-
sibilities such as "partakes of" or "shares in" because the notion of participation that can be seen in the
sentence "Jesus participated in divine and human nature" must be borne in mind, together with an argu-
ment in which Dürkheim was engaged. Lucien Lévy-Bruhl, whose book Les Fonctions mentales dans les
sociétés inférieures Dürkheim criticizes, considered "participations" to exemplify the inherent illogic of
"primitive" thought. Dürkheim held just the opposite.
10 Introduction

be for o u r p r i v a t e e x p e r i e n c e , i t is far f r o m sufficient t o c o n s t i t u t e the n o t i o n

o r category o f t i m e . T h e category o f t i m e is n o t s i m p l y a p a r t i a l o r c o m p l e t e
c o m m e m o r a t i o n o f o u r l i v e d life. I t is an abstract a n d i m p e r s o n a l f r a m e w o r k
that contains n o t o n l y o u r i n d i v i d u a l existence b u t also that o f h u m a n i t y . I t
is l i k e an endless canvas o n w h i c h all d u r a t i o n is spread o u t before the mind's
eye a n d o n w h i c h all possible events are l o c a t e d i n r e l a t i o n to p o i n t s o f refer-
ence that are fixed a n d specified. I t is n o t my time that is o r g a n i z e d i n this
way; i t is t i m e that is c o n c e i v e d o f o b j e c t i v e l y b y all m e n o f t h e same c i v i -
l i z a t i o n . T h i s b y i t s e l f is e n o u g h t o m a k e us b e g i n t o see that any such orga-
n i z a t i o n w o u l d have t o be collective. A n d i n d e e d , o b s e r v a t i o n establishes that
these indispensable p o i n t s , i n reference t o w h i c h all things are arranged t e m -
porally, are taken f r o m social life. T h e d i v i s i o n i n t o days, weeks, m o n t h s ,
years, etc., corresponds t o the recurrence o f rites, festivals, a n d p u b l i c cere-
3
m o n i e s at regular i n t e r v a l s . A calendar expresses the r h y t h m o f collective ac-
6
t i v i t y w h i l e e n s u r i n g that r e g u l a r i t y .
7
T h e same applies t o space. As H a m e l i n has s h o w n , space is n o t the
vague and i n d e t e r m i n a t e m e d i u m that K a n t i m a g i n e d . I f p u r e l y a n d ab-
solutely h o m o g e n e o u s , i t w o u l d be o f n o use a n d w o u l d offer n o t h i n g for
t h o u g h t t o h o l d o n t o . Spatial representation essentially consists i n a p r i m a r y
c o o r d i n a t i o n o f g i v e n sense experience. B u t this c o o r d i n a t i o n w o u l d be i m -
possible i f the parts o f space w e r e qualitatively equivalent, i f t h e y really w e r e
m u t u a l l y interchangeable. T o have a spatial o r d e r i n g o f things is t o be able t o
situate t h e m differently: t o place some o n the r i g h t , others o n the left, these
above, those b e l o w , n o r t h o r s o u t h , east o r west, a n d so f o r t h , j u s t as, t o
arrange states o f consciousness t e m p o r a l l y , i t m u s t b e possible t o locate t h e m
at d e f i n i t e dates. T h a t is, space w o u l d n o t be itself if, l i k e t i m e , i t was n o t d i -
v i d e d a n d differentiated. B u t w h e r e d o these divisions that are essential t o

5
In support of this assertion, see Henri Hubert and Marcel Mauss, Mélanges d'histoire des religions, the
chapter on "La Représentation du temps dans la religion," Paris, Alcan [1909].
6
Through this we see how completely different are the complexus of sensations and images that serves
Co orient us in duration, and the category of time. The first are the summary of individual experiences,
which hold only for the individual who has had them. By contrast, the category of time expresses a time
common to the group—social time, so to speak. This category itself is a true social institution. Thus it is
peculiar to man; animals have no representation of this kind.
This distinction between the category of time and the corresponding individual sensations
could easily be made in regard to space and cause. This may perhaps help clear up certain confusions,
which have fed controversies on these questions. I will return to this point at the Conclusion of the
present work.
7
Hamelin, Essai sur les éléments principaux de la représentation, pp. 75fF.
Introduction 11

space c o m e from? I n itself i t has n o r i g h t , n o left, n o h i g h o r l o w , n o n o r t h

o r s o u t h , etc. A l l these d i s t i n c t i o n s e v i d e n t l y arise f r o m the fact that different
affective c o l o r i n g s have b e e n assigned t o regions. A n d since all m e n o f the
same c i v i l i z a t i o n conceive o f space i n the same manner, i t is e v i d e n t l y neces-
sary that these affective c o l o r i n g s a n d the d i s t i n c t i o n s that arise from t h e m
also b e h e l d i n c o m m o n — w h i c h i m p l i e s almost necessarily that t h e y are o f
8
social o r i g i n .
Besides, i n s o m e instances this social character is m a d e manifest. T h e r e
are societies i n Australia a n d N o r t h A m e r i c a i n w h i c h space is c o n c e i v e d i n
9
the f o r m o f an i m m e n s e circle, because the camp itself is c i r c u l a r ; a n d the
spatial circle is d i v i d e d i n exactly the same w a y as t h e t r i b a l circle a n d i n its
image. As m a n y regions are d i s t i n g u i s h e d as there are clans i n the t r i b e , a n d
i t is t h e place the clans o c c u p y i n the e n c a m p m e n t that d e t e r m i n e s the o r i -
e n t a t i o n o f t h e regions. Each r e g i o n is d e f i n e d b y t h e t o t e m o f the clan t o
w h i c h i t is assigned. A m o n g the Z u f i i , f o r example, the p u e b l o is m a d e u p o f
seven sections; each o f these sections is a g r o u p o f clans that has a c q u i r e d its
o w n u n i t y . I n all l i k e l i h o o d , i t was o r i g i n a l l y a single clan that later s u b d i -
v i d e d . Space s i m i l a r l y contains seven regions, a n d each o f these seven sec-
tions o f the w o r l d is i n i n t i m a t e relationship w i t h a section o f the p u e b l o , that
10
is, w i t h a g r o u p o f c l a n s . " T h u s , " says C u s h i n g , " o n e d i v i s i o n is considered
t o be i n r e l a t i o n w i t h t h e n o r t h ; a n o t h e r represents the west, a n o t h e r the
11
south, etc." E a c h section o f the p u e b l o has its d i s t i n c t i v e c o l o r , w h i c h s y m -
bolizes i t ; each r e g i o n has its o w n c o l o r , w h i c h is that o f t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g
section. O v e r t h e course o f history, the n u m b e r o f basic clans has v a r i e d , a n d
t h e n u m b e r o f regions has v a r i e d i n the same way. T h u s , spatial o r g a n i z a t i o n
was m o d e l e d o n social o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d replicates i t . Far f r o m b e i n g b u i l t
i n t o h u m a n nature, n o idea exists, u p t o a n d i n c l u d i n g t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e -

otherwise, in order to explain this agreement, one would have to accept the idea that all individu-
als, by virtue of their organico-psychic constitution, are affected in the same manner by the different parts
of space—which is all the more improbable since the different regions have no affective coloring. More-
over, the divisions of space vary among societies—proof that they are not based exclusively on the inborn
nature of man.
9
See Emile Durkheim and Marcel Mauss, "De Quelques formes primitives de la classification," AS,
vol. VI, 1903, pp. 47ff.
10
Ibid., pp. 34ff.
"[Frank Hamilton] Cushing, "Outlines of Zuñi Creation Myths," Tlnrteenth Report, BAE, Washing-
ton, DC, Government Printing Office, 1896, pp. 367ff. [Throughout, quoted material is translated into
English from Durkheim s French renderings.]
12 Introduction

t w e e n r i g h t a n d left, that is n o t , i n all p r o b a b i l i t y , the p r o d u c t o f religious,

12
hence collective, representations.
A n a l o g o u s d e m o n s t r a t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g the n o t i o n s o f genus, force, per-
sonality, and efficacy w i l l be f o u n d b e l o w . O n e m i g h t even ask w h e t h e r the
n o t i o n o f c o n t r a d i c t i o n does n o t also arise f r o m social c o n d i t i o n s . W h a t
tends t o m a k e this plausible is the fact that t h e h o l d the n o t i o n o f c o n t r a d i c -
t i o n has h a d over t h o u g h t has v a r i e d w i t h times and societies. Today the
p r i n c i p l e o f i d e n t i t y governs scientific t h o u g h t ; b u t there are vast systems o f
representation that have played a m a j o r role i n the h i s t o r y o f ideas, i n w h i c h
i t is c o m m o n l y i g n o r e d : These systems are the m y t h o l o g i e s , f r o m the c r u d -
13
est t o the m o s t s o p h i s t i c a t e d . M y t h o l o g i e s deal w i t h beings that have the
m o s t c o n t r a d i c t o r y attributes at the same t i m e , that are o n e a n d many, m a t e -
r i a l and s p i r i t u a l , a n d capable o f s u b d i v i d i n g themselves i n d e f i n i t e l y w i t h o u t
l o s i n g that w h i c h makes t h e m w h a t t h e y are. T h e s e h i s t o r i c a l variations o f
the r u l e that seems t o g o v e r n o u r present l o g i c s h o w that, far f r o m b e i n g e n -
c o d e d f r o m e t e r n i t y i n the m e n t a l c o n s t i t u t i o n o f m a n , the r u l e depends at
least i n part u p o n h i s t o r i c a l , h e n c e social, factors. W e d o n o t k n o w exactly
14
w h a t these factors are, b u t w e can presume that t h e y e x i s t .
O n c e this hypothesis is accepted, the p r o b l e m o f k n o w l e d g e can be
framed i n n e w t e r m s .
U p t o the present, o n l y t w o d o c t r i n e s have opposed o n e another. For
some, the categories c a n n o t be d e r i v e d f r o m experience. T h e y are l o g i c a l l y
p r i o r t o experience and c o n d i t i o n i t . T h e y are t h o u g h t o f as so m a n y simple
data that are i r r e d u c i b l e and i m m a n e n t i n the h u m a n i n t e l l e c t b y v i r t u e o f its
natural m a k e u p . T h e y are thus called a priori. F o r others, b y contrast, the cat-
egories are c o n s t r u c t e d , m a d e o u t o f bits a n d pieces, and i t is t h e i n d i v i d u a l
1 3
w h o is the artisan o f t h a t c o n s t r u c t i o n .
i2
See Robert Hertz, "La Prééminence de la main droite: Etude de polarité religieuse," RP, Decem-
ber, 1909. On this question of the relations between the representation of space and the form of the
group, see the chapter in [Friedrich] Ratzel, Politische Geographie [Leipzig, R. Oldenbourg, 1897], titled
"Der Raum im Geiste der Völker" [pp. 261-262].
13
I do not mean to say that it is unknown to mythological thinking but that mythological thinking de-
parts from this principle more often and more overdy than scientific thought. Conversely, I will show that
science cannot help but violate it, even while following it more scrupulously than religion does. In this
respect and many others, there are only differences of degree between science and religion; but if these
should not be overstated, it is important to notice them, for they are significant.
14
This hypothesis has already been advanced by the founders of Völkerpsychologie. It is referred to, for
example, in a short article by Wilhelm Windelband titled, "Die Erkenntnisslehre unter dem Völkerpsy-
chologischen Geschichtspunkte," in ZK [Lichtenstein, Kraus Reprints, Ltd., 1968], VIII, pp. 166ff. Cf. a
note by [Heymann] Steinthal on the same subject, ibid., pp. 178ff.
1:,
Even in the theory of [Herbert] Spencer, the categories are constructedfromexperience. The only
difference in this respect between ordinary and evolutionary empiricism is that, according to the latter,
Introduction 13

B o t h solutions give rise t o grave difficulties.

Is the e m p i r i c i s t thesis adopted? T h e n the categories m u s t be s t r i p p e d o f
t h e i r characteristic properties. I n fact, t h e y are d i s t i n g u i s h e d f r o m all o t h e r
k n o w l e d g e b y t h e i r u n i v e r s a l i t y a n d t h e i r necessity. T h e y are the m o s t g e n -
eral concepts t h a t exist, because t h e y are a p p l i e d t o all that is real; a n d j u s t as
t h e y are n o t attached t o any p a r t i c u l a r object, t h e y are i n d e p e n d e n t o f any
i n d i v i d u a l subject. T h e y are the c o m m o n g r o u n d w h e r e all m i n d s meet. W h a t
is m o r e , m i n d s m e e t there o f necessity: R e a s o n , w h i c h is n o n e o t h e r t h a n the
fundamental categories taken together, is vested w i t h an a u t h o r i t y that w e c a n -
n o t escape at w i l l . W h e n w e t r y t o resist i t , t o free ourselves from some o f these
f u n d a m e n t a l n o t i o n s , w e m e e t sharp resistance. H e n c e , far f r o m m e r e l y d e -
p e n d i n g u p o n us, they i m p o s e themselves u p o n us. B u t the characteristics o f
e m p i r i c a l data are d i a m e t r i c a l l y opposite. A sensation o r an i m a g e is always
l i n k e d t o a d e f i n i t e object o r c o l l e c t i o n o f definite objects, a n d i t expresses the
m o m e n t a r y state o f a p a r t i c u l a r consciousness. I t is f u n d a m e n t a l l y i n d i v i d u a l
a n d subjective. M o r e o v e r , w e can d o as w e w i s h w i t h representations that are
o f this o r i g i n . O f course, w h e n sensations are present t o us, they impose t h e m -
selves o n us in fact. By right, however, w e r e m a i n free t o conceive t h e m o t h e r -
wise than they are and to picture t h e m as o c c u r r i n g i n an order different from the
o n e i n w h i c h t h e y o c c u r r e d . I n regard t o t h e m , n o t h i n g is b i n d i n g o n us u n -
less considerations o f a different sort i n t e r v e n e . H e r e , t h e n , are t w o sorts o f
k n o w l e d g e that are l i k e opposite poles o f the intellect. U n d e r these c o n d i t i o n s ,
t o reduce reason t o e x p e r i e n c e is t o m a k e reason disappear—because i t is t o
reduce the u n i v e r s a l i t y a n d necessity that characterize reason t o m e r e appear-
ances, illusions t h a t m i g h t be p r a c t i c a l l y c o n v e n i e n t b u t that c o r r e s p o n d t o
n o t h i n g i n t h i n g s . C o n s e q u e n t l y , i t is t o d e n y all o b j e c t i v e reality t o that l o g -
ical life w h i c h t h e f u n c t i o n o f the categories is t o regulate a n d organize. Clas-
sical e m p i r i c i s m leads t o irrationalism; perhaps i t s h o u l d be called b y that name.

N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g t h e sense w e o r d i n a r i l y attach t o the labels, i t is the

apriorists w h o are m o r e attentive to the facts. Since they d o n o t take i t as self-
e v i d e n t t r u t h t h a t the categories are made o f the same elements as o u r sense
representations, t h e y are n o t c o m m i t t e d t o i m p o v e r i s h i n g the categories sys-
tematically, e m p t y i n g t h e m o f all real c o n t e n t a n d r e d u c i n g t h e m t o m e r e
verbal artifices. Q u i t e the contrary, apriorists leave the categories w i t h all
t h e i r d i s t i n c t i v e characteristics. T h e apriorists are rationalists; t h e y believe

the results of individual experience are consolidated by heredity. But that consolidation adds nothing es-
sential; no element enters into their composition that does not originate in the experience of the indi-
vidual. Also, according to that theory, the necessity with which the categories impose themselves upon us
in the present is itself the product of an illusion, a superstitious prejudice that is deeply rooted in the or-
ganism but without foundation in the nature of things.
14 Introduction

that the w o r l d has a l o g i c a l aspect that reason e m i n e n t l y expresses. T o d o this,

however, they have t o ascribe t o the i n t e l l e c t a c e r t a i n p o w e r t o transcend
e x p e r i e n c e and a d d t o w h a t is i m m e d i a t e l y g i v e n . B u t f o r this singular
p o w e r , t h e y offer n e i t h e r e x p l a n a t i o n n o r w a r r a n t . M e r e l y t o say i t is i n h e r -
ent i n the nature o f h u m a n i n t e l l e c t is n o t t o e x p l a i n that p o w e r . I t w o u l d still
be necessary t o see w h e r e w e acquire this a s t o u n d i n g prerogative a n d h o w w e
are able t o see relationships i n things that m e r e spectating c a n n o t reveal t o us.
To c o n f i n e oneself t o saying that e x p e r i e n c e itself is possible o n l y o n that
c o n d i t i o n is t o shift t h e p r o b l e m , perhaps, b u t n o t t o solve i t . T h e p o i n t is to
k n o w h o w i t happens that e x p e r i e n c e is n o t e n o u g h , b u t presupposes c o n d i -
tions that are e x t e r n a l and p r i o r t o experience, a n d h o w i t happens that these
c o n d i t i o n s are m e t at the t i m e and i n the m a n n e r needed. T o answer these
questions, i t has sometimes b e e n i m a g i n e d that, b e y o n d the reason o f i n d i -
viduals, there is a s u p e r i o r and perfect reason f r o m w h i c h that o f individuals
emanated and, b y a sort o f mystic p a r t i c i p a t i o n , presumably a c q u i r e d its m a r -
velous faculty: T h a t s u p e r i o r a n d perfect reason is d i v i n e reason. B u t , at best,
this hypothesis has the grave disadvantage o f b e i n g shielded f r o m all e x p e r i -
m e n t a l c o n t r o l , so i t does n o t m e e t the r e q u i r e m e n t s o f a scientific h y p o t h e -
sis. M o r e t h a n that, the categories o f h u m a n t h o u g h t are never f i x e d i n a
d e f i n i t e f o r m ; t h e y are ceaselessly made, u n m a d e , and remade; t h e y v a r y ac-
c o r d i n g t o t i m e a n d place. B y contrast, d i v i n e reason is i m m u t a b l e . H o w
c o u l d this invariance a c c o u n t f o r such constant variability?

S u c h are the t w o c o n c e p t i o n s that have c o m p e t e d f o r centuries. A n d i f

the debate has g o n e o n a n d o n , i t is because the arguments back a n d f o r t h are
i n fact m o r e o r less equivalent. I f reason is b u t a f o r m o f i n d i v i d u a l e x p e r i -
ence, t h e n reason is n o m o r e . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , i f the capacities w i t h w h i c h
i t is c r e d i t e d are r e c o g n i z e d b u t left u n a c c o u n t e d for, t h e n reason apparently
is placed outside nature and science. Faced w i t h these opposite o b j e c t i o n s ,
the i n t e l l e c t remains u n c e r t a i n . B u t i f the social o r i g i n o f the categories is ac-
cepted, a n e w stance becomes possible, o n e that s h o u l d enable us, I believe,
t o avoid these opposite difficulties.
T h e f u n d a m e n t a l thesis o f a p r i o r i s m is that k n o w l e d g e is f o r m e d f r o m
t w o sorts o f elements that are i r r e d u c i b l e o n e t o the o t h e r — t w o distinct, su-
16
p e r i m p o s e d layers, so t o s p e a k . M y hypothesis keeps this p r i n c i p l e intact.
T h e k n o w l e d g e that people speak o f as e m p i r i c a l — a l l that theorists o f e m -
p i r i c i s m have ever used t o c o n s t r u c t reason—is the k n o w l e d g e that t h e direct

^'[t is perhaps surprising that I should not define apriorism by the hypothesis of innateness. But that
idea actually has only a secondary role in the doctrine. It is a simplistic way of portraying the irreducibil-
ity of rational cognition to empirical data. To call it innate is no more than a positive way of saying that it
is not a product of experience as usually conceived.
Introduction 15

a c t i o n o t objects calls f o r t h i n o u r m i n d s . T h u s t h e y are i n d i v i d u a l states that

are w h o l l y " e x p l a i n e d b y the psychic nature o f the i n d i v i d u a l . B u t i f the cat-
egories are essentially collective representations, as I t h i n k they are, they
translate states o f the c o l l e c t i v i t y , first and foremost. T h e y d e p e n d u p o n the
way m w h i c h the c o l l e c t i v i t y is o r g a n i z e d , u p o n its m o r p h o l o g y , its r e l i g i o u s ,
m o r a l , a n d e c o n o m i c i n s t i t u t i o n s , and so o n . B e t w e e n these t w o k i n d s o f
representations, t h e n , is all the distance that separates the i n d i v i d u a l f r o m t h e
social; o n e can n o m o r e derive the second f r o m the first t h a n o n e can deduce
the society f r o m the i n d i v i d u a l , the w h o l e f r o m the part, o r the c o m p l e x
18
f r o m the s i m p l e . Society is a reality stti generis; i t has its o w n characteristics
that are e i t h e r n o t f o u n d i n the rest o f the universe o r are n o t f o u n d there i n
the same f o r m . T h e representations that express society therefore have an a l -
t o g e t h e r different c o n t e n t f r o m the p u r e l y i n d i v i d u a l representations, and
one can be c e r t a i n i n advance that the f o r m e r add s o m e t h i n g t o the latter.
T h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h b o t h k i n d s o f representations are f o r m e d b r i n g s
a b o u t t h e i r d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n . C o l l e c t i v e representations are the p r o d u c t o f an
i m m e n s e c o o p e r a t i o n that extends n o t o n l y t h r o u g h space b u t also t h r o u g h
t i m e ; t o m a k e t h e m , a m u l t i t u d e o f different m i n d s have associated, i n t e r -
m i x e d , and c o m b i n e d t h e i r ideas a n d feelings; l o n g generations have a c c u -
m u l a t e d t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e and k n o w l e d g e . A v e r y special i n t e l l e c t u a l i t y that is
i n f i n i t e l y r i c h e r a n d m o r e c o m p l e x t h a n that o f the i n d i v i d u a l is distilled i n
t h e m . T h a t b e i n g the case, w e u n d e r s t a n d h o w reason has gained the p o w e r
t o go b e y o n d t h e range o f e m p i r i c a l c o g n i t i o n . I t owes this p o w e r n o t t o
some mysterious v i r t u e b u t s i m p l y t o the fact that, as the w e l l - k n o w n f o r -
m u l a has i t , m a n is d o u b l e . I n h i m are t w o beings: an i n d i v i d u a l b e i n g that
has its basis i n the b o d y a n d w h o s e sphere o f a c t i o n is s t r i c t l y l i m i t e d by this
fact, and a social b e i n g that represents w i t h i n us the highest reality i n the i n -
tellectual and m o r a l * r e a l m that is k n o w a b l e t h r o u g h o b s e r v a t i o n : I m e a n so-

!
'~On Durkheim's characteristic uses of the term "moral," see above, p. Iv—lvi.
' At least to the extent that there are individual, and thus fully empirical, representations. But m fact
there probably is no case in which those two sorts of elements are not found closelv bound up together.
^Furthermore, this irreducibility should not be understood in an absolute sense. I do not mean that
there is nothing in the empirical representations that announces the rational ones, or that there is nothing
in the individual that can be considered the harbinger ot social life. If experience w as completely foreign
to all that is rational, reason would not be applicable to it. Likewise, if the psychic nature of the mciis id-
ual was absolutely resistant to social life, society would be impossible. Therefore a full analvsis ot the cat-
egories would look for the seeds of rationalitv in individual consciousness. ! shall have occasion to return
7
to this point in my Conclusion. All I wish to establish here is that there is a distance between the indis-
tinct seeds of reason and reason properly so-called that is comparable to the distance between the proper-
ties of mineral elements, from which the living being is made, and the characteristic properties of life,
once constituted.
16 Introduction

c i e t y [J'entends la société]. I n the r e a l m o f practice, the consequence o f this

d u a l i t y i n o u r nature is the i r r e d u c i b i l i t y o f the m o r a l ideal to the u t i l i t a r i a n
m o t i v e ; i n the r e a l m o f t h o u g h t , i t is the i r r e d u c i b i l i t y o f reason t o i n d i v i d -
ual experience. As p a r t o f society, the i n d i v i d u a l n a t u r a l l y transcends himself,
b o t h w h e n he t h i n k s a n d w h e n he acts.
T h i s same social characteristic enables us t o u n d e r s t a n d w h e r e the n e -
cessity o f the categories comes f r o m . A n idea is said t o be necessary* w h e n ,
due t o some sort o f i n t e r n a l p r o p e r t y , i t enjoys credence w i t h o u t the support
o f any p r o o f . I t thus contains i n itself s o m e t h i n g that compels the i n t e l l e c t
a n d w i n s over i n t e l l e c t u a l adherence w i t h o u t p r i o r e x a m i n a t i o n . A p r i o r i s m
postulates that remarkable capacity w i t h o u t a c c o u n t i n g f o r i t . T o say that the
categories are necessary because t h e y are indispensable t o t h o u g h t is s i m p l y
t o repeat that they are necessary. B u t i f they have the o r i g i n that I a m at-
t r i b u t i n g t o t h e m , n o t h i n g a b o u t t h e i r ascendancy s h o u l d surprise us any
l o n g e r . T h e y d o i n d e e d express the m o s t general relationships that exist b e -
t w e e n things; h a v i n g broader scope t h a n all o u r ideas, t h e y g o v e r n all the
particulars o f o u r i n t e l l e c t u a l life. I f , at every m o m e n t , m e n d i d n o t agree o n
these f u n d a m e n t a l ideas, i f t h e y d i d n o t have a h o m o g e n e o u s c o n c e p t i o n o f
t i m e , space, cause, n u m b e r , a n d so o n . A l l consensus a m o n g m i n d s , a n d thus
all c o m m o n life, w o u l d b e c o m e impossible.

H e n c e society c a n n o t leave the categories u p t o the free c h o i c e o f i n d i -

viduals w i t h o u t a b a n d o n i n g itself. T o live, i t requires n o t o n l y a m i n i m u m
m o r a l consensus b u t also a m i n i m u m l o g i c a l consensus that i t c a n n o t d o
w i t h o u t either. T h u s , i n o r d e r t o prevent dissidence, society w e i g h s o n its
m e m b e r s w i t h all its a u t h o r i t y . D o e s a m i n d seek t o free itself f r o m these
n o r m s o f all t h o u g h t ? Society n o l o n g e r considers this a h u m a n m i n d i n the
full sense, a n d treats i t accordingly. T h i s is w h y i t is that w h e n w e try, even
deep d o w n inside, t o get away from these f u n d a m e n t a l n o t i o n s , w e feel that
w e are n o t f u l l y free; s o m e t h i n g resists us, f r o m inside a n d outside ourselves.
O u t s i d e us, i t is o p i n i o n that j u d g e s us; m o r e t h a n that, because society is
represented inside us as w e l l , i t resists these r e v o l u t i o n a r y impulses from
w i t h i n . W e feel t h a t w e c a n n o t a b a n d o n ourselves t o t h e m w i t h o u t o u r
t h o u g h t ' s ceasing t o be t r u l y h u m a n . S u c h appears t o be the o r i g i n o f the
v e r y special a u t h o r i t y that is i n h e r e n t i n reason a n d that makes us t r u s t i n g l y
19
accept its p r o m p t i n g s . T h i s is n o n e o t h e r t h a n t h e a u t h o r i t y o f s o c i e t y pass-
i n g i n t o c e r t a i n ways o f t h i n k i n g that are t h e indispensable c o n d i t i o n s o f all

*Note here that the sense of the word "necessary" is distinct from the everyday concept of need. See
also the next paragraph.
ly
It has often been noticed that social disturbances multiply mental disturbances. This is further evi-
dence that logical discipline is an aspect of social discipline. The former relaxes when the latter weakens.
Introduction 17

c o m m o n a c t i o n . T h u s the necessity w i t h w h i c h the categories press t h e m -

selves u p o n us is n o t m e r e l y the effect o f habits w h o s e y o k e w e c o u l d slip
w i t h l i t t l e effort; n o r is that necessity a h a b i t o r a physical o r metaphysical
need, since the categories change w i t h place a n d t i m e ; i t is a special sort o f
2 0
m o r a l necessity t h a t is t o i n t e l l e c t u a l life w h a t o b l i g a t i o n is t o the w i l l .
B u t i f the categories at first d o n o m o r e t h a n translate social states, does
i t n o t f o l l o w t h a t t h e y can be a p p l i e d t o the rest o f nature o n l y as metaphors?
I f t h e i r p u r p o s e is m e r e l y t o express social things, i t w o u l d seem that t h e y
c o u l d be e x t e n d e d t o o t h e r realms o n l y b y c o n v e n t i o n . T h u s , insofar as t h e y
serve us i n c o n c e i v i n g the physical o r b i o l o g i c a l w o r l d , t h e y can o n l y have
the value o f artificial symbols—useful perhaps, b u t w i t h n o c o n n e c t i o n t o r e -
ality. W e w o u l d thus r e t u r n t o n o m i n a l i s m a n d e m p i r i c i s m b y a n o t h e r r o u t e .
T o i n t e r p r e t a sociological t h e o r y o f k n o w l e d g e i n that w a y is t o forget that
even i f society is a specific reality, i t is n o t an e m p i r e w i t h i n an e m p i r e : I t is part
o f nature and nature's highest expression. T h e social r e a l m is a n a t u r a l r e a l m
that differs f r o m others o n l y i n its greater c o m p l e x i t y . I t is impossible that n a -
ture, i n that w h i c h is m o s t f u n d a m e n t a l i n itself, s h o u l d be radically different
b e t w e e n o n e p a r t a n d a n o t h e r o f itself. I t is impossible that the f u n d a m e n t a l
relations that exist b e t w e e n things—precisely those relations that the categor-
ies serve t o express—should be f u n d a m e n t a l l y dissimilar i n o n e r e a l m a n d a n -
21
other. I f , for reasons that w e shall have t o discover, they stand o u t m o r e clearly
i n t h e social w o r l d , i t is impossible that t h e y s h o u l d n o t be f o u n d elsewhere,
t h o u g h i n m o r e s h r o u d e d f o r m s . Society makes t h e m m o r e manifest b u t has
n o m o n o p o l y o n t h e m . T h i s is w h y n o t i o n s w o r k e d o u t o n the m o d e l o f so-
cial things can h e l p us t h i n k a b o u t o t h e r sorts o f t h i n g s . A t t h e v e r y least, i f ,
w h e n they deviate f r o m t h e i r i n i t i a l m e a n i n g , those n o t i o n s play i n a sense the
role o f symbols, i t is the role o f w e l l - f o u n d e d symbols. I f artifice enters i n ,
t h r o u g h the v e r y fact that these are c o n s t r u c t e d concepts, i t is an artifice that
22
closely f o l l o w s nature and strives t o c o m e ever closer t o n a t u r e . T h e fact
2
"There is an analogy between this logical necessity and moral obligation but not identity—at least not
at present. Today, society treats criminals differentlyfrompeople who are mentally handicapped. This is
evidence that, despite significant similarities, the authority attached to logical norms and that inherent in
moral norms are not of the same nature. They are two different species of one genus. It would be inter-
esting to research what that difference (probably not primitive) consists of and where it comes from, since
for a long time public consciousness barely distinguished the delinquentfromthe mentally ill. From this
example, we can see the numerous problems raised by the analysis of these notions, which are generally
thought elementary and simple but actually are extremely complex.
21
This question is treated in the Conclusion of this book.
22
Hence the rationalism that is immanent in a sociological theory of knowledge stands between em-
piricism and classical apriorism. For the first, the categories are purely artificial constructs; for the second,
on the other hand, they are naturally given; for us, they are works of art, in a sense, but an art that imi-
tates nature ever more perfectly.
18 Introduction

that the ideas o f t i m e , space, genus, cause, a n d personality are constructed

f r o m social elements s h o u l d n o t lead us t o c o n c l u d e that they are s t r i p p e d o f
all objective value. Q u i t e the contrary, t h e i r social o r i g i n leads o n e i n d e e d to
23
suppose that they are n o t w i t h o u t f o u n d a t i o n i n the nature o f t h i n g s .
I n this fresh f o r m u l a t i o n , the t h e o r y o f k n o w l e d g e seems destined t o j o i n
the opposite advantages o f t h e t w o r i v a l theories, w i t h o u t t h e i r disadvan-
tages. I t preserves all the essential p r i n c i p l e s o f a p r i o r i s m b u t at the same t i m e
takes i n s p i r a t i o n f r o m the positive t u r n o f m i n d that e m p i r i c i s m sought to
satisfy. I t leaves reason w i t h its specific p o w e r , b u t accounts f o r that power,
a n d does so w i t h o u t l e a v i n g the observable w o r l d . I t affirms as real the d u a l -
i t y o f o u r i n t e l l e c t u a l life, b u t explains that duality, and does so w i t h natural
causes. T h e categories cease t o be regarded as p r i m a r y and unanalyzable facts;
a n d yet t h e y r e m a i n o f such c o m p l e x i t y that analyses as simplistic as those
w i t h w h i c h e m p i r i c i s m c o n t e n t e d itself c a n n o t possibly be r i g h t . N o l o n g e r
d o they appear as v e r y simple n o t i o n s that anyone can sift from his personal
observations, and t h a t p o p u l a r i m a g i n a t i o n u n f o r t u n a t e l y c o m p l i c a t e d ; q u i t e
the contrary, they appear as i n g e n i o u s i n s t r u m e n t s o f t h o u g h t , w h i c h h u m a n
groups have p a i n s t a k i n g l y f o r g e d over centuries, a n d i n w h i c h t h e y have
24
amassed the best o f t h e i r i n t e l l e c t u a l c a p i t a l . A w h o l e aspect o f h u m a n his-
t o r y is, i n a way, s u m m e d u p i n t h e m . T h i s a m o u n t s t o saying that t o succeed
i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d evaluating t h e m , i t is necessary t o t u r n t o n e w p r o c e -
dures. T o k n o w w h a t the c o n c e p t i o n s that w e ourselves have n o t made are
made of, i t c a n n o t be e n o u g h t o c o n s u l t o u r o w n consciousness. W e must
l o o k outside ourselves, observe history, a n d i n s t i t u t e a w h o l e science, a c o m -
p l e x o n e at that, w h i c h can advance o n l y s l o w l y a n d b y c o l l e c t i v e labor. T h e
present w o r k is an a t t e m p t t o m a k e c e r t a i n fragmentary c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o that
science. W i t h o u t m a k i n g these questions t h e d i r e c t subject o f m y study, I w i l l
take advantage o f all the o p p o r t u n i t i e s that present themselves t o capture at
b i r t h at least some o f those ideas that, w h i l e religious i n o r i g i n , w e r e b o u n d
nevertheless t o r e m a i n at the basis o f h u m a n m e n t a l i t y .

23
For example, the category of time has its basis in the rhythm of social life; but if there is a rhythm of
collective life, one can be certain that there is another in the life of the individual and, more generally, that
of the universe. The first is only more marked and apparent than the others. Likewise, we will see that the
notion of kind was formedfromthat of the human group. But if men form natural groups, one can sup-
pose that there exist among things groups that are at once similar to them and different. These natural
groups of things are genera and species.
24
This is why it is legitimate to compare the categories with tools: Tools, for their part, are accumu-
lated material capital. Moreover, there is close kinship between the three ideas of tool, category, and in-
stitution.
 BOOK ONE

PRELIMINARY
QUESTIONS
 CHAPTER ONE

DEFINITION OF RELIGIOUS
PHENOMENA AND OF
1
RELIGION

I n o r d e r t o i d e n t i f y the simplest a n d m o s t p r i m i t i v e r e l i g i o n that observa-

t i o n can m a k e k n o w n t o us, w e m u s t first define w h a t is p r o p e r l y u n d e r -
s t o o d as a r e l i g i o n . I f w e d o n o t , w e r u n the risk o f either c a l l i n g a system o f
ideas a n d practices r e l i g i o n that are i n n o w a y r e l i g i o u s , o r o f passing b y r e l i -
g i o u s p h e n o m e n a w i t h o u t d e t e c t i n g t h e i r t r u e nature. A g o o d i n d i c a t i o n
that this danger is n o t i m a g i n a r y , a n d the p o i n t b y n o means a concession t o
e m p t y m e t h o d o l o g i c a l f o r m a l i s m , is this: H a v i n g failed t o take that p r e c a u -
t i o n , M . Frazer,* a scholar t o w h o m the c o m p a r a t i v e science o f religions is
nevertheless gready i n d e b t e d , failed t o recognize t h e p r o f o u n d l y r e l i g i o u s
character o f the beliefs a n d rites that w i l l be s t u d i e d b e l o w — b e l i e f s and rites
i n w h i c h , I s u b m i t , the o r i g i n a l seed o f r e l i g i o u s life i n h u m a n i t y is visible.
I n the m a t t e r o f d e f i n i t i o n , t h e n , there is a p r e j u d i c i a l q u e s t i o n that m u s t be
treated before any other. I t is n o t t h a t I h o p e t o arrive straightaway at the
deep a n d t r u l y e x p l a n a t o r y features o f r e l i g i o n , f o r these can be d e t e r m i n e d
o n l y at the e n d o f the research. B u t w h a t is b o t h necessary and possible is t o
p o i n t o u t a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f readily visible o u t w a r d features that a l l o w us t o
recognize r e l i g i o u s p h e n o m e n a w h e r e v e r t h e y are e n c o u n t e r e d , a n d that
p r e v e n t t h e i r b e i n g confused w i t h others. I t u r n t o this p r e l i m i n a r y step.
I f t a k i n g this step is t o y i e l d t h e results i t s h o u l d , w e m u s t b e g i n b y free-
i n g o u r m i n d s o f all p r e c o n c e i v e d ideas. W e l l before t h e science o f r e l i g i o n s
i n s t i t u t e d its m e t h o d i c a l c o m p a r i s o n s , m e n h a d t o create t h e i r o w n idea o f
w h a t r e l i g i o n is. T h e necessities o f existence r e q u i r e all o f us, believers a n d
unbelievers, t o conceive i n some fashion those t h i n g s i n the m i d s t o f w h i c h

*Sir James George Frazer (1854-1941).

'I have already tried to define the phenomenon of religion, in a work published by AS, vol. II [1899],
pp. Iff. ["De la Definition des phénomènes religieux"]. As will be seen, the definition given there differs
from the one I now propose. At the end of this chapter (p. 44, n. 68), I will give the reasons for these mod-
ifications. They do not, however, involve any fundamental change in the conceptualization of the facts.

21
22 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

w e live, a b o u t w h i c h w e c o n t i n u a l l y m a k e j u d g m e n t s , a n d o f w h i c h o u r c o n -
d u c t m u s t take a c c o u n t . B u t since these n o t i o n s are f o r m e d u n m e t h o d i c a l l y ,
i n the c o m i n g s a n d goings o f life, t h e y c a n n o t be relied o n and m u s t be r i g -
o r o u s l y k e p t t o o n e side i n the e x a m i n a t i o n that f o l l o w s . I t is n o t o u r pre-
c o n c e p t i o n s , passions, o r habits that m u s t be c o n s u l t e d f o r the elements o f
the d e f i n i t i o n w e need; d e f i n i t i o n is t o b e sought f r o m reality itself.
L e t us set ourselves before this reality. P u t t i n g aside all ideas a b o u t r e l i -
g i o n i n general, let us consider r e l i g i o n s i n t h e i r concrete reality a n d t r y to
see w h a t features t h e y m a y have i n c o m m o n : R e l i g i o n can be d e f i n e d o n l y
i n terms o f features that are f o u n d w h e r e v e r r e l i g i o n is f o u n d . I n this c o m -
p a r i s o n , t h e n , w e w i l l i n c o r p o r a t e all the r e l i g i o u s systems w e can k n o w , past
as w e l l as present, the m o s t p r i m i t i v e and simple as w e l l as t h e m o s t m o d e r n
a n d r e f i n e d , f o r w e have n o r i g h t t o e x c l u d e some so as t o keep o n l y certain
others, a n d n o l o g i c a l m e t h o d o f d o i n g so. T o anyone w h o sees r e l i g i o n as
n o t h i n g o t h e r t h a n a n a t u r a l m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f h u m a n activity, all r e l i g i o n s are
i n s t r u c t i v e , w i t h o u t e x c e p t i o n o f any k i n d : E a c h i n its o w n w a y expresses
m a n , a n d thus each can h e l p us u n d e r s t a n d b e t t e r that aspect o f o u r nature.
Besides, w e have seen that the preference f o r s t u d y i n g r e l i g i o n a m o n g the
2
m o s t c i v i l i z e d peoples is far f r o m b e i n g t h e best m e t h o d .
Before t a k i n g u p the q u e s t i o n a n d i n o r d e r t o h e l p the m i n d free itself o f
c o m m o n s e n s e n o t i o n s w h o s e i n f l u e n c e can prevent us f r o m seeing things as
t h e y are, i t is advisable t o e x a m i n e h o w those prejudices have entered i n t o
some o f the c o m m o n e s t d e f i n i t i o n s .

I
O n e n o t i o n that is generally t a k e n t o be characteristic o f all that is r e l i g i o u s
is the n o t i o n o f the supernatural. B y t h a t is m e a n t any o r d e r o f things that
goes b e y o n d o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g ; the supernatural is the w o r l d o f mystery, the
u n k n o w a b l e , o r t h e i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e . R e l i g i o n w o u l d t h e n be a k i n d o f
speculation u p o n all that escapes science, a n d clear t h i n k i n g generally. A c -
c o r d i n g t o Spencer, " R e l i g i o n s that are d i a m e t r i c a l l y opposite i n t h e i r d o g -
mas agree i n t a c i d y r e c o g n i z i n g that the w o r l d , w i t h all i t contains and all
that surrounds i t , is a m y s t e r y seeking an e x p l a n a t i o n " ; he makes t h e m o u t
basically t o consist o f " t h e b e l i e f i n the o m n i p r e s e n c e o f s o m e t h i n g that goes

2
See above, p. 3.1 do not push the necessity of these definitions further or the method to be followed.
The exposition is to be found in my Règles de la méthode sociologique [Paris, Alcan, 1895], pp. 43ff. Cf. Le
Suicide; [étude de sociologie] (Paris, F. Alcan [1897]), pp. Iff.
Definition of Religious Phenomena and of Religion 23

3
b e y o n d t h e i n t e l l e c t . " Similiarly, M a x M i i l l e r saw all r e l i g i o n as " a n effort t o
conceive the i n c o n c e i v a b l e a n d t o express the inexpressible, an aspiration t o -
4
ward the infinite."
C e r t a i n l y the role played b y the feeling o f m y s t e r y has n o t b e e n u n i m -
p o r t a n t i n c e r t a i n r e l i g i o n s , i n c l u d i n g C h r i s t i a n i t y . E v e n so, the i m p o r t a n c e
o f this role has s h o w n m a r k e d v a r i a t i o n at different m o m e n t s o f C h r i s t i a n
history. T h e r e have b e e n p e r i o d s w h e n t h e n o t i o n o f m y s t e r y has b e c o m e
secondary and even faded altogether. T o m e n o f the seventeenth century, f o r
e x a m p l e , d o g m a c o n t a i n e d n o t h i n g that unsettled reason. F a i t h effortlessly
r e c o n c i l e d itself w i t h science a n d p h i l o s o p h y ; a n d t h i n k e r s like Pascal, w h o
felt strongly that there is s o m e t h i n g p r o f o u n d l y obscure i n things, w e r e so l i t -
tle i n h a r m o n y w i t h t h e i r epochs that i t was t h e i r fate t o be m i s u n d e r s t o o d
5
b y t h e i r c o n t e m p o r a r i e s . T h e r e f o r e , i t w o u l d seem rash t o m a k e an idea that
has b e e n subject t o p e r i o d i c eclipse the essential e l e m e n t even o f C h r i s t i a n -
ity.
W h a t is c e r t a i n , i n any case, is that this idea appears v e r y late i n t h e h i s -
t o r y o f r e l i g i o n s . I t is t o t a l l y alien n o t o n l y t o the peoples called p r i m i t i v e b u t
also t o those w h o have n o t attained a c e r t a i n level o f i n t e l l e c t u a l c u l t u r e . O f
course, w h e n w e see m e n i m p u t i n g e x t r a o r d i n a r y v i r t u e s t o insignificant o b -
jects, o r p o p u l a t i n g the universe w i t h e x t r a o r d i n a r y p r i n c i p l e s made u p o f
the m o s t disparate elements a n d possessing a sort o f u b i q u i t y t h a t is h a r d t o
conceptualize, i t is easy f o r us t o find an air o f m y s t e r y i n these ideas. I t seems
t o us that these m e n have resigned themselves t o ideas so p r o b l e m a t i c f o r o u r
m o d e r n reason o n l y because t h e y have b e e n unable t o find m o r e r a t i o n a l
ones. I n reality, however, the explanations that amaze us seem t o the p r i m i -
tive t h e simplest i n t h e w o r l d . H e sees t h e m n o t as a k i n d of ultima ratio*' t o
w h i c h the i n t e l l e c t resigns itself i n despair b u t as the m o s t direct w a y o f c o n -
c e i v i n g and u n d e r s t a n d i n g w h a t he observes a r o u n d h i m . F o r h i m , there is
n o t h i n g strange i n b e i n g able, b y v o i c e o r gesture, t o c o m m a n d t h e elements,
h o l d u p o r accelerate the course o f the stars, m a k e t h e r a i n fall o r stop i t , a n d
so o n . T h e rites he uses t o ensure the f e r t i l i t y o f the soil o r o f the a n i m a l
species that n o u r i s h h i m are n o m o r e i r r a t i o n a l i n his eyes t h a n are, i n o u r

*Last resort.
'[Herbert Spencer, First Principles, New York, D. Appleton, 1862, French translation based on the
sixth English edition], Paris, F. Alcan [1902], pp. 38-39, [p. 37 in the English edition. Trans.].
4
Max Miiller, Introduction to the Science of Religions [London, Longmans, 1873], p. 18. Cf. [Lectures on]
the Origin and [Growth] of Religion [as Illustrated by the Religions of India, London, Longmans, 1878], p. 23.
5
The same turn of mind is also to be found in the period of scholasticism, as is shown in the formula
according to which the philosophy of that period was defined, Fides quaerens intellectum [Faith in search of
intellect. Trans.].
24 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

o w n eyes, the t e c h n i c a l processes that o u r agronomists use f o r t h e same p u r -

pose. T h e forces he b r i n g s i n t o play b y these various means d o n o t seem to
him p a r t i c u l a r l y m y s t e r i o u s . C e r t a i n l y , these forces differ f r o m those the
m o d e r n scientist conceives o f a n d teaches us t o use; t h e y behave differently
a n d c a n n o t be c o n t r o l l e d i n t h e same w a y ; b u t t o the o n e w h o believes i n
t h e m , t h e y are n o m o r e u n i n t e l l i g i b l e t h a n g r a v i t a t i o n o r e l e c t r i c i t y is t o
physicists today.
F u r t h e r m o r e , as w e w i l l see i n the course o f this w o r k , the idea o f nat-
u r a l forces is v e r y l i k e l y d e r i v e d from that o f religious forces, so b e t w e e n the
o n e a n d the o t h e r there c a n n o t be t h e chasm that separates the r a t i o n a l from
the i r r a t i o n a l . N o t even the fact that r e l i g i o u s forces are o f t e n c o n c e i v e d o f
as s p i r i t u a l entities a n d conscious w i l l s is any p r o o f o f t h e i r i r r a t i o n a l i t y . R e a -
son does n o t resist a priori the idea that i n a n i m a t e bodies m i g h t be m o v e d b y
intelligences, as h u m a n bodies are, even t h o u g h present-day science does n o t
easily a c c o m m o d a t e this hypothesis. W h e n L e i b n i z p r o p o s e d t o conceive the
e x t e r n a l w o r l d as an i m m e n s e society o f intelligences, b e t w e e n w h i c h there
w e r e n o t a n d c o u l d n o t be any b u t s p i r i t u a l relations, he m e a n t t o be w o r k -
i n g as a rationalist. H e d i d n o t see this universal a n i m i s m as a n y t h i n g that
m i g h t offend the i n t e l l e c t .
Besides, the idea o f the supernatural, as w e u n d e r s t a n d i t , is recent. I t
presupposes an idea that is its n e g a t i o n , a n d that is i n n o w a y p r i m i t i v e . T o be
able t o call c e r t a i n facts supernatural, o n e m u s t already have an awareness that
there is a natural order of things, i n o t h e r w o r d s , that t h e p h e n o m e n a o f t h e
universe are i n t e r n a l l y l i n k e d a c c o r d i n g t o necessary relationships called laws.
O n c e this p r i n c i p l e is established, a n y t h i n g that departs from those laws n e c -
essarily appears as b e y o n d nature and, thus, b e y o n d reason: F o r w h a t is i n this
sense natural is also r a t i o n a l , those relations expressing o n l y the m a n n e r i n
w h i c h things are l o g i c a l l y c o n n e c t e d . N o w , the idea o f universal d e t e r m i n -
ism is o f recent o r i g i n ; even the greatest t h i n k e r s o f classical a n t i q u i t y d i d n o t
achieve f u l l awareness o f i t . T h a t idea is t e r r i t o r y w o n b y the e m p i r i c a l sci-
ences; i t is the postulate o n w h i c h t h e y rest a n d w h i c h t h e i r advancement has
p r o v e d . So l o n g as this postulate wag l a c k i n g o r n o t w e l l established, there
was n o t h i n g a b o u t the m o s t e x t r a o r d i n a r y events that d i d n o t appear p e r -
fectly conceivable. So l o n g as w h a t is i m m o v a b l e and i n f l e x i b l e about the o r -
der o f things was u n k n o w n , a n d so l o n g as i t was seen as the w o r k o f
c o n t i n g e n t w i l l s , i t was o f course t h o u g h t n a t u r a l that these w i l l s o r others
c o u l d m o d i f y the o r d e r o f things arbitrarily. F o r this reason, the m i r a c u l o u s
i n t e r v e n t i o n s that the ancients ascribed t o t h e i r gods w e r e n o t i n t h e i r eyes
miracles, i n the m o d e r n sense o f the w o r d . T o t h e m , these i n t e r v e n t i o n s
w e r e beautiful, rare, o r t e r r i b l e spectacles, a n d objects o f surprise a n d w o n -
Definition of Religious Phenomena and of Religion 25

der (9auu,aTct, mirabilia, miracula); b u t t h e y w e r e n o t regarded as glimpses i n t o

a mysterious w o r l d w h e r e reason c o u l d n o t penetrate.
T h a t m i n d - s e t is all the m o r e readily understandable t o us because i t has
n o t c o m p l e t e l y disappeared. A l t h o u g h the p r i n c i p l e o f d e t e r m i n i s m is f i r m l y
established i n t h e physical a n d natural sciences, its i n t r o d u c t i o n i n t o the so-
cial sciences began o n l y a c e n t u r y ago, a n d its a u t h o r i t y there is still c o n -
tested. T h e idea that societies are subject t o necessary laws and constitute a
r e a l m o f nature has deeply penetrated o n l y a f e w m i n d s . I t f o l l o w s that t r u e
miracles are t h o u g h t possible i n society. T h e r e is, f o r example, t h e accepted
n o t i o n that a legislator can create an i n s t i t u t i o n o u t o f n o t h i n g a n d t r a n s f o r m
o n e social system i n t o another, b y fiat—just as t h e believers o f so m a n y r e l i -
gions accept that the d i v i n e w i l l m a d e t h e w o r l d o u t o f n o t h i n g o r can a r b i -
t r a r i l y m u t a t e some beings i n t o others. As regards social things, w e still have
the m i n d - s e t o f p r i m i t i v e s . B u t i f , i n matters s o c i o l o g i c a l , so m a n y p e o p l e t o -
day l i n g e r over this o l d - f a s h i o n e d idea, i t is n o t because social life seems o b -
scure a n d mysterious t o t h e m . Q u i t e the opposite: I f they are so easily
c o n t e n t e d w i t h such explanations, i f t h e y c l i n g t o these illusions that are r e -
peatedly c o n t r a d i c t e d b y experience, i t is because social facts seem t o t h e m
the m o s t transparent things i n t h e w o r l d . T h i s is so because t h e y have n o t yet
appreciated t h e real obscurity, a n d because t h e y have n o t yet grasped t h e
n e e d t o t u r n t o t h e p a i n s t a k i n g m e t h o d s o f t h e n a t u r a l sciences i n o r d e r p r o -
gressively t o sweep away t h e darkness. T h e same cast o f m i n d is t o be f o u n d
at the r o o t o f m a n y r e l i g i o u s beliefs that startle us i n t h e i r o v e r s i m p l i f i c a t i o n .
Science, n o t r e l i g i o n , has t a u g h t m e n that things are c o m p l e x a n d d i f f i c u l t t o
6
understand. B u t , Jevons replies, the h u m a n m i n d has n o n e e d o f p r o p e r l y
scientific e d u c a t i o n t o n o t i c e that there are d e f i n i t e sequences a n d a constant
o r d e r o f succession b e t w e e n p h e n o m e n a o r t o n o t i c e that this o r d e r is o f t e n
d i s t u r b e d . A t times t h e sun is suddenly eclipsed; t h e r a i n does n o t c o m e i n
t h e season w h e n i t is expected; t h e m o o n is s l o w t o reappear after its p e r i -
o d i c disappearance, a n d t h e l i k e . Because these occurrences are outside the
o r d i n a r y course o f events, p e o p l e have i m p u t e d t o t h e m extraordinary, e x -
c e p t i o n a l — i n a w o r d , extranatural—causes. I t is i n this f o r m , Jevons claims,
that the idea o f the supernatural was b o r n at the b e g i n n i n g o f h i s t o r y ; a n d i t
is i n this w a y a n d at this m o m e n t that r e l i g i o n a c q u i r e d its characteristic o b -
ject.
T h e supernatural, however, is n o t r e d u c i b l e t o the unforeseen. T h e n e w
is j u s t as m u c h p a r t o f nature as the opposite. I f w e n o t i c e that, i n general,
p h e n o m e n a o c c u r o n e after t h e o t h e r i n a d e f i n i t e order, w e also n o t i c e that

6
[Frank Byron] Jevons, Introduction to the History of Religions [London, Methuen, 1896], p. 15.
26 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

the o r d e r is never m o r e t h a n a p p r o x i m a t e , that i t is n o t exactly the same at

different times, a n d that i t has all k i n d s o f exceptions. W i t h even v e r y little
experience, w e b e c o m e a c c u s t o m e d t o h a v i n g o u r expectations u n m e t ; and
these setbacks o c c u r t o o o f t e n t o seem e x t r a o r d i n a r y t o us. G i v e n a certain
e l e m e n t o f chance, as w e l l as a c e r t a i n u n i f o r m i t y i n experience, w e have n o
reason t o a t t r i b u t e t h e o n e t o causes a n d forces different f r o m those t o w h i c h
t h e o t h e r is subject. T o have the idea o f t h e supernatural, t h e n , i t is n o t
e n o u g h f o r us t o witness u n e x p e c t e d events; these events m u s t be c o n c e i v e d
o f as impossible besides—that is, impossible t o r e c o n c i l e w i t h an o r d e r that
r i g h d y o r w r o n g l y seems t o be a necessary p a r t o f the o r d e r o f things. I t is
the positive sciences that have gradually c o n s t r u c t e d this n o t i o n o f a neces-
sary order. I t follows that the c o n t r a r y n o t i o n c a n n o t have predated those sci-
ences.
F u r t h e r m o r e , n o m a t t e r h o w m e n have c o n c e i v e d t h e i r experience o f
novelties a n d chance occurrences, these c o n c e p t i o n s can i n n o w a y b e used
to characterize r e l i g i o n . R e l i g i o u s c o n c e p t i o n s a i m above all t o express a n d
e x p l a i n n o t w h a t is e x c e p t i o n a l a n d a b n o r m a l b u t w h a t is constant a n d r e g -
ular. A s a general r u l e , the gods are used far less t o a c c o u n t f o r monstrosity,
o d d i t y , a n d a n o m a l y t h a n f o r the n o r m a l m a r c h o f the universe, the m o v e -
m e n t o f the stars, t h e r h y t h m o f the seasons, t h e annual g r o w t h o f vegetation,
the p e r p e t u a t i o n o f species, a n d so f o r t h . H e n c e , any n o t i o n that equates r e -
l i g i o n w i t h t h e u n e x p e c t e d is w i d e o f the m a r k . Jevons's r e p l y is that this w a y
o f c o n c e i v i n g r e l i g i o u s forces is n o t p r i m i t i v e . A c c o r d i n g t o h i m , p e o p l e
c o n c e i v e d o f t h e m first i n o r d e r t o a c c o u n t f o r disorder a n d accident, a n d
7
o n l y later used t h e m t o e x p l a i n the u n i f o r m i t i e s o f n a t u r e . B u t i t is unclear
w h a t c o u l d have m a d e m e n i m p u t e such o b v i o u s l y c o n t r a d i c t o r y f u n c t i o n s
t o t h e m , o n e after t h e other. M o r e o v e r , the s u p p o s i t i o n that sacred beings
w e r e at first c o n f i n e d t o t h e negative role o f disturbers is c o m p l e t e l y a r b i -
trary. A s i n d e e d w e w i l l see, starting w i t h the simplest r e l i g i o n s w e k n o w , the
f u n d a m e n t a l task o f sacred beings has b e e n t o m a i n t a i n t h e n o r m a l course o f
8
life b y positive a c t i o n .
T h u s t h e idea o f m y s t e r y is n o t at all o r i g i n a l . I t does n o t c o m e t o m a n
as a g i v e n ; m a n h i m s e l f has f o r g e d this idea as w e l l as its contrary. For this rea-
son, i t is o n l y i n a small n u m b e r o f advanced r e l i g i o n s that the idea o f m y s -
tery has any place at a l l . T h e r e f o r e i t cannot be made the defining
characteristic o f r e l i g i o u s p h e n o m e n a w i t h o u t e x c l u d i n g f r o m the d e f i n i t i o n
m o s t o f t h e facts t o b e d e f i n e d .

7
Ibid., p. 23.
8
See below Bk. III. chap. 2.
Definition of Religious Phenomena and of Religion 27

II
A n o t h e r idea b y w h i c h m a n y have t r i e d t o define r e l i g i o n is that o f d i v i n i t y .
9
A c c o r d i n g to M . R é v i l l e , " R e l i g i o n is the d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f h u m a n life
b y the sense o f a b o n d j o i n i n g the h u m a n m i n d w i t h t h e mysterious m i n d
w h o s e d o m i n a t i o n o f t h e w o r l d a n d o f itself i t recognizes, and w i t h w h i c h i t
takes pleasure i n f e e l i n g j o i n e d . " I t is a fact that i f the w o r d " d i v i n i t y " is taken
i n a precise a n d n a r r o w sense, this d e f i n i t i o n leaves aside a m u l t i t u d e o f o b -
v i o u s l y r e l i g i o u s facts. T h e souls o f the dead a n d spirits o f all kinds and ranks,
w i t h w h i c h the religious i m a g i n a t i o n s o f so m a n y diverse peoples have p o p -
ulated t h e w o r l d , are always the objects o f rites a n d sometimes even o f r e g u -
lar cults. S t r i c t l y speaking, however, t h e y are n o t gods. Still, all that is
necessary t o m a k e the d e f i n i t i o n i n c l u d e t h e m is t o replace the w o r d " g o d "
w i t h the m o r e inclusive t e r m " s p i r i t u a l b e i n g . "
T h i s is w h a t T y l o r has d o n e . " I n s t u d y i n g the r e l i g i o n s o f l o w e r races,"
he says, " t h e first p o i n t is t o define a n d specify w h a t o n e means b y r e l i g i o n .
I f o n e insists that the t e r m means b e l i e f i n a supreme b e i n g . . . , a c e r t a i n
n u m b e r o f tribes w i l l be e x c l u d e d from t h e w o r l d o f r e l i g i o n . B u t that
t o o - n a r r o w d e f i n i t i o n has the flaw o f i d e n t i f y i n g r e l i g i o n w i t h c e r t a i n o f its
p a r t i c u l a r developments. . . . I t seems better t o set ' s p i r i t u a l beings' as a
1 0
m i n i m u m definition." " S p i r i t u a l b e i n g s " m u s t be u n d e r s t o o d t o m e a n c o n -
scious subjects that have capacities s u p e r i o r t o those o f o r d i n a r y m e n , w h i c h
therefore r i g h t l y includes the souls o f the dead, g é n i e s , a n d d e m o n s as w e l l as
deities, p r o p e r l y so-called. I t is i m p o r t a n t t o n o t i c e i m m e d i a t e l y the p a r t i c u -
lar idea o f r e l i g i o n that this d e f i n i t i o n entails. T h e o n l y relations w e can have
w i t h beings o f this sort are d e t e r m i n e d b y the nature ascribed t o t h e m . T h e y
are conscious beings, a n d w e can o n l y i n f l u e n c e t h e m as w e i n f l u e n c e c o n -
sciousnesses generally, that is, b y p s y c h o l o g i c a l means, b y t r y i n g t o c o n v i n c e
o r rouse t h e m e i t h e r w i t h w o r d s (invocations a n d prayers) o r w i t h offerings
a n d sacrifices. A n d since the o b j e c t o f r e l i g i o n w o u l d t h e n be t o order o u r
relations w i t h these special beings, there c o u l d be r e l i g i o n o n l y w h e r e there
are prayers, sacrifices, p r o p i t i a t o r y rites, a n d t h e l i k e . I n this way, w e w o u l d
have a v e r y simple c r i t e r i o n f o r d i s t i n g u i s h i n g w h a t is religious f r o m w h a t is
11 12
n o t . Frazer systematically applies this c r i t e r i o n , as d o several e t h n o g r a p h e r s .
9
[Albert Réville], Prolégomènes de l'histoire des religions [Paris, Fischbacher, 1881], p. 34.
10
Edward Burnett Tylor, Primitive Culture, vol. I [London, John Murray, 1873, p. 491].
"Starting with thefirstedition of The Golden Bough, vol. I, pp. 30-32. [James Frazer, The Golden
Bough, 2 vols., London and New York, Macmillan, 1890.]
12
Including [Sir Baldwin] Spencer and [Francis James] Gillen and even [Konrad Theodor] Preuss, who
calls all nonindividualized religious forces magic.
28 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

B u t h o w e v e r o b v i o u s this d e f i n i t i o n m a y seem, g i v e n habits o f m i n d that

w e o w e t o o u r o w n religious u p b r i n g i n g , there are m a n y facts t o w h i c h i t is
n o t applicable b u t that nevertheless b e l o n g t o the d o m a i n o f r e l i g i o n .
I n the first place, there are great religions f r o m w h i c h the idea o f gods
a n d spirits is absent, o r plays o n l y a secondary a n d i n c o n s p i c u o u s role. T h i s
is the case i n B u d d h i s m . B u d d h i s m , says B u r n o u f , "takes its place i n o p p o s i -
t i o n t o B r a h m a n i s m as a m o r a l i t y w i t h o u t g o d a n d an atheism w i t h o u t N a -
13
ture." " I t recognizes n o g o d o n w h o m m a n depends," says M . B a r t h ; "its
14
d o c t r i n e is absolutely atheist." A n d M . O l d e n b e r g , f o r his part, calls i t "a
1 5
religion w i t h o u t god." T h e entire essence o f B u d d h i s m is c o n t a i n e d i n f o u r
1 6
p r o p o s i t i o n s that the faithful call the F o u r N o b l e T r u t h s . T h e first states
that t h e existence o f suffering is t i e d t o the p e r p e t u a l change o f things; the
second finds t h e cause o f suffering i n desire; the t h i r d makes the suppression
o f desire the o n l y w a y t o e n d suffering; the f o u r t h lists the three stages that
m u s t be passed t h r o u g h t o e n d suffering—uprightness, meditation, and f i -
n a l l y w i s d o m , f u l l k n o w l e d g e o f the d o c t r i n e . T h e e n d o f t h e r o a d — d e l i v -
erance, salvation b y N i r v a n a — i s reached after these stages have been passed
through.
I n n o n e o f these p r i n c i p l e s is there any q u e s t i o n o f d i v i n i t y . T h e B u d -
dhist is n o t p r e o c c u p i e d w i t h k n o w i n g w h e r e this w o r l d o f b e c o m i n g i n
17
w h i c h he lives a n d suffers came from; he accepts i t as a f a c t , a n d all his s t r i v -
i n g is t o escape i t . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , f o r this w o r k o f salvation he counts
o n l y o n himself; he "has n o g o d t o t h a n k , j u s t as i n his struggle he calls u p o n
18
none to help." Instead o f p r a y i n g — i n the usual sense o f the w o r d , t u r n i n g
t o a s u p e r i o r b e i n g t o b e g f o r h e l p — h e w i t h d r a w s i n t o h i m s e l f and m e d i -
tates. T h i s is n o t t o say " t h a t he denies o u t r i g h t t h e existence o f beings

"[Eugène] Burnouf, Introduction à l'histoire du bouddhisme indien, 2d. ed. [Paris, Maisonneuve, 1876], p.
464. The last word of the text means that Buddhism does not even accept the existence of an eternal Na-
ture.
"Auguste Barth, The Religions of India [translatedfromFrench by Rev. J. Wood, London, Houghton
Mifflin, 1882], p. 110.
15
[Hermann] Oldenberg, Le Bouddha [Sa vie, sa doctrine, sa communauté, translated from the German by
A. Foucher, Paris, F. Alcan, 1894, p. 51. I could not find an edition Dürkheim lists as translated by
"Hoey" and giving the page as 53. Trans.].
16
Ibid. [pp. 214, 318]. Cf. Hendrick Kern, Histoire du bouddhisme dans l'Inde, vol. I [Paris, Ernest Ler-
oux, 1901], pp. 389ff.
"Oldenberg, Bouddha, p. 259 [this passage actually examines the denial of the existence of the soul.
Trans.]; Barth, Religions of India, p. 110.
'"Oldenberg, Bouddha, p. 314.
Definition of Religious Phenomena and of Religion 29

19
named Indra, A g n i , or Varuna; b u t he feels that he owes t h e m n o t h i n g and
has n o t h i n g t o d o w i t h t h e m , " because t h e i r p o w e r is effective o n l y over the
things o f this w o r l d — a n d those things, f o r h i m , are w i t h o u t value. H e is thus
atheist i n t h e sense that he is u n i n t e r e s t e d i n w h e t h e r gods exist. M o r e o v e r ,
even i f t h e y exist a n d n o m a t t e r w h a t p o w e r t h e y m a y have, the saint, o r he
w h o is u n f e t t e r e d b y t h e w o r l d , regards h i m s e l f as s u p e r i o r t o t h e m . T h e
stature o f beings lies n o t i n the e x t e n t o f t h e i r p o w e r over things b u t i n the
20
e x t e n t o f t h e i r progress a l o n g t h e w a y t o s a l v a t i o n .
I t is t r u e that, i n at least some divisions o f t h e B u d d h i s t c h u r c h , * the
B u d d h a has c o m e t o be regarded as a k i n d o f g o d . H e has his temples and has
b e c o m e t h e o b j e c t o f a c u l t . B u t t h e c u l t is v e r y simple, essentially l i m i t e d t o
offerings o f a f e w flowers a n d the v e n e r a t i o n o f relics o r sacred images. I t is
l i t t l e m o r e t h a n a c o m m e m o r a t i v e c u l t . B u t further, assuming the t e r m t o be
apposite, this divinization o f t h e B u d d h a is p e c u l i a r t o w h a t has b e e n called
N o r t h e r n B u d d h i s m . " T h e B u d d h i s t s o f the S o u t h , " says K e r n , " a n d the
least advanced a m o n g t h e B u d d h i s t s o f the N o r t h can be said, a c c o r d i n g t o
presently available evidence, t o speak o f t h e f o u n d e r o f t h e i r d o c t r i n e as i f he
2 1
were a m a n . " T h e y p r o b a b l y d o ascribe t o t h e B u d d h a e x t r a o r d i n a r y p o w -
ers, s u p e r i o r t o those o r d i n a r y m o r t a l s possess; b u t i t is a v e r y o l d b e l i e f i n
I n d i a (and a b e l i e f w i d e s p r e a d i n m a n y different religions) that a great saint is
22
gifted w i t h exceptional v i r t u e s . S t i l l , a saint is n o t a g o d , any m o r e t h a n a
priest o r a m a g i c i a n is, despite the s u p e r h u m a n faculties that are o f t e n as-
c r i b e d t o t h e m . Besides, a c c o r d i n g t o the best scholarly a u t h o r i t y , this sort o f
t h e i s m a n d the c o m p l e x m y t h o l o g y that o r d i n a r i l y goes w i t h i t are n o m o r e
t h a n a derivative a n d d e v i a n t f o r m o f B u d d h i s m . A t first, the B u d d h a was n o t
2 3
regarded as a n y t h i n g o t h e r t h a n " t h e wisest o f m e n . " " T h e conception o f a
B u d d h a w h o is o t h e r t h a n a m a n w h o has reached t h e highest degree o f h o -
liness is," says B u r n o u f , " o u t s i d e the circle o f ideas that are the v e r y f o u n d a -

*Here, as in the definition of religion (p. 44), Durkheim capitalizes the word "church."
19
Barth [Religions of India], p. 109. "I am deeply convinced," says Burnouf as well, "that if Çâkya had
not found around him a Pantheon full of the gods whose names I gave, he would have seen no need what-
ever to invent it" ([Eugene Bournoufj, Bouddhisme indien, p. 119).
20
Burnouf, Bouddhisme indien, p. 117.
21
Kern, Histoire du bouddhisme, vol. I, p. 289.
22
"The belief universally accepted in India that great holiness is necessarily accompanied by supernat-
ural faculties, is the sole support that he (Çâkya) had to find in spirits" (Burnouf, Bouddhisme indien, p.
119).
23
Ibid., p. 120.
30 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

24
t i o n o f even the simple S u t r a s " ; a n d as the same a u t h o r adds elsewhere, "his
h u m a n i t y has r e m a i n e d a fact so uncontestably a c k n o w l e d g e d b y all that i t
d i d n o t o c c u r t o the m y t h makers, t o w h o m miracles c o m e v e r y easily, t o
25
m a k e a g o d o u t o f h i m after his d e a t h . " H e n c e , o n e m a y ask w h e t h e r he has
ever reached the p o i n t o f b e i n g c o m p l e t e l y s t r i p p e d o f h u m a n character and
2 6
thus w h e t h e r i t w o u l d be p r o p e r t o l i k e n h i m t o a g o d ; w h a t e v e r the case
is, i t w o u l d be t o a g o d o f a v e r y special nature, a n d w h o s e role i n n o w a y re-
sembles that o f o t h e r d i v i n e personalities. A g o d is first o f all a l i v i n g b e i n g
o n w h o m m a n m u s t c o u n t a n d o n w h o m h e can c o u n t ; n o w , the B u d d h a has
d i e d , he has entered N i r v a n a , a n d he can d o n o t h i n g m o r e i n the course o f
27
h u m a n events.
Finally, a n d w h a t e v e r else o n e m a y c o n c l u d e a b o u t the d i v i n i t y o f the
B u d d h a , the fact remains that this c o n c e p t i o n is w h o l l y extraneous t o w h a t
is t r u l y f u n d a m e n t a l i n B u d d h i s m . B u d d h i s m consists first a n d foremost i n
the idea o f salvation, a n d salvation o n l y requires o n e t o k n o w and practice
the r i g h t d o c t r i n e . O f course, that d o c t r i n e w o u l d n o t have b e e n k n o w a b l e
i f the B u d d h a h a d n o t c o m e t o reveal i t ; b u t o n c e that r e v e l a t i o n was made,
the Buddha's w o r k was d o n e . F r o m t h e n o n , he ceased t o be a necessary fac-
t o r i n religious life. T h e practice o f the F o u r H o l y T r u t h s w o u l d be possible
even i f the m e m o r y o f the o n e w h o m a d e t h e m k n o w n was erased f r o m
2 8
memory. V e r y different from this is C h r i s t i a n i t y , w h i c h is i n c o n c e i v a b l e
w i t h o u t the idea o f C h r i s t ever present a n d his c u l t ever practiced; f o r i t is
t h r o u g h t h e e v e r - l i v i n g C h r i s t , daily sacrificed, that the c o m m u n i t y o f the
faithful goes o n c o m m u n i c a t i n g w i t h the supreme source o f its s p i r i t u a l
29
life.

24
Ibid„ p. 107.
25
Ibid., p. 302.
26
Kern makes this point in the following terms: "In certain respects, he is a man; in certain respects,
he is not a man; in certain respects, he is neither one nor the other" (Histoire du bouddhisme vol. 1, p. 290).
27
"The idea that the divine head of the Community is not absent from among his people, but in real-
ity remains among them as their master and king, in such a way that the cult is nothing other than the ex-
pression of the permanence of that common life—this idea is entirely foreign to Buddhists. Their own
master is in Nirvana; if his faithful cried out to him he could not hear them" (Oldenberg, Le Bouddha [p.
368]).
28
"In all its basic traits, the Buddhist doctrine could exist, just as it does in reality, even if the idea of
Buddha remained wholly foreign to it" (Oldenberg, Le Bouddha, p. 322). And what is said of the histor-
ical Buddha also applies to all the mythological ones.
29
See in this connection Max Müller, Natural Religion [London, Longmans, Green & Co., 1889], pp.
103ff., 190.
Definition of Religious Phenomena and of Religion 31

A l l t h e p r e c e d i n g applies equally t o a n o t h e r great r e l i g i o n o f I n d i a , J a i n -

i s m . A d d i t i o n a l l y , t h e t w o d o c t r i n e s h o l d practically the same c o n c e p t i o n o f
the w o r l d a n d o f life. " L i k e t h e Buddhists," says M . B a r t h , " t h e Jainists are
atheists. T h e y reject the idea o f a creator; f o r t h e m , the w o r l d is eternal a n d
t h e y e x p l i c i t l y d e n y that there c o u l d exist a b e i n g perfect from all eternity."
L i k e t h e N o r t h e r n B u d d h i s t s , the Jainists, o r at least c e r t a i n o f t h e m , have
nevertheless r e v e r t e d t o a sort o f deism; i n the i n s c r i p t i o n s o f t h e D e c c a n ,
o n e Jinapati* is spoken of, a k i n d o f supreme Jina w h o is called the first cre-
ator; b u t such language, says the same author, " c o n f l i c t s w i t h the m o s t e x -
30
p l i c i t statements o f t h e i r m o s t a u t h o r i t a t i v e a u t h o r s . "
F u r t h e r m o r e , this indifference t o the d i v i n e is so d e v e l o p e d i n B u d d h i s m
a n d Jainism because the seed existed i n the B r a h m a n i s m from w h i c h b o t h r e -
l i g i o n s derive. I n at least c e r t a i n o f its f o r m s , B r a h m a n i c speculation l e d t o "a
31
f r a n k l y materialist a n d atheist e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h e u n i v e r s e . " W i t h the pas-
sage o f t i m e , the m u l t i p l e deities that the peoples o f I n d i a had l e a r n e d t o
w o r s h i p w e r e m o r e o r less amalgamated i n t o a k i n d o f abstract and i m p e r -
sonal p r i n c i p a l deity, t h e essence o f all that exists. M a n contains w i t h i n h i m -
self this supreme reality, i n w h i c h n o t h i n g o f d i v i n e p e r s o n h o o d remains; o r
rather, he is o n e w i t h i t , since n o t h i n g exists apart f r o m i t . T h u s t o f i n d and
u n i t e w i t h this reality, he does n o t have t o search f o r s u p p o r t outside himself;
all i t takes is f o r h i m t o focus o n h i m s e l f a n d m e d i t a t e . O l d e n b u r g says,
" W h e n B u d d h i s m takes u p the g r a n d endeavor o f i m a g i n i n g a w o r l d o f sal-
v a t i o n i n w h i c h m a n saves himself, a n d o f creating a r e l i g i o n w i t h o u t a g o d ,
B r a h m a n i c speculation has already prepared the g r o u n d . T h e n o t i o n o f d i -
v i n i t y has gradually receded; t h e figures o f the a n c i e n t gods d i m , a n d s l o w l y
disappear. Far above the terrestrial w o r l d , B r a h m a sits e n t h r o n e d i n his eter-
nal q u i e t , a n d o n l y o n e p e r s o n remains t o take an active part i n the great
3 2
w o r k o f salvation: M a n . " N o t e , t h e n , that a considerable part o f religious
e v o l u t i o n has consisted o f a gradual m o v e m e n t away from the ideas o f s p i r i -
t u a l b e i n g a n d d i v i n i t y . H e r e are great r e l i g i o n s i n w h i c h invocations, p r o p i -
tiations, sacrifices, a n d prayers p r o p e r l y so-called are far f r o m d o m i n a n t , and
therefore d o n o t e x h i b i t t h e d i s t i n g u i s h i n g m a r k b y w h i c h , i t is c l a i m e d ,
specifically r e l i g i o u s p h e n o m e n a are t o be r e c o g n i z e d .

*This term means "conquering lord" and, according to current scholarship, refers to a spiritual ideal,
not co a creator. I am indebted to my colleague Douglas Brooks on this point.
30
Barth, Religions of India, p. 146.

"Barch, ["Religions de l'Inde"] in Encyclopédie des sciences religieuses [Paris, Sandoz et Fischbacher,
1877-1882], vol. VI, p. 548.
32
01denberg, Le Bouddha [p. 51].
32 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

B u t m a n y rites that are w h o l l y i n d e p e n d e n t o f any idea o f gods o r s p i r i -

t u a l beings are f o u n d even i n deistic r e l i g i o n s . First o f all, there are a m u l t i -
t u d e o f p r o h i b i t i o n s . F o r example, t h e B i b l e c o m m a n d s the w o m a n t o live i n
3 3
isolation f o r a d e f i n i t e p e r i o d each m o n t h , imposes similar i s o l a t i o n at the
3 4
time o f childbirth, a n d forbids h i t c h i n g a d o n k e y and a horse together o r
3 5
w e a r i n g a g a r m e n t i n w h i c h h e m p is m i x e d w i t h l i n e n . I t is impossible t o
see w h a t role b e l i e f i n Y a h w e h c o u l d have played i n these p r o h i b i t i o n s , f o r
he is absent f r o m all the relations thus p r o h i b i t e d a n d c o u l d h a r d l y be i n t e r -
ested i n t h e m . T h e same can be said f o r m o s t o f the d i e t a r y restrictions. S u c h
restrictions are n o t peculiar t o t h e H e b r e w s ; i n various f o r m s , t h e y are f o u n d
i n innumerable religions.
I t is t r u e that these rites are p u r e l y negative, b u t they are nonetheless r e -
l i g i o u s . F u r t h e r m o r e , there are o t h e r rites that i m p o s e active and positive
o b l i g a t i o n s u p o n t h e f a i t h f u l a n d yet are o f t h e same nature. T h e y act o n t h e i r
o w n , a n d t h e i r efficacy does n o t d e p e n d u p o n any d i v i n e p o w e r ; t h e y m e -
chanically b r i n g a b o u t t h e effects that are t h e i r reason f o r b e i n g . T h e y c o n -
sist n e i t h e r o f prayers n o r o f offerings t o a b e i n g o n w h o s e g o o d w i l l t h e
anticipated result depends; instead, the result is achieved t h r o u g h the a u t o -
m a t i c o p e r a t i o n o f the r i t u a l . S u c h is the case, f o r example, o f sacrifice i n
Vedic r e l i g i o n . "Sacrifice," says M . Bergaigne, "exerts d i r e c t i n f l u e n c e u p o n
36
celestial p h e n o m e n a " ; i t is all p o w e r f u l b y itself a n d w i t h o u t any d i v i n e i n -
fluence. For instance, i t is sacrifice that b r o k e the doors o f the cave w h e r e the
3 7
auroras w e r e i m p r i s o n e d , a n d thus d i d d a y l i g h t e r u p t i n t o t h e w o r l d . Like-
wise, i t was appropriate h y m n s that acted d i r e c t l y t o m a k e the waters o f the
38
sky flow o n e a r t h — a n d this despite the gods. C e r t a i n ascetic practices are
equally efficacious. C o n s i d e r this: "Sacrifice is so m u c h t h e p r i n c i p l e , par e x -

33
I Sam. 21, 6. [This is in fact about the sexual purity of men. Trans.]
34
Lev. 12.
35
Deut. 12, 10—11. [These verses are in fact about establishing a place for God's name to dwell in.
They go on to discuss sacrifices. Trans.]
36
Abel Bergaigne, La Religion védique [d'après les hymnes du Rig Véda, 4 vols. Paris, F. Vieweg,
1878-1897], vol. I, p. 22.
37
Ibid., p. 133.
38
M. Bergaigne writes, "No text better reveals the inner meaning of magical action by man upon the
waters of the sky than Verse X, 32, 7, in which that belief is expressed in general terms as applicable to
the man of today as to his real or mythological ancestors. The ignorant man queried the savant; taught by
the savant, he acts, and therein lies the benefit of his teaching, he conquers the rush of the rapids." Ibid,
(p. 137).
Definition of Religious Phenomena and of Religion 33

cellence, that n o t o n l y t h e o r i g i n o f m e n b u t even that o f the gods has been

ascribed t o i t . Such an idea m a y v e r y w e l l seem strange. I t is explicable, h o w -
ever, as o n e u l t i m a t e consequence, a m o n g others, o f t h e idea that sacrifice is
3 9
all p o w e r f u l . " T h u s , t h e w h o l e first p a r t o f M . Bergaigne's w o r k deals o n l y
w i t h those sacrifices i n w h i c h the deities play n o role.
T h i s fact is n o t p e c u l i a r t o Vedic r e l i g i o n ; t o the contrary, i t is q u i t e
widespread. I n any c u l t , there are practices that act b y themselves, b y a v i r t u e
t h a t is t h e i r o w n , a n d w i t h o u t any god's s t e p p i n g i n b e t w e e n t h e i n d i v i d u a l
w h o p e r f o r m s the r i t e a n d t h e o b j e c t sought. W h e n t h e J e w stirred the air at
the Feast o f the Tabernacles b y s h a k i n g w i l l o w branches i n a c e r t a i n r h y t h m ,
i t was t o m a k e t h e w i n d b l o w a n d t h e r a i n fall; t h e b e l i e f was that t h e r i t e
p r o d u c e d the desired result automatically, p r o v i d e d i t was c o r r e c t l y p e r -
4 0
formed. I t is this, b y t h e way, that explains t h e p r i m a r y i m p o r t a n c e that
nearly all cults g i v e t o t h e physical aspect o f ceremonies. T h i s r e l i g i o u s f o r -
m a l i s m ( p r o b a b l y t h e earliest f o r m o f legal f o r m a l i s m ) arises from t h e fact
that, h a v i n g i n a n d o f themselves the source o f t h e i r efficacy, the formulas t o
be p r o n o u n c e d a n d t h e m o v e m e n t s t o be executed w o u l d lose efficacy i f they
w e r e n o t exactly the same as those that h a d already p r o v e d successful.
T h u s there are rites w i t h o u t gods, a n d i n d e e d rites from w h i c h gods d e -
r i v e . N o t all r e l i g i o u s v i r t u e s emanate from d i v i n e personalities, a n d there are
c u l t ties o t h e r t h a n those that u n i t e m a n w i t h a deity. T h u s , r e l i g i o n is
broader t h a n the idea o f gods o r spirits a n d so c a n n o t be d e f i n e d exclusively
i n those t e r m s .

Ill
W i t h these d e f i n i t i o n s set aside, l e t us n o w see h o w w e can approach t h e
problem.
First, let us n o t e that, i n all these f o r m u l a s , scholars have b e e n t r y i n g t o
express the nature o f r e l i g i o n as a w h o l e . A l t h o u g h r e l i g i o n is a w h o l e c o m -
posed o f parts—a m o r e o r less c o m p l e x system o f m y t h s , dogmas, rites, and
c e r e m o n i e s — t h e y operate as i f i t f o r m e d a k i n d o f i n d i v i s i b l e entity. Since a
w h o l e can be d e f i n e d o n l y i n relationship t o the parts that c o m p r i s e i t , a b e t -
ter m e t h o d is t o t r y t o characterize t h e e l e m e n t a r y p h e n o m e n a from w h i c h
any r e l i g i o n results, a n d t h e n characterize t h e system p r o d u c e d b y t h e i r

"Ibid., p. 139.
^Other examples are to be found in [Henri] Hubert, "Magia," in Dictionnaire des antiquités, vol. VI, p.
1509 [Paris, Hachette, 1877-1918].
34 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

u n i o n . T h i s m e t h o d is all the m o r e indispensable i n v i e w o f the fact that

there are r e l i g i o u s p h e n o m e n a that d o n o t fall u n d e r the j u r i s d i c t i o n o f any
p a r t i c u l a r r e l i g i o n . T h o s e that f o r m t h e subject m a t t e r o f f o l k l o r e d o n o t . I n
general, these p h e n o m e n a are j u m b l e d survivals, the remnants o f e x t i n c t r e -
l i g i o n s ; b u t there are some as w e l l that are f o r m e d spontaneously u n d e r the
i n f l u e n c e o f l o c a l causes. I n E u r o p e , C h r i s t i a n i t y u n d e r t o o k t o absorb and
assimilate t h e m ; i t i m p r i n t e d t h e m w i t h C h r i s t i a n c o l o r a t i o n . Nonetheless,
there are m a n y that have persisted u n t i l r e c e n d y o r that still persist m o r e o r
less autonomously—festivals o f t h e m a y p o l e , the s u m m e r solstice, carnival,
assorted beliefs a b o u t genies a n d l o c a l d e m o n s , a n d so o n . A l t h o u g h t h e r e -
l i g i o u s character o f these p h e n o m e n a is r e c e d i n g m o r e a n d m o r e , t h e i r r e l i -
gious i m p o r t a n c e is still such that t h e y have p e r m i t t e d M a n n h a r d t * a n d his
s c h o o l t o rejuvenate the science o f r e l i g i o n s . A d e f i n i t i o n o f r e l i g i o n that d i d
n o t take t h e m i n t o a c c o u n t w o u l d n o t encompass a l l that is r e l i g i o u s .
R e l i g i o u s p h e n o m e n a fall i n t o t w o basic categories: beliefs and rites.
T h e first are states o f o p i n i o n a n d consist o f representations; the second are
p a r t i c u l a r modes o f a c t i o n . B e t w e e n these t w o categories o f p h e n o m e n a lies
all that separates t h i n k i n g f r o m d o i n g .
T h e rites can be d i s t i n g u i s h e d f r o m o t h e r h u m a n practices—for e x a m -
ple, m o r a l p r a c t i c e s — o n l y b y the special nature o f t h e i r object. L i k e a r i t e , a
m o r a l r u l e prescribes ways o f b e h a v i n g t o us, b u t those ways o f b e h a v i n g a d -
dress objects o f a different k i n d . I t is t h e o b j e c t o f t h e r i t e that m u s t be char-
acterized, i n order t o characterize the r i t e itself. T h e special nature o f that
object is expressed i n the belief. T h e r e f o r e , o n l y after h a v i n g d e f i n e d the b e -
l i e f can w e define the r i t e .
W h e t h e r s i m p l e o r c o m p l e x , all k n o w n r e l i g i o u s beliefs display a c o m -
m o n feature: T h e y presuppose a classification o f t h e real o r ideal things that
m e n conceive o f i n t o t w o classes—two opposite genera—that are w i d e l y
designated b y t w o d i s t i n c t t e r m s , w h i c h the w o r d s profane a n d sacred translate
fairly w e l l . T h e d i v i s i o n o f t h e w o r l d i n t o t w o d o m a i n s , o n e c o n t a i n i n g all
that is sacred a n d t h e o t h e r all that is p r o f a n e — s u c h is the distinctive trait o f
religious t h o u g h t . Beliefs, m y t h s , dogmas, a n d legends are e i t h e r representa-
tions o r systems o f representations that express the nature o f sacred t h i n g s ,
the v i r t u e s a n d p o w e r s a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e m , t h e i r history, a n d t h e i r r e l a t i o n -
ships w i t h o n e a n o t h e r as w e l l as w i t h profane t h i n g s . Sacred things are n o t

""Wilhelm Mannhardt (1831-1880). Influenced by Jakob Grimm and borrowing methods from the
new disciplines of geology and archaeology, he pioneered the scientific study of oral tradition in Germany.
James G. Frazer's The Golden Bough drew on Mannhardt's European material.
Definition of Religious Phenomena and of Religion 35

s i m p l y those personal beings that are called gods o r spirits. A r o c k , a tree, a

s p r i n g , a pebble, a piece o f w o o d , a house, i n a w o r d a n y t h i n g , can be sacred.
A r i t e can have sacredness; i n d e e d there is n o r i t e that does n o t have i t t o
some degree. T h e r e are w o r d s , phrases, a n d f o r m u l a s that can be said o n l y b y
consecrated personages; there are gestures a n d m o v e m e n t s that c a n n o t be e x -
e c u t e d b y j u s t anyone. I f Vedic sacrifice has h a d such great efficacy—if, i n -
deed, sacrifice was far f r o m b e i n g a m e t h o d o f g a i n i n g t h e gods' favor b u t ,
a c c o r d i n g t o m y t h o l o g y , actually generated the gods—that is because the
v i r t u e i t possessed was comparable t o that o f the m o s t sacred beings. T h e c i r -
cle o f sacred objects c a n n o t be fixed o n c e a n d f o r all; its scope can v a r y i n f i -
n i t e l y f r o m o n e r e l i g i o n t o another. W h a t makes B u d d h i s m a r e l i g i o n is that,
i n the absence o f gods, i t accepts t h e existence o f sacred things, namely, the
4 1
F o u r N o b l e T r u t h s a n d t h e practices that are d e r i v e d f r o m t h e m .
B u t I have c o n f i n e d m y s e l f thus far t o e n u m e r a t i n g various sacred things
as examples: I m u s t n o w i n d i c a t e the general characteristics b y w h i c h they
are d i s t i n g u i s h e d from profane things.
O n e m i g h t be t e m p t e d t o define sacred t h i n g s b y the rank that is o r d i -
n a r i l y assigned t o t h e m i n the h i e r a r c h y o f beings. T h e y t e n d t o be regarded
as s u p e r i o r i n d i g n i t y a n d p o w e r t o profane t h i n g s , a n d p a r t i c u l a r l y t o m a n ,
i n n o w a y sacred w h e n he is o n l y a m a n . I n d e e d , he is p o r t r a y e d as o c c u p y -
i n g a r a n k i n f e r i o r t o a n d d e p e n d e n t u p o n t h e m . W h i l e that p o r t r a y a l is cer-
t a i n l y n o t w i t h o u t t r u t h , n o t h i n g a b o u t i t is t r u l y characteristic o f t h e sacred.
S u b o r d i n a t i o n o f o n e t h i n g t o a n o t h e r is n o t e n o u g h t o m a k e o n e sacred a n d
the o t h e r n o t . Slaves are subordinate t o t h e i r masters, subjects t o t h e i r k i n g ,
soldiers t o t h e i r leaders, l o w e r classes t o r u l i n g classes, t h e miser t o his g o l d ,
a n d t h e p o w e r seeker t o t h e p o w e r holders. I f a m a n is sometimes said t o have
t h e r e l i g i o n o f beings o r things i n w h i c h he recognizes an e m i n e n t value a n d
a k i n d o f s u p e r i o r i t y t o h i m , i t is o b v i o u s that, i n a l l such cases, t h e w o r d is
taken i n a m e t a p h o r i c a l sense, a n d there is n o t h i n g i n those relations that is
42
r e l i g i o u s i n a strict sense.
O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , w e s h o u l d bear i n m i n d t h a t there are things w i t h
w h i c h m a n feels relatively at ease, even t h o u g h t h e y are sacred t o t h e highest
degree. A n a m u l e t has sacredness, a n d yet there is n o t h i n g e x t r a o r d i n a r y
a b o u t t h e respect i t inspires. E v e n face t o face w i t h his gods, m a n is n o t a l -
ways i n such a m a r k e d state o f i n f e r i o r i t y , f o r he v e r y o f t e n uses physical co'-
e r c i o n o n t h e m t o get w h a t h e wants. H e beats the fetish w h e n he is

41
Not to mention the sage or the saint who practices these truths, and who is for this reason sacred.
42
This is not to say that the relations cannot take on a religious character, but that they do ¡y>t neces-
sarily.
36 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

displeased, o n l y t o b e r e c o n c i l e d w i t h i t i f , i n the end, i t becomes m o r e

43
amenable t o t h e wishes o f its w o r s h i p p e r . T o get r a i n , stones are t h r o w n
i n t o the s p r i n g o r the sacred lake w h e r e the g o d o f t h e r a i n is p r e s u m e d t o
reside; i t is b e l i e v e d t h a t he is f o r c e d b y this means t o c o m e o u t and s h o w
44
himself. F u r t h e r m o r e , w h i l e i t is t r u e that m a n is a d e p e n d e n t o f his gods,
this dependence is m u t u a l . T h e gods also n e e d m a n ; w i t h o u t offerings a n d
sacrifices, t h e y w o u l d die. I w i l l have occasion t o s h o w that this dependence
o f gods o n t h e i r faithful is f o u n d even i n the m o s t idealistic* r e l i g i o n s .
H o w e v e r , i f t h e c r i t e r i o n o f a p u r e l y h i e r a r c h i c a l d i s t i n c t i o n is at o n c e
t o o general a n d t o o imprecise, n o t h i n g b u t t h e i r h e t e r o g e n e i t y is left t o d e -
fine the r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e sacred a n d the profane. B u t w h a t makes this
h e t e r o g e n e i t y sufficient t o characterize that classification o f things and t o dis-
tinguish i t from any o t h e r is that i t has a v e r y p a r t i c u l a r feature: It is absolute.
I n t h e h i s t o r y o f h u m a n t h o u g h t , there is n o o t h e r e x a m p l e o f t w o categories
o f things as p r o f o u n d l y differentiated o r as radically o p p o s e d t o one another.
T h e t r a d i t i o n a l o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n g o o d a n d e v i l is n o t h i n g beside this o n e :
G o o d a n d e v i l are t w o o p p o s e d species o f the same genus, n a m e l y morals,
j u s t as h e a l t h a n d illness are n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n t w o different aspects o f t h e
same o r d e r o f facts, life; b y contrast, t h e sacred a n d the profane are always a n d
e v e r y w h e r e c o n c e i v e d b y t h e h u m a n i n t e l l e c t as separate genera, as t w o
w o r l d s w i t h n o t h i n g i n c o m m o n . T h e energies at play i n o n e are n o t m e r e l y
those e n c o u n t e r e d i n the other, b u t raised t o a h i g h e r degree; they are d i f -
ferent i n k i n d . T h i s o p p o s i t i o n has b e e n c o n c e i v e d differently i n different r e -
l i g i o n s . H e r e , l o c a l i z i n g t h e t w o k i n d s o f things i n different regions o f t h e
physical universe has appeared sufficient t o separate t h e m ; there, the sacred is
t h r o w n i n t o an ideal a n d transcendent m i l i e u , w h i l e t h e r e s i d u u m is aban-
d o n e d as t h e p r o p e r t y o f t h e m a t e r i a l w o r l d . B u t w h i l e the f o r m s o f the c o n -
45
trast are v a r i a b l e , t h e fact o f i t is universal.
T h i s is n o t t o say t h a t a b e i n g can never pass from o n e o f these w o r l d s t o
the other. B u t w h e n this passage occurs, the m a n n e r i n w h i c h i t occurs

*For the meaning of "idealistic," bear in mind Durkheim's contrast (above, p. 2) between religions
that contain more concepts and fewer sensations and images.
43
[Fritz] Schultze, [Der] Fetichismus [Ein Beitrag zur Anthropologic und Religionsgeschichte, Leipzig, C.
Wilfferodt, 1871], p. 129.
"Examples of these customs will be found in [James George] Frazer, Golden Bough, 2d ed., vol. I
[New York, Macmillan, 1894], pp. 8Iff.
45
The conception according to which the profane is opposed to the sacred as the rational is to the ir-
rational; the intelligible to the mysterious, is only one of the forms in which this opposition is expressed.
Science, once constituted, has taken on a profane character, especially in the eyes of the Christian reli-
gions; in consequence, it has seemed that science could not be applied to sacred things.
Definition of Religious Phenomena and of Religion 37

demonstrates t h e f u n d a m e n t a l d u a l i t y o f t h e t w o realms, f o r i t i m p l i e s a t r u e
m e t a m o r p h o s i s . R i t e s o f i n i t i a t i o n , w h i c h are p r a c t i c e d b y a great m a n y p e o -
ples, demonstrate this especially w e l l . I n i t i a t i o n is a l o n g series o f rites t o i n -
t r o d u c e t h e y o u n g m a n i n t o r e l i g i o u s life. F o r the first time, he comes o u t o f
t h e p u r e l y profane w o r l d , w h e r e he has passed his c h i l d h o o d , a n d enters i n t o
the circle o f sacred things. T h i s change o f status is c o n c e i v e d n o t as a m e r e
d e v e l o p m e n t o f p r e e x i s t i n g seeds b u t as a t r a n s f o r m a t i o n totius substantiae. *
A t that m o m e n t , the y o u n g m a n is said t o die, a n d the existence o f the par-
ticular p e r s o n he was, t o cease—instantaneously t o be replaced b y another.
H e is b o r n again i n a n e w f o r m . A p p r o p r i a t e ceremonies are h e l d t o b r i n g
a b o u t the death a n d t h e r e b i r t h , w h i c h are taken n o t m e r e l y i n a s y m b o l i c
46
sense b u t l i t e r a l l y . Is this n o t p r o o f that there is a r u p t u r e b e t w e e n the p r o -
fane b e i n g that he was a n d t h e r e l i g i o u s b e i n g that he becomes?
I n d e e d , this h e t e r o g e n e i t y is such that i t degenerates i n t o real antago-
n i s m . T h e t w o w o r l d s are c o n c e i v e d o f n o t o n l y as separate b u t also as hos-
t i l e a n d jealous rivals. Since the c o n d i t i o n o f b e l o n g i n g fully t o o n e is f u l l y
t o have left t h e other, m a n is e x h o r t e d t o retire c o m p l e t e l y f r o m the profane
i n o r d e r t o live an exclusively r e l i g i o u s life. F r o m thence comes m o n a s t i c i s m ,
w h i c h artificially organizes a m i l i e u that is apart f r o m , outside of, a n d closed
t o t h e n a t u r a l m i l i e u w h e r e o r d i n a r y m e n live a secular life, and that tends a l -
m o s t t o b e its antagonist. F r o m thence as w e l l comes mystic asceticism,
w h i c h seeks t o u p r o o t all that m a y r e m a i n o f man's a t t a c h m e n t t o the w o r l d .
Finally, f r o m t h e n c e c o m e all f o r m s o f r e l i g i o u s suicide, the c r o w n i n g l o g i c a l
step o f this asceticism, since the o n l y means o f escaping profane life f u l l y a n d
finally is escaping life altogether.
T h e o p p o s i t i o n o f these t w o genera is expressed o u t w a r d l y b y a visible
sign that p e r m i t s ready r e c o g n i t i o n o f this v e r y special classification, w h e r -
ever i t exists. T h e m i n d experiences deep repugnance a b o u t m i n g l i n g , even
simple contact, b e t w e e n the c o r r e s p o n d i n g t h i n g s , because the n o t i o n o f the
sacred is always a n d e v e r y w h e r e separate f r o m the n o t i o n o f the profane i n
man's m i n d , a n d because w e i m a g i n e a k i n d o f l o g i c a l v o i d b e t w e e n t h e m .
T h e state o f dissociation i n w h i c h the ideas are f o u n d i n consciousness is t o o
strongly c o n t r a d i c t e d b y such m i n g l i n g , o r even b y t h e i r b e i n g t o o close t o

*Of the whole essence.

46
See James George Frazer, "On Some Ceremonies of the Central Australian Tribes," in AAAS [Mel-
bourne, Victoria, published by the association], 1901 [vols. VIII-IX], pp. 313ff. The concept is, more-
over, very common. In India, mere participation in the sacrificial act has the same effects; the sacrifices
by the very fact of entering into the circle of sacred things, changes personality. (See Henri Hubert and
Marcel Mauss, "Essai sur [la nature et fonction du] sacrifice," AS, vol. II [1897], p. 101.)
38 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

o n e another. T h e sacred t h i n g is, par excellence, that w h i c h the profane must

n o t and c a n n o t t o u c h w i t h i m p u n i t y . T o be sure, this p r o h i b i t i o n cannot go
so far as t o m a k e all c o m m u n i c a t i o n b e t w e e n the t w o w o r l d s impossible, for
i f the profane c o u l d i n n o w a y enter i n t o relations w i t h the sacred, the sacred
w o u l d be o f n o use. T h i s p l a c i n g i n relationship i n itself is always a delicate
4 7
o p e r a t i o n that requires precautions a n d a m o r e o r less c o m p l e x i n i t i a t i o n .
Yet such an o p e r a t i o n is impossible i f the profane does n o t lose its specific
traits, a n d i f i t does n o t b e c o m e sacred itself i n some measure and t o some
degree. T h e t w o genera cannot, at t h e same t i m e , b o t h c o m e close t o o n e
a n o t h e r a n d r e m a i n w h a t t h e y were.
N o w w e have a first c r i t e r i o n o f religious beliefs. N o d o u b t , w i t h i n these
t w o f u n d a m e n t a l genera, there are secondary species that are themselves
48
m o r e o r less i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h each o t h e r . B u t characteristically, the r e l i -
gious p h e n o m e n o n is such that i t always assumes a b i p a r t i t e d i v i s i o n o f the
universe, k n o w n a n d k n o w a b l e , i n t o t w o genera that i n c l u d e all that exists
b u t radically e x c l u d e o n e another. Sacred things are things p r o t e c t e d a n d i s o -
lated b y p r o h i b i t i o n s ; profane things are those things t o w h i c h the p r o h i b i -
tions are a p p l i e d a n d that m u s t keep at a distance f r o m w h a t is sacred.
R e l i g i o u s beliefs are those representations that express t h e nature o f sacred
things a n d the relations t h e y have w i t h o t h e r sacred things o r w i t h profane
things. Finally, rites are rules o f c o n d u c t that prescribe h o w m a n m u s t c o n -
d u c t h i m s e l f w i t h sacred t h i n g s .
W h e n a certain n u m b e r o f sacred things have relations o f c o o r d i n a t i o n
a n d s u b o r d i n a t i o n w i t h o n e another, so as t o f o r m a system that has a certain
coherence a n d does n o t b e l o n g t o any o t h e r system o f the same sort, t h e n the
beliefs and rites, taken together, constitute a r e l i g i o n . B y this d e f i n i t i o n , a r e -
l i g i o n is n o t necessarily c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n a single idea a n d does n o t derive
from a single p r i n c i p l e that m a y v a r y w i t h t h e circumstances i t deals w i t h ,
w h i l e r e m a i n i n g basically the same everywhere. Instead, i t is a w h o l e f o r m e d
o f separate and relatively distinct parts. E a c h h o m o g e n e o u s g r o u p o f sacred
things, o r i n d e e d each sacred t h i n g o f any i m p o r t a n c e , constitutes an o r g a n i -
zational center a r o u n d w h i c h gravitates a set o f beliefs a n d rites, a c u l t o f its
o w n . T h e r e is n o r e l i g i o n , h o w e v e r u n i f i e d i t m a y be, that does n o t a c k n o w l -
edge a p l u r a l i t y o f sacred things. E v e n C h r i s t i a n i t y , at least i n its C a t h o l i c
f o r m , accepts the V i r g i n , the angels, the saints, the souls o f the dead, etc.-—

47
See what I say about initiation on p. 37, above.
48
Later I will show how, for example, certain species of sacred things between which there is incom-
patibility exclude one another as the sacred excludes the profane (Bk.III, chap.5, §4).
Definition of Religious Phenomena and of Religion 39

above a n d b e y o n d the d i v i n e personality ( w h o , besides, is b o t h three and one).

As a r u l e , f u r t h e r m o r e , r e l i g i o n is n o t m e r e l y a single c u l t either b u t is made
u p o f a system o f cults that possess a certain a u t o n o m y . T h i s a u t o n o m y is also
variable. Sometimes the cults are r a n k e d a n d subordinated t o some d o m i n a n t
c u l t i n t o w h i c h they are eventually absorbed; b u t sometimes as w e l l they s i m -
p l y exist side b y side i n c o n f e d e r a t i o n . T h e r e l i g i o n t o be studied i n this b o o k
w i l l p r o v i d e an e x a m p l e o f this confederate o r g a n i z a t i o n .
A t the same t i m e , w e can e x p l a i n w h y groups o f religious p h e n o m e n a
that b e l o n g t o n o c o n s t i t u t e d r e l i g i o n can exist: because they are n o t o r are
n o l o n g e r i n t e g r a t e d i n t o a r e l i g i o u s system. I f , f o r specific reasons, o n e o f
those cults j u s t m e n t i o n e d s h o u l d manage t o survive w h i l e the w h o l e t o
w h i c h i t b e l o n g e d has disappeared, i t w i l l survive o n l y i n fragments. T h i s is
w h a t has h a p p e n e d t o so m a n y agrarian cults that live o n i n f o l k l o r e . I n cer-
t a i n cases, w h a t persists i n t h a t f o r m is n o t even a c u l t , b u t a m e r e c e r e m o n y
4 9
or a particular r i t e .
A l t h o u g h this d e f i n i t i o n is m e r e l y p r e l i m i n a r y , i t indicates the terms i n
w h i c h t h e p r o b l e m that d o m i n a t e s t h e science o f r e l i g i o n s m u s t be posed. I f
sacred beings are b e l i e v e d t o be d i s t i n g u i s h e d f r o m the others solely b y the
greater i n t e n s i t y o f the p o w e r s a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e m , the q u e s t i o n o f h o w m e n
c o u l d have i m a g i n e d t h e m is rather simple: N o t h i n g m o r e is n e e d e d t h a n t o
i d e n t i f y those forces that, t h r o u g h t h e i r e x c e p t i o n a l energy, have managed t o
impress t h e h u m a n m i n d forcefully e n o u g h t o inspire r e l i g i o u s feelings. B u t
if, as I have t r i e d t o establish, sacred things are different i n nature from p r o -
fane things, i f t h e y are different i n t h e i r essence, t h e p r o b l e m is far m o r e
c o m p l e x . I n that case, o n e m u s t ask w h a t l e d m a n t o see the w o r l d as t w o
heterogeneous a n d i n c o m p a r a b l e w o r l d s , even t h o u g h n o t h i n g i n sense e x -
p e r i e n c e seems l i k e l y t o have suggested the idea o f such a radical duality.

IV
E v e n so, this d e f i n i t i o n is n o t yet complete, f o r i t fits equally w e l l t w o orders o f
things that must be distinguished even t h o u g h they are a k i n : magic and r e l i g i o n .
M a g i c , t o o , is m a d e u p o f beliefs a n d rites. L i k e r e l i g i o n , i t has its o w n
m y t h s a n d dogmas, b u t these are less w e l l d e v e l o p e d , p r o b a b l y because, g i v e n
its p u r s u i t o f t e c h n i c a l a n d u t i l i t a r i a n ends, m a g i c does n o t waste t i m e i n p u r e
speculation. M a g i c also has its ceremonies, sacrifices, p u r i f i c a t i o n s , prayers,

49
This is the case,forexample, of certain marriage and funeral rites.
40 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

songs, a n d dances. T h o s e beings w h o m the m a g i c i a n invokes and the forces

he puts t o w o r k are n o t o n l y o f the same nature as the forces addressed b y re-
l i g i o n b u t v e r y o f t e n are the same forces. I n the m o s t p r i m i t i v e societies, the
souls o f the dead are i n essence sacred things a n d objects o f r e l i g i o u s rites, b u t
50
at the same t i m e , t h e y have played a m a j o r role i n m a g i c . I n A u s t r a l i a as w e l l
51 52
as i n M e l a n e s i a , i n ancient Greece as w e l l as a m o n g C h r i s t i a n p e o p l e s , the
souls, bones, a n d hair o f the dead figure a m o n g the tools m o s t often used b y
the m a g i c i a n . D e m o n s are also a c o m m o n i n s t r u m e n t o f m a g i c a l influence.
N o w , demons are also s u r r o u n d e d b y p r o h i b i t i o n s ; t h e y t o o are separated a n d
live i n a w o r l d apart. I n d e e d , i t is o f t e n d i f f i c u l t t o d i s t i n g u i s h t h e m f r o m
53
gods p r o p e r . Besides, even i n C h r i s t i a n i t y , is n o t the d e v i l a fallen god? A n d
apart from his o r i g i n s , does he n o t have a r e l i g i o u s character, s i m p l y because
the h e l l o f w h i c h he is the keeper is an indispensable p a r t i n t h e m a c h i n e r y
o f the C h r i s t i a n r e l i g i o n ? T h e m a g i c i a n can i n v o k e regular and official
deities. Sometimes these are gods o f a f o r e i g n p e o p l e : F o r example, the
G r e e k magicians called u p o n E g y p t i a n , A s s y r i a n , o r J e w i s h gods. Sometimes
t h e y are even n a t i o n a l gods: H e c a t e a n d D i a n a w e r e objects o f a m a g i c c u l t .
T h e V i r g i n , the C h r i s t , a n d the saints w e r e used i n the same m a n n e r b y
54
Christian magicians.
M u s t w e therefore say that m a g i c c a n n o t be r i g o r o u s l y differentiated
from r e l i g i o n — t h a t m a g i c is f u l l o f r e l i g i o n a n d r e l i g i o n f u l l o f m a g i c and,
consequently, that i t is impossible t o separate t h e m a n d define the o n e w i t h -
o u t t h e other? W h a t makes that thesis h a r d t o sustain is the m a r k e d r e p u g -
nance o f r e l i g i o n f o r m a g i c a n d t h e h o s t i l i t y o f m a g i c t o r e l i g i o n i n r e t u r n .
55
M a g i c takes a k i n d o f professional pleasure i n p r o f a n i n g h o l y t h i n g s , in-
56
v e r t i n g r e l i g i o u s ceremonies i n its r i t e s . O n the o t h e r h a n d , w h i l e r e l i g i o n
has n o t always c o n d e m n e d a n d p r o h i b i t e d m a g i c rites, i t has generally r e -
50
See [Sir Baldwin] Spencer and [Francis James] Gillen, The Native Tribes of Central Australia [Lon-
don, Macmillan, 1889], pp. 534£F., and Northern Tribes of Central Australia [London, Macmillan, 1904], p.
463; [Alfred William] Howitt, Native Tribes of South East Australia [London, Macmillan, 1904], pp.
359-361.
51
See [Robert Henry] Codrington, The Melanesians [Studies in Their Anthropology and Folklore, Oxford,
Clarendon Press, 1891], chap. 12.
52
See Hubert, "Magia," in Dictionnaire des antiquités.
53
For example, in Melanesia the tindalo is a spirit that is sometimes religious and sometimes magical
(Codrington, The Melanesians, pp. 125ff., 194ff.).
54
See Hubert and Mauss, "Esquisse d'une théorie générale de la magie," AS, vol. VII [1904], pp.
83-84.
55
For example, the Host is profaned in the Black Mass.
56
See Hubert, "Magia," in Dictionnaire des antiquités.
Definition of Religious Phenomena and of Religion 41

garcled t h e m w i t h disfavor. A s messieurs H u b e r t a n d Mauss p o i n t o u t , there

57
is s o m e t h i n g i n h e r e n d y a n t i r e l i g i o u s a b o u t the maneuvers o f t h e m a g i c i a n .
So i t is d i f f i c u l t f o r these t w o i n s t i t u t i o n s n o t t o oppose o n e a n o t h e r at some
p o i n t , w h a t e v e r the relations b e t w e e n t h e m . Since m y i n t e n t i o n is t o l i m i t
m y research t o r e l i g i o n a n d stop w h e r e m a g i c begins, d i s c o v e r i n g w h a t d i s -
tinguishes t h e m is all the m o r e i m p o r t a n t .
H e r e is h o w a l i n e o f d e m a r c a t i o n can be d r a w n b e t w e e n these t w o
domains.
R e l i g i o u s beliefs p r o p e r are always shared b y a d e f i n i t e g r o u p that p r o -
fesses t h e m a n d that practices the c o r r e s p o n d i n g rites. N o t o n l y are t h e y i n -
d i v i d u a l l y accepted b y all m e m b e r s o f that g r o u p , b u t t h e y also b e l o n g t o the
g r o u p a n d u n i f y i t . T h e i n d i v i d u a l s w h o c o m p r i s e t h e g r o u p feel j o i n e d t o
o n e a n o t h e r b y t h e fact o f c o m m o n f a i t h . A society w h o s e m e m b e r s are
u n i t e d because t h e y i m a g i n e the sacred w o r l d a n d its relations w i t h the p r o -
fane w o r l d i n t h e same way, a n d because t h e y translate this c o m m o n r e p r e -
sentation i n t o i d e n t i c a l practices, is w h a t is called a C h u r c h . * I n h i s t o r y w e
d o n o t find r e l i g i o n w i t h o u t C h u r c h . S o m e t i m e s the C h u r c h is n a r r o w l y n a -
t i o n a l ; sometimes i t extends b e y o n d frontiers; sometimes i t encompasses an
e n t i r e p e o p l e ( R o m e , A t h e n s , t h e H e b r e w s ) ; sometimes i t encompasses o n l y
a fraction ( C h r i s t i a n d e n o m i n a t i o n s since the c o m i n g o f Protestantism);
sometimes i t is l e d b y a b o d y o f priests; sometimes i t is m o r e o r less w i t h o u t
5 8
any official d i r e c t i n g b o d y . B u t w h e r e v e r w e observe r e l i g i o u s life, i t has a
definite g r o u p as its basis. E v e n so-called p r i v a t e cults, l i k e the domestic c u l t
o r a c o r p o r a t e c u l t , satisfy this c o n d i t i o n : T h e y are always celebrated b y a
g r o u p , t h e f a m i l y o r the c o r p o r a t i o n . A n d , f u r t h e r m o r e , even these p r i v a t e
r e l i g i o n s o f t e n are m e r e l y special f o r m s o f a broader r e l i g i o n that embraces
5 9
the t o t a l i t y o f l i f e . T h e s e small C h u r c h e s are i n reality o n l y chapels i n a
larger C h u r c h and, because o f this v e r y scope, deserve all the m o r e t o be
60
called b y that n a m e .

*Durkheim capitalizes this term.

"Hubert and Mauss, "Esquisse," p. 19.
58
Certainly it is rare for each ceremony not to have its director at the moment it is conducted; even in
the most crudely organized societies, there generally are men designated, due to the importance of their
social role, to exercise a directive influence upon religious life (for example, the heads of local groups in
certain Australian societies). But this attribution of functions is nevertheless very loose.
59
In Athens, the gods addressed by the domestic cult are only specialized forms of the gods of the City
(Zev; KTrjoxo?, Zev; epicetos). [Zeus, protector of property, Zeus, the household god. Trans.] Similarly,
in the Middle Ages, the patrons of brotherhoods are saints of the calendar.
^For the name of Church ordinarily applies only to a group whose common beliefs refer to a sphere
of less specialized things.
42 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

M a g i c is an e n t i r e l y different matter. G r a n t e d , m a g i c beliefs are never

w i t h o u t a c e r t a i n currency. T h e y are o f t e n widespread a m o n g b r o a d strata o f
the p o p u l a t i o n , a n d there are even peoples w h e r e t h e y c o u n t n o fewer active
followers t h a n r e l i g i o n proper. B u t they d o n o t b i n d m e n w h o believe i n
t h e m t o o n e a n o t h e r a n d u n i t e t h e m i n t o the same g r o u p , l i v i n g the same life.
There is no Church of magic. B e t w e e n the m a g i c i a n a n d t h e i n d i v i d u a l s w h o
consult h i m , there are n o durable ties that m a k e t h e m m e m b e r s o f a single
m o r a l body, comparable t o t h e ties that j o i n t h e faithful o f the same g o d o r
the adherents o f the same c u l t . T h e m a g i c i a n has a clientele, n o t a C h u r c h ,
a n d his clients m a y have n o m u t u a l relations, a n d m a y even be u n k n o w n t o
o n e another. I n d e e d , t h e relations t h e y have w i t h h i m are generally a c c i d e n -
tal a n d transient, analogous t o those o f a sick m a n w i t h his d o c t o r . T h e o f f i -
cial a n d p u b l i c character w i t h w h i c h t h e m a g i c i a n is sometimes invested
makes n o difference. T h a t he functions i n b r o a d d a y l i g h t does n o t j o i n h i m
i n a m o r e regular and lasting m a n n e r w i t h those w h o m a k e use o f his services.
I t is t r u e that, i n certain cases, magicians f o r m a society a m o n g themselves.
T h e y m e e t m o r e o r less p e r i o d i c a l l y t o celebrate certain rites i n c o m m o n i n
some instances; the place h e l d b y w i t c h e s ' meetings i n E u r o p e a n folklore is
w e l l k n o w n . B u t these associations are n o t at all indispensable f o r the f u n c -
tioning o f magic. I n d e e d , they are rare a n d rather exceptional. T o practice his
art, the m a g i c i a n has n o need w h a t e v e r t o congregate w i t h his peers. H e is
m o r e often a loner. I n general, far f r o m seeking company, h e flees i t . " H e
61
stands aloof, even f r o m his colleagues." B y contrast, r e l i g i o n is inseparable
f r o m the idea o f C h u r c h . I n this first regard, there is already a fundamental d i f -
ference b e t w e e n magic and r e l i g i o n . F u r t h e r m o r e , and above all, w h e n m a g i c
societies o f this sort are f o r m e d , they never encompass all the adherents o f
magic. Far from i t . T h e y encompass o n l y the magicians. E x c l u d e d from t h e m
are the laity, as i t w e r e — t h a t is, those f o r w h o s e benefit the rites are c o n d u c t e d ,
w h i c h is t o say those w h o are the adherents o f regular cults. N o w , the m a g i -
cian is t o magic w h a t the priest is t o r e l i g i o n . B u t a college o f priests is n o m o r e
a r e l i g i o n t h a n a religious c o n g r e g a t i o n that worships a certain saint i n the
shadows o f the cloister is a private cult. A C h u r c h is n o t s i m p l y a priesdy b r o t h -
e r h o o d ; i t is a m o r a l c o m m u n i t y * made u p o f all the faithful, b o t h laity a n d
62
priests. M a g i c o r d i n a r i l y has n o c o m m u n i t y o f this s o r t .

*Note thefirstuse in this book of this fundamentally important Durkheimian concept which can also
be thought of as "imagined community." See pp. xxii-xxxiii, xiv.
61
Hubert and Mauss, "Esquisse," p. 18.
62
[William] Robertson Smith had already shown that magic is opposed to religion as the individual is
to the social {[Lectures on] the Religion of the Semites, 2d ed. [London, A. & C. Black, 1894], pp. 264-265).
Definition of Religious Phenomena and of Religioi 43

B u t i f o n e includes the n o t i o n o f C h u r c h i n the d e f i n i t i o n o f r e l i g i o n ,

does o n e n o t b y the same stroke e x c l u d e the i n d i v i d u a l religions that the i n -
d i v i d u a l institutes f o r h i m s e l f and celebrates f o r h i m s e l f alone? T h e r e is
scarcely any society i n w h i c h this is n o t t o be f o u n d . As w i l l be seen below,
every O j i b w a y has his personal manitou that he chooses h i m s e l f and t o w h i c h
he bears specific religious o b l i g a t i o n s ; t h e M e l a n e s i a n o f the Banks Islands
63 64
has his tamaniu; t h e R o m a n has his genius; the C h r i s t i a n has his p a t r o n
saint a n d his guardian angel, a n d so f o r t h . A l l these cults seem, b y d e f i n i t i o n ,
t o be i n d e p e n d e n t o f the g r o u p . A n d n o t o n l y are these i n d i v i d u a l religions
v e r y c o m m o n t h r o u g h o u t history, b u t some p e o p l e today pose the q u e s t i o n
w h e t h e r such r e l i g i o n s are n o t destined t o b e c o m e the d o m i n a n t f o r m o f r e -
l i g i o u s l i f e — w h e t h e r a day w i l l n o t c o m e w h e n the o n l y c u l t w i l l be the o n e
65
that each p e r s o n freely practices i n his i n n e r m o s t s e l f .
B u t , let us p u t aside these speculations a b o u t the future f o r a m o m e n t . I f
w e c o n f i n e o u r discussion t o r e l i g i o n s as t h e y are i n t h e present a n d as they
have b e e n i n t h e past, i t becomes o b v i o u s that these i n d i v i d u a l cults are n o t
distinct a n d a u t o n o m o u s r e l i g i o u s systems b u t s i m p l y aspects o f the r e l i g i o n
c o m m o n t o t h e w h o l e C h u r c h o f w h i c h the i n d i v i d u a l s are part. T h e p a t r o n
saint o f the C h r i s t i a n is chosen f r o m the official list o f saints r e c o g n i z e d b y
the C a t h o l i c C h u r c h , a n d there are c a n o n i c a l laws that prescribe h o w each
believer m u s t c o n d u c t this p r i v a t e c u l t . I n t h e same way, the idea that every
m a n necessarily has a p r o t e c t i v e genie is, i n different f o r m s , at t h e basis o f a
large n u m b e r o f A m e r i c a n r e l i g i o n s , as w e l l as o f R o m a n r e l i g i o n (to cite
o n l y these t w o examples). As w i l l be seen b e l o w , that idea is t i g h t l y b o u n d
u p w i t h the idea o f soul, a n d the idea o f soul is n o t a m o n g those things that
can be left e n t i r e l y t o i n d i v i d u a l c h o i c e . I n a w o r d , i t is the C h u r c h o f w h i c h
he is a m e m b e r that teaches t h e i n d i v i d u a l w h a t these personal gods are, w h a t
t h e i r role is, h o w he m u s t enter i n t o relations w i t h t h e m , and h o w he must
h o n o r t h e m . W h e n o n e analyzes the d o c t r i n e s o f that C h u r c h systematically,
sooner o r later o n e comes across t h e d o c t r i n e s t h a t c o n c e r n these special
cults. T h u s there are n o t t w o r e l i g i o n s o f different types, t u r n e d i n opposite

Further, in thus differentiating magic from religion, I do not mean to set up a radical discontinuity be-
tween them. The frontiers between these two domains are often blurred.
63
[Robert Henry] Codrington, "Notes on the Customs of Mota, Bank Islands in RSV, vol. XVI
[1880], p. 136.
M
[Augusto] Negrioli, Dei Genii pressa i Romani, [Bologna, Ditto Nicola Zanichelli, 1900].
65
This is the conclusion at which [Herbert] Spencer arrives in his Ecclesiastical Institutions [Part VI of
The Principles of Sociology, New York, D. Appleton, 1886], chap. 16. It is also the conclusion of [Auguste]
Sabatier, in his Esquisse d'une philosophie de la religion d'après la Psychologie et l'Histoire, [Paris, Fischbacher,
1897], and that of the entire school to which he belongs.
44 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

directions, b u t t h e same ideas a n d p r i n c i p l e s a p p l i e d i n b o t h cases—here, t o

circumstances that c o n c e r n t h e g r o u p as a w h o l e , a n d there, t o the life o f the
66
i n d i v i d u a l . I n d e e d , this u n i t y is so close that, a m o n g c e r t a i n p e o p l e s , the
ceremonies d u r i n g w h i c h t h e believer first enters i n t o c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h
his p r o t e c t i v e genie are c o m b i n e d w i t h rites w h o s e p u b l i c character is i n -
6 7
contestable, namely, rites o f i n i t i a t i o n .
W h a t remains are the present-day aspirations t o w a r d a r e l i g i o n that
w o u l d consist e n t i r e l y o f i n t e r i o r a n d subjective states a n d b e freely c o n -
structed b y each o n e o f us. B u t n o m a t t e r h o w real those aspirations, they
c a n n o t affect o u r d e f i n i t i o n : T h i s d e f i n i t i o n can be a p p l i e d o n l y t o real, ac-
c o m p l i s h e d facts, n o t t o u n c e r t a i n possibilities. R e l i g i o n s can be d e f i n e d as
t h e y are n o w o r as t h e y have b e e n , n o t as t h e y m a y be t e n d i n g m o r e o r less
vaguely t o b e c o m e . I t is possible that this r e l i g i o u s i n d i v i d u a l i s m is destined
t o b e c o m e fact; b u t t o be able t o say i n w h a t measure, w e m u s t first k n o w
w h a t r e l i g i o n is, o f w h a t elements i t is made, f r o m w h a t causes i t results, a n d
w h a t f u n c t i o n i t p e r f o r m s — a l l questions w h o s e answers c a n n o t be p r e o r -
dained, f o r w e have n o t crossed the t h r e s h o l d o f research. O n l y at the e n d o f
this study w i l l I t r y t o l o o k i n t o t h e future.
W e a r r i v e thus at the f o l l o w i n g d e f i n i t i o n : A religion is a unified system of
beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say, things set apart and forbid-
den—beliefs and practices which unite into one single moral community called a
Church, all those who adhere to them. T h e second e l e m e n t thus holds a place i n
m y d e f i n i t i o n that is n o less essential t h a n the first: I n s h o w i n g that the idea
o f r e l i g i o n is inseparable f r o m t h e idea o f a C h u r c h , i t conveys the n o t i o n
6 8
that r e l i g i o n m u s t be an e m i n e n t l y c o l l e c t i v e t h i n g .

66
Among numerous Indian peoples of North America, in particular.
"However, that factual point does not settle the question of whether external and public religion is
anything other than the development of an interior and personal religion that would be the primitive phe-
nomenon, or whether, on the other hand, the personal religion is the extension, inside individual con-
sciousnesses, of the exterior one. The problem will be taken up directly below (Bk. II, chap. 5, §2. Cf.
Bk. II, chap. 6 and Bk. II, chap. 7, §1). For now I merely note that the individual cult presents itself to
the observer as an element and an appendage of the collective cult.
^It is there that my definition picks up the one I proposed some time ago in the Année sociologique. In
that work, I defined religious beliefs exclusively by their obligatory character; but that obligation evidendy
arises, as I showed, from the fact that those beliefs belong to a group that imposes them on its members.
Thus the two definitions partly overlap. If I have thought it necessary to propose a new one, it is because
the first was too formal and went too far in downplaying the content of religious representatiops. In the
discussions that follow, we will see the point of having placed in evidence immediately what is characteris-
tic of this content. In addition, if the imperative character is indeed a distinctive feature of religious beliefs,
it has infinite gradations; consequently, it is not easily perceptible in some cases. There arise difficulties and
troublesome questions that are avoided if this criterion is replaced by the one I have used above.
 CHAPTER T W O

THE LEADING CONCEPTIONS

OF THE ELEMENTARY
RELIGION
I. Animism

W i t h this d e f i n i t i o n i n h a n d , w e can set o u t i n search o f t h e e l e m e n t a r y

religion, o u r i n t e n d e d goal.
E v e n the crudest religions that h i s t o r y a n d e t h n o g r a p h y make k n o w n t o
us are already so c o m p l e x that t h e y d o n o t f i t the n o t i o n people sometimes
have o f p r i m i t i v e mentality. T h e y display n o t o n l y a l u x u r i a n t system o f beliefs
b u t also such v a r i e t y i n p r i n c i p l e s and w e a l t h i n basic ideas that i t has seemed
impossible t o regard t h e m as a n y t h i n g b u t a late p r o d u c t o f a rather l o n g e v o -
l u t i o n . F r o m this scholars have c o n c l u d e d that i n o r d e r t o u n c o v e r the t r u l y
o r i g i n a l f o r m o f religious life, t h e y h a d t o delve beneath these observable r e -
ligions, analyze t h e m t o i d e n t i f y the basic elements t h e y share, and find o u t
w h e t h e r there is o n e such e l e m e n t f r o m w h i c h the others are d e r i v e d .
Set i n those t e r m s , t h e p r o b l e m has received t w o c o n t r a r y solutions.
I t can be said t h a t there is n o r e l i g i o u s system, o l d o r new, i n w h i c h w e
d o n o t find w h a t a m o u n t s t o t w o r e l i g i o n s e x i s t i n g side b y side and i n v a r i -
ous f o r m s . A l t h o u g h closely allied and even i n t e r p e n e t r a t i n g , yet t h e y r e m a i n
d i s t i n c t . O n e is addressed t o p h e n o m e n a i n n a t u r e — w h e t h e r great cosmic
forces, such as the w i n d s , t h e rivers, the stars, t h e sky, etc., o r t h e objects o f
all sorts t h a t p o p u l a t e t h e earth's surface, such as plants, animals, rocks, etc.
F o r this reason, i t is g i v e n the n a m e " n a t u r i s m . " T h e o t h e r is addressed t o
s p i r i t u a l beings—spirits, souls, genies, d e m o n s , deities proper. These beings
are animate a n d conscious agents, l i k e m a n , b u t differ from m a n i n the n a -
t u r e o f the p o w e r s ascribed t o t h e m , i n p a r t i c u l a r the special characteristic
that t h e y d o n o t affect t h e senses i n the same w a y ; t h e y are n o t usually p e r -
ceptible t o h u m a n eyes. T h i s r e l i g i o n o f spirits is called " a n i m i s m . " T w o i n -
c o m p a t i b l e theories have b e e n p u t f o r w a r d t o e x p l a i n the m o r e o r less

45
46 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

universal coexistence o f the t w o sorts o f c u l t . S o m e h o l d a n i m i s m t o have

b e e n the p r i m a r y r e l i g i o n , a n d n a t u r i s m o n l y a derivative a n d secondary
f o r m . O t h e r s h o l d that the c u l t o f nature was the starting p o i n t o f r e l i g i o u s
e v o l u t i o n , a n d t h e c u l t o f spirits o n l y a special case o f i t .
U p t o n o w , these t w o theories have b e e n the o n l y ones b y w h i c h p e o p l e
1
have t r i e d t o e x p l a i n t h e o r i g i n s o f r e l i g i o u s t h o u g h t r a t i o n a l l y . T h u s , the
c h i e f p r o b l e m that the science o f religions m o s t o f t e n sets itself comes d o w n
t o d e c i d i n g w h i c h o f these t w o solutions m u s t be a d o p t e d , o r w h e t h e r i t is
n o t better t o c o m b i n e t h e m and, i f so, w h a t place s h o u l d be assigned t o each
2
o f the" t w o e l e m e n t s . E v e n those scholars w h o accept n e i t h e r hypothesis i n
3
its e n t i r e t y still r e t a i n some o f the p r o p o s i t i o n s o n w h i c h t h e y rest. T h u s w e
have a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f r e a d y - m a d e ideas a n d s e e m i n g truisms that must be
subjected t o c r i t i q u e before w e take u p t h e study o f the facts o n o u r o w n ac-
c o u n t . H o w indispensable i t is t o t r y a n e w approach w i l l be clearer o n c e t h e
inadequacy o f these t r a d i t i o n a l n o t i o n s is u n d e r s t o o d .

I
4
T y l o r d e v e l o p e d the a n i m i s t t h e o r y i n its essential features. I t is t r u e that
Spencer, w h o thereafter t o o k i t u p , d i d n o t m e r e l y c o p y i t w i t h o u t m o d i f i -
5
c a t i o n . B u t , o n the w h o l e , b o t h T y l o r a n d Spencer pose the questions i n the
same terms, and, w i t h o n e e x c e p t i o n , t h e solutions a d o p t e d are i d e n t i c a l . I

'Thus I leave aside here the theories that, wholly or in part, involve supraexperimental data. This is
true, for example, of the theory Andrew Lang set forth in his book The Making of Religion [London, Long-
mans, 1898], and that Wilhelm Schmidt took up again, with variations of detail, in a series of articles on
"L'Origine de l'idée de Dieu" (in Anthropos [vols. Ill, IV], 1908, 1909). Lang does not wholly reject ei-
ther animism or naturism but accepts that, in the last analysis, there is a sense or a direct intuition of the
divine. Also, while I do not believe I must present and discuss that idea in this chapter, I do not intend to
pass over it in silence, but will return to it below, when I explain the facts to which it is applied (II.9,
p. 4).
2
This is the case, for example, of Fustel de Coulanges, who accepts the two ideas concurrendy (see
Bk. I and Bk. Ill, chap. 2 [of La Cité antique, Paris, Hachette, 1870] .
3
In this way, Jevons, while criticizing animism as set forth by Tylor, accepts his theories on the gene-
sis of the idea of soul and the anthropomorphic instinct of man. Inversely, while [Hermann Karl] Usener,
in his Gotternamen [Versuch einer Lehre von der religiosen Degengriffebildung, Bohn, F. Cohen, 1887], rejects
certain of hypotheses of Max Miiller to be presented below, he accepts the chief postulates of natur-
ism.
4
[Edward Burnett] Tylor, Primitive Culture [2 vols., London, J. Murray, 1871], chaps. 11, 18.
5
See [Herbert Spencer], Principles of Sociology, 1st and 6th parts [New York, D. Appleton, 1886].
The Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion 47

can therefore c o m b i n e the t w o d o c t r i n e s i n the f o l l o w i n g e x p o s i t i o n , n o t i n g

the p o i n t at w h i c h they p a r t c o m p a n y .
T h r e e c o n d i t i o n s m u s t be m e t i f animist beliefs a n d practices are l e g i t i -
m a t e l y t o be seen as the o r i g i n a l f o r m o f r e l i g i o u s life: First, because o n that
hypothesis the idea o f soul is the cardinal idea o f r e l i g i o n , o n e must s h o w h o w
i t was f o r m e d , w i t h o u t t a k i n g any o f its elements f r o m an earlier r e l i g i o n ; sec-
o n d , i t m u s t be s h o w n h o w souls became the object o f a c u l t and t u r n e d i n t o
spirits; t h i r d , since the c u l t o f spirits is n o t the w h o l e o f any r e l i g i o n , h o w the
c u l t o f nature was d e r i v e d from that c u l t m u s t also be explained.
A c c o r d i n g t o a n i m i s t t h e o r y , the idea o f s o u l was suggested t o m a n b y
the p o o r l y u n d e r s t o o d spectacle o f the d o u b l e life that he n o r m a l l y leads, o n
the o n e h a n d w h i l e awake, o n the o t h e r w h ü e asleep. T h e c l a i m is that, f o r
6
the savage, the representations he has i n his m i n d are o f the same s i g n i f i -
cance w h e t h e r h e is awake o r d r e a m i n g . H e objectifies b o t h ; that is, he sees
t h e m as the images o f e x t e r n a l objects, the e n t i r e appearance o f w h i c h they
r e p r o d u c e m o r e o r less accurately. T h u s , w h e n h e dreams o f h a v i n g v i s i t e d a
f a r - o f f c o u n t r y , he believes he really has g o n e there. B u t he can have gone
there o n l y i f t w o beings exist i n h i m : one, his b o d y , w h i c h remained
stretched o u t o n the g r o u n d a n d w h i c h , w h e n he awakens, he finds still i n
the same p o s i t i o n ; a n d another, w h i c h has m o v e d t h r o u g h space d u r i n g that
same t i m e . L i k e w i s e , i f w h i l e h e sleeps, he sees h i m s e l f t a l k i n g w i t h o n e o f
his friends w h o he k n o w s is far away, he concludes that this f r i e n d , t o o , is
c o m p o s e d o f t w o beings: o n e w h o is sleeping some distance away, a n d a n -
o t h e r w h o has manifested h i m s e l f t h r o u g h the d r e a m . F r o m the r e p e t i t i o n o f
such experiences, l i t d e b y l i t t l e t h e idea emerges that a d o u b l e , a n o t h e r self,
exists i n each o f us, and that i n p a r t i c u l a r c o n d i t i o n s i t has the p o w e r t o leave
the b o d y i n w h i c h i t lives a n d t o travel far a n d w i d e .
O f course, this d o u b l e replicates all the basic features o f the visible b e i n g
that serves as its e x t e r n a l envelope. A t t h e same t i m e , however, i t differs from
t h e visible b e i n g i n several respects. I t is m o r e m o b i l e , since i t can cover vast
distances i n an instant. I t is m o r e malleable a n d m o r e plastic; for, t o leave the
body, i t m u s t be able t o pass t h r o u g h the body's openings, especially t h e nose
a n d m o u t h . I t is c o n c e i v e d o f as s o m e h o w made o f matter, b u t o f a m u c h
m o r e subtle a n d ethereal m a t t e r t h a n any w e k n o w e m p i r i c a l l y . T h i s d o u b l e

6
This is the word Tylor [Primitive Culture, pp. 489fF.] uses. It has the drawback of seeming to imply that
human beings, in the full sense of the term, exist before civilization exists. However, there is no suitable
term to render the idea; the term "primitive," which I prefer to use for want of anything better, is, as I
have said, far from satisfactory.
48 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

is the soul. A n d i t is b e y o n d d o u b t that, i n m a n y societies, the soul has b e e n

t h o u g h t o f as an image o f t h e b o d y . I t is even t h o u g h t t o reproduce a c c i d e n -
tal d e f o r m i t i e s , such as those caused b y w o u n d s o r m u t i l a t i o n s . C e r t a i n A u s -
tralians c u t o f f t h e i r enemy's r i g h t t h u m b after k i l l i n g h i m , so that his soul,
h a v i n g b e e n relieved o f its o w n t h u m b b y t h e same stroke, c a n n o t t h r o w a
spear a n d avenge itself. B u t at the same t i m e , even t h o u g h i t resembles the
body, there is s o m e t h i n g already s e m i - s p i r i t u a l a b o u t i t . People say that " i t is
the m o s t insubstantial part o f t h e body, as l i g h t as air," that " i t has n e i t h e r
7
flesh, n o r bones, n o r nerves"; that i t is " l i k e a p u r i f i e d b o d y . "
I n a d d i t i o n , o t h e r facts o f e x p e r i e n c e that t u r n e d m i n d s o n t o t h e same
p a t h q u i t e n a t u r a l l y t e n d e d t o gather a r o u n d this f u n d a m e n t a l fact o f the
dream: f a i n t i n g , apoplexy, catalepsy, ecstasy—every state o f t e m p o r a r y u n -
consciousness. Actually, t h e y are e x p l a i n e d v e r y w e l l b y the hypothesis that
the p r i n c i p l e o f life a n d awareness can m o m e n t a r i l y leave the body. Besides,
i t was natural that this p r i n c i p l e s h o u l d have b e e n m e r g e d w i t h the d o u b l e ,
since each day the absence o f the d o u b l e d u r i n g sleep suspends life a n d
t h o u g h t . T h u s various observations seemed m u t u a l l y t o test a n d c o n f i r m the
8
idea o f the b u i l t - i n d u a l i t y o f m a n .
B u t the soul is n o t a s p i r i t . I t is attached t o a b o d y f r o m w h i c h i t exits
q u i t e rarely; and, so l o n g as i t is n o t h i n g m o r e , i t is t h e object o f n o c u l t . B y
contrast, a l t h o u g h the s p i r i t generally has a d e f i n i t e t h i n g as its residence, i t
can m o v e away at w i l l , a n d m a n can enter i n t o relations w i t h i t o n l y b y t a k -
i n g r i t u a l precautions. T h e soul c o u l d b e c o m e spirit, t h e n , o n l y i f i t trans-
f o r m e d itself. T h i s m e t a m o r p h o s i s was q u i t e easily a r r i v e d at, m e r e l y b y t h e
a p p l i c a t i o n o f the f o r e g o i n g ideas t o the reality o f death. T o a r u d i m e n t a r y
intellect, death is n o t m u c h different from a l o n g f a i n t i n g spell o r a p r o l o n g e d
sleep; i t has all t h e i r traits. T h u s , death also seems t o consist i n a separation o f
soul a n d b o d y , analogous t o t h e separation that occurs each n i g h t ; b u t b e -
cause t h e y d o n o t see the b o d y t o revive, t h e y c o m e t o accept the idea o f a
separation that is n o t l i m i t e d t o a specified p e r i o d . I n d e e d , o n c e the b o d y is
destroyed—and the object o f funeral is i n p a r t t o hasten this d e s t r u c t i o n — t h e
separation is o f necessity considered f i n a l . H e r e , t h e n , are spirits detached
from any b o d y a n d at l i b e r t y i n space. I n this w a y a p o p u l a t i o n o f souls is
f o r m e d all a r o u n d the l i v i n g , t h e i r n u m b e r g r o w i n g over t i m e . Because these
souls o f m e n have the needs and passions o f m e n , t h e y seek t o i n v o l v e t h e m -

7
Ibid., vol. I, pp. 455£F.
8
See Spencer, Principles of Sociology, vol. I, pp. 1439".; and Tylor, Primitive Culture, vol. I, pp. 434ff.,
445ff.
The Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion 49

selves i n t h e lives o f t h e i r f o r m e r c o m p a n i o n s a n d t o h e l p t h e l i v i n g o r h a r m
t h e m , d e p e n d i n g o n the feelings t h e y still have f o r t h e m . T h e i r nature makes
t h e m e i t h e r v e r y precious allies o r v e r y f o r m i d a b l e enemies. T h a n k s t o t h e i r
extreme fluidity, t h e y can g o inside bodies a n d cause t h e m disorders o f all
k i n d s , o r t h e y can increase t h e b o d i e s ' vitality. A n d so people take u p the
h a b i t o f a s c r i b i n g t o t h e m all t h e events o f life that are s l i g h d y unusual: T h e r e
are h a r d l y any t h e y c a n n o t a c c o u n t for. I n this w a y t h e y c o n s t i t u t e a v e r i t a -
ble arsenal o f causes, always at h a n d , never l e a v i n g t h e m i n d that is i n search
o f explanations u n e q u i p p e d . D o e s a m a n seem i n s p i r e d ; does he speak w i t h
e l o q u e n c e ; does he seem l i f t e d above b o t h h i m s e l f a n d t h e o r d i n a r y level o f
men? I t is because a b e n e v o l e n t s p i r i t is i n h i m , a n i m a t i n g h i m . Is a n o t h e r
m a n taken b y a seizure o r b y madness? A n e v i l s p i r i t has entered his body, ag-
i t a t i n g h i m . T h e r e is n o sickness that c a n n o t be p u t d o w n t o some such i n -
fluence. I n this way, t h e p o w e r o f souls increases from a l l that is a t t r i b u t e d t o
t h e m , so m u c h so that, i n the e n d , m a n finds h i m s e l f a captive i n this i m a g -
i n a r y w o r l d , even t h o u g h he is its creator a n d m o d e l . H e becomes the vassal
o f those s p i r i t u a l forces that h e has made w i t h his o w n hands a n d i n his o w n
image. F o r i f these souls are so m u c h i n c o n t r o l o f h e a l t h a n d illness a n d o f
g o o d a n d e v i l things, i t is w i s e t o seek t h e i r benevolence o r t o appease t h e m
w h e n t h e y are annoyed. F r o m t h e n c e c o m e offerings, sacrifices, p r a y e r s — i n
9
short, the w h o l e apparatus o f r e l i g i o u s observances.
B e h o l d , t h e n , t h e s o u l t r a n s f o r m e d . I t has g o n e from b e i n g m e r e l y a life
p r i n c i p l e a n i m a t i n g a h u m a n b o d y , t o b e i n g a s p i r i t , a g o o d o r e v i l genie, a n d
even a deity, d e p e n d i n g o n the scope o f t h e effects i m p u t e d t o i t . B u t since
i t is death that is p r e s u m e d t o have b r o u g h t a b o u t this apotheosis, i n the e n d
i t is t o the dead, t o t h e souls o f the ancestors, that t h e first c u l t that h u m a n -
i t y has k n o w n was addressed. T h u s : T h e first rites w e r e m o r t u a r y rites; the
first sacrifices, f o o d offerings t o satisfy the needs o f t h e departed; a n d t h e first
1 0
altars, t o m b s .
B u t because these spirits w e r e o f h u m a n o r i g i n , t h e y w e r e interested
o n l y i n the lives o f m e n a n d w e r e t h o u g h t t o act o n l y u p o n h u m a n events.
Yet t o be e x p l a i n e d is h o w o t h e r spirits w e r e i m a g i n e d i n o r d e r t o a c c o u n t
for o t h e r p h e n o m e n a o f t h e universe, a n d h o w a c u l t o f nature was t h e n
f o r m e d alongside the c u l t o f t h e ancestors.
As T y l o r has i t , this e x t e n s i o n o f a n i m i s m is d u e t o the peculiar m e n t a l -
i t y o f t h e p r i m i t i v e , w h o , l i k e t h e c h i l d , does n o t d i s t i n g u i s h t h e animate

'Tylor, Primitive Culture, vol. II [pp. 113ff.].

,0
Ibid., vol. I [pp. 113ff., 481ff.].
50 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

f r o m the i n a n i m a t e . Because the first beings o f w h i c h the c h i l d begins t o

f o r m any idea are h u m a n s — h i m s e l f a n d his parents—he tends t o i m a g i n e all
things o n t h e m o d e l o f h u m a n nature. H e sees t h e toys he uses, and the var-
ious objects that affect his senses, as l i v i n g beings l i k e himself. T h e p r i m i t i v e
t h i n k s l i k e a c h i l d , so h e t o o is i n c l i n e d t o e n d o w t h i n g s , even i n a n i m a t e
things, w i t h a nature similar t o his o w n . A n d thus, f o r the reasons already
g i v e n , o n c e he has a r r i v e d at the idea that m a n is a b o d y that a s p i r i t a n i -
mates, t h e n he m u s t o f necessity i m p u t e t o n a t u r a l bodies that same sort o f
duality, plus souls l i k e his o w n . T h e sphere o f i n f l u e n c e c o u l d n o t be the
same f o r b o t h , h o w e v e r . T h e souls o f m e n have d i r e c t i n f l u e n c e o n l y over the
w o r l d o f m e n . T h e y have a sort o f p r e d i l e c t i o n f o r the h u m a n body, o n c e
death has g i v e n t h e m t h e i r liberty. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , the souls o f t h i n g s r e -
side above a l l i n things a n d are v i e w e d as t h e operative causes o f all t h a t h a p -
pens t o things. H e a l t h o r illness, a g i l i t y o r clumsiness, a n d the rest, are
a c c o u n t e d f o r b y t h e souls o f m e n ; t h e p h e n o m e n a o f the physical w o r l d
above a l l — t h e m o v e m e n t o f t h e waters o r o f t h e stars, t h e g e r m i n a t i o n o f the
plants, the abundant r e p r o d u c t i o n o f the animals, a n d the rest—are a c c o u n t e d
for b y the souls o f things. T h u s , the f i n i s h i n g t o u c h t o that first p h i l o s o p h y o f
m a n , o n w h i c h the c u l t o f the ancestors is based, was a p h i l o s o p h y o f the w o r l d .
V i s - a - v i s those cosmic spirits, m a n f o u n d h i m s e l f i n an even m o r e o b v i -
ous state o f dependence t h a n vis-a-vis the w a n d e r i n g doubles o f his ances-
tors. W i t h t h e ancestors, he c o u l d o n l y have i d e a l * a n d i m a g i n a r y relations,
b u t he really does d e p e n d u p o n things. Since h e needs t h e i r c o o p e r a t i o n i n
order t o live, m a n came t o believe t h a t h e also n e e d e d t h e spirits that w e r e
h e l d t o animate those things a n d c o n t r o l t h e i r v a r i o u s manifestations. H e i m -
p l o r e d t h e i r h e l p t h r o u g h offerings a n d prayers. T h u s , t h e finishing touch to
the r e l i g i o n o f m a n was a r e l i g i o n o f nature.
H e r b e r t Spencer objects that this e x p l a n a t i o n rests o n a hypothesis that is
c o n t r a d i c t e d b y the facts. I t is h e l d , he says, that there was a t i m e w h e n m a n
d i d n o t grasp the differences b e t w e e n the animate a n d the inanimate. B u t as
w e ascend a m o n g the animals, w e see an increasing capacity t o make that dis-
t i n c t i o n . T h e h i g h e r animals d o n o t confuse an object that moves b y itself,
w h o s e m o v e m e n t s are d i r e c t e d t o w a r d goals, w i t h objects that are m o v e d m e -
chanically from outside. " W h e n a cat w h o is p l a y i n g w i t h a mouse he has
caught sees that i t stays still f o r a l o n g w h i l e , he touches i t w i t h his c l a w t o
make i t r u n . O b v i o u s l y , the cat t h i n k s that a l i v i n g b e i n g that o n e bothers w i l l
11
t r y t o escape." M a n , even p r i m i t i v e m a n , c o u l d n o t be less i n t e l l i g e n t t h a n

*Note Durkheim's use of this term in reference to things of the mind.

"Spencer, Principles of Sociology, vol. I [p.126].
The Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion 51

animals l o w e r t h a n he o n the scale o f e v o l u t i o n . I t was n o t t h r o u g h lack o f dis-

c e r n m e n t , t h e n , that he m o v e d f r o m the c u l t o f ancestors t o the c u l t o f things.
A c c o r d i n g t o Spencer, w h o o n this p o i n t (but o n this p o i n t o n l y ) parts
c o m p a n y w i t h T y l o r , this passage is i n d e e d d u e t o a c o n f u s i o n , b u t o n e o f a
different k i n d . H e t h i n k s i t results, at least i n the m a i n , f r o m the numberless
a m b i g u i t i e s o f language. I n m a n y l o w e r societies, i t is a v e r y c o m m o n cus-
t o m t o give each i n d i v i d u a l t h e n a m e o f an a n i m a l , p l a n t , star, o r some o t h e r
natural object, e i t h e r at b i r t h o r later. B u t , g i v e n the e x t r e m e i m p r e c i s i o n o f
his language, i t is v e r y d i f f i c u l t f o r the p r i m i t i v e t o d i s t i n g u i s h a m e t a p h o r
f r o m reality. T h u s he w o u l d q u i c k l y have lost sight o f the fact that these
names w e r e o n l y figures o f speech and, b y t a k i n g t h e m literally, e n d e d u p b e -
l i e v i n g that an ancestor called T i g e r o r L i o n was actually a tiger o r a l i o n .
A n d so, the c u l t o f w h i c h that ancestor h a d b e e n the object theretofore,
w o u l d have b e e n transposed thereafter t o the a n i m a l w i t h w h i c h the ances-
t o r h a d b e c o m e o n e a n d the same. A n d , the same s u b s t i t u t i o n b e i n g opera-
tive f o r the plants, stars, t o g e t h e r w i t h all t h e n a t u r a l p h e n o m e n a , the r e l i g i o n
o f nature t o o k t h e place o f t h e o l d r e l i g i o n o f the dead. T o be sure, Spencer
p o i n t s t o o t h e r confusions besides this one, r e i n f o r c i n g its effect i n this case
o r that. F o r example, as he proposes, the animals that frequent the environs
o f the t o m b s o r houses o f m e n w e r e t a k e n f o r r e i n c a r n a t e d souls and revered
12
as s u c h ; o r else, the m o u n t a i n h e l d b y t r a d i t i o n t o be the site w h e r e the race
b e g a n was taken t o be its actual f o u n d e r ; the ancestors b e i n g p r e s u m e d t o
have c o m e f r o m i t , a n d t h e m e n t o be its descendants, the m o u n t a i n itself was
13
therefore treated as an ancestor. B u t as Spencer admits, these a d d i t i o n a l
causes c o u l d have h a d o n l y a secondary i n f l u e n c e . P r i n c i p a l l y , w h a t l e d t o the
institution o f n a t u r i s m was "the literal interpretation o f metaphorical
names. "
F o r the sake o f completeness i n m y o w n e x p o s i t i o n o f a n i m i s m , I h a d t o
give an a c c o u n t o f this t h e o r y , b u t i t is t o o inadequate t o the facts, a n d today
t o o universally a b a n d o n e d , t o w a r r a n t b e i n g d w e l l e d u p o n further. F o r a
p h e n o m e n o n as w i d e s p r e a d as t h e r e l i g i o n o f nature t o be explainable b y an
i l l u s i o n , the cause o f t h e v e r y i l l u s i o n that is i n v o k e d w o u l d have t o be
equally widespread. E v e n w h e n such errors as those o f w h i c h Spencer r e -
p o r t s a f e w isolated examples ( w h e r e w e find such examples) can i n d e e d e x -
p l a i n t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f the c u l t o f ancestors i n t o a c u l t o f nature, i t is n o t

12
Ibid., pp. 322ff.
"Ibid., pp. 366-367.
14
Ibid., p. 346. Cf. p. 384.
52 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

clear w h y t h e y w o u l d be so w i d e l y p r o d u c e d . N o psychic m e c h a n i s m neces-

sitates t h e m . N o d o u b t , t h r o u g h t h e i r o w n a m b i g u i t y , w o r d s c o u l d lead p e o -
ple t o be m i s t a k e n ; b u t , at the same t i m e , all t h e personal m e m o r i e s that t h e
ancestor left i n men's m e m o r i e s m u s t have w o r k e d against t h e c o n f u s i o n .
W h y w o u l d the t r a d i t i o n that p o r t r a y e d t h e ancestor as he h a d b e e n — t h a t is,
as a m a n w h o h a d l i v e d a man's l i f e — h a v e g i v e n w a y e v e r y w h e r e t o the
m a g i c o f w o r d s . Besides, people m u s t have h a d a c e r t a i n d i f f i c u l t y a c c e p t i n g
the idea that m e n c o u l d have b e e n b o r n f r o m a m o u n t a i n o r a star, an a n i m a l
o r a plant; the idea o f such an e x c e p t i o n t o the o r d i n a r y c o n d i t i o n s o f p r o -
c r e a t i o n was b o u n d t o raise s t r o n g resistance. I n this way, far f r o m f i n d i n g the
w a y m a d e straight, this e r r o r w o u l d have b e e n i m p e d e d b y all sorts o f reasons
d e f e n d i n g m i n d s against i t . T h e r e f o r e h o w its v i c t o r y c o u l d have been so
general, despite so m a n y obstacles, is n o t clear.

II
T h e r e remains t h e t h e o r y o f T y l o r , w h i c h still has great a u t h o r i t y . Since his
hypotheses o n dreams a n d o n h o w the ideas o f soul and spirit o r i g i n a t e d are
still a u t h o r i t a t i v e , i t is i m p o r t a n t t o evaluate t h e m .
T o b e g i n , i t m u s t be a c k n o w l e d g e d that the theorists o f a n i m i s m have
rendered an i m p o r t a n t service t o the science o f r e l i g i o n s , a n d i n d e e d t o t h e
general h i s t o r y o f ideas, b y a p p l y i n g h i s t o r i c a l analysis t o t h e idea o f soul. I n -
stead o f t a k i n g i t t o be a s i m p l e a n d i m m e d i a t e g i v e n o f consciousness, as so
m a n y philosophers have, t h e y saw i t — f a r m o r e correctly—as a c o m p l e x
w h o l e and as a p r o d u c t o f h i s t o r y a n d m y t h o l o g y . I t is b e y o n d d o u b t that, b y
its nature, o r i g i n s , and f u n c t i o n s , the idea o f soul is f u n d a m e n t a l l y r e l i g i o u s .
Philosophers received i t from r e l i g i o n ; a n d the f o r m i t takes a m o n g the
t h i n k e r s o f a n t i q u i t y c a n n o t b e u n d e r s t o o d unless t h e m y t h i c a l elements that
entered i n t o i t are taken i n t o a c c o u n t .
B u t even t h o u g h setting the p r o b l e m is t o Tylor's credit, his s o l u t i o n
nonetheless raises serious difficulties.
First, there are reservations t o be h a d a b o u t the v e r y p r i n c i p l e o n w h i c h
his t h e o r y is based. I t grants as self-evident that t h e soul is altogether d i s t i n c t
f r o m the body, that i t is t h e body's d o u b l e , a n d that, w h e t h e r inside o r o u t -
15
side the body, i t o r d i n a r i l y lives its o w n a u t o n o m o u s life. N o w , w e w i l l s e e
that this c o n c e p t i o n is n o t that o f the p r i m i t i v e or, at least, that i t expresses

15
See below, Bk. II, chap. 8.
Tl\e Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion 53

o n l y o n e aspect o f the idea he has o f the soul. T o the p r i m i t i v e , a l t h o u g h the

soul is i n c e r t a i n respects i n d e p e n d e n t o f the b o d y i t animates, nevertheless i t
is p a r t l y m e r g e d w i t h the body, so m u c h so that i t c a n n o t be radically sepa-
rated f r o m the b o d y : C e r t a i n organs are n o t o n l y the special seat o f the soul
b u t also its o u t w a r d f o r m a n d physical manifestation. T h e n o t i o n is m o r e
c o m p l e x t h a n the d o c t r i n e assumes, t h e n , a n d so i t is d o u b t f u l that the e x -
periences i n v o k e d are sufficient e x p l a n a t i o n . F o r even i f those experiences
enabled o n e t o u n d e r s t a n d h o w m a n came t o believe he was d o u b l e , they
c o u l d n o t e x p l a i n w h y that d u a l i t y n o t o n l y does n o t exclude, b u t actually
entails, a p r o f o u n d u n i t y a n d an i n t i m a t e i n t e r p é n é t r a t i o n o f the t w o beings
thus differentiated.
H o w e v e r , let us g r a n t that the idea o f soul is r e d u c i b l e to the idea o f d o u -
ble a n d see h o w , a c c o r d i n g t o T y l o r , that second idea was f o r m e d . Suppos-
edly t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f d r e a m i n g suggested i t t o m a n . T o understand h o w , as
his b o d y r e m a i n e d l y i n g o n the g r o u n d , he c o u l d see m o r e o r less distant
places as he slept, h e is l e d t o t h i n k o f h i m s e l f as b e i n g made o f t w o beings:
o n t h e o n e h a n d , his body, and, o n the other, a second self able t o leave the
b o d y i n w h i c h i t lives a n d m o v e a b o u t i n space. B u t , o n the face o f i t , t o have
b e e n able t o t h r u s t itself u p o n m e n w i t h a k i n d o f necessity, this idea w o u l d
have t o have b e e n the o n l y possible hypothesis, o r at least the simplest. N o w ,
i n fact, there are s i m p l e r hypotheses, ideas that, i t seems, must have c o m e t o
m i n d j u s t as naturally. F o r example, w h y w o u l d the sleeper n o t have i m a g -
i n e d that he was able t o see at a distance as he slept? I m p u t i n g such a capac-
i t y t o h i m s e l f w o u l d have taxed his i m a g i n a t i o n less t h a n c o n s t r u c t i n g such a
c o m p l i c a t e d idea as that o f a d o u b l e — m a d e o f an ethereal substance, half-
invisible, a n d w i t h n o e x a m p l e f r o m d i r e c t e x p e r i e n c e .
I n any case, g r a n t i n g that c e r t a i n dreams call f o r t h the a n i m i s t explana-
t i o n rather naturally, m a n y others c e r t a i n l y are absolutely resistant t o i t . V e r y
often, o u r dreams refer t o past events; w e see again w h a t w e have seen o r
d o n e w h i l e awake, yesterday, day before yesterday, d u r i n g o u r y o u t h , and so
o n ; such dreams are c o m m o n , h a v i n g a rather large place i n o u r n i g h t t i m e
life: B u t t h e idea o f a d o u b l e c a n n o t a c c o u n t f o r t h e m . E v e n i f the d o u b l e
can transport itself from o n e p o i n t t o a n o t h e r i n space, i t is n o t clear h o w the
d o u b l e c o u l d g o back t h r o u g h t h e stream o f t i m e . H o w c o u l d a m a n , h o w -
ever p r i m i t i v e his i n t e l l e c t , believe w h e n he awakes that he has j u s t b e e n p r e -
sent at, o r actually t a k e n p a r t i n , events t h a t he k n o w s h a p p e n e d at a different
time? H o w c o u l d he i m a g i n e t h a t he h a d l i v e d a life w h i l e sleeping that he
k n e w was l o n g since past? I t w o u l d have b e e n m u c h m o r e natural f o r h i m t o
see those r e n e w e d images as w h a t t h e y really are: m e m o r i e s l i k e those he has
i n daytime, b u t o f special intensity.
54 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

Besides, i n the scenes w e take part i n a n d witness w h i l e w e sleep, some

c o n t e m p o r a r y is constantly t a k i n g some role at the same t i m e as w e . W e
t h i n k w e see and hear h i m i n the same place as w e . A c c o r d i n g t o a n i m i s m ,
the p r i m i t i v e w i l l e x p l a i n these facts b y i m a g i n i n g that his o w n d o u b l e has
been v i s i t e d o r m e t b y the doubles o f c e r t a i n o f his friends. B u t all i t w i l l take
for h i m t o n o t i c e that t h e i r experience does n o t c o i n c i d e w i t h his is t o ques-
t i o n t h e m w h e n he awakens. T h e y , t o o , have h a d dreams at t h e same t i m e ,
but e n t i r e l y different ones. T h e y d i d n o t see themselves t a k i n g part i n the
same scene b u t believe they v i s i t e d e n t i r e l y different places. A n d since, i n that
case, c o n t r a d i c t i o n s m u s t be the r u l e , h o w w o u l d those c o n t r a d i c t i o n s n o t
lead m e n t o t h i n k that there was apparendy an error, that t h e y i m a g i n e d i t ,
that they w e r e taken i n b y some illusion? F o r there is a c e r t a i n o v e r s i m p l i f i -
c a t i o n i n the b l i n d c r e d u l i t y that is ascribed t o t h e p r i m i t i v e . H e is far f r o m
f i n d i n g i t necessary t o objectify all his sensations. H e is n o t incapable o f
n o t i c i n g that his senses sometimes t r i c k h i m , even w h e n he is awake. W h y
w o u l d he believe t h e m t o be m o r e i n f a l l i b l e at n i g h t t h a n i n daytime? H e n c e ,
a g o o d m a n y reasons stand i n the w a y o f his t a k i n g dreams f o r realities t o o
easily and i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e m b y a d o u b l i n g o f his b e i n g .
F u r t h e r m o r e , even i f the hypothesis o f the d o u b l e c o u l d satisfactorily e x -
p l a i n all d r e a m i n g , a n d all d r e a m i n g c o u l d be e x p l a i n e d i n n o o t h e r way, o n e
w o u l d still have t o say w h y m a n t r i e d t o e x p l a i n i t at all. N o d o u b t , the
d r e a m has the m a k i n g s o f a possible p r o b l e m . B u t w e c o n t i n u a l l y bypass
problems that w e d o n o t see as such, w h o s e existence w e d o n o t even suspect
so l o n g as n o t h i n g has m a d e us feel any n e e d t o see t h e m as problems. E v e n
w h e n the taste f o r p u r e speculation is w i d e awake, i t is far f r o m t r u e that r e -
flection raises all the questions t o w h i c h i t c o u l d possibly apply itself; o n l y
those that are o f p a r t i c u l a r interest attract i t . Especially w h e n the p h e n o m e n a
i n q u e s t i o n always recur i n the same manner, h a b i t easily puts c u r i o s i t y t o
sleep and w e n o l o n g e r even i m a g i n e q u e r y i n g ourselves. T o shake o f f that
t o r p o r , practical needs, o r at least v e r y pressing t h e o r e t i c a l interest, m u s t at-
tract o u r a t t e n t i o n and t u r n i t i n that d i r e c t i o n . A n d so i t happens that, at
every m o m e n t o f history, there are a great m a n y things that w e give u p t r y -
i n g t o understand, w i t h o u t even n o t i c i n g that w e are so d o i n g . U n t i l n o t
v e r y l o n g ago, t h e sun was b e l i e v e d t o b e o n l y several feet i n diameter. T h e r e
was s o m e t h i n g i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e i n t h e fact that a l u m i n o u s disc o f such
small d i a m e t e r c o u l d be adequate t o l i g h t the E a r t h — a n d yet centuries w e n t
by before h u m a n i t y t h o u g h t o f r e s o l v i n g that c o n t r a d i c t i o n .
H e r e d i t y is a p h e n o m e n o n that has b e e n k n o w n f o r a l o n g t i m e , b u t o n l y
v e r y r e c e n t l y has anyone t r i e d t o c o n s t r u c t a t h e o r y o f i t . I n d e e d , the accep-
tance o f c e r t a i n beliefs made i t c o m p l e t e l y u n i n t e l l i g i b l e . T h u s , i n c e r t a i n
Tlie Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion 55

Australian societies t o be discussed, the c h i l d is n o t p h y s i o l o g i c a l l y the p r o d -

16
uct o f its p a r e n t s . Inevitably, such i n t e l l e c t u a l laziness is greatest i n the
p r i m i t i v e . T h i s frail b e i n g , w h o m u s t struggle so h a r d f o r his life against the
forces that assail i t , lacks the w h e r e w i t h a l f o r the l u x u r y o f speculation. H e
p r o b a b l y does n o t reflect unless he has t o . I t is therefore n o t easy t o see w h a t
c o u l d have l e d h i m t o m a k e d r e a m i n g t h e t o p i c o f his meditations. W h a t is
d r e a m i n g i n o u r life? W h a t a small place i t has, especially since i t leaves v e r y
vague impressions i n m e m o r y a n d is q u i c k l y erased; a n d h o w surprising,
t h e n , that a m a n o f such c r u d e i n t e l l e c t s h o u l d have p u t so m u c h effort i n t o
t r y i n g t o e x p l a i n i t ! O f t h e t w o existences that he leads o n e after the other,
d a y t i m e a n d n i g h t t i m e , i t is the first, his d a y t i m e existence, that s h o u l d i n -
terest h i m m o r e . Is i t n o t strange that the n i g h t t i m e existence s h o u l d have so
captivated his a t t e n t i o n that he m a d e i t t h e basis o f a w h o l e system o f c o m -
p l i c a t e d ideas destined t o have such p r o f o u n d i n f l u e n c e o n his t h o u g h t and
conduct?
E v e r y t h i n g tends t o prove, therefore, that the animist t h e o r y o f the soul
m u s t be reassessed, despite its c o n t i n u i n g a u t h o r i t y . Today, the p r i m i t i v e
p r o b a b l y does a t t r i b u t e his dreams, o r c e r t a i n o f t h e m , t o the m o v e m e n t s o f .
his d o u b l e . B u t this is n o t the same as saying that dreams actually p r o v i d e d
the r a w m a t e r i a l f r o m w h i c h the idea o f d o u b l e o r soul was made. Instead o f
b e i n g d e r i v e d f r o m the p h e n o m e n a o f dreams, ecstasy, a n d possession, i t
c o u l d have b e e n a p p l i e d t o t h e m after the fact. As o f t e n happens, once an
idea is f o r m e d , i t is used t o organize o r t o shed l i g h t ( w i t h l i g h t that is s o m e -
times m o r e apparent t h a n real) o n facts w i t h w h i c h the idea was u n c o n -
n e c t e d at first, a n d that, i n themselves, c o u l d n o t have suggested i t . Today,
G o d a n d the i m m o r t a l i t y o f t h e soul are o f t e n p r o v e d w i t h a s h o w i n g that
those beliefs are i m p l i e d i n the basic p r i n c i p l e s o f m o r a l i t y . I n reality, those
beliefs are o f a c o m p l e t e l y different o r i g i n . T h e h i s t o r y o f religious t h o u g h t
c o u l d p r o v i d e n u m e r o u s examples o f these retrospective justifications that
can teach us n o t h i n g a b o u t e i t h e r the m a n n e r i n w h i c h those ideas t o o k
f o r m o r a b o u t the elements o f w h i c h t h e y are made.
I t is likely, f u r t h e r m o r e , that the p r i m i t i v e distinguishes among his
dreams a n d does n o t e x p l a i n t h e m all i n t h e same way. H e r e i n E u r o p e , there
are still m a n y p e o p l e f o r w h o m t h e state o f sleep is a sort o f m a g i c o - r e l i g i o u s
state i n w h i c h t h e m i n d , p a r t i a l l y u n b u r d e n e d o f t h e body, has an acuteness

16
See [Sir Baldwin] Spencer and [Francis James] Gillen, The Native Tribes of Central Australia [London,
Macmillan, 1889], pp. 123—127; [Carl] Strehlow, Die Aranda- und Loritja-Stämme in Zentral-Australien [2
vols., Frankfurt, J. Baer, 1907], pp. 52ff.
56 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

o f v i s i o n that i t does n o t enjoy i n wakefulness. S t i l l t h e y d o n o t g o so far as

t o consider all t h e i r dreams t o be so m a n y mystic i n t u i t i o n s . Instead, l i k e
everyone else, t h e y see the m a j o r i t y o f t h e i r dreams o n l y as profane states a n d
e m p t y plays o f images, m e r e h a l l u c i n a t i o n s . T h e p r i m i t i v e can be t h o u g h t o f
as always h a v i n g made s i m i l a r d i s t i n c t i o n s . C o d r i n g t o n states e m p h a t i c a l l y
that the Melanesians d o n o t i n d i s c r i m i n a t e l y e x p l a i n all t h e i r dreams as m i -
1 7
grations o f souls, b u t o n l y those that strike t h e i r i m a g i n a t i o n v i v i d l y . We
s h o u l d p r o b a b l y u n d e r s t a n d that t o m e a n those dreams i n w h i c h t h e sleeper
believes he is i n t o u c h w i t h r e l i g i o u s beings, g o o d o r e v i l genies, souls o f t h e
dead, a n d so o n . L i k e w i s e , the D i e r i m a k e a v e r y clear d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n
o r d i n a r y dreams a n d those n i g h t t i m e visions i n w h i c h some deceased f r i e n d
o r relative appears t o t h e m . T h e y give different names t o those t w o sorts o f
state. T h e y see the first as a m e r e f l i g h t o f t h e i m a g i n a t i o n , b u t t h e y ascribe
18
the second t o the w o r k o f an e v i l s p i r i t . A l l t h e facts H o w i t t offers as e x -
amples, s h o w i n g that the A u s t r a l i a n ascribes t o the soul t h e p o w e r t o leave the
body, also have a m y s t i c a l character: T h e sleeper believes h i m s e l f t r a n s p o r t e d
1 9
i n t o the l a n d o f the dead, o r else that he is t a l k i n g w i t h a deceased f r i e n d .
2 0
These dreams are c o m m o n a m o n g p r i m i t i v e s . I t is p r o b a b l y i n c o n n e c t i o n
w i t h such facts that the t h e o r y t o o k f o r m . T o a c c o u n t f o r t h e m , t h e n o t i o n
that the souls o f the dead c o m e b a c k t o be w i t h the l i v i n g as t h e y sleep is ac-
cepted. A c c e p t a n c e o f this e x p l a n a t i o n was all t h e easier because n o fact o f
experience c o u l d d i s c o n f i r m i t . B u t such dreams w e r e possible o n l y w h e r e
people already had the ideas o f spirits, souls, a n d lands o f t h e dead—that is,
o n l y w h e r e r e l i g i o u s e v o l u t i o n was relatively advanced. Far from h a v i n g b e e n
able t o p r o v i d e r e l i g i o n w i t h the f u n d a m e n t a l idea o n w h i c h i t rests, t h e y
21
presupposed a n d w e r e the result o f a r e l i g i o u s system already c o n s t i t u t e d .

"[Robert Henry Codrington],The Melanesians [Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1891], pp. 249-250.
18
[Alfred William] Howitt, The Native Tribes of South-East Australia [London, Macmillan, 1904], p. 358
(following Gason).
19
Ibid„ pp. 434-442.
20
The Negroes of southern Guinea, says Tylor, have "during their sleep almost as many relations with
the dead as they have during the day with the living" (Primitive Culture, vol. I, p. 443). Of these peoples,
the same author cites this remark by an observer: "They regard all their dreams as visits by spirits of their
dead friends" (ibid., vol. I, p. 514 ). The statement is surely exaggerated, but it is further proof that mys-
tical dreams are common among primitives. This tends as well to confirm the etymology Strehlow offers
for the Arunta word altjirerama, which means "to dream." It is composed of altjira, which Strehlow trans-
lates as "god," and rama, which means "see." So the dream would be the moment when the man is in re-
lation with the sacred beings (Aranda, vol. I, p. 2).
21
Andrew Lang (who also refuses to concede that the idea of the soul was suggested to man by the ex-
perience of dreaming) believed he could derive it from other experiential data: the facts of spiritism
(telepathy, seeing at a distance, etc.). I do not think it necessary to discuss his theory, as set forth in his
The Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion 57

III
B u t let us c o m e t o t h e v e r y heart o f the d o c t r i n e .
W h e r e v e r t h e idea o f a d o u b l e m a y c o m e f r o m , that idea is n o t
e n o u g h — o n t h e animists' o w n a d m i s s i o n — t o e x p l a i n h o w the ancestor c u l t
was f o r m e d , the c u l t that is regarded as t h e o r i g i n a l t y p e o f all r e l i g i o n s . T o
have b e c o m e the o b j e c t o f a c u l t , t h e d o u b l e h a d t o cease b e i n g a m e r e
replica o f the i n d i v i d u a l . I t h a d t o take o n t h e characteristics r e q u i r e d f o r
p l a c e m e n t o n a par w i t h the sacred beings. D e a t h is said t o b r i n g a b o u t this
t r a n s f o r m a t i o n . B u t w h e r e w o u l d the special p r o p e r t y that people i m p u t e t o
death c o m e from? E v e n i f t h e analogy b e t w e e n sleep a n d death m i g h t have
b e e n e n o u g h t o m a k e p e o p l e believe that the s o u l survives the b o d y (and o n
this p o i n t , there are reservations t o be had), w h y w o u l d this soul c o m p l e t e l y
change its nature s i m p l y as a result o f b e i n g n o w detached f r o m the b o d y ? I f ,
w h i l e i t l i v e d , i t was o n l y a profane t h i n g , a w a l k i n g l i f e - p r i n c i p l e , h o w
w o u l d i t suddenly b e c o m e a sacred t h i n g a n d the o b j e c t o f religious feelings?
A p a r t f r o m greater f r e e d o m o f m o v e m e n t , death adds n o t h i n g essential t o i t .
B e i n g attached t o n o regular residence f r o m t h e n o n , i t can d o at any t i m e
the things i t o n c e d i d o n l y at n i g h t ; b u t t h e things i t can d o are still o f the
same nature. So w h y w o u l d the l i v i n g have seen this u p r o o t e d a n d v a g a b o n d
d o u b l e o f yesterday's f r i e n d as a n y t h i n g b u t a f e l l o w h u m a n ? I t was a f e l l o w
h u m a n w h o s e nearness m i g h t i n d e e d have b e e n i n o p p o r t u n e , b u t i t was n o t
22
a deity.
I n fact, i t seems that, far f r o m t e n d i n g t o increase the v i t a l energies,
death s h o u l d actually have sapped t h e m . I t is a w i d e s p r e a d b e l i e f i n the l o w e r
societies that t h e s o u l shares i n t i m a t e l y i n the body's life. I f t h e b o d y is i n -
j u r e d , the s o u l i t s e l f is i n j u r e d i n t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g place. H e n c e , i t s h o u l d

book The Making of Religion. In fact, it rests on the hypothesis that spiritism is a constant fact of observa-
tion, that seeing at a distance is a real faculty of man or, at least, of certain men—and we know the extent
to which this postulate is disputed. What is still more disputable is that the facts of spiritism should be suf-
ficiently apparent and sufficiendy common to have been able to serve as the basis of all the religious be-
liefs and practices that bear upon souls and spirits. Examination of these questions would take me too far
awayfromthe object of my study. Furthermore, since Lang's theory remains open to several of the ob-
jections that I will address to Tylor's, my engaging in such an examination is still less necessary.
^[Frank Byron] Jevons makes a similar observation. Along with Tylor, he accepts that the idea of the
soul comes from dreaming and that, once this idea was created, man projected it into things. But, he adds,
the fact that nature has been conceived of as animate in the way man is does not explain why it should
have become the object of a cult. "From the fact that man sees a tree that bends and aflamethat comes
and goes as a living being like himself, it does not at all follow that either is considered a supernatural be-
ing; on the contrary, to the extent that they resemble him, they can do nothing that in his eyes is super-
natural" (An Introduction to the History of Religion [London, Methuen, 1896], p. 55).
58 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

age a l o n g w i t h the body. I n fact, there are peoples a m o n g w h o m funeral r e -

spects are n o t p a i d t o m e n w h o have reached senility; they are treated as i f
2 3
t h e i r souls had b e c o m e senile as w e l l . T h e r e are even cases i n w h i c h c e r t a i n
p r i v i l e g e d i n d i v i d u a l s are l a w f u l l y p u t t o death before t h e y arrive at o l d
age—for example, kings o r priests t h o u g h t t o be vessels o f some p o w e r f u l
spirit w h o s e p r o t e c t i o n society is anxious t o keep. T h e o b j e c t i n this is t o
prevent the spirit f r o m b e i n g s t r i c k e n w i t h the physical degeneration o f those
w h o are its t e m p o r a r y trustees. T h u s , the spirit is r e m o v e d before age w e a k -
ens the b o d y i n w h i c h i t is residing; since i t has lost n o n e o f its strength, the
spirit is transferred i n t o a y o u n g e r b o d y i n w h i c h i t w i l l be able t o keep its
24
vitality intact. B u t i n that case, w h e n death results f r o m sickness o r o l d age,
it w o u l d seem that the s o u l c o u l d retain o n l y d i m i n i s h e d p o w e r . A n d i n d e e d ,
i f the soul is o n l y the d o u b l e o f the b o d y , i t is unclear h o w i t c o u l d survive at
all once the b o d y has f i n a l l y disintegrated. F r o m this p o i n t o f view, t h e idea
o f its survival becomes barely i n t e l l i g i b l e . H e n c e , here is a gap—a l o g i c a l a n d
psychological v o i d — b e t w e e n the idea o f a d o u b l e at l i b e r t y a n d that o f a
spirit t o w h i c h a c u l t is addressed.
T h a t v o i d seems all t h e greater w h e n w e realize h o w w i d e an abyss sep-
arates the sacred w o r l d f r o m the profane one. I t is o b v i o u s that a mere change
o f degree c o u l d n o t possibly be e n o u g h t o m a k e a t h i n g pass f r o m one cate-
g o r y t o the other. Sacred beings are n o t d i s t i n g u i s h e d f r o m profane ones
m e r e l y b y the strange o r u n s e t t l i n g f o r m s t h e y take o n o r b y t h e w i d e r p o w -
ers they enjoy. T h e r e is n o c o m m o n measure b e t w e e n t h e m . N o w , there is
n o t h i n g i n the idea o f a d o u b l e that c o u l d a c c o u n t f o r such a radical h e t e r o -
geneity. I t is said that, o n c e freed f r o m the body, t h e d o u b l e can d o e i t h e r
great g o o d o r great h a r m t o the l i v i n g , d e p e n d i n g o n the m a n n e r i n w h i c h
i t regards t h e m . B u t u p s e t t i n g those a r o u n d h i m is n o t e n o u g h t o make a b e -
i n g appear t o be o f a different nature f r o m those w h o s e peace i t threatens. T o
be sure, some fear and restraint always enter i n t o the feelings the faithful have
for the things t h e y reverence; b u t i t is a fear sui generis, made o f respect m o r e
t h a n fear, a n d made m a i n l y o f that v e r y special e m o t i o n that majesty elicits i n
m a n . T h e idea o f majesty is essentially r e l i g i o u s . I n a sense, therefore, w e
have e x p l a i n e d n o t h i n g a b o u t r e l i g i o n so l o n g as w e have n o t discovered
w h e r e that idea comes f r o m , w h a t i t corresponds t o , a n d w h a t c o u l d have

23
See [Sir Baldwin] Spencer and [Francis James] Gillen, Northern Tribes [of Central Australia, London,
Macmillan, 1904], p. 506; and Native Tribes, p. 512. [Reference is to the relationship of soul and life; it is
not about funeral practices. Therefore the footnote is probably to the sentence ". . . the soul participates
actively in the life of the body." Trans.]
24
This is the ritual and mythical theme that [Sir James George] Frazer studies in his The Golden Bough
[a Study in Magk and Religion, London, Macmillan, 1890].
The Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion 59

awakened i t i n consciousnesses. M e r e h u m a n souls c o u l d n o t possibly be i n -

vested w i t h this trait f o r t h e simple reason that t h e y are d i s e m b o d i e d .
A n e x a m p l e from Melanesia b r i n g s this o u t . T h e Melanesians believe
that m a n possesses a soul t h a t leaves the b o d y at death, w h e n i t changes
names a n d becomes w h a t t h e y call a tindalo, a natmat, etc. A t the same t i m e ,
t h e y also have a c u l t t o the souls o f the dead: T h e s e souls are prayed t o and
i n v o k e d . O f f e r i n g s a n d sacrifices are m a d e t o t h e m . B u t n o t every t i n d a l o *
is the o b j e c t o f those r i t u a l practices. T h a t h o n o r goes o n l y t o those that e m -
anate from m e n w h o , d u r i n g t h e i r lifetimes, w e r e c r e d i t e d b y p u b l i c o p i n i o n
w i t h the v e r y special v i r t u e that the Melanesians call mana. Later, I e x p l a i n
the idea that this w o r d expresses. F o r the t i m e b e i n g , suffice i t t o say t h a t i t
is the d i s t i n g u i s h i n g characteristic o f any sacred b e i n g . M a n a , says C o d r i n g ¬
t o n , "is that w h i c h p e r m i t s t h e p r o d u c t i o n o f effects that are outside t h e o r -
25
d i n a r y p o w e r o f m e n , a n d outside the o r d i n a r y processes o f n a t u r e . " A
priest, a sorcerer, o r a r i t u a l f o r m u l a has mana, as does a sacred stone o r a
spirit. T h u s , t h e o n l y tindalos g i v e n r e l i g i o u s h o n o r s are those that w e r e a l -
ready sacred beings w h i l e t h e i r o w n e r s w e r e alive. As t o o t h e r souls, those
that c o m e from o r d i n a r y m e n , from t h e c o m m o n h e r d o f the profane, t h e y
26
are " n o t h i n g s after death, as before," a c c o r d i n g t o t h e same a u t h o r . Since i t
consummates t h e separation from profane things m o r e f u l l y a n d finally, death
m a y v e r y w e l l reinforce t h e sacredness o f t h e soul, i f t h e soul already has this
quality, b u t death does n o t create i t .
F u r t h e r m o r e i f , as the a n i m i s t hypothesis assumes, t h e first sacred beings
t r u l y h a d b e e n the souls o f the dead, a n d t h e first c u l t h a d b e e n that o f the
ancestors, o n e s h o u l d n o t i c e that t h e l o w e r the type o f society is, the m o r e
p r e d o m i n a n t this c u l t is i n r e l i g i o u s life. Instead, the t r u t h is t h e o t h e r w a y
a r o u n d . T h e ancestral c u l t develops and appears i n its characteristic form
o n l y i n advanced societies such as C h i n a , E g y p t , and the GreeTc and R o m a n
cities? o n the o t h e r h a n d , i t is l a c k i n g i n the A u s t r a l i a n societies, w h i c h .rep-
resent, as w e w i l l see, t h e lowest a n d simplest f o r m u p f social o r g a n i z a t i o n w e
kacjw. T o be sure, funeral a n d m o u r n i n g rites are t o be f o u n d i n those s o c i -
eties, b u t even t h o u g h the n a m e " c u l t " has sometimes b e e n g i v e n t o prac-
tices o f this sort, t h e y d o n o t c o n s t i t u t e a c u l t . I n fact, a c u l t is n o t a m e r e
c o l l e c t i o n o f r i t u a l precautions that m a n is responsible f o r t a k i n g i n c e r t a i n

*The French text sometimes takes these foreign terms out of italics once they have been explained. I
have done this consistendy throughout.
25
Codrington, The Melanesians, p. 119.
26
Ibid., p. 125. [Although the passage Durkheim cites is indeed a discussion of mana, the quotation
does not appear there. Trans.]
60 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

circumstances. I t is a system o f rites, feasts, a n d v a r i o u s ceremonies all having

the characteristic that they recur periodically. T h e y m e e t t h e n e e d that the faithful
feel p e r i o d i c a l l y t o t i g h t e n a n d strengthen t h e b o n d b e t w e e n t h e m a n d the
sacred beings o n w h i c h t h e y d e p e n d . * T h i s is w h y o n e speaks o f n u p t i a l rites
and n o t o f a n u p t i a l cult, o f b i r t h rites b u t n o t a c u l t o f t h e n e w b o r n : T h e
events that occasion these rites i m p l y n o p e r i o d i c i t y . I n t h e same way, there
is an ancestor c u l t o n l y i f sacrifices are made o n t h e t o m b s f r o m t i m e t o t i m e ,
i f l i b a t i o n s are p o u r e d there m o r e o r less frequendy, o r i f regular feasts are
celebrated i n h o n o r o f the dead person. B u t the A u s t r a l i a n does n o t have any
dealings o f this sort w i t h his dead. C e r t a i n l y he m u s t r i t u a l l y b u r y t h e i r r e -
mains, m o u r n t h e m f o r a p e r i o d a n d i n a m a n n e r p r e s c r i b e d and, i f n e e d be,
2 7
avenge t h e m . B u t o n c e he has c a r r i e d o u t these pious duties, o n c e t h e
bones are d r y and the m o u r n i n g has e n d e d , t h e n all is said a n d done, a n d t h e
survivors have n o f u r t h e r o b l i g a t i o n s t o w a r d those o f t h e i r relatives w h o are
n o m o r e . T r u e , there is i n d e e d a f o r m i n w h i c h the dead c o n t i n u e t o keep a
certain place i n t h e lives o f t h e i r k i n , even after the m o u r n i n g is over. T h e i r
28
hair o r certain o f t h e i r b o n e s are sometimes k e p t because o f special v i r t u e s
attached t o t h e m . S t i l l , they have ceased t o be l i k e persons, and have d r o p p e d
t o the r a n k o f a n o n y m o u s a n d i m p e r s o n a l amulets. I n that state, they are the
object o f n o cult, a n d the o n l y purposes t h e y still have are m a g i c a l .
-"" H o w e v e r , some A u s t r a l i a n tribes p e r i o d i c a l l y celebrate rites i n h o n o r o f
fabled ancestors that t r a d i t i o n places at the o r i g i n o f t i m e . G e n e r a l l y these
ceremonies consist i n a sort o f dramatic p e r f o r m a n c e , i n w h i c h are m i m e d
29
the deeds a t t r i b u t e d i n m y t h t o those l e g e n d a r y h e r o e s . S t i l l , t h e personages
thus d e p i c t e d are n o t m e n w h o , after h a v i n g e x p e r i e n c e d t h e life o f m e n ,
w e r e t r a n s f o r m e d b y death i n t o s o m e t h i n g l i k e gods. Instead t h e y are
t h o u g h t t o have enjoyed s u p e r h u m a n p o w e r s t h r o u g h o u t t h e i r lives. E v e r y -
t h i n g great that was d o n e i n t h e h i s t o r y o f the t r i b e , a n d even i n the h i s t o r y
o f the w o r l d , is a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e m . I n large part, i t is t h e y w h o have made
the earth as i t is and m e n as t h e y are. T h u s the aura that continues t o sur-
r o u n d t h e m does n o t c o m e m e r e l y from t h e fact that t h e y are ancestors—

*In nearly all contexts, the word "depend" seems to mean both "counting upon" and "being sub-
jects of."
27
Apparendy sometimes there are even funeral offerings (see [Walter E.] Roth, "Superstition, Magic
and Medicine," in North Queensland Ethnography, Bulletin, no. 5, sec. 69 [Brisbane, G. A. Vaughn, 1903];
and "Burial [Ceremonies and the Disposal of the Dead"] in North Queensland Ethnography, Bulletin, no.
10, in RAM, vol. VI, part 1907, 5, p. 395). But these offerings are not periodic.
28
See Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 538, 553; and Northern Tribes, pp. 463, 543, 547.
29
See especially Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, chaps. 6, 7, 9.
Tlie Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion 61

w h i c h is t o say, i n s u m , from t h e fact that t h e y are d e a d — b u t from the fact

that a d i v i n e characteristic is a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e m , a n d has b e e n d o w n the ages.
To repeat the M e l a n e s i a n expression, t h e y are b y nature e n d o w e d w i t h mana.
C o n s e q u e n t l y , n o t h i n g i n any o f this demonstrates that death s h o u l d have the
least p o w e r t o d e i f y I n d e e d , o n e c a n n o t say w i t h o u t i m p r o p r i e t y that these
rites c o n s t i t u t e an ancestor c u l t , since t h e y are n o t addressed to ancestors as
such. F o r a t r u e c u l t o f t h e dead t o b e possible, t h e real ancestors—the rela-
tives that m e n really lose each d a y — m u s t b e c o m e the o b j e c t o f a c u l t after
they die. O n c e again, n o traces o f a c u l t o f this t y p e exist i n Australia.
T h u s t h e c u l t that s h o u l d have b e e n d o m i n a n t i n the l o w e r societies, ac-
c o r d i n g t o the hypothesis, is n o n e x i s t e n t i n t h e m , a c c o r d i n g t o reality. I n the
final analysis, t h e A u s t r a l i a n is c o n c e r n e d w i t h his dead o n l y at the v e r y m o -
m e n t o f death a n d i m m e d i a t e l y f o l l o w i n g . Nevertheless, as w e w i l l see, i n r e -
gard t o sacred beings o f an altogether different nature, these same peoples
practice a c o m p l e x c u l t made u p o f m u l t i p l e ceremonies that sometimes o c -
c u p y weeks a n d even m o n t h s . I t is u n t h i n k a b l e that t h e f e w rites the A u s -
tralian p e r f o r m s w h e n he happens t o lose o n e o f his relatives s h o u l d have
b e e n t h e o r i g i n o f those p e r m a n e n t cults that r e t u r n r e g u l a r l y every year a n d
take u p a significant p a r t o f his life. T h e contrast is so great, i n fact, that o n e
m i g h t w e l l ask w h e t h e r i t is n o t t h e first that derives from the second—
w h e t h e r t h e souls o f m e n , far from b e i n g t h e m o d e l o n w h i c h the gods w e r e
i m a g i n e d , w e r e from the b e g i n n i n g c o n c e i v e d o f as emanations o f the deity.

IV
I f the c u l t o f t h e dead is n o t p r i m i t i v e , a n i m i s m has n o basis. I t m i g h t t h e r e -
fore seem pointless t o e x a m i n e the t h i r d thesis o f the system, c o n c e r n i n g t h e
t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f t h e c u l t o f t h e dead i n t o a c u l t o f nature. B u t its e x a m i n a -
t i o n is necessary, since the postulate o n w h i c h i t rests is f o u n d even a m o n g
historians o f r e l i g i o n w h o d o n o t accept a n i m i s m p r o p e r l y so-called, such as
3 0 3 1 3 2 33
Brinton, Lang, Réville, and R o b e r t s o n S m i t h himself.

-"•[Daniel Garrison Brinton], The Religions of Primitive Peoples [New York, G. P. Putnam's, 1897], pp.
478".
31
[Andrew Lang], Mythes, cultes et religions [ Paris, F. Alcan, 1896], p. 50.
32
[Albert Réville], Les Religions des peuples non civilisés, vol. II [Paris, Fischbacher, 1883], Conclusion.
33
[William Robertson Smith, Lectures on the Religions] of the Semites, 2d ed. [London, A & C Black,
1894], pp. 126, 132.
62 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

T h i s e x t e n s i o n o f the c u l t o f the dead t o the w h o l e o f nature is t h o u g h t

t o arise f r o m the fact that w e t e n d i n s t i n c t i v e l y t o conceive all things i n o u r
o w n image, that is, as l i v i n g a n d t h i n k i n g beings. W e saw that Spencer has a l -
ready disputed the reality o f this so-called i n s t i n c t . Since an a n i m a l clearly
distinguishes l i v i n g bodies f r o m n a t u r a l objects, i t seemed t o h i m impossible
that m a n , as h e i r o f the a n i m a l , s h o u l d n o t have had this same faculty o f dis-
c r i m i n a t i o n f r o m the start. B u t as sure as m a y be t h e facts that Spencer cites,
i n this particular case t h e y d o n o t have the character o f p r o o f that he believes
they have. I n d e e d , his a r g u m e n t assumes t h a t all t h e faculties, instincts, and
abilities o f the a n i m a l have passed t o m a n i n t h e i r entirety. B u t a great m a n y
errors o r i g i n a t e i n this p r i n c i p l e , w h i c h is w r o n g l y taken as self-evident
t r u t h . For example, f r o m the fact that sexual j e a l o u s y is generally v e r y s t r o n g
a m o n g the h i g h e r animals, i t has b e e n c o n c l u d e d that this same jealousy m u s t
be f o u n d i n m a n , from the b e g i n n i n g o f h i s t o r y a n d w i t h the same i n t e n -
34
sity. Today i t c a n n o t be d o u b t e d that m a n is able t o practice a sexual c o m -
m u n i s m that w o u l d be impossible i f that j e a l o u s y c o u l d n o t w e a k e n o r even
35
disappear w h e n necessary. T h i s is so because m a n is n o t s i m p l y an a n i m a l ,
plus c e r t a i n qualities: H e is s o m e t h i n g different. H u m a n nature is the p r o d -
u c t o f a recasting, so t o speak, o f a n i m a l nature. T h e r e have b e e n gains as w e l l
as losses i n the course o f the i n t r i c a t e operations o f w h i c h this recasting is the
result. H o w m a n y instincts have w e n o t lost! W e have lost t h e m because m a n
is i n relationship n o t o n l y w i t h a physical m i l i e u , b u t also w i t h a social m i -
l i e u that is i n f i n i t e l y m o r e extensive, stable, a n d p o w e r f u l t h a n those t o
w h o s e influence animals are subject. I n o r d e r t o live, t h e n , he must adapt to
i t . N o w , t o m a i n t a i n itself, society often needs us t o see things f r o m a c e r t a i n
standpoint a n d feel t h e m i n a c e r t a i n way. I t therefore m o d i f i e s the ideas w e
w o u l d be i n c l i n e d t o have a b o u t t h e m , a n d the feelings t o w h i c h w e w o u l d
be i n c l i n e d i f w e o b e y e d o n l y o u r a n i m a l n a t u r e — e v e n t o the e x t e n t o f r e -
p l a c i n g t h e m w i t h q u i t e opposite feelings. D o e s society n o t g o so far as t o
make us see o u r o w n life as a t h i n g o f l i t t l e value, w h i l e f o r animals life is
36
p r o p e r t y par e x c e l l e n c e ? T h u s t o t r y t o i n f e r the m e n t a l m a k e u p o f the
p r i m i t i v e m a n from that o f the h i g h e r animals is a v a i n quest.

34
Such, for example, is the reasoning of [Edward Alexander] Westermarck (Origine du marriage dans
l'espèce humaine [Paris, Guillaumain, 1895], p.6).
33
By sexual communism, I do not mean that state of promiscuity in which man supposedly recognized
no matrimonial rules. I believe that such a state has never existed. But it has often happened that a group
of men have regularly united with one or several women.
36
See my [Le] Suicide, [Paris, F. Alcan, 1897], pp. 233ff.
The Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion 63

B u t w h i l e the o b j e c t i o n raised b y Spencer does n o t have the force its a u -

t h o r t h o u g h t i t d i d , n e i t h e r can the a n i m i s t postulate draw any a u t h o r i t y
f r o m the confusions c h i l d r e n seem t o make. W h e n w e hear a c h i l d a n g r i l y
abusing an o b j e c t that has h i t h i m , w e c o n c l u d e that he sees the object as a
conscious b e i n g l i k e himself; b u t this is a p o o r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f his speech
a n d gestures. I n reality, he is a stranger t o the v e r y c o m p l e x reasoning that is
i m p u t e d t o h i m . H e blames the table that has h u r t h i m n o t because he sup-
poses i t t o b e animate a n d i n t e l l i g e n t , b u t because i t has h u r t h i m . O n c e
anger is aroused b y the p a i n , i t seeks s o m e t h i n g o n w h i c h t o discharge itself;
the anger n a t u r a l l y goes t o the v e r y same t h i n g that p r o v o k e d i t , even t h o u g h
that t h i n g can d o n o t h i n g . T h e b e h a v i o r o f t h e adult i n a similar case is o f -
t e n j u s t as unreasonable. W h e n w e are intensely angry, w e feel the need t o
abuse a n d destroy, b u t w i t h o u t i m p u t i n g any sort o f conscious i l l w i l l t o the
objects o n w h i c h w e v e n t o u r anger. T h e r e is so l i t t l e c o n f u s i o n that, w h e n
the e m o t i o n o f the c h i l d has c o o l e d , he k n o w s v e r y w e l l h o w to distinguish
a chair f r o m a person: H e does n o t treat b o t h i n the same way. H i s t e n d e n c y
t o treat his toys as i f t h e y w e r e h u m a n beings is e x p l a i n e d similarly. H i s v e r y
intense n e e d t o play creates suitable m a t e r i a l f o r itself, j u s t as, i n the p r e c e d -
i n g case, t h e s t r o n g feelings that p a i n had unleashed created t h e i r o w n , o u t o f
n o t h i n g . T h u s , t o be able t o play c o n s c i e n t i o u s l y w i t h his p u p p e t , he i m a g -
ines i t as a l i v i n g p e r s o n . T h e i l l u s i o n is the easier f o r h i m , moreover, because
i m a g i n a t i o n is his sovereign mistress; he scarcely t h i n k s i n a n y t h i n g b u t i m -
ages, and w e k n o w t o w h a t e x t e n t images are pliable things that b e n d i n o b e -
dience t o all that desire c o m m a n d s . B u t so l i t t l e is he the d u p e o f his o w n
f i c t i o n that i f i t s u d d e n l y became reality a n d his p u p p e t b i t h i m , he w o u l d be
37
the first a s t o n i s h e d .
L e t us therefore p u t aside these d u b i o u s analogies. T o k n o w i f m a n was
o r i g i n a l l y i n c l i n e d t o w a r d the confusions that are ascribed t o h i m , i t is n o t
the a n i m a l o r the c h i l d o f today that m u s t be considered, b u t the p r i m i t i v e
beliefs themselves. I f t h e spirits a n d gods o f nature really are c o n s t r u c t e d i n
the image o f the h u m a n s o u l , t h e y m u s t bear the m a r k o f t h e i r o r i g i n and the
essential traits o f t h e i r m o d e l . T o be c o n c e i v e d o f as the i n w a r d p r i n c i p l e that
animates the b o d y is the t r a i t par excellence o f the soul. I t is the soul that
moves t h e b o d y a n d makes i t live, such that life ends o r is suspended w h e n
the s o u l leaves. I t is i n t h e b o d y that the s o u l has its natural residence—so
l o n g as the b o d y exists, at least. S u c h is n o t the case f o r the spirits i n charge
o f the various n a t u r a l p h e n o m e n a . T h e g o d o f the sun is n o t necessarily i n

Spencer, Principles of Sociology, p. 188.

37
64 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

the sun, o r the spirit o f a c e r t a i n r o c k i n the r o c k that serves as its p r i m a r y

residence. A spirit u n d o u b t e d l y has close relations w i t h the b o d y t o w h i c h i t
is attached, b u t t o call that s p i r i t its soul is t o use a v e r y inaccurate phrase. " I n
Melanesia," says C o d r i n g t o n , " i t does n o t seem that p e o p l e believe i n t h e e x -
istence o f spirits that animate a n a t u r a l object, such as a tree, a waterfall, a
s t o r m o r a r o c k , i n such a w a y as t o be f o r that o b j e c t w h a t the soul is b e -
l i e v e d t o be f o r the h u m a n b o d y . I t is t r u e that Europeans talk about spirits
o f the sea, the s t o r m , o r t h e forest; b u t t h e idea o f the natives that is trans-
lated i n this w a y is altogether different. T h e natives t h i n k that the spirit fre-
quents the forest o r the sea a n d has t h e p o w e r t o raise storms and m a k e
38
travelers s i c k e n . " Whereas the soul is basically t h e inside o f the body, the
spirit pursues the greater part o f its existence outside the object that serves as
its base. H e r e , t h e n , is a difference t h a t does n o t seem t o s h o w t h a t t h e idea
o f spirit came f r o m t h e idea o f soul.
F r o m another p o i n t o f v i e w , i f m a n really h a d b e e n d r i v e n t o project his
image i n t o things, the first sacred beings w o u l d have b e e n c o n c e i v e d o f i n his
image. N o w , far from b e i n g p r i m i t i v e , a n t h r o p o m o r p h i s m is the m a r k o f a
relatively advanced c i v i l i z a t i o n . A t t h e b e g i n n i n g , sacred beings are c o n -
ceived o f i n the f o r m o f animals o r plants, f r o m w h i c h h u m a n f o r m has
s l o w l y emerged. I t w i l l be seen b e l o w that i n Australia, animals a n d plants are
i n the highest r a n k o f sacred things. E v e n a m o n g t h e Indians o f N o r t h A m e r -
ica, the great cosmic deities that are b e g i n n i n g t o be t h e object o f a c u l t are
39
v e r y o f t e n c o n c e i v e d o f i n the f o r m o f a n i m a l s . " A c c o r d i n g t o this t u r n o f
m i n d , " says R e v i l l e , n o t w i t h o u t surprise, " n o d i s t i n c t i o n is m a d e b e t w e e n
a n i m a l , m a n , a n d d i v i n e b e i n g , " " a n d , m o s t o f t e n , one would say that the ani-
40
mal form is the fundamental form."
T o f i n d a g o d c o n s t r u c t e d e n t i r e l y o u t o f h u m a n elements, o n e m u s t
c o m e almost t o C h r i s t i a n i t y . I n C h r i s t i a n i t y , t h e G o d is a m a n , n o t o n l y i n
the physical aspect i n w h i c h he t e m p o r a r i l y manifested h i m s e l f b u t also i n
the ideas and feelings he expresses. B u t even t h o u g h t h e gods i n R o m e a n d
Greece w e r e generally represented w i t h h u m a n traits, several m y t h i c a l p e r -
sonages nonetheless c a r r i e d the m a r k o f an a n i m a l o r i g i n . T h e r e is D i o n y s u s ,
w h o m o n e o f t e n meets i n the f o r m o f a b u l l o r at least w i t h t h e h o r n s o f a
b u l l ; there is D e m e t e r , represented w i t h the m a n e o f a horse; there are Pan,

38
Codringcon, The Meianesians, p. 123.
39
[}ames Owen] Dorsey, "A Study of Siouan Cults," in Xlth Annual Report of the Bureau of American
Ethnology [Washington, D.C., Government Printing Office, 1894], pp. 431ff.
40
Réville, La Religion des peuples non civilisés, vol. I, p. 248.
The Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion 65

41
Silenus, the Fauns, e t c . T h u s , i t is far f r o m t r u e that m a n was strongly i n -
c l i n e d t o i m p o s e his f o r m u p o n things. W h a t is m o r e , he began t o i m a g i n e
h i m s e l f as a close p a r t i c i p a n t i n a n i m a l nature. I n d e e d , there is a b e l i e f that is
nearly universal i n Australia, a n d also v e r y w i d e s p r e a d a m o n g the Indians o f
N o r t h A m e r i c a , that the ancestors o f m e n w e r e animals o r plants, o r at least
that, w h o l l y o r i n part, t h e first m e n h a d t h e d i s t i n g u i s h i n g characteristics o f
c e r t a i n a n i m a l o r p l a n t species. T h u s , m a n d i d n o t see beings like h i m s e l f
e v e r y w h e r e — f a r f r o m i t . H e started o u t t h i n k i n g o f h i m s e l f i n the image o f
beings f r o m w h i c h he specifically differed.

V
F u r t h e r , the a n i m i s t t h e o r y i m p l i e s a consequence that is perhaps its o w n best
refutation.
I f that t h e o r y was t r u e , o n e w o u l d have t o accept the n o t i o n that r e l i -
gious beliefs are so m a n y h a l l u c i n a t o r y representations, w i t h o u t any objective
basis. T h e assumption is that all those beliefs are d e r i v e d from the idea o f soul,
since spirits a n d gods are seen as n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n p u r i f i e d souls. B u t , ac-
c o r d i n g t o T y l o r a n d his followers, the v e r y n o t i o n o f soul itself is made o f the
vague a n d variable images that f i l l o u r m i n d s d u r i n g sleep—for the soul is the
d o u b l e , a n d the d o u b l e is n o t h i n g b u t the m a n as he appears to h i m s e l f w h e n
he is asleep. F r o m this p o i n t o f v i e w , sacred beings w o u l d be mere i m a g i n i n g s
that m a n created i n a sort o f d e l i r i u m that seizes h i m regularly each day; and,
from this p o i n t o f v i e w , i t is impossible t o see w h a t useful ends t h e y serve o r
t o w h a t t h e y c o r r e s p o n d i n reality. I f he prays, i f he makes sacrifices and o f -
ferings, i f he binds h i m s e l f t o the m u l t i p l e p r i v a t i o n s that r i t u a l prescribes t o
h i m , that is o n l y because some k i n d o f i n b o r n a b e r r a t i o n has made h i m take
dreams f o r perceptions, death f o r a p r o l o n g e d sleep, a n d i n a n i m a t e objects f o r
l i v i n g , t h i n k i n g beings. I n this w a y (as m a n y have b e e n l e d to concede), n o t
o n l y does the f o r m i n w h i c h religious forces are o r have been c o n c e i v e d o f
fail t o express t h e m accurately, a n d n o t o n l y d o t h e symbols w i t h w h o s e help
t h e y have b e e n t h o u g h t a b o u t partially mask t h e i r nature, b u t , m o r e even
t h a n that, there w o u l d be n o t h i n g b e h i n d these images and f o r m s b u t the
nightmares o f u n c u l t i v a t e d m i n d s . I n the end, r e l i g i o n w o u l d be o n l y a dream,

""[Marinus Willem] de Visser, De Graecorum diis non referentibus speciem humanam, Lugduni-Batavorum,
apud G. Los, 1900; Cf. [Paul] Perdrizet, Bulletin de correspondance hellénique [Athens, Ecole française
d'Athènes], 1889, p. 635.
66 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

42
systematized a n d l i v e d , b u t w i t h o u t f o u n d a t i o n i n the r e a l . A n d this is w h y ,
w h e n the theorists o f a n i m i s m seek the o r i g i n s o f religious t h o u g h t , they d o
n o t o v e r l y exert themselves. W h e n they t h i n k they have managed to e x p l a i n
w h a t c o u l d have l e d t o i m a g i n e beings o f strange a n d vaporous f o r m , such as
those w e see i n dreams, the p r o b l e m appears solved.
I n reality, the p r o b l e m has n o t even b e e n t o u c h e d . I t is u n t h i n k a b l e that
systems o f ideas l i k e r e l i g i o n s , w h i c h have h e l d such a large place i n h i s t o r y —
t h e w e l l t o w h i c h peoples i n all the ages have c o m e t o d r a w the energy they
h a d t o have i n order t o l i v e — c o u l d be m e r e fabrics o f i l l u s i o n . Today w e
agree t o recognize that law, morals, a n d scientific t h o u g h t itself were b o r n i n
r e l i g i o n , were l o n g c o n f o u n d e d w i t h i t , and have r e m a i n e d i m b u e d w i t h its
spirit. H o w c o u l d a h o l l o w phantasmagoria have b e e n able t o m o l d h u m a n
consciousnesses so p o w e r f u l l y a n d so lastingly? Surely, i t o u g h t t o be a p r i n -
ciple f o r the science o f r e l i g i o n s that r e l i g i o n expresses n o t h i n g that is n o t i n
nature: T h e r e is n o science except science o f n a t u r a l p h e n o m e n a . T o w h i c h
r e a l m o f nature these realities b e l o n g , and w h a t has m a d e m e n conceive o f
t h e m i n the singular f o r m that is p e c u l i a r t o religious t h o u g h t , is the w h o l e
question. B u t t o m a k e t h e p o s i n g o f that q u e s t i o n even possible, w e m u s t first
a l l o w that real things are c o n c e i v e d o f i n that way. W h e n the philosophers o f
the e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y treated r e l i g i o n as a vast e r r o r i n v e n t e d b y priests,
they c o u l d at least e x p l a i n its persistence b y the interest o f the priestly caste
i n d u p i n g the masses. B u t i f the p e o p l e themselves created those systems o f
mistaken ideas, and at the same t i m e w e r e d u p e d b y t h e m , h o w c o u l d this
a m a z i n g d u p e r y have p e r p e t u a t e d itself t h r o u g h t h e w h o l e course o f history?
I n d e e d , w h e t h e r the t e r m "science o f r e l i g i o n s " can be used w i t h o u t
i m p r o p r i e t y i n those circumstances, is questionable. A science is a discipline
that, h o w e v e r c o n c e i v e d , always applies t o a reality that is g i v e n . Physics a n d
c h e m i s t r y are sciences because p h y s i c o c h e m i c a l p h e n o m e n a are real, and o f
a reality that is i n d e p e n d e n t o f the t r u t h s those sciences demonstrate. There

42
According to Spencer, however, the belief in spirits has a grain of truth: the idea "that the power that
is manifested in consciousness is another form of the power that is manifested outside of consciousness"
([Herbert Spencer], "Ecclesiastical Institutions" [part VI, sec. 659], in Principles of Sociology, vol. Ill,
p. 169]). By this, Spencer means that the notion of force in general is the feeling of the force that we have,
spread to the entire universe. Animism implicidy concedes this when it populates nature with spirits anal-
ogous to our own. But even if this hypothesis was true—and it calls forth serious reservations that I will
state (Bk. Ill, chap. 3, §3)—it is not in any way religious; and it calls for no cult. Thus it would still be the
case that the system of religious symbols and rites, the classification of things as sacred and profane—all
that is properly religious in religion—does not correspond to anything in reality. Moreover, this grain of
truth is also, and even more, a grain of error: For if it is true that the forces of nature and those of con-
sciousness are akin, they are also profoundly different, and to treat them as identical is to open oneself to
strange errors.
The Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion 67

is a p s y c h o l o g i c a l science because there really are consciousnesses, w h i c h d o

n o t acquire f r o m t h e p s y c h o l o g i s t t h e i r r i g h t t o exist. B u t r e l i g i o n c o u l d n o t
possibly survive t h e a n i m i s t t h e o r y i f o n e day i t was r e c o g n i z e d as t r u e b y all
m e n : M e n c o u l d n o t fail t o free themselves f r o m errors w h o s e nature a n d
o r i g i n w o u l d thus stand revealed. W h a t sort o f science is i t w h o s e p r i n c i p a l
discovery is t o m a k e the v e r y o b j e c t i t treats disappear?
 CHAPTER. T H R E E

THE LEADING CONCEPTIONS

OF THE ELEMENTARY
RELIGION (CONTINUATION)
II. Naturism

T he o u t l o o k o f t h e naturist s c h o o l has an e n t i r e l y different i n s p i r a t i o n . I t

is also r e c r u i t e d from different m i l i e u x . T h e animists are ethnographers
o r anthropologists, f o r the m o s t part. T h e r e l i g i o n s t h e y have studied are
a m o n g t h e crudest that h u m a n i t y has p r a c t i c e d . H e n c e the p r i m a r y i m p o r -
tance these theorists give t o the souls o f t h e dead, spirits, a n d d e m o n s , that
is, t o s p i r i t u a l beings o f t h e second o r d e r : S p i r i t u a l beings o f a h i g h e r o r d e r
1
are v i r t u a l l y u n k n o w n i n those r e l i g i o n s . B y contrast, t h e theories I w i l l
n o w present are the w o r k o f scholars w h o have b e e n m a i n l y c o n c e r n e d w i t h
the great civilizations o f E u r o p e and Asia.
As s o o n as researchers, f o l l o w i n g the brothers G r i m m , saw the f r u i t f u l -
ness o f c o m p a r i n g the different m y t h o l o g i e s o f the I n d o - E u r o p e a n peoples,
t h e y w e r e s t r u c k b y t h e remarkable similarities these m y t h o l o g i e s displayed.
M y t h i c a l personages w e r e i d e n t i f i e d that, a l t h o u g h h a v i n g different names,
s y m b o l i z e d t h e same ideas a n d h a d t h e same f u n c t i o n s . T h e names t h e m -
selves w e r e c o m p a r e d , a n d researchers b e l i e v e d i t c o u l d sometimes be s h o w n
t h a t they w e r e n o t u n r e l a t e d . I t appeared t h a t such similarities c o u l d b e e x -
p l a i n e d o n l y b y c o m m o n o r i g i n . So researchers w e r e l e d t o suppose that, d i f -
ferent as these ideas w e r e i n appearance, t h e y w e r e i n reality different f o r m s

'This no doubt explains as well the sympathy that folklorists like [Wilhelm] Mannhardt [1831-1880]
have felt for animist ideas. In popular religions, as in the lower religions, spiritual beings of the second or-
der have prominence. [Friedrich L. W. Schwartz] Der Ursprung der Mythologie, Berlin [W. Herzt], 1860.

68
The Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion (Continuation) 69

o r i g i n a t i n g f r o m a c o m m o n source that m i g h t b e discoverable. T h e y p o s t u -

lated that, b y u s i n g t h e c o m p a r a t i v e m e t h o d , i t s h o u l d b e possible t o g o back,
b e y o n d t h e great r e l i g i o n s , t o a far m o r e a n c i e n t system o f ideas, a t r u l y
p r i m i t i v e r e l i g i o n f r o m w h i c h t h e others d e r i v e d .
W h a t c o n t r i b u t e d m o s t t o arousing these a m b i t i o n s was the discovery o f
the Vedas, a w r i t t e n t e x t w h o s e a n t i q u i t y m a y w e l l have b e e n exaggerated at
the m o m e n t i t was discovered, b u t that nevertheless is o n e o f t h e m o s t a n -
c i e n t w e have i n a n I n d o - E u r o p e a n language. T h u s , b y using t h e o r d i n a r y
m e t h o d s o f p h i l o l o g y , t h e y w e r e i n a p o s i t i o n t o study a literature as o l d as o r
o l d e r t h a n that o f H o m e r a n d a r e l i g i o n t h o u g h t t o b e m o r e p r i m i t i v e t h a n
that o f t h e ancient G e r m a n s . Clearly, a d o c u m e n t o f such value was b o u n d
t o shed n e w l i g h t o n t h e r e l i g i o u s b e g i n n i n g s o f h u m a n i t y , a n d t h e science
o f r e l i g i o n s c o u l d n o t fail t o b e r e v o l u t i o n i z e d b y i t .
So m u c h was t h e c o n c e p t i o n thus b o r n called f o r b y t h e state o f science
a n d b y t h e general c u r r e n t o f ideas t h a t i t e m e r g e d at almost t h e same t i m e
i n t w o different c o u n t r i e s . I n 1856, M a x M u l l e r set f o r t h t h e p r i n c i p l e s i n his
2
Oxford Essays. C l e a r l y i n t h e same s p i r i t , A d a l b e r t K u h n ' s b o o k , Origine du
3
feu et de la boisson divine, appeared three years later. O n c e advanced, t h e idea
spread v e r y r a p i d l y i n scientific circles. K u h n ' s n a m e is closely associated w i t h
that o f his b r o t h e r - i n - l a w [ F r i e d r i c h ] S c h w a r t z , w h o s e b o o k L'Origine de la
4
mythologie appeared s h o r d y after K u h n ' s . [ H y m a n n ] S t e i n t h a l a n d t h e w h o l e
G e r m a n s c h o o l o f Voelkerpsychologie* b e l o n g t o t h e same m o v e m e n t . T h e
5
t h e o r y was i m p o r t e d i n t o France i n 1863 b y M . M i c h e l B r e a l . I t m e t so l i t -
6
de resistance that, a c c o r d i n g t o [ O t t o ] G r u p p e , " t h e r e came a t i m e w h e n ,
apart f r o m a f e w classical p h i l o l o g i s t s w o r k i n g outside Vedic studies, a l l t h e

*Folk Psychology, the title of a ten-volume work by Wilhelm Wundt (1832—1920). The founder of ex-
perimental psychology, Wundt envisaged a comparative social psychology to supplement individual ex-
perimental psychology with research into the data of anthropology, history, and linguistics.
2
In an essay tided Comparative Mythology [New York, Arno Press, 1977], pp. 47ff. [The French trans-
lation was titled, Essai de mythologie comparée, Paris-London, 1859].
3
[Adalbert, Kuhn], Herabkunft des Feuers und Göttertranks, Berlin [F. Dummler], 1859 (a new edition of
it was done by Ernst Kuhn in 1886). Cf. Der Schuss des Wilden Jägers auf den Sonnenhirsch, ZDP, vol.
I (1869), pp. 89-169; Entwicklungsstufen des Mythus, Berlin Academy, 1873.
4
[Schwartz], Der Ursprung der Mythologie, Fl.
5
In his book Hercule et Cocus, Etude de mythologie comparée [Paris, A. Durand, 1863, p. 12]. L'Essaie de
mythologie comparée by Max Muller is cited there as a work "that marks a new era in the history of Mythol-
ogy- (p. 12).
6
[Otto Gruppe], Die griechischen Kulte und Mythen [Ihren Beziehungen zu der orientalischen Religionen,
Leipzig, B. G. Teubner, 1887].
70 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

m y t h o l o g i s t s t o o k the p r i n c i p l e s o f M a x M u l l e r o r o f K u h n as the starting

7
p o i n t o f t h e i r explanations." I t is i m p o r t a n t , therefore, t o e x a m i n e w h a t t h e y
are a n d w h a t t h e y are w o r t h .
Since n o o n e has presented those p r i n c i p l e s m o r e systematically t h a n
8
M a x M u l l e r , I take f r o m h i m the elements o f t h e e x p o s i t i o n t o f o l l o w .

I
W e have seen that the u n d e r l y i n g a s s u m p t i o n o f a n i m i s m is that r e l i g i o n , at
least at its o r i g i n , does n o t express any e x p e r i e n t i a l reality. M a x M u l l e r sets
o u t f r o m the opposite p r i n c i p l e . F o r h i m , i t is a x i o m a t i c that r e l i g i o n rests o n
an e x p e r i e n c e f r o m w h i c h i t draws its entire a u t h o r i t y . " T o h o l d its p r o p e r
place as a l e g i t i m a t e e l e m e n t o f o u r consciousnesses," he says, " r e l i g i o n m u s t
9
b e g i n , as does all o u r k n o w l e d g e , w i t h sense e x p e r i e n c e . " T a k i n g u p the o l d
e m p i r i c i s t adage Nihil est in intellectu quod non antefuerit in sensu, * h e applies
i t t o r e l i g i o n a n d asserts that there can be n o t h i n g i n t h e f a i t h that was n o t
first i n the senses. H e r e is a d o c t r i n e that s e e m i n g l y o u g h t t o escape the se-
r i o u s o b j e c t i o n I raised t o a n i m i s m . I n d e e d , i t seems that r e l i g i o n must o f n e -
cessity appear, from this p o i n t o f v i e w , n o t as a k i n d o f vague and confused
d r e a m i n g b u t as a system o f ideas a n d practices w e l l g r o u n d e d i n reality.
B u t w h a t are the sense experiences that give rise t o religious t h o u g h t ?
T h i s is the q u e s t i o n the study o f the Vedas s h o u l d have h e l p e d t o resolve.
T h e names o f its gods are generally e i t h e r c o m m o n n o u n s still used as
such o r archaic c o m m o n n o u n s w h o s e o r i g i n a l m e a n i n g can be recovered.
B o t h designate the p r i n c i p a l p h e n o m e n a o f nature. T h u s at first Agni, the

""Nothing is in the mind that was not first in the senses.

7
[Ernest] Renan must be counted among the writers who adopted that conception. See his Nouvelles
études d'histoire religieuse [Paris, Caiman Lévy], 1884, p. 31.
8
Apart from his Comparative Mythology, the works of Max Muller in which his general theories of re-
ligion are presented are the following: The Hibbert Lectures [Lectures on the Origin and Growth of Religion as
Illustrated by the Religions of India, London, Longmans, Green & Co.] (1878), translated into French under
the title Origine et développement de la religion [étudiés à la lumière des religions de l'Inde, Paris, C. Reinwald,
1879] ; Natural Religion [London, Longmans, 1889]; Physical Religion [London, Longmans, 1891]; Anthro-
pological Religion [London, Longmans, \S92];Theosophy or Psychological Religion [London, Longmans,
1895]; Contributions to the Science of Mythology [London, Longmans, 1897]. Because of the relationships be-
tween the mythological theories of Max Muller and his linguistic philosophy, the foregoing works must
be compared with those of his books that are devoted to language or to logic, in particular, Lectures on the
Science of Language [London, Longmans, 1873], translated into French as Nouvelles leçons sur la science du lan-
gage], and The Science of Thought [London, Longmans, 1878].
9
Mùller, Natural Religion, p. 114.
The Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion (Continuation) 71

name o f o n e o f India's p r i n c i p a l deities, m e a n t o n l y the natural p h e n o m e n o n

o f fire as the senses perceive i t , w i t h o u t any m y t h o l o g i c a l a d d i t i o n . I n the
Vedas themselves, i t is still used i n that m e a n i n g ; i n any case, the fact o f its
preservation i n o t h e r I n d o - E u r o p e a n languages clearly shows that this m e a n -
i n g was p r i m i t i v e : T h e L a t i n ignis, t h e L i t h u a n i a n ugnis, and the ancient Slav
ogny are close relatives o f Agni. Similarly, the k i n s h i p o f the Sanskrit Dyaus,
the G r e e k Zeus, the L a t i n Jovis, a n d the H i g h G e r m a n Zio is u n d i s p u t e d t o -
day. T h a t k i n s h i p proves that these different w o r d s d e n o t e o n e and the same
deity, r e c o g n i z e d as such b y different I n d o - E u r o p e a n peoples before t h e i r
separation. N o w , Dyaus means " t h e b r i g h t sky." These facts and others like
t h e m t e n d t o demonstrate that, a m o n g these peoples, t h e bodies a n d forces o f
nature w e r e the first objects t o w h i c h r e l i g i o u s feeling became attached. T h e y
w e r e the first things t o be deified. T a k i n g a f u r t h e r step a l o n g the r o a d t o g e n -
eralization, M a x M u l l e r b e l i e v e d he h a d v a l i d g r o u n d s f o r c o n c l u d i n g that the
religious e v o l u t i o n o f h u m a n i t y i n general h a d t h e same starting p o i n t .
H e justifies that inference almost exclusively w i t h p s y c h o l o g i c a l c o n s i d -
erations. T o h i m , t h e v a r i e d spectacles that nature offers t o m a n seem t o m e e t
all the necessary c o n d i t i o n s f o r arousing t h e r e l i g i o u s idea i n the m i n d d i -
rectly. I n fact, he says, "at the first glance m e n cast u p o n the w o r l d , n o t h i n g
appeared less n a t u r a l t o t h e m t h a n nature. N a t u r e was f o r t h e m t h e great sur-
prise a n d the great fear; i t was a p e r m a n e n t m a r v e l a n d a p e r m a n e n t miracle.
I t was o n l y later, w h e n m e n discovered t h e i r constancy, t h e i r invariance, and
t h e i r regular recurrence, that c e r t a i n aspects o f that m i r a c l e w e r e called n a t -
u r a l , i n the sense that t h e y w e r e foreseen, o r d i n a r y , a n d i n t e l l i g i b l e . . . . I t is
this vast d o m a i n o p e n t o feelings o f surprise a n d fear, this m a r v e l , this m i r a -
cle, this i m m e n s e u n k n o w n o p p o s e d t o w h a t is k n o w n . . . that p r o v i d e d the
10
first i m p u l s e t o r e l i g i o u s t h o u g h t a n d r e l i g i o u s l a n g u a g e . " A n d , t o illustrate
his t h o u g h t , he applies i t t o a n a t u r a l force that has a large place i n Vedic r e -
l i g i o n : fire. " T r y , " he says, " t o transport y o u r s e l f b a c k w a r d i n t h o u g h t t o that
stage i n p r i m i t i v e life w h e r e , o f necessity, o n e m u s t place the o r i g i n a n d even
the first phases o f the r e l i g i o n o f nature; y o u w i l l find i t easy t o i m a g i n e w h a t
i m p r e s s i o n the first appearance o f fire m u s t have made o n the h u m a n m i n d .

N o matter h o w i t first appeared—whether i t came from lightning, whether

it was obtained by rubbing tree branches against one another, or whether i t
sprang forth as sparks from rocks—it was something that moved, that pro-
gressed, from w h i c h one had to protect oneself, that carried destruction
w i t h i t ; but at the same time, i t was something that made life possible i n

'"Müller, Physical Religion, pp. 119-120.

72 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

winter, gave protection at night, and served as b o t h an offensive and a de-

fensive weapon. Thanks to fire, man ceased to be a devourer o f raw meat
and became an eater o f cooked foods. Later, i t was also by means o f fire that
metals were worked, and tools and weapons made; i t thus became an indis-
pensable factor i n all technical and artistic progress. Where w o u l d we be,
11
even now, w i t h o u t fire?"

M a n c a n n o t enter i n t o relations w i t h nature w i t h o u t g a i n i n g a sense o f its i n -

f i n i t y and its i m m e n s i t y , as the same a u t h o r says i n a n o t h e r w o r k . I t surpasses
h i m i n every d i r e c t i o n . B e y o n d t h e spaces he sees, there are others that
stretch o u t limitlessly; each m o m e n t o f d u r a t i o n is preceded a n d f o l l o w e d b y
a t i m e t o w h i c h n o l i m i t can be set; the flowing r i v e r manifests an i n f i n i t e
1 2
force, since n o t h i n g exhausts i t . T h e r e is n o aspect o f nature that is n o t
e q u i p p e d t o awaken i n us the o v e r w h e l m i n g sensation o f an i n f i n i t e that e n -
13
velops a n d dominates u s . F o r M i i l l e r , i t is from this sensation that r e l i g i o n s
1 4
are d e r i v e d .
15
H o w e v e r , o n l y t h e i r seed was present i n the sensation. R e l i g i o n is t r u l y
f o r m e d o n l y w h e n these n a t u r a l forces are n o l o n g e r c o n c e i v e d o f abstractly.
T h e y must be t r a n s f o r m e d i n t o personal agents, l i v i n g a n d t h i n k i n g beings,
s p i r i t u a l powers, gods; f o r the c u l t is usually addressed t o beings o f this sort.
W e have seen that a n i m i s m , t o o , m u s t pose this q u e s t i o n , a n d h o w i t answers:
M a n supposedly h a d some c e r t a i n i n b o r n i n a b i l i t y t o d i s t i n g u i s h the animate
from the i n a n i m a t e , t o g e t h e r w i t h an irresistible urge t o conceive o f the
16
i n a n i m a t e i n animate f o r m . T h i s s o l u t i o n , M a x M i i l l e r rejects. According
t o h i m , i t is language that b r o u g h t a b o u t t h e m e t a m o r p h o s i s , t h r o u g h its i n -
fluence over t h o u g h t .
T h a t m e t a m o r p h o s i s is easily u n d e r s t o o d i n the f o l l o w i n g w a y : P u z z l e d
b y these marvelous forces o n w h i c h t h e y felt d e p e n d e n t , m e n w e r e roused t o
t h i n k a b o u t t h e m ; t h e y asked themselves w h a t those forces consisted o f and
t r i e d t o replace the vague awareness t h e y o r i g i n a l l y h a d o f t h e m w i t h a
17
clearer idea, a b e t t e r - d e f i n e d c o n c e p t . B u t as o u r a u t h o r q u i t e r i g h t l y says,

"Ibid., p. 121; cf. p. 304.

12
Muller, Natural Religion, pp. 121ff., 149-155.
,3
"The overwhelming pressure of the infinite" (ibid., p. 138).
"Ibid., pp. 195-196.
15
Max Miiller goes so far as to say that, when thought has not gone beyond that phase, it has only a
very few of the features that we now impute to religion (Physical Religion, p. 120).
16
Ibid., p. 128.
"See Miiller, The Science of Thought, p. 30.
The Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion (Continuation) 73

ideas a n d concepts are impossible w i t h o u t w o r d s . Language is n o t o n l y the

o u t w a r d c l o t h i n g o f o u r t h o u g h t ; i t is t h o u g h t ' s i n t e r n a l skeleton. Language
does n o t m e r e l y stand outside t h o u g h t , translating s o m e t h i n g that is already
f o r m e d , b u t i n actuality serves t o f o r m t h o u g h t . H o w e v e r , since language has
its o w n nature, its laws are n o t the same as those o f t h o u g h t . T h u s since l a n -
guage helps t o fashion t h o u g h t , i t is b o u n d t o d o a c e r t a i n measure o f v i o -
lence t o t h o u g h t a n d t o d i s t o r t i t . D i s t o r t i o n o f this k i n d supposedly gave rise
t o t h e p e c u l i a r i t y o f o u r r e l i g i o u s representations.
T o t h i n k is actually t o o r d e r a n d thus t o classify o u r ideas. T o t h i n k o f
fire, f o r example, is t o place i t i n t o such a n d such category o f things, so as t o
be able t o say i t is this o r that, this a n d n o t that. A t the same t i m e , t o classify
is t o name, f o r a general idea has n o existence a n d n o reality except i n a n d
t h r o u g h the w o r d that expresses i t , a n d t h a t alone makes i t w h a t i t is. So the
language o f a p e o p l e always influences t h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h the n e w things
that p e o p l e c o m e t o k n o w are classified i n t h e i r m i n d s — t h o s e things m u s t f i t
i n t o p r e e x i s t i n g f r a m e w o r k s . F o r this reason, w h e n m e n set o u t t o m a k e a
c o m p r e h e n s i v e representation o f the universe, t h e language they spoke i n -
d e l i b l y m a r k e d the system o f ideas that was t h e n b o r n .
W e still k n o w some p a r t o f that language—at least t h e I n d o - E u r o p e a n
peoples do. D e s p i t e its remoteness, o u r languages still c o n t a i n relics that e n -
able us t o i m a g i n e w h a t i t m u s t have been. These relics are the roots. M a x
M u l l e r considers these r o o t w o r d s — t h e s e w o r d s from w h i c h the o t h e r w o r d s
w e use are d e r i v e d a n d w h i c h are f o u n d as t h e basis o f all t h e I n d o - E u r o p e a n
i d i o m s — a s so m a n y echoes o f the language s p o k e n b y t h e ancient p e o p l e b e -
fore t h e i r separation: that is, as t h e m o m e n t w h e n that r e l i g i o n o f nature, the
object o f e x p l a n a t i o n , was b e i n g f o r m e d . N o w , the roots display t w o r e -
m a r k a b l e characteristics that, a l t h o u g h as yet w e l l d o c u m e n t e d f o r this par-
ticular g r o u p o f languages only, o u r a u t h o r believes t o be equally verifiable i n
18
the o t h e r l i n g u i s t i c f a m i l i e s .
First, t h e roots are t y p i f i e d . T h a t is, t h e y express n o t p a r t i c u l a r things o r
i n d i v i d u a l s b u t t y p e s — a n d i n d e e d types h a v i n g v e r y w i d e a p p l i c a t i o n . T h e y
represent t h e m o s t general themes o f t h o u g h t . T h e f u n d a m e n t a l categories o f
t h e m i n d that g o v e r n t h e w h o l e o f m e n t a l life at each h i s t o r i c a l m o m e n t —
a n d w h o s e o r d e r p h i l o s o p h e r s have o f t e n t r i e d t o reconstruct—are f o u n d i n
1 9
t h e m fixed a n d crystallized, as i t w e r e .

!8
Muller, Natural Religion, pp. 393ff.
"Muller, Physical Religion, p. 133; The Science ofThought, p. 219, Nouvelles leçons sut la science du langage,
vol. II, pp. Iff.
74 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

Second, the types t o w h i c h t h e y c o r r e s p o n d are types o f a c t i o n , n o t types

o f objects. W h a t they express are t h e m o s t general ways o f a c t i n g that can be
observed a m o n g l i v i n g things, p a r t i c u l a r l y a m o n g humans: t h e acts o f s t r i k -
i n g , p u s h i n g , r u b b i n g , t y i n g , l i f t i n g , pressing, c l i m b i n g , descending, w a l k i n g ,
a n d so o n . I n o t h e r w o r d s , m a n generalized a n d n a m e d his p r i n c i p a l modes
20
o f a c t i o n before g e n e r a l i z i n g a n d n a m i n g the p h e n o m e n a o f n a t u r e .
B y v i r t u e o f t h e i r e x t r e m e generality, these w o r d s c o u l d easily be a p p l i e d
t o all sorts o f objects that t h e y d i d n o t o r i g i n a l l y i n c l u d e . M o r e o v e r , this e x -
t r e m e suppleness enabled t h e m t o give b i r t h t o the m a n y w o r d s that are d e -
r i v e d from t h e m . So w h e n m a n , t u r n i n g t o things, set o u t t o name t h e m i n
order t o be able t o t h i n k a b o u t t h e m , he a p p l i e d those w o r d s t o things even
t h o u g h they had n o t been meant for things. B y v i r t u e o f their o r i g i n , they
c o u l d designate the various forces o f nature o n l y b y those manifestations that
m o s t resembled h u m a n actions: T h e t h u n d e r b o l t was called that thing that
digs u p t h e g r o u n d w h e n i t descends o r spreads fire, t h e w i n d that thing
that moans o r b l o w s , the sun that thing that hurls g o l d e n arrows t h o u g h space,
the r i v e r that thing that runs, a n d so o n . B u t because n a t u r a l p h e n o m e n a b e -
came assimilated t o h u m a n actions i n this way, this s o m e t h i n g t o w h i c h t h e y
w e r e j o i n e d was o f necessity i m a g i n e d i n t h e f o r m o f personal agents m o r e
o r less l i k e m a n . T h i s was o n l y a m e t a p h o r , b u t o n e that was taken literally.
T h e e r r o r was i n e v i t a b l e because the science that alone c o u l d have swept
away t h e i l l u s i o n d i d n o t yet exist. I n s u m , because i t was m a d e u p o f h u m a n
elements that translated h u m a n states, language c o u l d n o t be a p p l i e d t o n a -
2 1
ture w i t h o u t transfiguring i t . E v e n today, remarks M . B r e a l , i t s o m e h o w
slants the m a n n e r i n w h i c h w e i m a g i n e t h i n g s . " W e d o n o t express an idea,
even w h e n i t m e r e l y denotes a quality, w i t h o u t g i v i n g i t a gender, that is t o
say, a sex. W e c a n n o t speak o f an object, even i f i t is considered i n a general
way, w i t h o u t specifying i t w i t h an article. E v e r y subject o f a sentence is p r e -
sented as an a c t i n g b e i n g , every idea as an a c t i o n , a n d the d u r a t i o n o f each
a c t i o n , passing o r p e r m a n e n t , as d e l i m i t e d b y t h e tense i n w h i c h w e p u t the
22
verb." O f course, o u r scientific c u l t u r e makes i t easy f o r us t o c o r r e c t the
errors that language m i g h t t h e r e b y suggest t o us, b u t the i n f l u e n c e o f w o r d s
m u s t have b e e n all p o w e r f u l w h e n t h e y h a d n o c o u n t e r w e i g h t . T h u s , u p o n
the physical w o r l d , as i t is revealed t o o u r senses, language s u p e r i m p o s e d a

20
Muller, The Science of Thought, p. 272.
21
Ibid., vol. I, p. 327; Physical Religion, pp. 125ff.
2 2
[Michel Jules Alfred Bréal], Mélanges de mythologie et de linguistique [Paris, Hachette, 1877], p. 8.
The Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion (Continuation) 75

n e w w o r l d , a w o r l d c o m p r i s i n g o n l y s p i r i t u a l beings that i t h a d created o u t

o f n o t h i n g a n d that w e r e f r o m t h e n o n regarded as t h e d e t e r m i n i n g causes o f
physical p h e n o m e n a .
M o r e o v e r , the w o r k i n g s o f language d i d n o t stop there. O n c e w o r d s h a d
b e e n f o r g e d t o designate these personalities, w h i c h p o p u l a r i m a g i n a t i o n had
p u t b e h i n d things, the personalities reacted u p o n the words themselves,
thereby creating the riddles o f all k i n d s that the m y t h s w e r e i n v e n t e d t o solve.
Sometimes a single object received several names c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o the several
aspects i n w h i c h i t presented itself t o experience. So i t came about that there
are m o r e t h a n t w e n t y w o r d s i n the Vedas t o denote the sky. B e i n g different,
the w o r d s w e r e believed t o c o r r e s p o n d t o as m a n y distinct personalities. B u t at
the same t i m e , these personalities w e r e strongly felt t o have an air o f kinship.
T o account f o r that kinship, they were i m a g i n e d as f o r m i n g one family; g e -
nealogies, a m a r i t a l status, a n d a h i s t o r y w e r e i n v e n t e d f o r t h e m . I n o t h e r cases,
different things were designated b y a single t e r m . T o e x p l a i n h o w different
things came t o have the same name, i t was a l l o w e d that the c o r r e s p o n d i n g
things w e r e really transformations o f o n e another; a n d n e w fictions were
f o r g e d t o m a k e these metamorphoses i n t e l l i g i b l e . O r again, a w o r d that h a d
ceased t o be u n d e r s t o o d was the o r i g i n o f fables i n t e n d e d t o give i t a m e a n -
i n g . T h u s the creative w o r k o f language c o n t i n u e d , i n ever m o r e c o m p l e x
constructions. A n d as m y t h o l o g y came t o e n d o w each g o d w i t h an ever m o r e
extensive a n d c o m p l e t e biography, the d i v i n e personalities, at first u n d i s t i n -
guished from things, n o w separated f r o m things and s t o o d o n t h e i r o w n .
T h u s , supposedly, t h e n o t i o n o f t h e d i v i n e was f o r m e d . T h e r e l i g i o n o f
2 3
the ancestors? O n l y an echo o f the earlier r e l i g i o n . A c c o r d i n g t o this t h e -
ory, the idea o f the s o u l was f o r m e d f o r reasons rather similar t o those T y l o r
gave, except that, f o r M a x M i i l l e r , the p u r p o s e o f that idea was t o a c c o u n t
24
f o r death, n o t f o r d r e a m s . T h e n , u n d e r t h e i n f l u e n c e o f various ( i n part, ac-
25
cidental) c i r c u m s t a n c e s , t h e souls o f m e n , o n c e separated from t h e body,
w e r e d r a w n l i t d e b y l i t t l e i n t o t h e circle o f d i v i n e beings, a n d thus w e r e u l -
timately d e i f i e d as w e l l . B u t this n e w c u l t was m e r e l y t h e p r o d u c t o f a sec-
ondary formation. Further proof: Deified men have very often been

23
Müller, Anthropological Religion, pp. 128—130.
24
This explanation, however, is no better than [Edward Burnett] Tylor's. According to Max Müller,
man was unable to accept that life ended with death. For that reason, he concluded that there are two be-
ings in him, one of which survives the body. It is hard to see what could have made people believe that
life continues, when the body is in full decomposition.
25
See for details, Müller, Anthropological Religion, pp. 35Iff.
76 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

i m p e r f e c t gods, o r d e m i g o d s , w h i c h all peoples have always k n o w n h o w t o

26
distinguish f r o m deities p r o p e r .

II
T h i s d o c t r i n e rests i n p a r t o n v a r i o u s l i n g u i s t i c postulates that w e r e t h e n a n d
still are v e r y m u c h i n dispute. Scholars have q u e s t i o n e d t h e reality o f m a n y
concordances that M a x M i i l l e r t h o u g h t h e saw a m o n g t h e names o f gods i n
the various E u r o p e a n languages. T h e y have especially cast d o u b t o n his i n -
t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e m : T h e y have q u e s t i o n e d w h e t h e r , far f r o m b e i n g t h e
m a r k o f a v e r y p r i m i t i v e r e l i g i o n , t h e concordances m i g h t n o t be t h e late r e -
27
sult o f e i t h e r d i r e c t b o r r o w i n g s o r n a t u r a l interchange a m o n g peoples.
M o r e o v e r , i t is n o l o n g e r accepted t o d a y that roots c o u l d have existed i n i s o -
l a t i o n as a u t o n o m o u s realities—or, consequently, that t h e y enable us even
h y p o t h e t i c a l l y t o r e c o n s t r u c t t h e p r i m i t i v e language o f t h e I n d o - E u r o p e a n
28
peoples. Finally, recent studies w o u l d t e n d t o p r o v e that n o t all t h e V e d i c
deities h a d t h e exclusively naturist q u a l i t y that M a x M i i l l e r a n d his s c h o o l at-
2 9
tributed to t h e m . B u t I w i l l leave aside questions w h o s e e x a m i n a t i o n p r e -
supposes the linguist's v e r y specialized c o m p e t e n c e , i n o r d e r t o take u p t h e
general p r i n c i p l e s o f t h e system. Besides, t h e n a t u r i s t idea s h o u l d n o t be t o o
closely m i n g l e d w i t h t h e d i s p u t e d postulates, f o r that idea is accepted b y a
n u m b e r o f scholars w h o d o n o t ascribe t o language t h e d o m i n a n t role M a x
Miiller did.
T h a t m a n has an interest i n k n o w i n g t h e w o r l d a r o u n d h i m a n d that,
consequendy, his r e f l e c t i o n was q u i c k l y a p p l i e d t o i t , everyone w i l l readily
accept. T h e h e l p o f the things w i t h w h i c h h e was i n i m m e d i a t e c o n t a c t was
so necessary t h a t h e i n e v i t a b l y t r i e d t o investigate t h e i r nature. B u t i f , as n a -

26
Ibid., p. 130. This does not stop Max Miiller from seeing Christianity as the high point of this en-
tire development. The religion of the ancestors, he says, assumes there is something divine in man. Is that
not the idea that is at the basis of the teaching of Christ (ibid., pp. 3788)? There is no need to emphasize
what is odd about a conception that makes Christianity the culmination of the cult of the dead.
27
On this same point, see the critique to which Gruppe subjects the hypotheses of Max Miiller in
Crieschischen Kulte und Mythen, pp. 79—184.

^See [Antoine] Meillet, Introduction à l'étude comparative des langues indo-européennes [Paris, Hachette,
1903], p. 119.
29
[Herman] Oldenberg, Die Religion des Veda [Berlin, W. Hertz, 1844], pp. 59ff.; [Antoine] Meillet,
"Le Dieu Iranien Mithra,"J/4, vol. X, no. 1 (July-August 1907), pp. 143ff.
The Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion (Continuation) 77

t u r i s m contends, r e l i g i o u s t h o u g h t was b o r n from these p a r t i c u l a r reflec-

tions, t h e n i t becomes i n e x p l i c a b l e that r e l i g i o u s t h o u g h t s h o u l d have sur-
v i v e d t h e first tests made, a n d u n i n t e l l i g i b l e that religious t h o u g h t has b e e n
m a i n t a i n e d . I f , i n fact, w e have a n e e d t o k n o w things, i t is i n o r d e r t o act i n
a m a n n e r appropriate t o t h e m . B u t the representation o f the universe that r e -
l i g i o n gives us, especially at the b e g i n n i n g , is t o o grossly i n c o m p l e t e t o have
b e e n able t o b r i n g a b o u t practices that h a d secular u t i l i t y . A c c o r d i n g t o that
representation o f the universe, things are n o t h i n g less t h a n l i v i n g , t h i n k i n g
beings—consciousnesses a n d personalities l i k e those the religious i m a g i n a -
t i o n has m a d e i n t o the agents o f cosmic p h e n o m e n a . So i t is n o t b y c o n c e i v -
i n g o f t h e m i n that f o r m a n d t r e a t i n g t h e m a c c o r d i n g t o that n o t i o n that m a n
c o u l d have m a d e t h e m h e l p f u l t o h i m . I t is n o t b y p r a y i n g t o t h e m , celebrat-
i n g t h e m i n feasts a n d sacrifices, a n d i m p o s i n g fasts a n d p r i v a t i o n s o n h i m s e l f
that he c o u l d have p r e v e n t e d t h e m from h a r m i n g h i m o r o b l i g e d t h e m t o
serve his purposes. S u c h procedures c o u l d have succeeded o n l y o n v e r y rare
occasions—miraculously, so t o speak. I f the p o i n t o f r e l i g i o n was t o give us a
representation o f the w o r l d that w o u l d g u i d e us i n o u r dealings w i t h i t , t h e n
r e l i g i o n was i n n o p o s i t i o n t o c a r r y o u t its f u n c t i o n , a n d h u m a n i t y w o u l d n o t
have b e e n s l o w t o n o t i c e that fact: Failures, i n f i n i t e l y m o r e c o m m o n t h a n
successes, w o u l d have n o t i f i e d t h e m v e r y q u i c k l y that they w e r e o n the
w r o n g p a t h ; a n d r e l i g i o n , constantly shaken b y these constant d i s a p p o i n t -
ments, w o u l d have b e e n unable t o last.
N o d o u b t , sometimes an e r r o r does i n d e e d perpetuate itself i n history.
B u t b a r r i n g an altogether unusual c o n j u n c t i o n o f circumstances, i t c a n n o t
m a i n t a i n itself this w a y unless i t proves t o be practically true—that is t o say, i f ,
w h i l e n o t g i v i n g us a c o r r e c t t h e o r e t i c a l idea o f the things t o w h i c h i t is r e -
lated, i t expresses c o r r e c t l y e n o u g h the m a n n e r i n w h i c h those things affect
us, f o r better o r f o r worse. U n d e r those c o n d i t i o n s , b e h a v i o r d e c i d e d u p o n
f o r the w r o n g reasons has every chance o f b e i n g the r i g h t behavior, at least
overall; a n d so w h y t h e e r r o r c o u l d have s u r v i v e d the test o f experience b e -
30
comes u n d e r s t a n d a b l e . O n the o t h e r h a n d , an error, and especially an o r -
ganized system o f errors that leads a n d can o n l y lead t o practical setbacks, is
n o t viable. W h a t is there i n c o m m o n b e t w e e n t h e rites b y w h i c h the faithful
have t r i e d t o act o n nature a n d the procedures that t h e sciences have t a u g h t
us t o use a n d that w e n o w k n o w t o be the o n l y effective ones? I f that is w h a t
m e n asked o f r e l i g i o n , w e c a n n o t u n d e r s t a n d w h y r e l i g i o n s h o u l d have b e e n
able t o survive, unless clever t r i c k s p r e v e n t e d t h e m from n o t i c i n g that i t d i d

30
This is applicable to numerous maxims of popular wisdom.
78 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

n o t give t h e m w h a t t h e y e x p e c t e d o f i t . I t w o u l d therefore b e j u s t as w e l l t o
31
go back once m o r e t o t h e simplistic explanations o f the e i g h t e e n t h c e n t u r y .
O n l y i n appearance, therefore, does n a t u r i s m escape the o b j e c t i o n I
made against a n i m i s m a short w h i l e ago. Since n a t u r i s m reduces r e l i g i o n t o
n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n an i m m e n s e m e t a p h o r w i t h o u t objective f o u n d a t i o n , * i t
t o o makes r e l i g i o n o u t t o be a system o f h a l l u c i n a t o r y images. I t does, o f
course, assign r e l i g i o n a p o i n t o f departure i n r e a l i t y — n a m e l y , the sensations
that the p h e n o m e n a o f nature i n d u c e i n us; b u t b y t h e m a g i c a l w o r k i n g s o f
language, this sensation is t r a n s f o r m e d i n t o bizarre ideas. R e l i g i o u s t h o u g h t
comes i n t o contact w i t h reality o n l y t o s h r o u d i t straightaway w i t h a t h i c k
veil that hides its t r u e f o r m s , this v e i l b e i n g the fabric o f fabulous beliefs s p u n
by m y t h o l o g y . T h u s , h k e the d e l i r i o u s i n d i v i d u a l , the believer lives i n a w o r l d
p o p u l a t e d w i t h beings a n d things that have o n l y a verbal existence. W h a t is
m o r e , M a x M i l l i e r h i m s e l f recognizes this, since f o r h i m m y t h s arise f r o m a
malady o f t h o u g h t . A t first, he ascribed t h e m t o a m a l a d y o f language, b u t
since language a n d t h o u g h t are inseparable t o h i m , w h a t is t r u e o f one is t r u e
o f the other. " W h e n I t r i e d b r i e f l y t o characterize the i n n e r nature o f
m y t h o l o g y , " he says, " I called i t a malady o f language m o r e t h a n a o n e o f
t h o u g h t . B u t after all I h a d said i n m y b o o k The Science of Thought about the
inseparability o f t h o u g h t a n d language, a n d therefore a b o u t the absolute i d e n -
tity b e t w e e n a malady o f language a n d o n e o f t h o u g h t , n o f u r t h e r e q u i v o c a -
tion seemed possible. . . . D e p i c t i n g the h i g h G o d as g u i l t y o f every c r i m e ,
t r i c k e d b y m e n , o u t o f sorts w i t h his w i f e , a n d b e a t i n g his c h i l d r e n , is surely
s y m p t o m a t i c o f an a b n o r m a l c o n d i t i o n o r a malady o f t h o u g h t , o r better, o f
3 2
madness o u t r i g h t . " T h i s a r g u m e n t is v a l i d n o t o n l y against M a x M i l l i e r a n d

* Valeur objective. Compare the similar passage on p. 80.

31
It is true that this argument does not change the minds of those who see religion as a technique (es-
pecially a hygienic technique), the rules of which were well founded, even if sanctioned by imaginary be-
ings. But I will not tarry here to criticize an idea that is so untenable and that, in fact, has never been
argued systematically by minds that were even minimally well informed in the history of religions. It is
difficult to show in what way the terrible practices of initiation sustain the health that they place in jeop-
ardy; in what way the dietary prohibitions, which very commonly apply to perfecdy wholesome animals,
are hygienic; in what way sacrifices, which took place during the building of a house, made the house
more solid, and so forth. No doubt, there are religious precepts that turn out to have technical utility at
the same time, but they disappear in the mass of others. And indeed, very often the services that they do
render have their opposites. If there is a religious prophylaxis, there is also a religiousfilthderiving from
the same principles. The commandment to take the deceased person awayfromthe camp because he is
the seat of a dreaded spirit has practical utility. But the same belief has the relatives anointing themselves
with the liquids that comefromthe body as it rots, because they are thought to have exceptional virtues.
In matters technical, magic has served more often than religion.
32
Mùller, [Etudes de mythologie comparée, pp. 51—52].
The Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion (Continuation) 79

his t h e o r y b u t against the v e r y p r i n c i p l e o f n a t u r i s m , h o w e v e r applied. D o

w h a t w e may, i f expressing the forces o f nature is m a d e o u t t o be the p r i n c i -
pal object o f r e l i g i o n , i t is impossible t o see r e l i g i o n as a n y t h i n g o t h e r t h a n a
system o f d e c e i v i n g fictions, the survival o f w h i c h is i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e .
T r u e , M a x M u l l e r t h o u g h t he escaped that o b j e c t i o n , t h e seriousness o f
w h i c h he sensed, b y radically d i s t i n g u i s h i n g m y t h o l o g y f r o m r e l i g i o n a n d e x -
c l u d i n g i t f r o m r e l i g i o n . H e claims the r i g h t t o reserve the name " r e l i g i o n "
o n l y f o r beliefs that c o n f o r m t o the prescriptions o f w h o l e s o m e m o r a l i t y and
t o t h e teachings o f a r a t i o n a l t h e o l o g y . H e considered m y t h s , o n the o t h e r
h a n d , t o have b e e n parasitic developments that, u n d e r the i n f l u e n c e o f l a n -
guage, came t o graft themselves o n t o t h e f u n d a m e n t a l representations and
p e r v e r t t h e m . T h u s , f o r h i m , t h e b e l i e f i n Zeus was r e l i g i o u s t o the e x t e n t
that the Greeks saw Z e u s as a supreme G o d , father o f h u m a n i t y , p r o t e c t o r o f
laws, avenger o f c r i m e s , a n d so f o r t h . B u t e v e r y t h i n g a b o u t t h e b i o g r a p h y o f
3 3
Zeus, his marriages a n d his adventures, was o n l y m y t h o l o g y .
B u t this d i s t i n c t i o n is arbitrary. W h i l e there is n o d o u b t that m y t h o l o g y
is i m p o r t a n t t o aesthetics as w e l l as t o the science o f religions, i t is n o n e t h e -
less o n e o f the essential elements o f r e l i g i o u s life. I f m y t h is w i t h d r a w n f r o m
r e l i g i o n , r i t u a l m u s t also be w i t h d r a w n : R i t e s are m o s t c o m m o n l y addressed
t o d e f i n i t e personalities that have a name, a character, d e f i n i t e attributes, a n d
a h i s t o r y ; a n d those v a r y a c c o r d i n g t o t h e w a y i n w h i c h t h e personalities are
c o n c e i v e d . T h e c u l t o n e renders t o t h e d e i t y depends o n the f o r m ascribed
t o that deity. I n d e e d the r i t e is often n o t h i n g o t h e r t h a n t h e m y t h i n a c t i o n .
T h e C h r i s t i a n c o m m u n i o n is inseparable f r o m t h e paschal m y t h f r o m w h i c h
i t takes its entire m e a n i n g . T h u s i f all m y t h o l o g y results from a sort o f verbal
d e l u s i o n , t h e q u e s t i o n I posed remains intact: T h e existence and, above all,
the persistence o f t h e c u l t b e c o m e i n e x p l i c a b l e . I t does n o t m a k e sense that
m e n c o u l d g o o n d o i n g things f o r centuries, poindessly. Besides, i t is n o t
o n l y t h e p a r t i c u l a r traits o f d i v i n e figures t h a t are specified b y the m y t h s . T h e
v e r y idea that there are gods, s p i r i t u a l beings, a n d custodians assigned t o v a r -
ious departments o f nature is essentially m y t h i c a l , n o m a t t e r h o w those b e -
34
ings are d e p i c t e d . W h a t remains i f o n e takes away from t h e religions o f the

33
See Miiller, Science du langage [vol. II, p. 147]; and Physical Religion, pp. 276ff. In the same vein is
Bréal, Mélanges de mythologie et de linguistique, p. 6: "To bring to the question of the origin of mythology
the necessary clarity, it is necessary to distinguish carefully the gods, who are a direct product of human in-
tellect, from the legends, which are only its indirect and involuntary product."
34
Max Muller recognizes this. See Physical Religion, p. 132, and Mythologie Comparée, p. 58. "The
gods," he says, "are nomina [names] and not numina [shades], names without being and not beings with-
out name."
80 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

past e v e r y t h i n g that rests o n the n o t i o n o f gods c o n c e i v e d as cosmic agents?

T h e idea o f d i v i n i t y i n itself, o f a transcendent p o w e r t o w h i c h m a n is sub-
o r d i n a t e a n d o n w h i c h he leans? B u t t h a t is a p h i l o s o p h i c a l and abstract c o n -
c e p t i o n that has never b e e n realized as such i n any h i s t o r i c a l r e l i g i o n ; i t is
35
w i t h o u t interest f o r the science o f r e l i g i o n s . L e t us therefore guard against
differentiating a m o n g r e l i g i o u s beliefs, k e e p i n g some because they seem j u s t
and w h o l e s o m e , t o us, a n d r e j e c t i n g others as u n w o r t h y o f b e i n g called r e l i -
gious because t h e y o f f e n d a n d unsetde us. A l l m y t h s , even those w e f i n d
3 6
m o s t unreasonable, have b e e n objects o f f a i t h . M a n b e l i e v e d i n t h e m n o less
t h a n i n his o w n sensations; he regulated his c o n d u c t i n accordance with
t h e m . Despite appearances, therefore, t h e y c a n n o t be w i t h o u t objective
f o u n d a t i o n [fondement objectif].
Nevertheless, i t w i l l be said, n o m a t t e r h o w r e l i g i o n s are e x p l a i n e d , they
have c e r t a i n l y e r r e d a b o u t t h e t r u e nature o f things: T h e sciences have
d e m o n s t r a t e d that. So the modes o f a c t i o n t h e y e n c o u r a g e d o r i m p o s e d
u p o n m a n c o u l d o n l y rarely have h a d useful effects: I t is n o t w i t h p u r i f i c a -
tions that sicknesses are c u r e d , o r w i t h sacrifices o r songs that t h e c r o p is
made t o g r o w . I n this way, the o b j e c t i o n that I have made against n a t u r i s m
seems applicable t o all possible systems o f e x p l a n a t i o n .
B u t there is o n e that escapes i t . L e t us suppose that r e l i g i o n answers a
n e e d q u i t e different from adapting us t o tangible things^ T h e r e w i l l be n o risk
o f its b e i n g w e a k e n e d solely because i t satisfies this n e e d p o o r l y o r n o t at all.
I f religious faith was n o t b o r n t o place m a n i n h a r m o n y w i t h the physical
w o r l d , the errors i t m i g h t have caused h i m t o m a k e i n his struggle w i t h the
w o r l d w o u l d n o t h a r m i t at its source, since i t is fed f r o m another. I f i t was n o t
for such reasons that people w e r e l e d t o believe, t h e y must have g o n e o n b e -
l i e v i n g even w h e n those reasons w e r e c o n t r a d i c t e d b y the facts. O n e even
imagines that faith c o u l d have b e e n rather strong, strong e n o u g h n o t o n l y t o

35
Granted, Max Miiller holds that,forthe Greeks, "Zeus was and remained the name of the supreme
deity despite all the mythological obscurities" (Science du Langage [vol. II, p. 173]). I will not dispute that
assertion, which in historical terms is quite disputable; but in any case, that conception of Zeus could
never be other than a glimmering amid the totality of the Greeks' religious beliefs.
Moreover, in a later work, Max Miiller goes as far as to make the very idea of god in general the prod-
uct of a wholly verbal process and, in consequence, a mythological elaboration (Physical Religion, p. 138).
36
Apart from myths proper, there certainly have always been fables that were not believed or, at least,
were not believed to the same degree and in the same manner and that for this reason were not religious
in character. The line of demarcation between fables and myths is certainlyfluidand hard to determine.
But this is no reason to make all the myths into fables, any more than we would dream of making all the
fables into myths. There is at least one characteristic that is sufficient in many cases to differentiate the re-
ligious myth, and that is its relationship to the cult.
The Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion (Continuation) 81

endure such c o n t r a d i c t i o n s b u t also t o d e n y t h e m a n d i n h i b i t the believer

f r o m p e r c e i v i n g t h e i r i m p o r t — t h u s m a k i n g t h e m harmless t o r e l i g i o n . W h e n
a religious feeling is strong, i t does n o t accept that r e l i g i o n c o u l d be guilty, a n d
i t readily p r o m p t s explanations that acquit r e l i g i o n : I f the r i t e does n o t p r o -
duce the e x p e c t e d results, the failure is i m p u t e d either t o some flaw o f e x e c u -
t i o n o r t o the i n t e r v e n t i o n o f a c o n t r a r y deity. B u t for that t o occur, religious
ideas must n o t d r a w t h e i r o r i g i n from a feeling that is disturbed b y the set-
backs o f experience, f o r o t h e r w i s e , w h e r e w o u l d t h e i r resilience c o m e from?

Ill
W h a t is m o r e , even t h o u g h m a n m i g h t have h a d reason t o go o n e x p l a i n i n g
the cosmic p h e n o m e n a w i t h r e l i g i o u s symbols, despite every setback, still
those symbols w o u l d have t o have b e e n t h e k i n d that suggest such i n t e r p r e -
t a t i o n . W h e r e w o u l d t h e y have a c q u i r e d such a p r o p e r t y ? H e r e again, w e
c o m e face t o face w i t h o n e o f those postulates that seem o b v i o u s o n l y b e -
cause t h e y have n o t b e e n e x a m i n e d critically. I t is set u p as a x i o m a t i c that the
natural play o f physical forces has all i t takes t o arouse t h e idea o f the sacred
i n us. B u t w h e n the evidence (sketchy, b y the w a y ) that has b e e n a d d u c e d t o
s u p p o r t this p r o p o s i t i o n is e x a m i n e d m o r e closely, w e n o t i c e that i t boils
d o w n t o a p r e c o n c e i v e d idea.
W e talk a b o u t t h e a m a z e m e n t that m e n m u s t have felt as t h e y discovered
the w o r l d . B u t i t is a r e g u l a r i t y shading o f f i n t o m o n o t o n y that above all
characterizes t h e life o f nature. E v e r y m o r n i n g , the sun c l i m b s t h e h o r i z o n ,
a n d every e v e n i n g i t sets; every m o n t h , t h e m o o n completes t h e same cycle;
t h e r i v e r flows u n i n t e r r u p t e d l y i n its b e d ; the same seasons p e r i o d i c a l l y b r i n g
b a c k t h e same sensory experiences. S o m e u n e x p e c t e d event occurs here a n d
there, n o d o u b t : T h e sun is eclipsed, t h e m o o n disappears b e h i n d t h e clouds,
the r i v e r floods. B u t these passing disturbances can never give b i r t h t o a n y -
t h i n g b u t e q u a l l y passing impressions, the m e m o r y o f w h i c h is erased after a
t i m e ; so t h e y c o u l d n o t possibly serve as t h e basis o f those stable a n d p e r m a -
n e n t systems o f ideas a n d practices that c o n s t i t u t e religions. O r d i n a r i l y , the
course o f nature is u n i f o r m , a n d u n i f o r m i t y c a n n o t p r o d u c e s t r o n g e m o -
tions. T o c o n c e i v e the savage as b e i n g f u l l o f a d m i r a t i o n before these marvels
is t o transfer t o the o r i g i n o f h i s t o r y feelings that are m u c h m o r e m o d e r n . H e
is t o o used t o those marvels t o be p o w e r f u l l y surprised. I t takes i n t e l l e c t u a l
c u l t i v a t i o n a n d r e f l e c t i o n t o shake o f f this y o k e o f h a b i t a n d discover all that
37
is a m a z i n g even i n that v e r y regularity. F u r t h e r m o r e , as I observed e a r l i e r ,

37
See above p. 25.
82 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

i t is n o t e n o u g h that w e a d m i r e an o b j e c t f o r i t t o appear t o us as sacred—

that is, f o r i t t o be m a r k e d w i t h the q u a l i t y that makes all d i r e c t contact w i t h
i t seem a p r o f a n a t i o n a n d a sacrilege. W e m i s u n d e r s t a n d w h a t is specific t o
religious feeling i f w e confuse i t w i t h every i m p r e s s i o n o f a d m i r i n g surprise.
B u t f a d i n g a d m i r a t i o n , some say, there is o n e i m p r e s s i o n that m a n c a n -
n o t help b u t feel i n the presence o f nature. H e c a n n o t enter i n t o relations
w i t h nature w i t h o u t r e a l i z i n g that i t goes as far as he can be, o r see, and t h e n
b e y o n d that. Its i m m e n s i t y o v e r w h e l m s h i m . T h a t sensation o f an i n f i n i t e
space s u r r o u n d i n g h i m , o f an i n f i n i t e t i m e p r e c e d i n g a n d t o f o l l o w the pres-
ent m o m e n t , o f forces i n f i n i t e l y s u p e r i o r t o those at his disposal, cannot fail
t o arouse the idea inside h i m that there is an i n f i n i t e p o w e r outside h i m t o
w h i c h h e is subject. T h i s idea t h e n enters i n t o o u r c o n c e p t i o n o f the d i v i n e
as an essential e l e m e n t .
B u t let us r e m e m b e r w h a t is at issue. T h e q u e s t i o n is h o w m a n c o u l d
have a r r i v e d at t h i n k i n g that there are, i n reality, t w o categories o f radically
heterogeneous a n d i n c o m p a r a b l e things. H o w c o u l d the p a n o r a m a o f nature
have g i v e n us the idea o f that duality? N a t u r e is always a n d e v e r y w h e r e i d e n -
tical t o itself. I t does n o t m a t t e r that nature extends t o the i n f i n i t e : B e y o n d
the farthest l i m i t o f m y gaze, i t does n o t differ f r o m w h a t i t is this side. T h e
space that I conceive b e y o n d the h o r i z o n is still space, i d e n t i c a l t o the space
I see. T h e t i m e that passes endlessly is m a d e u p o f m o m e n t s i d e n t i c a l t o those
I have l i v e d t h r o u g h . Space, l i k e t i m e , repeats itself i n d e f i n i t e l y ; i f t h e p o r -
tions o f i t that I reach have n o sacredness i n themselves, h o w c o u l d the o t h -
ers have any? T h e fact that I d o n o t perceive t h e m d i r e c d y is n o t sufficient t o
3 8
transform t h e m . I t makes n o difference f o r a w o r l d o f profane things t o be
limitless; i t remains a profane w o r l d . D o e s o n e say that the physical forces
w i t h w h i c h w e i n t e r a c t exceed o u r o w n ? B u t the sacred forces are n o t dis-
t i n g u i s h e d f r o m the profane m e r e l y b y t h e i r greater i n t e n s i t y ; t h e y are differ-
ent; t h e y have special qualities that the profane have n o t . O n the o t h e r h a n d ,
all those forces manifest i n the u n i v e r s e — b o t h those i n us a n d those outside
us—are o f the same nature. M o s t o f all, w h a t c o u l d have enabled us t o l e n d
any sort o f p r e e m i n e n c e t o some, as c o m p a r e d t o others? N o t h i n g . So i f r e -
l i g i o n was really b o r n o u t o f the n e e d t o assign causes t o physical p h e n o m -

38
Furthermore, there is actual twisting of words in Max Miiller's language. Sense experience, he says,
implies, at least in certain cases, "that beyond the known there is something unknown, something that I ask
permission to call infinite" (Natural Religion, p. 195. Cf. p. 218). The unknown is no more necessarily the in-
finite than the infinite is necessarily the unknown—if it is totally identical to itself and, thus, to what we
do know about it. It would have to be shown that what we perceive of the infinite is different in nature
from what we do not.
Tlie Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion (Continuation) 83

ena, the forces i m a g i n e d i n this w a y w o u l d n o t be m o r e sacred t h a n those

39
that the scientist o f t o d a y conceives o f i n a c c o u n t i n g f o r the same facts.
T h e r e w o u l d n o t have b e e n sacred b e i n g s — o r , consequently, r e l i g i o n .
Furthermore, even supposing that this sensation o f "being over-
w h e l m e d " really c o u l d suggest t h e idea o f r e l i g i o n , i t w o u l d n o t have had
that effect o n the p r i m i t i v e — f o r that sensation he does n o t have. H e has ab-
solutely n o awareness that cosmic forces are so far s u p e r i o r t o his o w n . B e -
cause science has n o t yet c o m e t o teach h i m modesty, he ascribes t o h i m s e l f
a d o m i n i o n over things that h e does n o t have, b u t the i l l u s i o n o f i t is e n o u g h
t o p r e v e n t h i m f r o m f e e l i n g d o m i n a t e d b y t h e m . A s I have said, he believes
he can t e l l t h e elements w h a t t o d o : u n c h a i n t h e w i n d , force the r a i n t o fall,
40
stop the sun w i t h a wave o f t h e h a n d , e t c . R e l i g i o n itself helps t o give h i m
that security, f o r i t is b e l i e v e d t o a r m h i m w i t h b r o a d p o w e r s over nature. I n
part, the rites are m e a n t t o enable h i m t o i m p o s e his wishes o n the w o r l d .
T h u s , far from b e i n g i n s p i r e d b y a sense m a n has o f his smallness before the
universe, r e l i g i o n s have t h e opposite i n s p i r a t i o n . T h e effect o f even the m o s t
elevated and idealistic is o n e o f reassuring m a n i n his struggle w i t h things. I t
professes that f a i t h , b y itself, is able " t o m o v e m o u n t a i n s " — t h a t is, t o d o m i -
nate the forces o f nature. H o w c o u l d t h e y p r o v i d e this c o n f i d e n c e i f t h e i r
o r i g i n really was a sensation o f weakness a n d powerlessness?
F u r t h e r m o r e , i f n a t u r a l things t r u l y h a d b e c o m e sacred beings b y v i r t u e
o f t h e i r i m p o s i n g f o r m s o r t h e force t h e y display, w e w o u l d observe that the
sun, t h e m o o n , t h e sky, the m o u n t a i n s , the sea, the w i n d s — i n short, the
great cosmic phenomena—-were the first t o be l i f t e d t o that status; n o n e are
better e q u i p p e d t o dazzle the senses a n d the i m a g i n a t i o n . B u t i n fact, the
great cosmic p h e n o m e n a w e r e n o t d e i f i e d u n t i l fairly recent times. T h e first
beings t o w h i c h the c u l t was addressed—the p r o o f o f this w i l l be g i v e n i n the
chapters t o f o l l o w — a r e h u m b l e plants a n d animals i n r e l a t i o n t o w h i c h m a n
f o u n d h i m s e l f o n an equal f o o t i n g at the v e r y least: t h e d u c k , the hare, the
kangaroo, t h e e m u , the lizard, the caterpillar, t h e frog, a n d so f o r t h . T h e i r
objective qualities surely c o u l d n o t have b e e n the o r i g i n o f the r e l i g i o u s feel-
ings t h e y i n s p i r e d .
39
This Max Miiller unintentionally acknowledges in certain places. He admits seeing little difference
between the notion of Agni, the god of fire, and the notion of ether by which the modern physicist ex-
plains light and heat (Physical Religion, pp. 126-127). Besides, he connects the idea of divinity to that of
agency (p. 138), to an idea of causality that is in no way natural and profane. The fact that religion depicts
the causes thus conceived in the form of personal agents is insufficient to explain why those causes should
have sacredness. A personal agent can be profane, and, besides, many religious forces are essentially im-
personal.
40
When I come to speak about rites and about faith in their efficacy, we will see how these illusions
can be understood (Bk. Ill, chap. 2).
 CHAPTER FOUR

TOTEMISM AS ELEMENTARY
RELIGION
Review of the Question—Method of Treating It

A l t h o u g h seemingly q u i t e opposed i n t h e i r conclusions, the t w o systems I

have j u s t e x a m i n e d are nonetheless i n agreement o n a fundamental
p o i n t : T h e y frame the p r o b l e m i n i d e n t i c a l terms. B o t h set o u t t o c o n s t r u c t
the n o t i o n o f the d i v i n e o u t o f the sensations that c e r t a i n natural p h e n o m e n a ,
either physical o r b i o l o g i c a l , arouse i n us. A c c o r d i n g t o the animists, dreams
w e r e t h e starting p o i n t o f r e l i g i o u s e v o l u t i o n ; a c c o r d i n g t o the naturists, cer-
t a i n cosmic manifestations w e r e . A c c o r d i n g t o b o t h , however, the seed o f the
great o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n the sacred a n d the profane is t o be f o u n d i n nature.
B u t such an enterprise is impossible. I t assumes a veritable c r e a t i o n o u t
o f n o t h i n g . N o fact o f o r d i n a r y e x p e r i e n c e can give us t h e idea o f s o m e t h i n g
w h o s e d e f i n i n g t r a i t is t o be outside t h e w o r l d o f o r d i n a r y experience. A
m a n as he appears t o h i m s e l f i n his dreams is o n l y a m a n . T h e natural forces
that o u r senses perceive are o n l y n a t u r a l forces, h o w e v e r intense they m a y be.
H e n c e m y c r i t i c i s m o f b o t h d o c t r i n e s . T o e x p l a i n h o w these supposed data
o f r e l i g i o u s t h o u g h t c o u l d take o n a sacredness that has n o objective basis,
they h a d t o a d o p t t h e n o t i o n that a w h o l e w o r l d * o f h a l l u c i n a t o r y represen-
tations s u p e r i m p o s e d themselves u p o n those data o f e x p e r i e n c e , d i s t o r t i n g
t h e m t o t h e p o i n t o f m a k i n g t h e m unrecognizable, a n d r e p l a c i n g reality w i t h
m e r e figments o f the i m a g i n a t i o n . I n o n e case, i t is t h e illusions o f d r e a m i n g
that supposedly b r o u g h t a b o u t such a t r a n s f i g u r a t i o n ; i n t h e other, i t is the
b r i l l i a n t b u t vacant m a r c h o f images e v o k e d b y w o r d s . B u t i n e i t h e r case, o n e
a r r i v e d necessarily at r e l i g i o n as the p r o d u c t o f d e l i r i o u s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n .
T h u s o n e positive c o n c l u s i o n arises from this c r i t i c a l e x a m i n a t i o n . Since,
i n themselves, n e i t h e r m a n n o r nature is i n h e r e n t l y sacred, b o t h acquire sa-

* Thefirstedition says monde, or "world"; the second says mode.

84
Totemism as Elementary Religion 85

credness elsewhere. B e y o n d the h u m a n i n d i v i d u a l a n d the n a t u r a l w o r l d ,

t h e n , there m u s t b e some o t h e r reality i n r e l a t i o n t o w h i c h this species o f
d e l i r i u m that every r e l i g i o n is, i n some sense, takes o n m e a n i n g a n d o b j e c -
tive significance. I n o t h e r w o r d s , b e y o n d w h a t has b e e n called n a t u r i s m a n d
a n i m i s m , there m u s t be a n o t h e r m o r e f u n d a m e n t a l a n d m o r e p r i m i t i v e c u l t ,
o f w h i c h a n i m i s m a n d n a t u r i s m are d e r i v a t i v e f o r m s o r particular aspects.
T h a t c u l t exists. I t is the o n e t o w h i c h t h e ethnographers have g i v e n the
name " t o t e m i s m . "

I
T h e w o r d " t o t e m " appeared i n the e t h n o g r a p h i c l i t e r a t u r e o n l y at the e n d o f
the e i g h t e e n t h century. I t crops u p first i n the b o o k o f an I n d i a n interpreter,
1
J. L o n g , w h i c h was p u b l i s h e d i n L o n d o n i n 1 7 9 1 . F o r nearly h a l f a century,
2
t o t e m i s m was k n o w n exclusively as an A m e r i c a n i n s t i t u t i o n . I t was o n l y i n
3
1841 that Grey, i n a passage that is still c e l e b r a t e d , d r e w a t t e n t i o n t o the e x -
istence o f similar practices i n A u s t r a l i a . F r o m t h e n o n , scholars began t o r e -
alize that t h e y w e r e i n the presence o f a system that has a c e r t a i n generality.
r B u t t h e y saw i t as b e i n g essentially an archaic i n s t i t u t i o n , an e t h n o -
graphic c u r i o s i t y w i t h o u t m u c h interest f o r t h e h i s t o r i a n . M c L e n n a n was the
first t o t r y t o c o n n e c t t o t e m i s m w i t h general h u m a n history. I n a series o f ar-
4
ticles p u b l i s h e d i n t h e Fortnightly Review, h e set o u t t o s h o w n o t o n l y that
t o t e m i s m was a r e l i g i o n b u t also that a m u l t i p l i c i t y o f beliefs a n d practices
that recur i n m u c h m o r e advanced r e l i g i o u s systems w e r e d e r i v e d f r o m i t . H e
even w e n t so far as t o m a k e i t the source o f all t h e a n i m a l - a n d p l a n t -
w o r s h i p p i n g cults that can be observed a m o n g ancient peoples. T h a t e x t e n -
sion o f t o t e m i s m was surely overstated. T h e c u l t o f animals a n d plants has
m u l t i p l e causes that c a n n o t be r e d u c e d t o o n l y o n e w i t h o u t v e r y great o v e r -
s i m p l i f i c a t i o n . Yet b y its overstatements, this s i m p l i f i c a t i o n had the advantage
o f d r a w i n g a t t e n t i o n t o the h i s t o r i c a l i m p o r t a n c e o f t o t e m i s m .
F o r t h e i r part, the A m e r i c a n i s t s h a d l o n g since n o t i c e d that t o t e m i s m
was l i n k e d w i t h a d e f i n i t e social o r g a n i z a t i o n , o n e based o n the d i v i s i o n o f

'[John Long], Voyages and Travels of an Indian Interpreter and Trader, [Cleveland, A. H. Clark, 1904].
2
This idea was so widespread that M. [Albert] Reville still treated America as the classical locale of
totemism ([Les] Religions des peuples non civilises, vol. I [Paris, Fishbacher, 1883], p. 242).
3
[George Grey,] Journals oflwo Expeditions in North- West and Western Australia, vol. II [London, T. & W.
Boone, 1841], p. 228.
4
[James Ferguson McLennan] "The Worship of Animals and Plants" ["Totems and Totemism"—ap-
parendy Durkheim's expansion of the title. Trans.], [FR, vol. XII old series, vol. VI new series (1869), pp.
407-427, 562-582], [vol. XIII old series, vol. VII new series (1870), pp. 194-200].
86 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

5 6
society i n t o clans. I n 1877, i n his Ancient Society, L e w i s H . M o r g a n u n d e r -
t o o k t h e study o f this social o r g a n i z a t i o n i n o r d e r t o d e t e r m i n e its d i s t i n -
g u i s h i n g features and, at the same t i m e , t o s h o w its prevalence a m o n g the
I n d i a n tribes o f N o r t h and C e n t r a l A m e r i c a . A t almost the same t i m e , a n d
7
m o r e o v e r at M o r g a n ' s suggestion, F i s o n a n d H o w i t t d o c u m e n t e d the exis-
tence o f the same social system i n Australia, as w e l l as its relations w i t h
totemism.
U n d e r the i n f l u e n c e o f these l e a d i n g ideas, studies c o u l d be d o n e m o r e
m e t h o d i c a l l y . Research e n c o u r a g e d b y t h e B u r e a u o f A m e r i c a n E t h n o l o g y
8
c o n t r i b u t e d greatly t o t h e progress o f these studies. B y 1887, the d o c u m e n t s
w e r e o f sufficient n u m b e r a n d significance f o r Frazer t o have j u d g e d i t o p -
p o r t u n e t o c o l l e c t a n d present t h e m t o us i n a systematic overview. S u c h is
9
the object o f his small b o o k t i d e d Totemism, i n w h i c h t o t e m i s m is studied as
b o t h r e l i g i o n a n d legal i n s t i t u t i o n . B u t this study was p u r e l y descriptive,
1 0
m a k i n g n o effort either t o e x p l a i n t o t e m i s m o r t o delve i n t o its f u n d a m e n -
tal ideas.
R o b e r t s o n S m i t h was t h e first t o take u p the task o f e l a b o r a t i o n . H e r e -
alized m o r e k e e n l y t h a n his predecessors h o w r i c h i n seeds f o x i h e future this

5
This idea is clearly expressed in a study by [Albert] Gallatin, "A Synopsis of the Indian Tribes" (Ar-
chaeologia Americana vol. II, pp. 109ff. [also New York, AMS Press, 1973.]), and in a circular letter of Mor-
gan [an article under the name A. P. Morris. Trans.], reproduced in CJ (1860), p. 149.
6
[Lewis Henry Morgan, Ancient Society or Researches in the Lines of Human Progress from Savagery, through
Barbarism to Civilisation, London, Macmillan, 1887.] This work had been prepared for and preceded by
two others by the same author: [Lewis Henry Morgan, The League of the [Hodenosaunee or] Iroquois, New
York, M. H. Newman, 1851; and Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family, Washington,
D.C., Smithsonian Institution, 1870].
'[Lorimer Fison and Alfred Howitt], Kamilaroi and Kurnai [Group Marriage and Relationship, and Mar-
riage by Element, Draum Chiefly from the Usage of the Australian Aborigines, Melbourne, G. Robertson, 1880].

"Beginning with the first volumes of the Annual Report of the Bureau ofAmerican Ethnology [First An-
nual Report, 1879—1881, Washington, DC, Government Printing Office, 1881. Trans.], we find the
study of [John Wesley] Powell, "Wyandot Government" (vol. I, p. 59), those of [Frank Hamilton] Cush-
ing, "Zuiii Fetishes" (vol. II, p. 9), [Erminnie Adele] Smith, "Myths of the Iroquois" (vol. II, p. 76), and
the important work of [J. Owen] Dorsey "Omaha Sociology" (vol. Ill, p. 211), which are all contribu-
tions to the study of totemism.
9
It [James George Frazer, "Totemism"]firstappeared, abridged, in the Encyclopedia Britannica [9th ed.,
Edinburgh, Adam & Charles Black, 1887].
10
In his Primitive Culture [New York, Henry Holt, 1871], Tylor [Edward Burnett] had already at-
tempted an explanation of totemism, to which I will return later but do not recount here; by reducing
totemism to no more than a special case of the ancestor cult, that explanation completely misunderstands
the importance of totemism. I mention in this chapter only the observations or theories that have led to
important advances in the study of totemism.
Totetnism as Elementary Religion 87

crude a n d confused r e l i g i o n was. T o be sure, M c L e n n a n h a d already c o m -

pared t o t e m i s m w i t h the great r e l i g i o n s o f a n t i q u i t y , b u t that was o n l y b e -
cause he t h o u g h t he h a d f o u n d a c u l t o f animals a n d plants i n b o t h . B u t t o
reduce t o t e m i s m t o a k i n d o f a n i m a l o r p l a n t w o r s h i p was t o see o n l y w h a t
was m o s t superficial and, even at that, t o m i s u n d e r s t a n d its t r u e nature. S m i t h
set o u t t o m o v e b e y o n d the letter o f t o t e m i c beliefs i n o r d e r t o f i n d t h e f u n -
damental p r i n c i p l e s g o v e r n i n g t h e m . I n his b o o k Kinship and Marriage in
11
Early Arabia, he h a d already s h o w n that t o t e m i s m presupposes a c o n s u b -
stantiality o f m a n a n d a n i m a l ( o r p l a n t ) , w h e t h e r natural o r acquired. I n his
12
Religion of the Semites, he m a d e this same idea the o r i g i n o f the w h o l e sac-
r i f i c i a l system. H e c o n t e n d e d that h u m a n i t y owes the p r i n c i p l e o f a l i m e n t a r y
c o m m u n i o n t o t o t e m i s m . C e r t a i n l y w e m a y find Smith's t h e o r y one-sided,
and i t is n o l o n g e r adequate t o the facts w e n o w have. Nonetheless, i t c o n -
tains an i n g e n i o u s i n s i g h t a n d i t has h a d a f r u i t f u l i n f l u e n c e o n the science o f
13
religions. Frazer draws u p o n these same ideas i n The Golden Bough. I n i t he
relates t o E u r o p e a n f o l k l o r e the t o t e m i s m that M c L e n n a n h a d related t o the
religions o f classical a n t i q u i t y a n d S m i t h t o those o f t h e S e m i t i c peoples.
1 4
M c L e n n a n ' s s c h o o l a n d M o r g a n ' s thus came t o j o i n that o f M a n n h a r d t .
D u r i n g this t i m e , the A m e r i c a n t r a d i t i o n c o n t i n u e d t o develop, a n d w i t h
an independence, moreover, that i t has k e p t u n t i l q u i t e recently. T h r e e groups
o f societies i n p a r t i c u l a r w e r e t h e object o f research o n t o t e m i s m : the tribes
o f the N o r t h w e s t — t h e T l i n g i t , the H a i d a , the Salish, a n d the T s h i m s h i a n ;
the great S i o u x n a t i o n ; and finally, i n America's center, the Pueblo Indians. T h e
first w e r e s t u d i e d p r i n c i p a l l y b y D a l l , Krause, Boas, S w a n t o n , and H i l l T o u t ;
1 5
the second b y D o r s e y ; the last b y M i n d e l e f f , M r s . Stevenson, and C u s h i n g .
B u t h o w e v e r r i c h the harvest o f facts c o l l e c t e d , the available d o c u m e n t s r e -
m a i n e d fragmentary. A l t h o u g h t h e A m e r i c a n religions c o n t a i n m a n y traces
o f t o t e m i s m , t h e y have nevertheless g o n e b e y o n d the t o t e m i c phase proper.
O n the o t h e r hand, d o c u m e n t a t i o n o n Australia scarcely w e n t b e y o n d isolated

"[William Robertson Smith], Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia, Cambridge [Cambridge Univer-
sity Press], 1885.
12
[William Robertson Smith], Leaures on the Religion of the Semites [London, A & C Black, 1889]. This
is the published version of a course taught at the University of Aberdeen in 1888. Cf. the article "Sacri-
fice" in the Encyclopedia Britannica [9th ed., Edinburgh, Adam & Charles Black, 1887].
13
[James George] Frazer, The Golden Bough [A Study in Magic and Religion], London [and New York,
Macmillan], 1890. Since then, a three-volume second edition has appeared (1900), and the third of five
volumes is in the process of publication. [This text was reissued by St. Martin's Press in 1990. Trans.]
14
It is well to cite the interesting work of [Edwin] Sidney Hardand, The Legend of Perseus, 3 vols. [Lon-
don, D. Nutt, 1894-1896] in this connection.
15
Here I confine myself to giving the authors' names; the books will be indicated below, as I use them.
88 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

beliefs a n d rites, rites o f i n i t i a t i o n a n d p r o h i b i t i o n s relative t o the t o t e m .

T h u s i t is w i t h facts taken f r o m h i t h e r a n d y o n that Frazer t r i e d t o sketch an
overall p i c t u r e o f t o t e m i s m . W h a t e v e r its o b v i o u s m e r i t , a r e c o n s t r u c t i o n u n -
d e r t a k e n i n these c o n d i t i o n s c o u l d o n l y be i n c o m p l e t e and h y p o t h e t i c a l . A l l
things considered, a f u l l y f u n c t i o n i n g t o t e m i c system h a d n o t yet b e e n seen.
T h i s gap has b e e n f i l l e d o n l y i n recent years. T w o r e m a r k a b l y astute o b -
16
servers, Messieurs B a l d w i n Spencer a n d F. J. G i l l e n , have d i s c o v e r e d , i n the
i n t e r i o r o f t h e A u s t r a l i a n c o n t i n e n t , a rather large n u m b e r o f tribes i n w h i c h
they saw i n o p e r a t i o n a f u l l religious system w h o s e basis a n d coherence w e r e
p r o v i d e d b y t o t e m i c beliefs. T h e results o f t h e i r i n q u i r y w e r e set f o r t h i n t w o
w o r k s that have g i v e n n e w life t o the study o f t o t e m i s m . T h e first, The Na-
17
tive Tribes of Central Australia, treats t h e m o s t central o f those tribes, t h e
A r u n t a , the L u r i t c h a , * and, a l i t d e farther s o u t h , o n t h e w e s t e r n shore o f
Lake E y r e , the U r a b u n n a . T h e second, titled The Northern Tribes of Central
18
Australia, treats the societies t o the n o r t h o f the U r a b u n n a : T h e y o c c u p y
the t e r r i t o r y that extends f r o m t h e M a c d o n n e l l R a n g e s t o the Carpenter
G u l f . T o cite o n l y the m a i n groups, these are the U n m a t j e r a , the K a i t i s h , the
W a r r a m u n g a , the T j i n g i l l i , the B i n b i n g a , the W a l p a r i , the G n a n j i a n d finally,
1 9
o n the v e r y shores o f the gulf, the M a r a and the A n u l a .

*The spelling "Loritja" is used elsewhere.

''Although Spencer and Gillen were thefirstto study these tribes thoroughly they were not the first
to speak about them. Howitt had drawn attention to the social organization of the Wuaramongo (Warra-
munga of Spencer and Gillen) as long ago as 1888 in "Further Notes on the Australian Class [Systems],"
JAI, [vol. XVIII (1889)], pp. 44—45. The Arunta had already been studied in summary fashion by [Rev-
erend Louis] Schulze ("The Aborigines of the Upper and Middle Finke River" [RSSv4, vol. XIV, pp.
210-246], 2d installment]; the organization of the Chingalee (the Tjingilli of Spencer and Gillen), the
Wombya, etc., by [R. H.] Mathews, "Wombya Organization of the Australian Aborigines, " AA, vol. II
new series [1900], p. 494; "Divisions of Some West Australian Tribes, ibid., p. 185; ["Divisions of Aus-
tralian Tribes"], APS, vol. XXXVII [1898], pp. 151-152 and ["Australian Divisional Systems"] JRS, vol.
XXXII, p. 71, vol. XXXIII, p. 111). In addition, hefirstcites results of the study conducted on the
Arunta that had already been published in [Baldwin Spencer], Report on the Work of the Horn Scientific Ex-
pedition to Central Australia, part IV [London, Dulau], 1896. Thefirstpart of this Report is by [Edward] Stir-
ling, the second is Gillen's; and the entire publication was directed by Baldwin Spencer.
17
[Sir Baldwin Spencer and Francis James Gillen], The Native Tribes of Central Australia [London,
Macmillan, 1899], hereafter abbreviated, Native Tribes or Nat. Tr. [I have used Native Tribes. Trans.]
I8
[Sir Baldwin Spencer and Francis James Gillen], The Northern Tribes of Central Australia [London,
Macmillan, 1904], hereafter Northern Tribes or North. Tr. [I have used Northern Tribes. Trans.]
19
I write "the Arunta," "the Anula," "the Tjingilli," etc. without adding an "s" to these names to mark
the plural. It seems illogical to incorporate into words that are not French a grammatical sign that has its
meaning only in our language. I will make exception to this rule only when the tribal name has obviously
been gallicized (les Hurons, for example). [I have followed Durkheim in not adding "s" to proper nouns,
but to avoid the confusion that can arise because English articles do not indicate plurals, I have made com-
mon nouns plural by adding "s." Trans.]
Totemism as Elementary Religion 89

M o r e recently, C a r l Strehlow, a G e r m a n missionary w h o also spent m a n y

20
years i n these same societies o f central A u s t r a l i a , has b e g u n t o p u b l i s h his
o w n studies o n t w o o f these tribes, the A r a n d a a n d the L o r i t j a ( A r u n t a a n d
2 1
L u r i t c h a o f Spencer a n d G i l l e n ) . H a v i n g mastered the language spoken b y
22
these p e o p l e s , S t r e h l o w was able t o r e p o r t m a n y t o t e m i c m y t h s a n d r e l i -
gious songs, m o s t o f w h i c h are g i v e n t o us i n t h e i r o r i g i n a l texts. N o t w i t h -
standing variations o f d e t a i l that are easily e x p l a i n e d a n d w h o s e i m p o r t a n c e
23
has b e e n gready e x a g g e r a t e d , w e w i l l see that Strehlow's observations,
while complementing, specifying, a n d sometimes c o r r e c t i n g those of
Spencer a n d G i l l e n , o n t h e w h o l e c o n f i r m t h e m .
These discoveries gave rise t o an abundant literature, t o w h i c h I w i l l have
occasion t o r e t u r n . T h e w o r k s o f Spencer a n d G i l l e n especially have h a d
great i n f l u e n c e , n o t o n l y because t h e y w e r e t h e oldest b u t because the data
24
w e r e presented i n a systematic f o r m that enabled t h e m t o g u i d e later studies
a n d also t o p r o v o k e speculation. T h e results w e r e c o m m e n t e d u p o n , d e -
bated, a n d i n t e r p r e t e d i n all k i n d s o f ways. A t t h e same t i m e H o w i t t , w h o s e
25
fragmentary studies w e r e scattered t h r o u g h m a n y different p u b l i c a t i o n s ,

20
[Carl] Strehlow has been in Australia since 1892. He livedfirstamong the Dieri and moved from
there to live among the Arunta.
21
Strehlow, DieAranda-und Loritja-Stämme in Zentral-Australien [Frankfurt, Joseph Baer, 1907]. To date,
four volumes have been published; thefirstappeared when this book had just been completed. I was un-
able to evaluate it. Thefirsttwo volumes deal with myth and legend, the third with the cult. It is proper
to add to Strehlow's name that of [Gustav] von Leonhardi, who played an important role in the publica-
tion. Not only was he responsible for editing Strehlow's manuscripts, but also, by judicious questions on
more than one point, he led Strehlow to specify some of his observations. By the way, an article that
Leonhardi gave to Globus [Hildbringhausen, Brunswick, 1861—1910] may profitably be consulted; and
one will find many extracts from his correspondence with Strehlow ("Ueber einige religiöse und
totemistische Vorstellungen der Aranda und Loritja in Zentral-Australien," Globus vol. XCI, p. 285). Cf.
on the same subject an article of Northcote W. Thomas ["Religious Ideas of the Arunta"], Folklore vol.
XVI [1905], pp. 428ff.
22
While not ignorant of the language, Spencer and Gillen know it far less well than Strehlow.
23
Notably by [Hermann] Klaatsch, "Schlussbericht über meine Reise nach Australien in den jähren
1904-1907," ZE, vol. XXIX [1907], pp. 635ff.
24
The book of K. Langloh Parker [Catherine Somerville Parker], The EuahlayiTribe [London, A. Con-
stable, 1905]; that of [Erhard] Eylmann, Die Eingeborenen der Kolonie Südaustralien [Berlin, D. Reimer,
1908]; that ofJohn Mathew, Two Representative Tribes of Queensland [London, T. F. Urwin, 1910]; and cer-
tain recent articles by Mathew show the influence of Spencer and Gillen.
25
The list of these publications is to be found in the preface of [Alfred William] Howitt [Native Tribes
of South-East Australia, New York, Macmillan, 1904], pp. 8-9.
90 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

u n d e r t o o k t o d o for the s o u t h e r n tribes w h a t Spencer a n d G i l l e n h a d d o n e

26
for those o f the center. I n his Native Tribes of South-East Australia, he gives
us an o v e r v i e w o f social o r g a n i z a t i o n a m o n g t h e peoples w h o o c c u p y s o u t h -
e r n Australia, N e w S o u t h Wales, a n d a large p a r t o f Q u e e n s l a n d . T h e a d -
vances thus achieved p r o m p t e d Frazer t o s u p p l e m e n t his Totemism w i t h a sort
2 7
of compendium that b r i n g s t o g e t h e r all the i m p o r t a n t d o c u m e n t s that c o n -
c e r n e i t h e r t o t e m i c r e l i g i o n o r t h e k i n s h i p a n d m a r r i a g e o r g a n i z a t i o n that is
t h o u g h t , r i g h t l y o r w r o n g l y , t o be c o n n e c t e d w i t h i t . T h e a i m o f this w o r k
is n o t t o give us a general a n d systematic v i e w o f t o t e m i s m b u t rather t o m a k e
2 8
available t o researchers the materials necessary f o r c o n s t r u c t i n g o n e . I n it
the facts are arranged i n a s t r i c d y e t h n o g r a p h i c a n d geographical order: E a c h
c o n t i n e n t and, w i t h i n each c o n t i n e n t , each t r i b e o r e t h n i c g r o u p is s t u d i e d
separately. A study as b r o a d as this, passing so m a n y different peoples i n r e -
v i e w o n e after t h e other, c e r t a i n l y c o u l d n o t be equally detailed t h r o u g h o u t ;
b u t i t is still a useful reference t h a t can facilitate research.

II
I t emerges f r o m this b r i e f a c c o u n t that Australia is the m o s t favorable t e r r a i n
for the study o f t o t e m i s m . F o r this reason, I w i l l m a k e i t the p r i n c i p a l area o f
m y observation.
I n Totemism, Frazer was interested p r i m a r i l y i n c o l l e c t i n g every trace o f
t o t e m i s m that can be f o u n d i n h i s t o r y a n d ethnography. T h i s l e d h i m t o i n -
clude i n his study societies w h o s e k i n d a n d degree o f c u l t u r a l d e v e l o p m e n t
2 9 30
are q u i t e disparate: A n c i e n t E g y p t , Arabia, Greece, a n d the southern

26
Ibid. From now on, I will cite this book with the abbreviation Nat. Tr. [Native Tribes. Trans.], but al-
ways preceded by the name "Howitt" to distinguish it from the first book of Spencer and Gillen, whose
title I abridge in the same way. [To avoid the confusion that can arise from these abbreviations, I precede
every short citation by the author's surname. Trans.]
27
[James George Frazer], Totemism and Exogamy, 4 vols., London [Macmillan], 1910. This work be-
gins with a republication of the little book Totemism, reproduced without fundamental changes. [This re-
publication is found in vol. I. Trans.]
28
It is true that, at the beginning and end, we find general theories of totemism that will be set forth
and discussed further on. But these theories are relatively independent of the collected facts accompany-
ing them, for they had already been published in various review articles well before this work appeared.
Those articles were reproduced in the first volume (pp. 89—172).
29
Ibid., p. 12.
30
Ibid., p. 15.
Tolemism as Elementary Religion 91

31
Slavs figure alongside the tribes o f Australia a n d A m e r i c a . T h i s procedure
was u n s u r p r i s i n g i n a disciple o f t h e a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l s c h o o l . T h e a i m o f that
3 2
school is n o t t o situate r e l i g i o n s i n t h e social m i l i e u x o f w h i c h t h e y are p a r t
and t o differentiate a m o n g t h e m o n that basis. Instead, as the name indicates,
the a i m is t o g o b e y o n d n a t i o n a l a n d h i s t o r i c a l differences i n o r d e r t o arrive
at the universal a n d t r u l y h u m a n basis o f r e l i g i o u s life. T h e y assume that m a n
possesses a r e l i g i o u s nature i n a n d o f himself, b y v i r t u e o f his o w n c o n s t i t u -
t i o n a n d i n d e p e n d e n t o f all social c o n d i t i o n s , a n d t h e y propose t o deter-
3 3
m i n e * w h a t that nature i s . I n research o f this sort, all peoples can be d r a w n
u p o n . N o d o u b t , i t w o u l d be preferable t o i n q u i r e m o s t o f the m o s t p r i m i -
tive, because a m o n g p r i m i t i v e s that o r i g i n a l nature is m o r e l i k e l y t o be i n the
o p e n ; b u t since i t can also be f o u n d a m o n g t h e m o r e c i v i l i z e d , they t o o are
naturally called u p o n t o testify. E v e n m o r e w i l l all those t h o u g h t «-o be n o t
v e r y distant f r o m t h e o r i g i n s (all those assembled haphazardly u n d e r the i m -
precise r u b r i c o f savages) be p u t o n t h e same plane a n d consulted i n t e r -
changeably. M o r e o v e r , since f r o m this p o i n t o f v i e w t h e facts are o f interest
o n l y i n p r o p o r t i o n t o t h e i r degree o f universality, researchers feel o b l i g e d t o
amass the largest possible n u m b e r o f t h e m . I t is n o t t h o u g h t possible t o m a k e
the scope o f c o m p a r i s o n t o o b r o a d .
S u c h c a n n o t be m y m e t h o d , a n d f o r several reasons.
First, f o r the sociologist as f o r the h i s t o r i a n , social facts exist i n r e l a t i o n -
ship w i t h t h e social system t o w h i c h t h e y b e l o n g ^ ; hence they c a n n o t be u n -
d e r s t o o d apart f r o m i t . T h i s is w h y t w o facts b e l o n g i n g t o t w o different
societies c a n n o t be f r u i t f u l l y c o m p a r e d s i m p l y because t h e y resemble o n e a n -
other. T h o s e societies m u s t also resemble o n e a n o t h e r — w h i c h is t o say that
the societies themselves m u s t b e varieties o f the same species. T h e c o m p a r a -
tive m e t h o d w o u l d be impossible i f social types d i d n o t exist, a n d i t c a n n o t

""The typo-ridden French second edition says terminer ("to finish" or "finish off"), instead of déter-
miner.

tThe term "function," in one of the senses associated with functionalism, appears in the French text:
Les faits sociaux sont fonction du système social dont ils font partie.
31
Ibid., p. 32. [Frazer's actual reference is to Transylvania, not to the southern Slavs. Trans.]
32
In this regard, it should be noted that the more recent work, Totemism and Exogamy, marks an im-
portant advance in Frazer's thought and method. Whenever he describes the religious or household insti-
tutions of a tribe, he makes an effort to determine the geographical and social conditions in which that
tribe is found. As sketchy as these analyses may be, they still suggest a break with the old methods of the
anthropological school.
33
Of course, I, too, consider that the principal object of the science of religions is to arrive at an un-
derstanding of the religious nature of man. But since I see it not as an innate given but a product of social
causes, there can be no question of determining it wholly apart from the social milieu.
92 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

be usefully a p p l i e d except w i t h i n t h e same t y p e . W h a t mistakes have b e e n

left u n m a d e t h r o u g h failure t o u n d e r s t a n d this r u l e ! So i t is that scholars have
i m p r o p e r l y c o m p a r e d facts that, despite e x t e r n a l resemblances, had n e i t h e r
the same m e a n i n g n o r the same i m p o r t : p r i m i t i v e d e m o c r a c y a n d that o f t o -
day, the c o l l e c t i v i s m o f l o w e r societies a n d t h e socialist tendencies o f today,
the m o n o g a m y that is prevalent a m o n g the A u s t r a l i a n tribes a n d that sanc-
t i o n e d b y o u r codes, etc. C o n f u s i o n s o f this sort are f o u n d even i n Frazer's
b o o k . H e o f t e n j u m b l e s t o g e t h e r m e r e a n i m a l - w o r s h i p a n d practices that are
specifically t o t e m i c , even t h o u g h t h e sometimes e n o r m o u s distance b e t w e e n
the c o r r e s p o n d i n g social m i l i e u x precludes any n o t i o n o f assimilating the
t w o . T h u s , i f w e d o n o t w i s h t o fall i n t o the same mistakes, w e m u s t c o n -
centrate o u r research o n a clearly d e f i n e d t y p e o f society rather t h a n e x t e n d
o u r research over all possible societies.
I n d e e d , i t is i m p o r t a n t t o focus as n a r r o w l y as possible. W e can usefully
c o m p a r e o n l y facts that w e k n o w w e l l . W h e n w e u n d e r t a k e t o encompass all
sorts o f societies a n d civilizations, w e c a n n o t k n o w any w i t h the requisite
c o m p e t e n c e ; w h e n w e p u t t o g e t h e r facts f r o m e v e r y w h e r e t o c o m p a r e t h e m ,
w e are f o r c e d t o take t h e m i n d i s c r i m i n a t e l y , h a v i n g n e i t h e r t h e means n o r ,
for that matter, the t i m e t o treat t h e m critically. T h e s e chaotic and sketchy
comparisons have discredited t h e c o m p a r a t i v e m e t h o d a m o n g a c e r t a i n
n u m b e r o f g o o d m i n d s . T h a t m e t h o d can y i e l d serious results o n l y i f i t is ap-
p l i e d t o a rather l i m i t e d n u m b e r o f societies, so that each o f t h e m can be
studied w i t h adequate p r e c i s i o n . T h e k e y is t o choose those i n w h i c h t h e i n -
vestigation has t h e greatest chance o f b e i n g fruitful.
I n any event, the q u a l i t y o f the facts is m u c h m o r e i m p o r t a n t t h a n t h e i r
3 4
n u m b e r . Q u i t e secondary, i n m y v i e w , is the q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r t o t e m i s m
was m o r e w i d e s p r e a d o r less so. I f t o t e m i s m interests m e , that is m a i n l y b e -
cause, t h r o u g h s t u d y i n g i t , I h o p e j t o discover relationships t h a t j w i l l h e l p us
understand w h a t r e l i g i o n isrTo establish relationships, i t is n e i t h e r necessary
n o r always useful t o stack e x p e r i m e n t s o n e u p o n t h e other. I t is far m o r e i m -
p o r t a n t t o have w e l l - d o n e e x p e r i m e n t s that are t r u l y significant. A solitary
fact can shed l i g h t o n a law, w h i l e a m u l t i t u d e o f vague a n d imprecise obser-
vations can lead o n l y t o c o n f u s i o n . I n every k i n d o f science, the scientist
w o u l d be s u b m e r g e d b y the facts that present themselves i f he d i d n o t m a k e
a c h o i c e a m o n g t h e m . H e m u s t perceive w h i c h ones p r o m i s e t o be t h e m o s t
i n s t r u c t i v e a n d t u r n his a t t e n t i o n t o those, w h i l e t u r n i n g aside from t h e o t h -
ers t e m p o r a r i l y .

34
Hence the importance I ascribe to totemism is entirely independent of the question whether it was
universal, a point that cannot be repeated too many times.
Totemism as Elementary Religion 93

T h i s is w h y , w i t h o n e e x c e p t i o n that w i l l be i n d i c a t e d later, I propose t o

l i m i t m y research t o the A u s t r a l i a n societies. T h e y f u l f i l l all the c o n d i t i o n s
that have j u s t b e e n listed. T h e y are c o m p l e t e l y h o m o g e n e o u s ; and w h i l e o n e
can discern varieties a m o n g t h e m , t h e y b e l o n g t o t h e same type. I n d e e d ,
t h e i r h o m o g e n e i t y is so great that the f r a m e w o r k o f social o r g a n i z a t i o n is n o t
o n l y the same b u t designated b y names that are e i t h e r i d e n t i c a l o r equivalent
35
i n m a n y tribes that are sometimes v e r y far f r o m o n e a n o t h e r . I n addition,
the m o s t t h o r o u g h d o c u m e n t a t i o n w e have concerns A u s t r a l i a n t o t e m i s m .
Finally, w h a t I propose above all t o study i n this w o r k is t h e m o s t p r i m i t i v e
and the simplest r e l i g i o n t h a t can b e f o u n d . T o discover that r e l i g i o n , t h e r e -
fore, i t is n a t u r a l f o r m e t o address m y s e l f t o societies that stand as close as
possible t o the o r i g i n s o f e v o l u t i o n . I t is o b v i o u s l y there that I have the great-
est chance o f d i s c o v e r i n g that r e l i g i o n a n d s t u d y i n g i t properly. N o w , there
are n o societies that e x h i b i t this characteristic m o r e f u l l y t h a n d o the A u s -
tralian tribes. N o t o n l y is t h e i r t e c h n o l o g y q u i t e r u d i m e n t a r y — t h e house
and even t h e h u t are still u n k n o w n a m o n g t h e m — b u t t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n is
the m o s t p r i m i t i v e a n d t h e simplest k n o w n . I t is the o r g a n i z a t i o n that I have
36
called e l s e w h e r e " o r g a n i z a t i o n based u p o n clans." B e g i n n i n g i n t h e n e x t
chapter, I w i l l set o u t its basic traits.
S t i l l , w h i l e m a k i n g A u s t r a l i a the m a i n object o f m y research, I t h i n k i t
useful n o t t o disregard c o m p l e t e l y t h e societies i n w h i c h t o t e m i s m was first
discovered: t h e I n d i a n tribes o f N o r t h A m e r i c a .
T h e r e is n o t h i n g i l l f o u n d e d a b o u t e x p a n d i n g the field o f c o m p a r i s o n i n
this way. G r a n t e d , the A m e r i c a n peoples are m o r e advanced than those o f A u s -
tralia. T h e t e c h n o l o g y has b e c o m e m o r e developed, the people live i n houses
o r tents, and there are even f o r t i f i e d villages. T h e social density is greater, and
centralization, w h i c h is altogether absent i n Australia, begins t o appear: T h e r e
are vast confederations u n d e r a central authority, such as that o f the I r o q u o i s .
Sometimes there is a c o m p l e x system o f differentiated a n d hierarchically o r -
dered classes. Nonetheless, the basic lines o f societal structure r e m a i n w h a t
they are i n Australia; i t is still o r g a n i z a t i o n based o n clans. T h u s w e d o n o t have
t w o different types b u t t w o varieties o f the same type, w h i c h are rather close

35
This is the case of the phratries and the marriage classes; on this point, see Spencer and Gillen,
Northern Tribes, chap. Ill; Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 109, 137-142; [Northcote Whitridge] Thomas, Kin-
ship [Organizations] and [Croup] Marriage in Australia [Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1906],
chaps. VI, VII.
3 6
Emile Dürkheim, Division du travail social, 3d ed. [Paris, F. Mean, (1893) 1902], p. 150. [Also in
Emile Dürkheim on the Division of Labor in Society, New York, Macmillan, 1933, p. 175. Trans.].
94 PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS

to one another. T h e y are t w o successive m o m e n t s i n a single e v o l u t i o n ; i n

consequence, they are similar e n o u g h t o make comparisons possible.
Besides, such comparisons can have t h e i r uses. Precisely because t h e
t e c h n o l o g y o f the Indians is m u c h m o r e advanced t h a n that o f t h e A u s -
tralians, c e r t a i n aspects o f the social o r g a n i z a t i o n c o m m o n t o b o t h are m o r e
easily s t u d i e d a m o n g t h e Indians. A s l o n g as m e n are still m a k i n g t h e i r first
steps i n the art o f expressing t h e i r t h o u g h t , i t is n o t easy f o r the observer t o
perceive w h a t moves t h e m ; f o r n o t h i n g translates i n an o b v i o u s w a y w h a t
happens i n these obscure m i n d s t h a t have o n l y a confused a n d fleeting self-
awareness. F o r example, r e l i g i o u s symbols are at that p o i n t o n l y formless
c o m b i n a t i o n s o f lines a n d colors, t h e m e a n i n g o f w h i c h is n o t easy t o guess,
as w e w i l l see. T h e r e are i n d e e d m a n y actions a n d m o v e m e n t s b y w h i c h i n -
w a r d states are expressed; b u t since those states are b y nature fleeting, they
q u i c k l y disappear from v i e w . T h e reason t o t e m i s m was n o t i c e d earlier i n
N o r t h A m e r i c a t h a n i n A u s t r a l i a is this: i t was m o r e readily seen—even
t h o u g h i n A m e r i c a i t h a d a relatively smaller place i n t h e t o t a l i t y o f r e l i g i o u s
life. Besides, w h e r e the beliefs a n d i n s t i t u t i o n s are n o t captured i n a rather
d e f i n i t e m a t e r i a l f o r m , t h e y are m o r e l i k e l y t o change u n d e r the i n f l u e n c e o f
the slightest circumstance, o r t o be erased from m e m o r y altogether. T h u s ,
there is s o m e t h i n g changeable a n d p r o t e a n a b o u t the A u s t r a l i a n clans,
whereas the c o r r e s p o n d i n g o r g a n i z a t i o n i n A m e r i c a m o s t o f t e n has greater
stability a n d m o r e clearly d e f i n e d c o n t o u r s . T h u s , a l t h o u g h A m e r i c a n
t o t e m i s m is f u r t h e r from the o r i g i n s t h a n Australia's, there are i m p o r t a n t fea-
tures w h o s e remnants i t has better preserved f o r us.
I n t h e second place, t o u n d e r s t a n d an i n s t i t u t i o n p r o p e r l y , i t is o f t e n w e l l
3 7
to f o l l o w i t i n t o advanced phases o f its e v o l u t i o n , f o r sometimes i t is o n l y
w h e n t h e i n s t i t u t i o n is f u l l y d e v e l o p e d that its t r u e m e a n i n g appears w i t h
greatest clarity. O n those g r o u n d s as w e l l , since A m e r i c a n t o t e m i s m has a
3 8
l o n g e r history, i t can h e l p clarify c e r t a i n aspects o f A u s t r a l i a n t o t e m i s m . At
the same time, i t w i l l p u t us i n a better p o s i t i o n t o see h o w t o t e m i s m is c o n -
n e c t e d w i t h t h e r e l i g i o u s f o r m s that have c o m e later a n d t o place i t w i t h i n
the c o n t e x t o f h i s t o r i c a l d e v e l o p m e n t .

37
Of course, things do not always work in this fashion. As I have said, the simplest forms frequently
help us better understand the more complex. On this point, no rule of method is automatically applica-
ble to all possible cases.
38
It is in this way that individual totemism in America will help us understand its role and importance
in Australia. Since individual totemism is very rudimentary in Australia, it probably would have passed
unnoticed.
Totemism as Elementary Religion 95

I n the analyses t o f o l l o w , I w i l l n o t bar m y s e l f f r o m u s i n g certain data

d r a w n f r o m the I n d i a n societies o f N o r t h A m e r i c a . I use i t n o t because there
39
c o u l d be any q u e s t i o n o f s t u d y i n g A m e r i c a n t o t e m i s m h e r e . S u c h a study
must be d o n e direcdy, i n a n d o f itself, a n d n o t b u r i e d i n the study I w i l l u n -
dertake: I t w o u l d pose different problems a n d w o u l d i n v o l v e a w h o l e set o f
specific investigations. I use A m e r i c a n data o n l y as a s u p p l e m e n t a n d o n l y
w h e n i t appears w e l l suited t o h e l p i n g us understand the A u s t r a l i a n data b e t -
40
ter. T h e latter are the real a n d i m m e d i a t e o b j e c t o f m y research.

"Moreover, in America there is not one type of totemism but different types that would have to be
distinguished.
'"I will depart from that circle of facts quite rarely, when a particularly instructive comparison seems
essential.
 BOOK TWO

"HE ELEMENTARY
B ELIEFS
 CHAPTER ONE

THE PRINCIPAL TOTEMIC

BELIEFS
The Totem as Name and as Emblem

O w i n g t o its nature, m y study w i l l be i n t w o parts. Since every r e l i g i o n is

m a d e u p o f i n t e l l e c t u a l c o n c e p t i o n s a n d r i t u a l practices, I m u s t treat i n
succession the beliefs a n d rites that m a k e u p t o t e m i c r e l i g i o n . Nevertheless,
these t w o elements o f religious life are t o o closely allied f o r any radical sepa-
r a t i o n t o be possible. A l t h o u g h i n p r i n c i p l e d e r i v e d f r o m t h e beliefs, t h e c u l t
nevertheless reacts u p o n t h e m , a n d the m y t h is o f t e n m o d e l e d o n the r i t e so
as t o a c c o u n t f o r i t , especially w h e n the m e a n i n g o f the r i t e is n o t , o r is n o
longer, apparent. Conversely, there are beliefs that d o n o t clearly manifest
themselves except t h r o u g h rites that translate t h e m . T h u s , the t w o parts o f
the analysis c a n n o t fail t o i n t e r p e n e t r a t e . S t i l l , t h e y are o f such a different o r -
der that separate study o f t h e m is indispensable. A n d since i t is impossible t o
understand a n y t h i n g a b o u t a r e l i g i o n w i t h o u t k n o w i n g the ideas o n w h i c h i t
rests, w e m u s t first b e c o m e a c q u a i n t e d w i t h those ideas.
M y i n t e n t i o n is n o t t o retrace here all the speculative byways o f r e l i g i o u s
t h o u g h t , even a m o n g the Australians. I w i s h t o get d o w n t o the e l e m e n t a r y
ideas at the basis o f r e l i g i o n , b u t the p o i n t is n o t t o f o l l o w speculative
t h o u g h t t h r o u g h all the sometimes q u i t e l u x u r i a n t detail that the m y t h o l o g -
ical i m a g i n a t i o n has g i v e n t h e m i n these societies. W h e n m y t h s can a i d i n
u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e f u n d a m e n t a l n o t i o n s better, I w i l l c e r t a i n l y use those, b u t
w i t h o u t m a k i n g m y t h o l o g y itself t h e o b j e c t o f study. Besides, insofar as
m y t h o l o g y is a w o r k o f art, i t does n o t b e l o n g solely t o the science o f r e l i -
gions. I n a d d i t i o n , the m e n t a l processes o f w h i c h i t is the o u t c o m e are far t o o
c o m p l e x t o a l l o w t h e m t o be s t u d i e d i n d i r e c t l y a n d obliquely. M y t h o l o g y is
a d i f f i c u l t p r o b l e m i n its o w n r i g h t , o n e t h a t m u s t be treated i n a n d o f itself
and a c c o r d i n g t o its o w n specialized m e t h o d .

99
100 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

A m o n g the beliefs o n w h i c h t o t e m i c r e l i g i o n rests, the m o s t i m p o r t a n t

are those that c o n c e r n the t o t e m , and so w e m u s t b e g i n w i t h those beliefs.

I
A t the basis o f m o s t Australian tribes, w e f i n d a g r o u p that has a d o m i n a n t place
i n collective life: T h a t g r o u p is the clan. T w o essential traits characterize i t .
First, the i n d i v i d u a l s w h o c o m p r i s e i t consider themselves j o i n e d b y a
b o n d o f k i n s h i p b u t a b o n d o f a particular sort. T h i s k i n s h i p does n o t arise
f r o m the fact that they have w e l l - d e f i n e d relations o f c o m m o n b l o o d ; t h e y are
k i n solely because t h e y bear the same name. T h e y are n o t fathers, m o t h e r s ,
sons o r daughters, uncles o r n e p h e w s o f o n e a n o t h e r i n the sense w e n o w
give those terms; nevertheless t h e y regard themselves as f o r m i n g a single f a m -
ily, w h i c h is b r o a d o r n a r r o w d e p e n d i n g o n the size o f the clan, solely because
they are c o l l e c t i v e l y designated b y the same w o r d . A n d i f w e say they regard
o n e a n o t h e r as b e i n g o f the same family, i t is because t h e y a c k n o w l e d g e r e -
ciprocal obligations i d e n t i c a l t o those that have b e e n i n c u m b e n t o n k i n i n all
ages: obligations o f help, vengeance, n o t m a r r y i n g o n e another, and so f o r t h .
I n this first characteristic, the c l a n is n o t different f r o m t h e R o m a n gens
a n d the G r e e k yevos, f o r k i n s h i p a m o n g the gentiles arose exclusively f r o m t h e
1
fact that a l l t h e m e m b e r s o f t h e gens c a r r i e d t h e same n a m e , the nomen gen-
tilicium. A n d o f course the^ens is i n sense a clan, b u t i t is a v a r i e t y o f the genus
2
that m u s t n o t be confused w i t h the A u s t r a l i a n c l a n . W h a x d j i t i i i g u i s l i g s - t l i e
Australianjclan is t h a t t h e n a m e i t bears is also that^of a d e f i n i t e species o f m a -
terial things w i t h w h i c h i t t h i n k s i t has special relations w h o s e nature I w i l l
address b e l o w , i n particular, relations o f k i n s h i p . T h e species o f things that
serves t o designate t h e clan c o l l e c t i v e l y is called its totem. T h e clan's t o t e m is
also that o f each clan m e m b e r .
E v e r y clan has a t o t e m that belongs t o i t alone; t w o different clans o f t h e
same t r i b e c a n n o t have t h e same o n e . I n d e e d , o n e is p a r t o f a clan o n l y b y
v i r t u e o f h a v i n g a c e r t a i n name. So all w h o bear this n a m e are m e m b e r s o f i t
i n the same r i g h t ; h o w e v e r scattered across t h e t r i b a l t e r r i t o r y they m a y be,
3
t h e y all have the same k i n relations w i t h o n e a n o t h e r . I n consequence, t w o

'Here is the definition Cicero gave to gentility. Gentiles sunt qui inter se eodem nomine sunt (Top. 6).
[Members of a gens are those who have the same family name. Trans.]
2
In general, a clan is a family group in which kinship results onlyfromhaving the same name. It is in
this sense that the gens is a clan. The totemic clan is a particular species within the genus thus constituted.
3
To a certain extent, the ties of solidarity extend even beyond the limits of the tribe. When individu-
als of different tribes have the same totem, they have special duties toward one another. This fact is ex-
plicidy stated for certain tribes of North America. (See [James George] Frazer, Totemism and Exogamy, vol.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs 101

groups that have t h e same t o t e m can o n l y be t w o sections o f the same clan.

I t is c o m m o n f o r a clan n o t t o reside i n t h e same place, b u t to have m e m b e r s
i n different places. E v e n so, t h e clan's u n i t y is felt, t h o u g h i t has n o g e o -
graphical basis.
R e g a r d i n g the w o r d " t o t e m " : T h e O j i b w a y , an A l g o n q u i n t r i b e , use this
4
w o r d t o d e n o t e the species o f things w h o s e n a m e a clan bears. A l t h o u g h the
5
t e r m is n o t A u s t r a l i a n , a n d i n fact is f o u n d i n o n l y o n e society o f A m e r i c a ,
ethnographers have a d o p t e d i t a n d use i t generally t o d e n o t e the i n s t i t u t i o n
I a m d e s c r i b i n g . Schoolcraft, the first t o e x t e n d t h e m e a n i n g i n this sense,
6
spoke o f a " t o t e m i c system." T h i s e x t e n s i o n , o f w h i c h there are n u m e r o u s
examples i n ethnography, does have drawbacks. I t is n o t q u i t e r i g h t f o r an i n -
s t i t u t i o n o f such i m p o r t a n c e t o bear a n a m e that is g i v e n haphazardly, taken
from a s t r i c t l y l o c a l dialect, a n d i n n o w a y r e f l e c t i n g t h e distinctive traits o f
the t h i n g i t expresses. B u t t o d a y this usage o f t h e w o r d is so universally ac-
7
cepted that i t w o u l d be an excess o f p u r i s m t o rebel against i t .
I n t h e great m a j o r i t y o f cases, t h e objects t h a t serve as t o t e m s * b e l o n g t o

III [4 vols., London, Macmillan, 1910], pp. 57, 81, 299, 356-357. The texts on Australia are less explicit.
Still, the prohibition of marriage between members of the same totem is probably international.
*In this chapter, Durkheim applies the adjective "totemic" (totemique) to "system," "group," "belief,"
"mark," "representation," "significance," "coat of arms," "symbol," and "decoration"—indeed, to every-
thing except the animal or plant that serves as the totem of some group. I believe he intends to keep re-
minding the reader that while an animal or plant is the totem of some group, in itself it is not the totem;
hence his careful locution, "the animal that serves as totem," which weighs down English sentences. Hav-
ing stated this reminder, I simplify with "totemic animal" from now on.
4
[Lewis Henry] Morgan, Ancient Society [or Researches in the Lines of Human Progress from Savagery
through Barbarism to Civilization, London, Macmillan, 1877], p. 165.
5
In Australia, the words used vary by tribe. In the regions observed by Grey, people said Kobong; the
Dieri say Murdu ([Alfred William] Howitt, The Native Tribes of South-East Australia [New York, Macmil-
lan, 1904], p. 91), the Narrinyeri, Ngaitye ([Rev. George] Taplin, in [Edward] Micklethwaite Curr, [The
Australian Race; Its Origin, Languages, Customs, Place of Landing in Australia, and the Routes by Which It Sprea
Itself over That Continent], vol. II ([Melbourne, J. Ferres, 1886-87], p. 244), the Warramunga, Mungai or
Mungaii [Sir Baldwin Spencer and Francis James Gillen] Northern Tribes [of Central Australia, London,
Macmillan, 1904], p. 754), etc.
6
[Henry Rowe] Schoolcraft, [Historical and Statistical Information Respecting the History, Condition, and
Prospects of the] Indian Tribes of the United States, IV [Philadelphia, Lippincott Grambo, 1851—1857], p. 86.
[The phrase "totemic element" appears on this page, but the passage is not about a "totemic system."
Trans.]
'And yet the fate of this word is all the more regrettable, since we do not even know exacdy how it is
spelled. Some spell it totam, others toodaim or dodaim or ododam. See Frazer, Totemism qnd Exogamy, vol. I,
p. 1. Even the meaning of the word is not exactly defined. If we rely on thefirstobserver of the Ojibway,
J. Long, the word totem designates the protective genie, the individual totem (to be discussed later, Bk. II,
chap. 4), and not the totem of the clan. But the reports of other explorers say exacdy the opposite (see on
this point Frazer, Totemism and Exogamy, vol. Ill, pp. 49—52).
102 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

e i t h e r the p l a n t o r a n i m a l k i n g d o m b u t m a i n l y t o the latter. I n a n i m a t e things

are used m u c h m o r e rarely. O f m o r e t h a n 5 0 0 t o t e m i c names listed b y
H o w i t t f r o m a m o n g the tribes o f the A u s t r a l i a n Southwest, barely f o r t y are
n o t names o f e i t h e r plants o r animals: T h e y are clouds, r a i n , h a i l , frost,
m o o n , sun, w i n d , a u t u m n , s u m m e r , w i n t e r , c e r t a i n stars, t h u n d e r , fire,
smoke, water, r e d ochre, a n d sea. T o be n o t e d is the v e r y l i m i t e d place g i v e n
t o heavenly bodies and, m o r e generally, t o the great cosmic p h e n o m e n a that
nonetheless w e r e t o have a great future i n the course o f r e l i g i o u s d e v e l o p -
m e n t . A m o n g all t h e clans o f w h i c h H o w i t t speaks, there are o n l y t w o w i t h
8 9 10
the m o o n as t o t e m , t w o w i t h the s u n , three w i t h a star, three w i t h the
11 1 2
thunder, and t w o w i t h l i g h t n i n g . O n l y the r a i n is an e x c e p t i o n ; u n l i k e
1 3
the others, r a i n is v e r y c o m m o n .
Such are t h e t o t e m s that m a y be called n o r m a l , b u t t o t e m i s m has its ab-
n o r m a l i t i e s as w e l l . S o m e t i m e s t h e t o t e m is n o t a w h o l e o b j e c t b u t p a r t o f
14
one. T h i s seems t o be rather u n c o m m o n i n A u s t r a l i a ; H o w i t t cites o n l y a
15
single e x a m p l e . H o w e v e r , i t m i g h t w e l l t u r n o u t t o be a rather frequent o c -
c u r r e n c e i n tribes i n w h i c h t h e t o t e m i c groups have b e e n excessively s u b d i -
v i d e d , i n w h i c h o n e c o u l d say that t h e totems themselves m u s t have b e e n
b r o k e n i n o r d e r t o p r o v i d e names f o r t h e m a n y divisions. T h i s seems t o have
happened a m o n g the A r u n t a a n d the Loritja. I n those t w o societies,
S t r e h l o w lists as m a n y as 4 4 2 t o t e m s , several o f w h i c h designate n o t an a n i -
m a l species b u t a p a r t i c u l a r p a r t o f such a n i m a l s — f o r example, t h e tail o r t h e
16
s t o m a c h o f the o p o s s u m , o r the fat o f t h e k a n g a r o o .

"The Wotjobaluk (p. 121) and the Buandik (p. 123).

'Ibid.
10
The Wolgal (p. 102), the Wotjobaluk, and the Buandik.
"The Muruburra (p. 117), the Wotjobaluk, and the Buandik.
12
The Buandik and the Kaiabara (p. 116). Note that all these examples are taken from onlyfivetribes.
"Similarly, of 204 kinds of totems collected by Spencer and Gillen in a large number of tribes, 188
are animals or plants. Inanimate objects are the boomerang, cold water, darkness,fire,lightning, the
moon, red ochre, resin, salt water, the evening star, a stone, the sun, water, the whirlwind, the wind, and
hailstones (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 773. Cf. Frazer, Totemism and Exogamy, vol. I, pp.
253-254).
,4
Frazer (Totemism and Exogamy, pp. 10, 13) cites numerous cases and even makes them a genus apart,
which he calls split-totems. But these examples are taken from tribes in which totemism is profoundly al-
tered, as in Samoa and in the tribes of Bengal.
"Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 107.
16
See the tables compiled by [Carl] Strehlow, Die Aranda- und Loritja-Stdmme in Zentral-Australien,
Frankfurt, J. Baer, 1907, vol. II, pp. 61—72 (cf. Ill, xiii—xvii). It is worth noting that these fragmentary
totems are exclusively animal totems.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs 103

T h e t o t e m is o r d i n a r i l y n o t an i n d i v i d u a l b u t a species o r a v a r i e t y : I t is
n o t such a n d such kangaroo o r c r o w b u t the kangaroo o r the c r o w i n g e n -
eral. Nonetheless, i t is sometimes a p a r t i c u l a r object. T h i s is u n a v o i d a b l y the
case w h e n a t h i n g that is u n i q u e o f its k i n d serves as t o t e m : the sun, the
m o o n , such a n d such c o n s t e l l a t i o n , a n d so f o r t h . B u t sometimes, as w e l l ,
clans d r a w t h e i r names f r o m this f o l d , that g e o l o g i c a l l y caused depression i n
the t e r r a i n , that a n t h i l l , a n d so f o r t h . W h i l e i t is t r u e that w e have o n l y a
17
small n u m b e r o f examples i n Australia, S t r e h l o w m e n t i o n s s o m e . B u t the
v e r y causes that have g i v e n rise t o these a b n o r m a l totems s h o w that they are
o f relatively recent o r i g i n . W h a t actually has caused the e r e c t i o n o f c e r t a i n
sites i n t o t o t e m s is that a m y t h i c a l b e i n g is t h o u g h t t o have stopped there a n d
1 8
t o have d o n e some deed o f his l e g e n d a r y l i f e . T h e s e ancestors are at the
same time presented t o us i n the m y t h s as themselves b e l o n g i n g t o clans that
o n c e h a d p e r f e c d y n o r m a l t o t e m s , that is, taken f r o m a n i m a l o r p l a n t species.
So the t o t e m i c names that c o m m e m o r a t e the e x p l o i t s o f these heroes c a n n o t
be p r i m i t i v e , b u t instead are l i n k e d w i t h a f o r m o f t o t e m i s m that is already
derivative a n d altered. T h e q u e s t i o n arises w h e t h e r the m e t e o r o l o g i c a l t o -
tems are n o t o f the same o r i g i n , since the sun, m o o n , and stars are o f t e n
19
i d e n t i f i e d w i t h ancestors o f t h e m y t h i c a l a g e .
S o m e t i m e s — t h o u g h r a r e l y — a g r o u p o f ancestors o r a single ancestor is
used as a t o t e m . T h e t o t e m i n this case is n o t n a m e d after a real t h i n g o r a
species o f real things b u t after a p u r e l y m y t h i c a l b e i n g . Spencer a n d G i l l e n
l o n g ago n o t e d t w o o r three t o t e m s o f this sort. A m o n g the W a r r a m u n g a and
a m o n g t h e T j i n g i l l i is a^ cjan that bears t h e n a m e o f an ancestor called T h a -
20
balla, w h o seems t o incarnate g a i e t y . A n o t h e r W a r r a m u n g a clan bears the
n a m e o f a fabulous g i a n t snake n a m e d W o l l u n q u a , from w h o m the clan is
21
h e l d t o be d e s c e n d e d . W e are i n d e b t e d t o S t r e h l o w f o r several examples o f

17
Ibid., pp. 52, 72.
18
For example, one of those totems is a depression in which an ancestor of the wildcat totem rested;
another is an underground gallery dug by an ancestor of the Mouse clan (ibid., p. 72).
l9
[Sir Baldwin Spencer and Francis James Gillen], NativeTribes [of Central Australia, London, Macmil-
lan, 1899], pp. 561ff. Strehlow [Aranda], vol. II, p. 71 n. 2. [Alfred William] Howitt, Native Tribes, pp.
426ff.; "On Australian Medicine Men," JA1, vol. XVI (1887), p. 53; "Further Notes on the Australian
Class Systems," _/,4/, vol. XVIII [1899], pp. 63ff.
20
According to the translation of Spencer and Gillen, "Thaballa" means "the boy who laughs." The
members of the clan that bears his name believe they hear him laugh in the rocks that serve as his resi-
dence (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 207, 215 [227 n.]). According to the myth reported on p.
422, there was an initial group of mythical Thaballas (cf. p. 208). The clan of the Kati, fully developed
men ("full-grown men" as Spencer and Gillen say) seems to be of the same sort (p. 207).
21
Ibid„ pp. 226ff.
104 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

22
this s o r t . I n all these cases, i t is rather easy t o see w h a t m u s t have happened.
U n d e r t h e i n f l u e n c e o f v a r i o u s causes, and t h r o u g h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of
m y t h o l o g i c a l t h o u g h t itself, the collective a n d i m p e r s o n a l t o t e m gave w a y t o
certain m y t h i c a l personages w h o m o v e d t o the first r a n k a n d became t o t e m s
themselves.
T h u s , as i n t e r e s t i n g as these various irregularities m a y be, n o t h i n g a b o u t
t h e m s h o u l d require us t o m o d i f y o u r d e f i n i t i o n o f the t o t e m . T h e y d o n o t ,
23
as was once b e l i e v e d , c o n s t i t u t e so m a n y k i n d s o f t o t e m s m o r e o r less i r r e -
d u c i b l e t o one a n o t h e r a n d t o the n o r m a l t o t e m , as I have d e f i n e d i t . T h e y
are o n l y secondary a n d sometimes m u t a n t f o r m s o f one a n d the same n o t i o n
that is b y far t h e m o s t c o m m o n a n d that there is every reason t o regard also
as the m o s t p r i m i t i v e .
How the t o t e m i c n a m e is a c q u i r e d bears m o r e o n the r e c r u i t m e n t a n d
o r g a n i z a t i o n o f the clan t h a n o n r e l i g i o n ; i t thus belongs m o r e t o the s o c i o l -
24
o g y o f the f a m i l y t h a n t o r e l i g i o u s s o c i o l o g y . Therefore, I w i l l not go be-
y o n d a s u m m a r y sketch o f t h e m o s t basic g o v e r n i n g p r i n c i p l e s .
D e p e n d i n g o n t h e t r i b e , three different rules are i n use.
I n m a n y societies, i n fact i n m o s t , the c h i l d has the t o t e m o f its m o t h e r ,
by b i r t h : T h i s is the case a m o n g the D i e r i a n d t h e U r a b u n n a o f s o u t h - c e n t r a l
Australia; the W o t j o b a l u k and the G o u r n d i t c h - M a r a o f V i c t o r i a ; the K a m i ¬
l a r o i , the W i r a d j u r i , the W o n g h i b o n , a n d t h e E u a h l a y i o f N e w S o u t h Wales;
the W a k e l b u r a , the P i t t a - P i t t a , a n d t h e K u r n a n d a b u r i o f Q u e e n s l a n d , t o cite
o n l y the m o s t i m p o r t a n t names. Since i n this case the m o t h e r must be o f a
different t o t e m from her husband, g i v e n t h e r u l e o f exogamy, a n d yet lives at
her husband's place o f o r i g i n , t h e m e m b e r s o f a single t o t e m are o f necessity
dispersed a m o n g different places, d e p e n d i n g o n marriages. As a result, the
t o t e m i c g r o u p has n o t e r r i t o r i a l base.
Elsewhere, the t o t e m is t r a n s m i t t e d i n the paternal line. I n that case, the
c h i l d remains near its father, a n d the l o c a l g r o u p is essentially m a d e u p o f p e o -
ple w h o b e l o n g t o the same t o t e m , w i t h o n l y the m a r r i e d w o m e n i n t h e m

22
Strehlow [Aranda], vol. II, pp. 71-72. Strehlow reports from among the Loritja and the Arunta the
totem of a mythical water snake, which is very like that of the serpent Wollunqua.
23
This is true of Klaatsch, in his article previously cited (see [Hermann Klaatsch, "Schlussbericht iiber
meine Reise nach Australien in den Jahren 1904-1907"], ZE, vol. XXXIX ([1907], above, p. 89, n. 23).
24
As I indicated in the preceding chapter, totemism concerns both religion and the family. In lower
societies, these problems are closely interrelated, but both are so complex that they must be dealt with sep-
arately. Moreover, familial organization cannot be understood in advance of knowing primitive religious
ideas, for those ideas serve as principles of the family. This is why it was necessary to study totemism as
religion before studying the totemic clan as family grouping.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs 105

representing f o r e i g n totems. I n o t h e r w o r d s , each l o c a l i t y has its o w n t o t e m .

I n Australia u n t i l recent times, this m o d e o f o r g a n i z a t i o n had o n l y b e e n m e t
w i t h i n some tribes w h e r e t o t e m i s m is i n decay—for example, a m o n g the
25
N a r r i n y e r i , w h e r e t h e t o t e m has v i r t u a l l y n o religious character a n y m o r e .
T h u s there was g o o d reason t o believe that a close c o n n e c t i o n existed b e -
t w e e n the t o t e m i c system a n d descent i n the m a t e r n a l l i n e . B u t Spencer a n d
G i l l e n have observed, i n the n o r t h e r n part o f central Australia, a w h o l e g r o u p
o f tribes i n w h i c h the t o t e m i c r e l i g i o n is still p r a c t i c e d a n d yet the transmis-
sion o f the t o t e m moves t h r o u g h the paternal l i n e : These are the W a r r a -
2 6
m u n g a , the G n a n j i , the U m b a i a , the B i n b i n g a , the M a r a , and the A n u l a .
Finally, a t h i r d c o m b i n a t i o n is observed a m o n g t h e A r u n t a a n d the
L o r i t j a . H e r e t h e t o t e m o f the c h i l d is n o t necessarily that o f either its m o t h e r
o r its father b u t that o f the m y t h i c a l ancestor w h o m y s t i c a l l y i m p r e g n a t e d t h e
m o t h e r at the t i m e o f c o n c e p t i o n , b y procedures that the observers r e p o r t i n
27
different w a y s . A d e f i n i t e t e c h n i q u e p e r m i t s r e c o g n i t i o n o f w h i c h ancestor
28
it is a n d t o w h i c h t o t e m i c g r o u p he b e l o n g s . B u t because chance places o n e
ancestor a n d n o t a n o t h e r close t o t h e m o t h e r , t h e t o t e m o f t h e c h i l d t u r n s
29
o u t t o b e subject t o f o r t u i t o u s c i r c u m s t a n c e s .
A b o v e a n d b e y o n d the totems o f clans are t h e t o t e m s o f phratries. A l -
t h o u g h n o t different i n nature f r o m clan t o t e m s , t h e y m u s t nevertheless be
distinguished.
A g r o u p o f clans u n i t e d b y p a r t i c u l a r b o n d s o f f r a t e r n i t y is called a
p h r a t r y . N o r m a l l y , a n A u s t r a l i a n t r i b e is d i v i d e d i n t o t w o p h r a t r i e s , w i t h
t h e v a r i o u s clans d i v i d e d b e t w e e n t h e m . A l t h o u g h there are societies f r o m

25
See Taplin, "The Narrinyeri Tribe," in Curr, The Australian Race, vol. II, pp. 244—245; Howitt, Na-
tive Tribes, p. 131.
26
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 163, 169, 170, 172. Still, it should be noted that in all these
tribes except the Mara and the Anula, the transmission of the totem in the paternal line is apparently the
most widespread rule, but there are exceptions.
27
According to Spencer and Gillen (Native Tribes, pp. 123ff.), the ancestor's soul is incarnated in the
body of the mother and then becomes the soul of the child. According to Strehlow (Aranda, vol. II, pp.
51ff.), although conception is the work of the ancestor, it does not involve a reincarnation. But in both
interpretations, the totem specific to the child does not necessarily depend on that of its parents.
28
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 133; Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, p. 53.
29
For the most part, it is the locality where the mother thinks she conceived that determines the totem
of the child. As we will see, each totem has its center, and the ancestors prefer to frequent the places that
serve as the centers of their respective totems. The totem of the child is thus that of the locality where the
mother thinks she conceived. Further, as the mother must be most often in the environs of the place that
is the totemic center of her husband, the child usually has the same totem as the father. This doubdess ex-
plains why most of the inhabitants in each locality belong to the same totem ([Spencer and Gillen] Native
Tribes, p. 9).
106 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

w h i c h t h a t o r g a n i z a t i o n has disappeared, t h e r e is e v e r y reason t o b e l i e v e

t h a t i t was o n c e w i d e s p r e a d . I n A u s t r a l i a , at any rate, n o t r i b e has m o r e
than t w o phratries.
I n almost a l l cases i n w h i c h the phratries have a name w h o s e m e a n i n g
c o u l d be d e t e r m i n e d , t h e n a m e t u r n e d o u t t o be that o f an a n i m a l ; i t t h e r e -
3 0
fore seems t o be a t o t e m . A . L a n g has s h o w n this clearly i n a recent b o o k .
A c c o r d i n g l y , a m o n g the G o u r n d i t c h - M a r a ( V i c t o r i a ) , o n e o f the phratries is
called K r o k i t c h a n d the o t h e r K a p u t c h ; the first o f these means " w h i t e c o c k -
31
a t o o " a n d t h e second " b l a c k c o c k a t o o . " T h e same terms are f o u n d , w h o l l y
3 2
o r i n part, a m o n g the B u a n d i k a n d t h e W o t j o b a l u k . A m o n g the W a r r a -
3 3
m u n g a , t h e names used, B u n j i l a n d W a a n g q u i , m e a n eaglehawk and c r o w .
T h e w o r d s " M u k w a r a " a n d " K i l p a r a " are used f o r t h e same objects i n a large
34 35
n u m b e r o f tribes i n N e w S o u t h W a l e s ; t h e y designate the same a n i m a l s .
T h e eaglehawk a n d the c r o w have also g i v e n t h e i r names to the t w o phratries
3 6
o f t h e N g a r i g o a n d the W o l g a l . A m o n g t h e K u i n m u r b u r a , i t is t h e w h i t e
3 7
c o c k a t o o a n d the c r o w . O t h e r examples c o u l d b e c i t e d . T h u s w e c o m e t o
see the p h r a t r y as an a n c i e n t clan that was b r o k e n u p , the present clans as the
result o f this d i s m e m b e r m e n t , a n d the s o l i d a r i t y that j o i n s t h e m as a relic o f
3 8
their original u n i t y . I t is t r u e that the phratries i n c e r t a i n tribes seem n o
l o n g e r t o have d e f i n i t e names; i n others, w h e r e names exist, t h e m e a n i n g is
n o l o n g e r k n o w n even t o the natives. T h i s is i n n o w a y s u r p r i s i n g . T h e p h r a -
tries are doubtless a p r i m i t i v e i n s t i t u t i o n , since t h e y are r e c e d i n g e v e r y w h e r e ;

30
[Andrew Lang], The Secret of theTotem [London, Longmans, 1905], pp. 159ff. Cf. [Lorimer] Fison
and [Alfred William] Howitt, Kamilaroi and Kurnai [Group Marriage by Elopement Drawn Chiefly from the Us-
age ofAustralian Aborigines; also The Kurnai Tribe, Their Customs in Peace and War, Melbourne, G. Robertson,
1880], pp. 40-41; John Mathew, Eaglehawk and Crow [London, D. Nutt, 1899]; [Northcote Whitridge]
Thomas, Kinship [Organization] and [Group] Marriage in Australia [Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press, 1906], pp. 52ff.
31
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 124.
32
Ibid., pp. 121, 123, 124; Curr [TheAustralian Race], vol. Ill, p. 461.
33
Ho,witt, Native Tribes, p. 126.
M
Ibid., pp. 98ff.
35
Curr [The Australian Race], vol. II, p. 165; [Robert] Brough Smyth, [The Aborigines ofVictoria, vol. I,
Melbourne, J. Ferres, Government Printer, 1878], p. 423; Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 429.
^Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 101-102.
37
[John] Mathew, Two Representative Tribes of Queensland [London, T. F. Unwin, 1910], p. 139.
38
Other support for this hypothesis could be adduced, but that would make it necessary to bring in
considerations relative to familial organization, and I am trying to keep the two matters separate. More-
over, that question is of only secondary relevance to my subject.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs 107

i t is the clans, t h e i r offspring, that have c o m e t o the fore. So i t is natural that

the names the phratries b o r e s h o u l d gradually have b e e n erased f r o m m e m -
o r y o r that p e o p l e s h o u l d have ceased t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e m , f o r they m u s t
have b e l o n g e d t o a v e r y archaic language t h a t is n o l o n g e r used. A s p r o o f o f
this, i n several cases i n w h i c h w e k n o w w h a t animal's n a m e i t bears, the w o r d
that designates that a n i m a l i n everyday language is e n t i r e l y different f r o m t h e
39
o n e that designates the p h r a t r y .
T h e r e is a k i n d o f s u b o r d i n a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e p h r a t r y t o t e m and the clan
totems. E a c h clan i n p r i n c i p l e belongs t o o n e a n d o n l y o n e phratry. I t is v e r y
unusual f o r a clan t o have m e m b e r s i n t h e o t h e r phratry, a case that is almost
4 0
never seen outside c e r t a i n tribes o f t h e center, especially the A r u n t a . Still,
even w h e r e d i s r u p t i v e influences have p r o d u c e d overlappings o f that k i n d ,
the m a j o r i t y o f clan m e m b e r s are e n t i r e l y c o n t a i n e d i n o n e o f t h e tribe's t w o
41
halves; o n l y a m i n o r i t y are f o u n d o n t h e o t h e r s i d e . Hence, the t w o phra-
tries d o n o t as a r u l e interpenetrate; hence, the possible totems an i n d i v i d u a l
can have are d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e p h r a t r y t o w h i c h h e belongs. I n o t h e r w o r d s ,
the p h r a t r y t o t e m is l i k e a genus o f w h i c h t h e clan totems are species. W e w i l l
see that this c o m p a r i s o n is n o t p u r e l y m e t a p h o r i c a l .
I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e phratries a n d clans, w e o f t e n f i n d i n A u s t r a l i a n s o c i -
eties a secondary g r o u p that is n o t w i t h o u t a c e r t a i n distinctiveness: the m a r -
riage class.
Subdivisions o f t h e phratry, w h o s e n u m b e r m a y v a r y f r o m t r i b e t o t r i b e ,
are called m a r r i a g e classes; sometimes w e f i n d t w o p e r p h r a t r y a n d s o m e -
4 2
times f o u r . T h e i r r e c r u i t m e n t a n d f u n c t i o n i n g are regulated b y t w o p r i n c i -
ples. First, i n each phratry, each g e n e r a t i o n belongs t o a different class f r o m
the g e n e r a t i o n d i r e c t l y p r e c e d i n g i t , so w h e n there are t w o classes per p h r a -
try, t h e y necessarily alternate i n each g e n e r a t i o n . T h e c h i l d r e n b e l o n g t o the

39
For example, Mukwara, which designates a phratry among the Barkinji, the Paruinji, and the
Milpulko, means "eaglehawk," according to Brough Smyth; among the clans included in that phratry,
there is one that has the eaglehawk as its totem, but here that animal is designated by the word Bilyara.
The reader will find several cases of this sort cited by Lang, Secret of the Totem, p. 162.
"""Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 115. According to Howitt (Native Tribes pp. 121, 454), among
the Wotjobaluk, the Pelican clan is also represented in both phratries. This seems to me doubtful. Possi-
bly the two clans had two different species of pelicans as their totems. This is what seems to emerge from
the information given by [R. H.] Mathews on the same tribe ("[Ethnological Notes on the] Aboriginal
Tribes of New South Wales and Victoria," in RSNSW [vol. XXXVIII], 1904, pp. 287-288).
41
On this question, see my article [with Marcel Mauss] "[Sur] le Totémisme," in AS, vol. V [1902],
pp. 82ff.
42
On the question of Australian classes in general, see my article "La Prohibition de l'inceste," in AS,
vol. I [1898], pp. 9fF., and specifically on the tribes having eight classes, "L'Organisation matrimoniale des
sociétés australiennes," in AS, vol. VIII [1905], pp. 118-147.
108 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

class t o w h i c h t h e i r parents d o n o t b e l o n g , a n d the g r a n d c h i l d r e n are o f the

same class as t h e i r grandparents. T h u s , a m o n g t h e K a m i l a r o i , the K u p a t h i n
p h r a t r y comprises t w o classes, I p p a i and K u m b o ; the D i l b i p h r a t r y comprises
t w o others, called M u r r i a n d K u b b i . Since f i l i a t i o n goes i n the m a t e r n a l l i n e ,
the c h i l d is o f its mother's p h r a t r y ; i f the m o t h e r is K u p a t h i n , the c h i l d w i l l
also be a K u p a t h i n . B u t i f she is o f the I p p a i class, he w i l l be a K u m b o ; t h e n ,
i f female, that child's c h i l d r e n w i l l again c o u n t w i t h i n t h e I p p a i class. L i k e -
wise, t h e c h i l d r e n o f w o m e n o f the M u r r i class w i l l be o f t h e K u b b i class, a n d
the c h i l d r e n o f the K u b b i w o m e n w i l l again be M u r r i . * W h e n there are f o u r
classes p e r p h r a t r y instead o f t w o , the system is m o r e c o m p l e x , b u t t h e p r i n -
ciple is the same. T h e f o u r classes basically f o r m t w o pairs o f t w o classes each,
a n d these t w o classes alternate i n each g e n e r a t i o n i n the m a n n e r j u s t i n d i -
cated. Second, i n p r i n c i p l e , the m e m b e r s o f a class can c o n t r a c t m a r r i a g e i n
43
o n l y o n e class o f t h e o t h e r p h r a t r y . T h e I p p a i m u s t m a r r y i n the K u b b i
class; the M u r r i , i n the K u m b o class. Because this o r g a n i z a t i o n p r o f o u n d l y
affects m a r r i a g e relations, these g r o u p i n g s have b e e n g i v e n the name " m a r -
riage classes."
Scholars have asked w h e t h e r these classes sometimes h a d totems, as t h e
phratries a n d the clans d o . T h i s q u e s t i o n arose because, i n c e r t a i n Q u e e n s l a n d
tribes, each m a r r i a g e class is subject t o d i e t a r y restrictions peculiar t o i t . T h e
individuals w h o c o m p r i s e i t m u s t abstain from the flesh o f certain animals
44
that the o t h e r classes m a y freely e a t . W o u l d these animals n o t be totems?
T h e d i e t a r y r e s t r i c t i o n , however, is n o t the characteristic m a r k o f t o t e m -
ism. T h e t o t e m is, first a n d foremost, a n a m e and, as w e w i l l see, an e m -
b l e m . ^ I n the societies j u s t e x a m i n e d , n o m a r r i a g e class bears the name o f an
4 5
a n i m a l o r p l a n t o r has an e m b l e m . I t is possible, o f course, that these r e -

*The children of the Kubbi men will take their classfromtheir mother. Trans.
^That is, a stylized representation of the group designated—flags, coats of arms, and distinctive paint-
ing on people and things are examples.
,3
This principle is not upheld everywhere with equal rigor. In the tribes of the center that have eight
classes, in particular, beyond the class with which marriage is regularly permitted, there is another with
which people have a kind of secondary connubium (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 126). The same
is true of certain tribes with four classes. Each class has the choice between two classes of the other phra-
try. This is true of the Kabi (see Mathew, in Curr, vol. Ill, p. 162 [This reference remains obscure. Trans.]).
44
See [Walter Edmund] Roth, Ethnological Studies among the North-West-Central Queensland Aborigines
(Brisbane, E. Gregory, Government Printer, 1897), pp. 56ff.; [Edward] Palmer, "Notes on Some Aus-
tralian Tribes," JAI, vol. XIII (1894), [pp. 302ff.].
45
Still, a few tribes are cited in which marriage classes have the names of animals or plants. This is the
case of the Kabi (Mathew, Two Representative Tribes, p. 150), tribes observed by Mrs. [Daisy M.] Bates
("The Marriage Laws and Customs of the W. Australian Aborigines," in VGJ, vols. XXIII—XXIV, p. 47)
and perhaps of two tribes observed by Palmer. But these phenomena are very rare and their significance
The Principal Totemic Beliefs 109

strictions derive f r o m t o t e m i s m indirectly. C o n c e i v a b l y the animals p r o t e c t e d

b y t h e m o r i g i n a l l y served as t o t e m s f o r clans that have since disappeared,
w h i l e the m a r r i a g e classes have r e m a i n e d . S o m e t i m e s i n d e e d t h e y d o have a
staying p o w e r that clans d o n o t have. A s a result, t h e restrictions n o w adrift
f r o m t h e i r o r i g i n a l supports m a y have spread t h r o u g h o u t each class, since
there w e r e n o l o n g e r any o t h e r g r o u p i n g s t o w h i c h t h e y c o u l d b e c o m e at-
tached. B u t even i f that r u l e was b o r n o f t o t e m i s m , clearly i t n o l o n g e r r e p -
4 6
resents a n y t h i n g m o r e t h a n a w e a k e n e d a n d d i l u t e d f o r m o f t o t e m i s m .
A l l that has j u s t b e e n said o f t h e t o t e m i n the A u s t r a l i a n societies is ap-
plicable t o the I n d i a n tribes o f N o r t h A m e r i c a . T h e o n l y difference is that
t o t e m i c o r g a n i z a t i o n a m o n g the Indians has a boundedness a n d a stability
that i t lacks i n A u s t r a l i a . T h e A u s t r a l i a n clans are n o t s i m p l y v e r y n u m e r o u s
b u t o f almost u n l i m i t e d n u m b e r i n a single t r i b e . T h e observers cite some o f
t h e m b y w a y o f e x a m p l e b u t never succeed i n g i v i n g us a full list. T h e rea-
son is that t h e list is never d e f i n i t i v e l y closed. T h e same process o f segmenta-
t i o n that o r i g i n a l l y d i s m e m b e r e d the p h r a t r y a n d gave rise t o clans p r o p e r
goes o n endlessly w i t h i n the clans; as a consequence o f that progressive
47
c r u m b l i n g , a clan o f t e n has o n l y a v e r y small m e m b e r s h i p . I n America, by
contrast, the f o r m o f t h e t o t e m i c system is b e t t e r d e f i n e d . I n A m e r i c a the

poorly established. Moreover, it is not surprising that the classes, as well as the sexual groups, have some-
times adopted the names of animals. This unusual extension of totemic names in no way modifies my
conception of totemism. [The ethnographer Durkheim identified simply as "Mrs. Bates" is the subject of
a full-scale biography: Julia Blackburn, Daisy Bates in the Desert, New York, Pantheon, 1994. Trans.)
"^The same explanation perhaps applies to certain other tribes of the Southeast and East in which, if
Howitt's informants are to be believed, one wouldfindtotems specifically assigned to each marriage class
as well. This presumably would be the case among the Wiradjuri, the Wakelbura, and the Bunta-Murra
of the River Bulloo (Howitt, NativeTribes pp. 210, 221, 226). However, by his own admission, the testi-
monies he gathered are suspect. In fact, it emerges from the lists he compiled that several totems are found
in both classes of the same phratry.
The explanation I propose, after Frazer (Totemism and Exogamy, pp. 531fE), raises another difficulty. In
principle, each clan, hence each totem, is represented indiscriminately in both classes of a single phratry,
since one of those classes is that of children and the other that of the parents from whom the children get
their totems. Thus, when the clans disappeared, the totemic prohibitions that survived must have re-
mained common to the two marriage classes, since, in the cases cited, each class has its own. Whence that
differentiation? The example of the Kaiabara (a tribe of the south of Queensland) enables us, perhaps, to
visualize how this differentiation occurred. In that tribe, the children have their mother's totem, but it is
individualized by a distinctive mark. If the mother has the black eaglehawk totem, the child's is the white
eaglehawk (Howitt, NativeTribes, p. 229). Here, apparendy, are beginnings of a tendency for totems to dif-
ferentiate according to marriage class.
47
A tribe of a few hundred people sometimes has as many asfiftyor sixty clans and even many more.
See on this point Durkheim and Mauss, "De Quelques formes primitives de classification," in AS, vol. VI
(1903), p. 28, n.l.
110 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

tribes are, o n the average, m a r k e d l y b i g g e r t h a n i n A u s t r a l i a b u t there are

4 8
fewer clans. Since a single t r i b e rarely has m o r e t h a n a b o u t t e n , and o f t e n
fewer, each clan is a m u c h larger g r o u p . M o s t o f all, t h e i r n u m b e r is better
49
defined: People k n o w h o w m a n y there are a n d t e l l u s .
T h i s difference is d u e t o t h e i r m o r e advanced social o r g a n i z a t i o n . F r o m
the first t i m e those tribes w e r e observed, the social groups were deeply
r o o t e d i n the soil and c o n s e q u e n t l y better able t o w i t h s t a n d the forces t o w a r d
dispersion that assailed t h e m . A t t h e same t i m e , the society already h a d t o o
strong a sense o f its u n i t y t o r e m a i n u n c o n s c i o u s o f itself a n d t h e parts c o m -
p r i s i n g i t . T h u s , the A m e r i c a n e x a m p l e gives us a b e t t e r grasp o f organiza-
t i o n based o n clans. T o j u d g e that o r g a n i z a t i o n b y the w a y i t n o w appears i n
Australia w o u l d b £ m i s l e a d i n g . T h e r e , i n fact, i t is i n a state o f disorder a n d
d i s s o l u t i o n that is b y n o means n o r m a l ; i t o u g h t t o be seen instead as t h e
p r o d u c t o f a decay that is a t t r i b u t a b l e as m u c h t o t h e n a t u r a l w e a r and tear o f
t i m e as t o the d i s o r g a n i z i n g i n f l u e n c e o f the w h i t e s . T o be sure, i t is u n l i k e l y
that the A u s t r a l i a n clans w e r e ever as large o r as s t r u c t u r a l l y durable as the
A m e r i c a n clans. S t i l l , there m u s t have b e e n a t i m e w h e n the distance b e -
t w e e n t h e t w o was n o t so great as i t is today. T h e societies o f A m e r i c a w o u l d
never have managed t o e q u i p themselves w i t h t h e substantial skeleton t h e y
d i d i f the clan h a d always b e e n so fluid a n d insubstantial.
I n d e e d , that greater stability has enabled t h e archaic system o f phratries
t o persist i n A m e r i c a w i t h a c l a r i t y a n d r e l i e f that i t n o l o n g e r has i n Australia.
I n Australia, t h e p h r a t r y is e v e r y w h e r e i n decline; i t is o f t e n n o t h i n g m o r e
t h a n a g r o u p w i t h o u t a name. W h e n i t does have a name, that name is taken
from a f o r e i g n language o r f r o m o n e that is n o l o n g e r spoken a n d is n o l o n g e r
u n d e r s t o o d o r n o l o n g e r means m u c h t o the native. W e have b e e n able t o i n -
fer the existence o f p h r a t r y totems from a f e w survivals* that are, f o r the m o s t
part, so i n c o n s p i c u o u s that they have escaped a n u m b e r o f observers. B y c o n -
trast, i n c e r t a i n parts o f A m e r i c a , this system o f phratries has r e m a i n e d at the
fore. T h e tribes o f the n o r t h w e s t coast, i n p a r t i c u l a r the T l i n g i t a n d the
H a i d a , have attained a relatively advanced level o f c i v i l i z a t i o n , a n d yet t h e y

"•Rendered here as "survivals," which is seldom used today, Durkheim's term survivances belongs to
evolutionary theories of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It refers to traits thought of as
vestiges from an earlier stage and, consequendy without present meaning or function.
48
Except among the Pueblo Indians of the Southwest, where they are more numerous. See [Freder-
ick Webb] Hodge, "Pueblo Indian Clans," in AA, 1st ser., vol. IX (October 1895), pp. 345ff. Even so, we
can ask whether the groups having those totems are clans or subclans.
49
See the tables compiled by Morgan in Ancient Society, pp. 153—185.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs 111

are d i v i d e d i n t o t w o phratries that are s u b d i v i d e d i n t o a n u m b e r o f clans:

5 0
phratries o f t h e C r o w and t h e W o l f a m o n g the T l i n g i t , a n d o f the Eagle a n d
5 1
the C r o w a m o n g t h e H a i d a . T h a t d i v i s i o n is n o t m e r e l y n o m i n a l ; i t c o r r e -
sponds t o e x i s t i n g c u s t o m a n d p r o f o u n d l y marks life. C o m p a r e d t o the dis-
52
tance b e t w e e n the phratries, t h e m o r a l distance b e t w e e n clans is s m a l l . The
n a m e each o f t h e m bears is n o t a m e r e w o r d w h o s e m e a n i n g has b e e n f o r -
g o t t e n o r is k n o w n b u t vaguely. I t is a t o t e m i n t h e f u l l sense o f the w o r d , a n d
i t has all the essential attributes o f the t o t e m , such as t h e y w i l l be described
53
below. So o n this p o i n t as w e l l , there was g o o d reason n o t t o disregard t h e
tribes o f A m e r i c a , because there w e can d i r e c t l y observe examples o f p h r a t r y
totems, whereas Australia o n l y offers us a f e w d i m vestiges o f t h e m .

II
T h e t o t e m is n o t s i m p l y a n a m e ; i t is an e m b l e m , a t r u e coat o f arms, and its
resemblance t o the heraldic coat o f arms has o f t e n b e e n c o m m e n t e d u p o n .
" E v e r y family," says G r e y o f the Australians, "adopts an a n i m a l o r a p l a n t as
5 4
t h e i r crest a n d s i g n " — a n d w h a t G r e y calls a f a m i l y is i n d i s p u t a b l y a clan. As
Fison a n d H o w i t t also say, " T h e A u s t r a l i a n o r g a n i z a t i o n shows that the t o t e m
55
is, first o f all, the badge o f a g r o u p . " Schoolcraft speaks i n the same terms
about t h e t o t e m s o f N o r t h A m e r i c a : " T h e t o t e m is i n fact a design that c o r -
responds t o the heraldic e m b l e m s o f t h e c i v i l i z e d nations, a n d each person is
a u t h o r i z e d t o w e a r i t as p r o o f o f the i d e n t i t y o f the f a m i l y t o w h i c h he b e -
longs. T h i s is s h o w n b y t h e real e t y m o l o g y o f t h e w o r d f r o m w h i c h dodaim

50
[Avrel] Krause, Die Tlinkit-Indianer [Jena, H. Constenoble, 1885], p. 112; [John Reed] Swanton,
"Social Condition, Beliefs and Linguistic Relationship of the Tlingit Indians," BAE, XKVIth Report
[1908], p. 398.
51
[John Reed] Swanton, Contributions to the Ethnology of the Haida [Leiden, E. J. Brill, 1905], p. 62.
52
"The distinction between the two clans is absolute in every respect," says Swanton, p. 68; he calls
"clans" what I call "phratries." The two phratries, he says elsewhere, are like two peoples foreign to one
another.
53
Among the Haida at least, the totem of the clans proper is even more altered than the totem of the
phratries. The custom that permits a clan to give or to sell the right to wear its totem arises from the fact
that each clan has a number of totems, some of them shared with other clans (see Swanton, pp. 107, 268).
Because Swanton calls clans phratries, he is obliged to give the name "family" to clans proper, and the
name "household" to real families. But the actual meaning of the terminology he adopts is not in doubt.
^[George Grey],_foMmais ofTwo Expeditions in Northwestern and Western Australia, II [London, T. and W.
Boone, 1841], p. 228.
55
[Fison and Howitt], Kamilaroi and Kurnai, p. 165.
112 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

56
is d e r i v e d , w h i c h means village o r residence o f a f a m i l y g r o u p . " Therefore,
w h e n the Indians entered i n t o relations w i t h the Europeans a n d made c o n -
tracts w i t h t h e m , each clan sealed t h e treaties thus c o n c l u d e d w i t h its
5 7
totem.
T h e nobles o f the feudal age sculpted, engraved, a n d i n every w a y dis-
played t h e i r coats o f arms o n the walls o f t h e i r castles, o n t h e i r weapons, and
o n all k i n d s o f o t h e r objects b e l o n g i n g t o t h e m . T h e blacks o f Australia a n d
the Indians o f N o r t h A m e r i c a d o t h e same w i t h t h e i r totems. T h e Indians
w h o a c c o m p a n i e d Samuel H e a r n e p a i n t e d t h e i r t o t e m s o n t h e i r shields b e -
58
fore g o i n g i n t o b a t t l e . I n t i m e o f war, a c c o r d i n g t o C h a r l e v o i x , c e r t a i n I n -
d i a n tribes h a d banners, m a d e o f bits o f b a r k attached t o the e n d o f a p o l e o n
59
w h i c h the totems w e r e r e p r e s e n t e d . A m o n g the T l i n g i t , w h e n a c o n f l i c t
breaks o u t b e t w e e n t w o clans, t h e c h a m p i o n s o f the t w o e n e m y groups wear
6 0
helmets o n w h i c h t h e i r respective t o t e m s are p a i n t e d . A m o n g the I r o q u o i s ,
the s k i n o f t h e t o t e m i c a n i m a l was placed o n each w i g w a m , as a m a r k o f the
61
clan. A c c o r d i n g t o a n o t h e r observer, the a n i m a l was stuffed w i t h straw a n d
6 2
placed i n front o f t h e d o o r . A m o n g the W y a n d o t , each c l a n has its o w n o r -
6 3
naments a n d d i s t i n c t i v e p a i n t i n g . A m o n g the Omaha, and among the
6 4
S i o u x m o r e generally, the t o t e m is p a i n t e d o n the t e n t .
W h e r e v e r t h e society has b e c o m e sedentary, w h e r e the house has r e -
placed t h e t e n t a n d t h e plastic arts are m o r e developed, the t o t e m is carved

^[Schoolcraft], Indian Tribes, vol. I, p. 420. [The quoted material is not on this page, nor is the discus-
sion relevant. Trans.] Cf. vol. I, p. 52. This etymology is, by the way, very disputable. Cf. [Frederick Webb
Hodge], Handbook of American Indians North of Mexico (Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of Ethnology, lid
part [Washington, Government Printing Office, 1907-1910], p. 787.
57
[Schoolcraft] Indian Tribes, vol. Ill, p. 184. Garrick Mallery, Picture-Writing of the American Indians,
BAE, Xth Report, 1893, p. 377.
58
[Samuel] Hearne, [A] Journey [from Prince of Wale's Fort in Hudson's Bay] to the Northern Ocean
[Dublin, Printed for P. Byrne and J. Rice, 1796], p. 148 (cited in [James George] Frazer, "Totemism"
([Encyclopedia Britannica, 9th ed. (Edinburgh, Adam and Charles Black, 1887)], p. 30).
59
[Pierre François Xavier de] Charlevoix, Histoire et description de la Nouvelle France, vol. V [Paris, Chez
la Veuve Ganeau, 1744], p. 329.
60
Krause, Tlinkit-Indianer, p. 248.
6
'Erminnie A. Smith, "Myths of the Iroquois," BAE Second [Annual] Report [Washington, Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1883], p. 78.
62
[Richard Irving] Dodge, Our Wild Indians [Hartford, A. D. Washington and Co., 1882], p. 225.
63
[John Wesley] Powell, "Wyandot Government," First Annual Report, BAE, Washington, Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1881), p. 64.
"[James Owen] Dorsey, "Omaha Sociology," Third [Annual] Report, [BAE, Washington, Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1884], pp. 229, 240, 248.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs 113

o n the w o o d a n d o n t h e walls. T h i s occurs, for e x a m p l e , a m o n g the H a i d a ,

the T s h i m s h i a n , t h e Salish, a n d t h e T l i n g i t . Krause says, " T h e t o t e m i c arms
are a v e r y special house d e c o r a t i o n a m o n g the T l i n g i t . " These are a n i m a l
forms c o m b i n e d i n c e r t a i n cases w i t h h u m a n forms a n d sculpted o n poles
that rise beside the d o o r as h i g h as fifteen meters; t h e y are usually p a i n t e d i n
65
very flashy c o l o r s . Yet t o t e m i c representations are n o t v e r y n u m e r o u s i n a
T l i n g i t village; there are o n l y a few, a n d those are f o u n d i n f r o n t o f the
houses o f chiefs a n d t h e r i c h . T h e y are m u c h m o r e c o m m o n , o f t e n several
6 6
per house, i n t h e n e i g h b o r i n g t r i b e o f t h e H a i d a . W i t h its m a n y sculpted
poles standing o n a l l sides a n d sometimes v e r y tall, a H a i d a village gives the
67
impression o f a h o l y c i t y b r i s t l i n g w i t h t i n y b e l l t o w e r s and m i n a r e t s .
A m o n g the Salish, the t o t e m is o f t e n d r a w n o n t h e i n t e r i o r walls o f the
68
house. Elsewhere i t is f o u n d o n canoes, utensils o f all k i n d s , a n d funeral
6 9
monuments.
T h e p r e c e d i n g examples are taken exclusively from a m o n g the Indians o f
N o r t h A m e r i c a because such sculptures, engravings, a n d p e r m a n e n t r e p r e -
sentations are possible o n l y w h e r e the t e c h n o l o g y o f t h e arts already has a
degree o f r e f i n e m e n t that t h e A u s t r a l i a n tribes have n o t yet attained. I n
consequence, t h e t o t e m i c representations o f t h e k i n d j u s t m e n t i o n e d are
rarer a n d less apparent i n A u s t r a l i a t h a n i n A m e r i c a . Nonetheless, there are
some examples. A m o n g t h e W a r r a m u n g a , at t h e e n d o f the funeral cere-
m o n i e s , the bones o f the deceased are b u r i e d after h a v i n g b e e n d r i e d a n d r e -
d u c e d t o p o w d e r ; a figure representing t h e t o t e m is traced o n t h e g r o u n d
70
beside t h e place w h e r e t h e y are d e p o s i t e d . A m o n g t h e M a r a a n d the A n ¬
ula, t h e b o d y is p l a c e d i n a piece o f h o l l o w e d - o u t w o o d t h a t is also decorated
7 1
w i t h the i d e n t i f y i n g designs o f t h e t o t e m . I n N e w S o u t h Wales, O x l e y

65
Krause, Tlinkit-Indianer, pp. 130-131.
"•Ibid., p. 308.
67
See the photograph of a Haida village in Swanton, Haida, PI. IX. Cf. [Edward] Tylor, "Totem Post
of the Haida Village of Masset," JAI, New Series, vol. I [1907], p. 133.
^Charles Hill Tout, "Report on the Ethnology of the Stadumh of British Columbia," JAI, vol.
XXXV, 1905, p. 155.
69
Krause, Tlinkit-Indianer, p. 230; Swanton, Haida, pp. 129, 135ff.; Schoolcraft, Indian Tribes, vol. I, pp.
52—53, 337, 356. In this last case, the totem is represented upside down as a sign of mourning. Similar cus-
toms are found among the Creek (C. Swan, in Schoolcraft, Indian Tribes of the United States, vol. V, p. 265),
among the Delaware ([John Gottlieb Ernestus] Heckwelder, An Account of the History, Manners, and Cus-
toms of the Indian Nations Who Once Inhabited Pennsylvania [Philadelphia, A. Small, 1818], pp. 246—247).
70
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 168, 537, 540.
71
Ibid., p. 174.
114 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

f o u n d carvings o n trees near the t o m b w h e r e a native was b u r i e d , t o w h i c h

72
B r o u g h S m y t h ascribes t o t e m i c s i g n i f i c a n c e . T h e natives o f U p p e r D a r l i n g
73
engrave t h e i r shields w i t h t o t e m i c i m a g e s . A c c o r d i n g t o C o l l i n s , almost all
the utensils are covered w i t h o r n a m e n t s that p r o b a b l y have the same m e a n -
74
i n g ; figures o f this sort are also f o u n d o n r o c k s . Since, f o r reasons t o be set
f o r t h b e l o w , i t is n o t always easy t o i n t e r p r e t these t o t e m i c designs, t h e y m a y
w e l l be m o r e c o m m o n t h a n t h e y seem.
These v a r i e d facts p r o v i d e a sense o f the large place h e l d b y the t o t e m i n
the social life o f p r i m i t i v e s . T h u s far, however, i t has appeared t o us m o r e o r
less as apart from m a n himself; w e have seen i t represented o n l y o n things. B u t
t o t e m i c images are n o t o n l y r e p r o d u c e d o n the outsides o f houses and canoes,
o n weapons, instruments, a n d t o m b s ; they recur o n men's bodies. M e n d o
n o t s i m p l y place t h e i r e m b l e m o n the objects they possess b u t also w e a r i t o n
t h e i r persons; they i m p r i n t i t i n t h e i r flesh, a n d i t becomes part o f t h e m . T h i s
m o d e o f representation is i n fact, a n d b y far, the m o s t i m p o r t a n t one.
I n d e e d , generally the m e m b e r s o f each clan seek t o give themselves t h e
o u t w a r d appearance o f t h e i r t o t e m . A t certain r e l i g i o u s festivals a m o n g the
T l i n g i t , the person w h o c o n d u c t s the c e r e m o n y wears a c o s t u m e that w h o l l y
75
o r i n p a r t represents t h e b o d y o f t h e a n i m a l w h o s e n a m e the clan b e a r s .
Special masks are used f o r this purpose. T h e same practices crop u p again
7 6
t h r o u g h o u t the A m e r i c a n N o r t h w e s t . T h e y are also f o u n d a m o n g the
77 78
Minnitaree w h e n they go i n t o battle and a m o n g the Pueblo Indians.
Elsewhere, w h e n the t o t e m is a b i r d , the i n d i v i d u a l s w e a r its feathers o n t h e i r
79
heads. A m o n g t h e I o w a , each clan has a special w a y o f c u t t i n g the hair. I n
the Eagle clan, t w o large tufts are arranged at the front o f the head, w h i l e a n -

72
Brough Smyth, Aborigines of Victoria, vol. I, p. 99n.
"Ibid., p. 284. Strehlow cites an example of the same sort among the Arunta, Aranda, vol. Ill, p. 68.
74
[David Collins], An Account of the English Colony in New South Wales, vol. II [London, Printed for T.
Cadell and W. Davies, 1804], p. 381.
75
Krause, Ttinkit-Indiana, p. 327.
76
Swanton, "Social Conditions," pp. 435£F.; [Franz] Boas, "The Social Organization and the Secret
Societies of the Kwakiutl Indians," in Report of the United States National Museum for 1895, Washington,
Government Printing Office, 1897, p. 358.
77
Frazer, Totemism and Exogamy, vol. I, p. 26.
78
[John Gregory] Bourke, The Snake Dance of the Moquis of Arizona [Chicago, Rio Grande Press,
1962], p. 229; J. W. Fewkes, "The Group of Tusayan Ceremonials Called Katcinas," in XVth Report [BAE,
Washington, Government Printing Office], 1897, pp. 251-263.
79
[Johann Georg] Miiller, Geschichte der amerikanischen Urreligionen [Basel, Schewighauser, 1855], p.
327.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs 115

other hangs b e h i n d ; i n the B u f f a l o clan, the hair is arranged i n the shape o f

80
horns. S i m i l a r arrangements are f o u n d a m o n g t h e O m a h a : E a c h clan has its
o w n hairstyle. I n the T o r t o i s e clan, f o r e x a m p l e , the head is shaved, l e a v i n g
six c u r l s — t w o o n each side, o n e i n f r o n t a n d o n e b e h i n d — s o as t o i m i t a t e
8 1
the feet, head, a n d tail o f t h e a n i m a l .
B u t i t is m o s t o f t e n o n t h e b o d y itself that the t o t e m i c m a r k is i m p r i n t e d ,
for this is a m o d e o f representation that is w i t h i n t h e reach o f less advanced
societies. I t has sometimes b e e n asked w h e t h e r t h e c o m m o n r i t e o f e x t r a c t -
i n g a y o u n g man's t w o u p p e r incisors w h e n he reaches p u b e r t y m i g h t n o t
have the p u r p o s e o f i m i t a t i n g t h e f o r m o f t h e t o t e m . T h i s has n o t b e e n es-
tablished as fact, b u t i t is w o r t h n o t i n g that the natives themselves sometimes
e x p l a i n the c u s t o m i n that way. F o r example, a m o n g t h e A r u n t a , the e x t r a c -
t i o n o f t e e t h is p r a c t i c e d o n l y i n the clan o f r a i n a n d water. A c c o r d i n g t o t r a -
d i t i o n , that o p e r a t i o n is p e r f o r m e d t o m a k e t h e m resemble c e r t a i n b l a c k
clouds w i t h l i g h t edges that are h e l d t o a n n o u n c e the speedy c o m i n g o f
82
r a i n — t h e clouds b e i n g considered as things o f t h e same f a m i l y . T h i s is e v -
idence that the native h i m s e l f realizes that the p u r p o s e o f these d e f o r m a t i o n s
is t o give h i m the appearance o f his t o t e m , at least c o n v e n t i o n a l l y . A l s o
a m o n g the A r u n t a , d u r i n g the rites o f s u b i n c i s i o n , * specific k i n d s o f gashes
are made o n the sisters a n d t h e f u t u r e w i f e o f t h e n o v i c e ; t h e f o r m o f the r e -
s u l t i n g scars appears as w e l l o n a sacred o b j e c t called t h e churinga J o f w h i c h
I w i l l presendy speak. T h e lines d r a w n o n t h e c h u r i n g a are e m b l e m a t i c o f
8 3
the t o t e m . A m o n g the K a i t i s h , the euro is considered t o be closely a k i n t o
8 4
the r a i n ; the p e o p l e o f the r a i n clan w e a r small earrings made o f euro
85
teeth. A m o n g the Yerkla, a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f gashes t h a t leave scars are i n -
flicted o n the y o u n g m a n d u r i n g i n i t i a t i o n ; the n u m b e r a n d f o r m o f these

*A form of genital mutilation that involves a cut made along the underside of the penis, and that in
some traditions is accompanied by circumcision as well.
^Dürkheims convention of not pluralizing words that are not pluralized in their original languages by
the addition of "s" (like "churinga," "waninga," and "nurtunja") can lead to confusion in English,
in which articles do not have plurals. For that reason where he says les churinga, I say "the churingas."
Also, I have followed his tendency to remove Australian terms from italics, once they have been ex-
plained.
""Schoolcraft, Indian Tribe^ vol. Ill, p. 269.
81
Dorsey, "Omaha Sociology," pp. 229, 238, 240, 245.
82
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 451.
83
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 257.
84
What these relations of kinship signify will be seen below (Bk. II, chap. 4).
85
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 296.
116 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

8 6
scars v a r y a c c o r d i n g t o t o t e m . O n e o f Fison's i n f o r m a n t s notes t h e same
87
sort o f t h i n g i n the tribes he s t u d i e d . A c c o r d i n g t o H o w i t t , the same sort
o f relationship b e t w e e n c e r t a i n scarifications a n d the w a t e r t o t e m exists
8 8
a m o n g the D i e r i . Finally, a m o n g the Indians o f t h e N o r t h w e s t , the c u s t o m
89
o f t a t t o o i n g the t o t e m o n the b o d y is v e r y w i d e s p r e a d .
T h e tattoos m a d e b y m u t i l a t i o n o r scarification d o n o t always have t o t -
90
emic significance; b u t t h e case is o t h e r w i s e f o r simple designs p a i n t e d o n
the b o d y : T h o s e usually represent t h e t o t e m . T r u e , the native does n o t w e a r
t h e m every day. W h e n he engages i n p u r e l y e c o n o m i c occupations, as w h e n
the small f a m i l y groups disperse f o r h u n t i n g a n d fishing, they do n o t e n -
c u m b e r themselves w i t h this paraphernalia, w h i c h can be q u i t e elaborate.
B u t w h e n t h e clans c o m e t o g e t h e r t o share a c o m m o n life a n d devote t h e m -
selves t o religious ceremonies, w e a r i n g i t is o b l i g a t o r y . As w e w i l l see, each
o f those ceremonies is t h e affair o f a specific t o t e m , and, i n p r i n c i p l e , t h e
rites that are addressed t o a t o t e m can be p e r f o r m e d o n l y b y the p e o p l e o f
9 1
that t o t e m . T h o s e w h o c o n d u c t t h e m , p l a y i n g t h e r o l e o f celebrants—and
sometimes even those w h o are present as spectators—always w e a r designs o n
9 2
t h e i r bodies t h a t represent t h e t o t e m . O n e o f the p r i n c i p a l rites o f i n i t i a -
t i o n , the o n e that initiates t h e y o u n g m a n i n t o the r e l i g i o u s life o f the t r i b e ,
9 3
is the p a i n t i n g o f the t o t e m i c s y m b o l u p o n his b o d y . I t is t r u e that, a m o n g
^Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 744-746; cf. p. 129.
s7
Kamilaroi and Kurnai, p. 66 n. It is true that this is disputed by other informants.
88
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 744.
89
Swanton, Haida, pp. 41£f. See plates X X and XXI; Boas, The Social Organization of the Kwakiutl, p.
318; Swanton, Tlinkit, Plates xviff. In one case outside the two ethnographic regions we are specifically
studying, such tattoos are placed on the animals that belong to the clan. The Bechuana of southern Africa
are divided into a certain number of clans: the people of the crocodile, the buffalo, the monkey, etc. The
people of the crocodile, for example, make an incision on the ears of their beasts, the shape of which re-
sembles the face of the animal ([Eugene Arnaud] Casalis, Les Bassoutos [English trans., The Basutos,
Capetown, C. Struik, 1965], p. 221). According to [William] Robertson Smith, the same custom existed
among the ancient Arabs (Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia [Cambridge, Cambridge University Press,
1885], pp. 212-214).

'"According to Spencer and Gillen, there are some that have no religious meaning (see Native Tribes,
pp. 41-42; Northern Tribes, pp. 45, 54-56).
9!
Among the Arunta, this rule has exceptions that will be explained below.
92
Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes, p. 162; Northern Tribes, pp. 179, 259, 292, 295-296; Schulze, [Rev-
erend Louis, "Aborigines of the Upper and Middle Finke River," RSSA, vol. XIV, 1891], p. 221. What
is represented in this way is not always the totem itself but one of those objects that, being associated with
the totem, are regarded as things of the same family. [The reference states that bodies are painted; it does
not mention painting as a religious rite. Trans.]
"This is the case, for example, among the Warramunga, the Walpari, the Wulmala, the TjingiUi, the
Umbaia, and the Unmatjera (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 339, 348). Among the Warramunga,
Tlie Principal Totemic Beliefs 117

the A r u n t a , the design thus m a d e does n o t always a n d necessarily represent

9 4
the t o t e m o f the n o v i c e ; b u t this is an e x c e p t i o n , n o d o u b t a result o f the
95
disturbed state i n t o w h i c h the t o t e m i c o r g a n i z a t i o n o f that t r i b e has f a l l e n .
W h a t is m o r e , even a m o n g t h e A r u n t a , at the m o s t s o l e m n m o m e n t o f the
i n i t i a t i o n (its h i g h p o i n t a n d consecration b e i n g t h e m o m e n t w h e n the
novice is a d m i t t e d t o t h e sanctuary w h e r e t h e sacred objects o f the clan are
kept), an e m b l e m a t i c p a i n t i n g is d r a w n o n h i m . T h i s time i t is i n d e e d the
96
t o t e m o f t h e y o u n g m a n that is r e p r e s e n t e d . T h e ties that b i n d the i n d i v i d -
ual t o his t o t e m are so close that, i n the tribes o f the N o r t h A m e r i c a n n o r t h -
west coast, the e m b l e m o f t h e clan is p a i n t e d n o t o n l y o n t h e l i v i n g b u t even
9 7
o n the dead: A t o t e m i c m a r k is placed o n the corpse before b u r i a l .

at the moment the design is made, the officiants say the following words to the novice: "This mark be-
longs to your place: Do not turn your eyes to another place." According to Spencer and Gillen, "This lan-
guage means that the young man must not involve himself in any ceremonies but those that concern his
totem; they also testify to the close association that is held to exist between a man, his totem, and the place
especially consecrated to that totem." (Northern Tribes, p. 584.) Among the Warramunga, the totem is
transmitted from father to children; consequendy each locality has its own.
94
Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes, pp. 215, 241, 376.
95
It will be recalled (see p. 105 above) that in this tribe, the child can have a different totem from his
father or his mother and, more generally, of his kin. The relatives of both sides are the designated cele-
brants of the initiation ceremonies. As a result, since a man in principle is qualified as operator or cele-
brant only for ceremonies of his own totem, it follows that in certain cases, the rites at which the child is
initiated necessarily concern a totem other than his own. This is how it comes about that the paintings
made on the body of the novice do not necessarily represent his totem. Cases of this kind are to be found
in Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 229. This shows, moreover, that if there is an anomaly, it is because
the ceremonies of circumcision nevertheless belong essentially to the totem that would be the totem of
the novice himself if the totemic organization was not disturbed—if the totemic organization was among
the Arunta what it is among the Warramunga (ibid., p. 219).
The same disruption has had another consequence. Its effect everywhere has been to loosen some-
what the bonds that unite each totem with a definite group, since the same totem can include members
in all the possible local groups, and even in the two phratries indiscriminately. The idea that ceremonies
of a totem could be conducted by an individual of a different totem—an idea that is contrary to the very
principles of totemism, as we will see better below—has thus been able to establish itself without exces-
sive resistance. It is conceded that a man to whom a spirit has revealed the formula of a ceremony is qual-
ified to preside in it, even though he was not of the totem concerned (ibid., p. 519). Proof that this is an
exception to the rule, and the result of a kind of toleration, is that the beneficiary of the formula thus re-
vealed cannot do with it as he pleases. If he transmits the formula, and such transmissions are common, it
can only be to a member of the totem to which the rite refers (ibid.).
%
Ibid., p. 140. In this case, the novice keeps the decoration in which he was dressed until it goes away
by itself with the passage of time.
97
Franz Boas, "First General Report on the Indians of British Columbia," in BAAS, Fifth Report of the
Committee on the North-Westem Tribes of the Dominion of Canada [London, Offices of the Association, 1890],
p. 41.
118 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

III
These t o t e m i c decorations suggest that t h e t o t e m is n o t m e r e l y a n a m e a n d
an e m b l e m . T h e y are used d u r i n g religious ceremonies a n d are part o f the
l i t u r g y : T h u s , w h i l e the t o t e m is a collective label, i t also has a religious char-
acter. I n fact, things are classified as sacred a n d profane b y reference t o the
t o t e m . I t is t h e v e r y archetype o f sacred things.
T h e tribes o f central Australia, p r i n c i p a l l y t h e A r u n t a , the L o r i t j a , t h e
9 8
K a i t i s h , the U n m a t j e r a , a n d the I l p i r r a , use c e r t a i n i n s t r u m e n t s i n t h e i r
rites that, a m o n g the A r u n t a , are called churingas, a c c o r d i n g t o Spencer a n d
G i l l e n and, a c c o r d i n g t o Strehlow, Tjurunga." T h e y are pieces o f w o o d o r
1 0 0
bits o f p o l i s h e d stone o f various shapes b u t generally oval o r o b l o n g . Each
t o t e m i c g r o u p has a m o r e o r less sizable c o l l e c t i o n o f t h e m . Upon each of them
101
is engraved a design representing the totem of this group. S o m e churingas are
p i e r c e d at o n e e n d , w i t h a s t r i n g m a d e from h u m a n hair o r opossum fur
passed t h r o u g h the h o l e . T h o s e that are m a d e o f w o o d a n d p i e r c e d i n this
w a y serve the same p u r p o s e as those c u l t i n s t r u m e n t s * t o w h i c h the E n g l i s h
ethnographers have g i v e n the n a m e " b u l l roarers." H e l d b y t h e s t r i n g from
w h i c h t h e y are suspended, t h e y are r a p i d l y w h i r l e d i n the air so as t o p r o d u c e
the same sort o f h u m m i n g that is m a d e b y t h e " d e v i l s " that o u r c h i l d r e n use
as toys today; this deafening noise has r i t u a l m e a n i n g a n d accompanies all r e -
l i g i o u s ceremonies o f any i m p o r t a n c e . T h u s , churingas o f this k i n d are a c t u -
ally b u l l roarers. O t h e r s , w h i c h are n o t w o o d e n o r are n o t p i e r c e d , c a n n o t be
used i n this m a n n e r . Nevertheless, t h e y evoke the same feelings o f r e l i g i o u s
respect.
I n d e e d every c h u r i n g a , h o w e v e r used, counts a m o n g the m o s t p r e e m i -
n e n t l y sacred things. N o t h i n g has surpassed i t i n r e l i g i o u s d i g n i t y . T h e w o r d
that designates i t makes this i m m e d i a t e l y clear. A t the same t i m e that
" c h u r i n g a " is a n o u n , i t is also an a d j e c t i v e — m e a n i n g "sacred." T h u s , a m o n g

This term applies to special containers, knives, coverings, bells, and other objects used in the course
of religious rites.
98
There are some among the Warramunga as well, but fewer than among the Arunta, and although
they have a certain place in the myths, they do notfigurein the totemic ceremonies (Spencer and Gillen,
Northern Tribes, p. 163).

"Other names are used in other tribes. I give the Arunta term a generic sense, because it is in that
tribe that the churingas have greatest importance and are the best studied.
100
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, p. 81.
""There are some, but not many, that do not bear any obvious design (see Spencer and Gillen, Native
Tribes, p. 144).
The Principal Totemic Beliefs 119

the names that each A r u n t a has, there is o n e so sacred that i t must n o t be r e -

vealed t o a stranger; i t is p r o n o u n c e d b u t rarely a n d i n a l o w v o i c e , a sort
o f mysterious m u r m u r . T h a t n a m e is called aritna churinga (aritna means
1 0 2
"name"). M o r e generally, t h e w o r d " c h u r i n g a " designates a l l r i t u a l acts;
1 0 3
for example, ilia churinga means t h e c u l t o f the E m u . Thus, churinga, pe-
r i o d , used as a n o u n , is t h e t h i n g w h o s e quintessential feature is t o be sacred.
T h e profane, t h e r e f o r e — w o m e n a n d - y o u n g m e n n o t y e t i n i t i a t e d i n t o r e l i -
gious l i f e — m a y n o t t o u c h o r see t h e churingas; t h e y are o n l y p e r m i t t e d t o
104
l o o k f r o m afar a n d even t h e n r a r e l y .
T h e churingas are p i o u s l y k e p t i n a special place t h e A r u n t a call the ert-
105
natulunga—a sort o f small cave h i d d e n i n a deserted p l a c e . T h e entrance is
carefully closed w i t h rocks placed so skillfully that a passing stranger never
suspects that t h e r e l i g i o u s treasury o f the clan is nearby. S u c h is t h e churingas'
sacredness that i t is passed o n t o t h e place w h e r e t h e y are deposited; w o m e n
and t h e u n i n i t i a t e d m a y n o t c o m e near i t . Y o u n g m e n m a y d o so o n l y w h e n
t h e i r i n i t i a t i o n is c o m p l e t e l y over, a n d even t h e n , some are j u d g e d t o m e r i t
1 0 6
that p r i v i l e g e o n l y after several years o f t r i a l . T h e religiousness o f t h e place
radiates b e y o n d a n d is transfused i n t o all that surrounds i t : E v e r y t h i n g p a r t i c -
ipates i n t h e same q u a l i t y a n d is f o r that reason insulated f r o m profane c o n -
tact. Is a m a n chased b y another? H e is safe i f h e reaches t h e ertnatulunga; h e
107
cannot be captured t h e r e . E v e n a w o u n d e d a n i m a l that takes refuge there

102
Ibid„ pp. 139, 648; Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, p. 75.
103
Strehlow, who spells it Tjurunga, translates the word a little differently. "This word," he says, "means
all that is secret and personal" (der eigene geheime). Tju is an old word that means hidden, secret, and runga
means that which is personal to me." But Kempe, who has more authority than Strehlow in the matter,
translates tju as "great," "powerful," or "sacred" ([Reverend H.[ Kempe, "Vocabulary of the Tribes In-
habiting the MacdonnellvRanges," in RSSA, vol. XIV (1890-1891, 1898), pp. 1-54], under "Tju."
Moreover, Strehlows translation is basically not so far from the preceding as one might think at first
glance, for what is secret is that which is taken away from the knowledge of the profane, in other words,
that which is sacred. As concerns the meaning of the word runga, that seems very doubtful. The cere-
monies of the emu belong to all the members of the Emu clan; all can participate in them; they are not
the personal property of any member.
104
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 130-132; Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, p. 78. A woman who has
seen the churinga and the man who has shown it to her are both put to death.
105
Strehlow calls that place, defined exacdy in the same terms Spencer and Gillen use, arknanuaua in-
stead of ertnatulunga (Aranda, vol. II, p. 78).
106
[Spencer and Gillen], Northern Tribes, p. 270, and Native Tribes, p. 140.
I07
Ibid., p. 135.
120 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

108
m u s t be r e s p e c t e d . Q u a r r e l s are p r o h i b i t e d . I t is a place o f peace, as is said
i n the G e r m a n i c societies; i t is the sanctuary o f the t o t e m i c g r o u p ; i t is a t r u e
asylum.
T h e churinga's v i r t u e s are manifested n o t o n l y b y t h e w a y i t keeps the
profane at a distance. I t is isolated i n this w a y because i t is a t h i n g o f great r e -
l i g i o u s value, a n d its loss w o u l d tragically i n j u r e the g r o u p a n d the i n d i v i d u -
als. T h e c h u r i n g a has all sorts o f m i r a c u l o u s qualities. B y its t o u c h , w o u n d s
1 0 9
are healed, especially those r e s u l t i n g f r o m c i r c u m c i s i o n ; i t is similarly ef-
110 1 1 1
fective against i l l n e s s ; i t makes the beard g r o w ; i t conveys i m p o r t a n t
112
powers over t h e t o t e m i c species, w h o s e n o r m a l r e p r o d u c t i o n i t ensures; it
gives m e n strength, courage, a n d perseverance, w h i l e depressing a n d w e a k -
e n i n g t h e i r enemies. I n d e e d , this last b e l i e f is so d e e p - r o o t e d that w h e n t w o
fighters are b a t t l i n g , i f o n e happens t o glimpse that his o p p o n e n t is w e a r i n g
1 1 3
churingas, he i n s t a n d y loses c o n f i d e n c e a n d his defeat is c e r t a i n . Thus, no
114
r i t u a l i n s t r u m e n t s have a m o r e i m p o r t a n t place i n r e l i g i o u s ceremonies.
T h e i r powers are passed o n t o t h e celebrants o r t o t h e c o n g r e g a t i o n b y a k i n d
o f a n o i n t i n g ; the faithful are smeared w i t h fat a n d t h e n t h e churingas are
1 1 5
r u b b e d against t h e i r arms, legs, a n d s t o m a c h . O r t h e churingas are covered
w i t h d o w n that flies away i n all directions w h e n t h e y are w h i r l e d , this b e i n g
1 1 6
o n e w a y t o spread t h e v i r t u e s t h e y c o n t a i n .
C h u r i n g a s are n o t m e r e l y useful t o i n d i v i d u a l s ; t h e collective fate o f the
entire clan is b o u n d u p w i t h theirs. L o s i n g t h e m is a disaster, the greatest m i s -
1 1 7
f o r t u n e that can befall t h e g r o u p . S o m e t i m e s churingas leave the e r t n a t u -
l08
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, p. 78. However, Strehlow says that a murderer who takes refuge near an
ertnatulunga is mercilessly pursued there and put to death. I have some difficulty reconciling that fact with
the privilege the animal enjoys and wonder if the greater rigor with which the criminal is treated is not
recent and if it should not be ascribed to a weakening of the taboo that originally protected the ertnatu-
lunga.
109
[Spencer and Gillen], Native Tribes, p. 248.
110
Ibid., pp. 545-546; Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, p. 79. For example, the dust scraped from a stone
churinga and dissolved in water makes a potion that heals the sick.
"'Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 545—546; Strehlow, Aranda vol. II, p. 79 disputes that.
2
" For example, a churinga of the Yam totem that is placed in the ground makes yams grow at that
spot (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 275). It has the same power over the animals (Strehlow,
Aranda, vol. II, pp. 76, 78; vol. Ill, pp. 3, 7).
3
" [Spencer and Gillen], Native Tribes, p. 135; Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, p. 79.
114
[Spencer and Gillen], Northern Tribes p. 278.
5
" Ibid.,p. 180.
6
" Ibid., pp. 272-273.
117
Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes, p. 135.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs 121

8
l u n g a — f o r example, w h e n t h e y are l e n t t o some f o r e i g n g r o u p . " T h e r e is
real p u b l i c m o u r n i n g w h e n this happens. F o r t w o weeks, the people o f the
t o t e m c r y a n d l a m e n t , c o v e r i n g t h e i r bodies w i t h w h i t e clay as t h e y d o w h e n
1 1 9
they have lost o n e o f t h e i r k i n . T h e churingas are n o t left f o r i n d i v i d u a l s
t o d o w i t h as t h e y please; t h e e r t n a t u l u n g a w h e r e t h e y are kept is u n d e r the
c o n t r o l o f the group's chief. T o be sure, each i n d i v i d u a l has special rights over
1 2 0
certain o f t h e m ; b u t even i f he is t o some e x t e n t t h e i r o w n e r , he can use
t h e m o n l y w i t h the consent o f the c h i e f a n d u n d e r the chief's guidance. I t is
1 2 1
a collective treasury, t h e H o l y A r k * o f the c l a n . T h e d e v o t i o n they receive
f u r t h e r illustrates the great value t h a t is attached t o t h e m . T h e y are h a n d l e d
122
w i t h a respect that is displayed b y t h e s o l e m n i t y o f t h e m o v e m e n t s . They
are cared for, o i l e d , r u b b e d , a n d p o l i s h e d ; w h e n they are c a r r i e d f r o m o n e
place t o another, i t is i n the m i d s t o f ceremonies, p r o o f that this travel is c o n -
1 2 3
sidered an act o f the v e r y highest i m p o r t a n c e .
I n themselves, the churingas are m e r e l y objects o f w o o d a n d stone l i k e
so m a n y others; t h e y are d i s t i n g u i s h e d f r o m profane things o f the same k i n d
b y o n l y o n e p a r t i c u l a r i t y : T h e t o t e m i c m a r k is d r a w n o r engraved upon
t h e m . T h a t m a r k , a n d o n l y t h a t m a r k , confers sacredness o n t h e m . T o be
sure, Spencer a n d G i l l e n believe that the c h u r i n g a serves as the residence o f
an ancestral soul a n d that t h e a u t h o r i t y o f that soul gives t h e object its p r o p -
124
erties. S t r e h l o w v i e w s that i n t e r p r e t a t i o n as i n c o r r e c t b u t the o n e he p r o -

*Here, Dürkheim shifts from the term sacrée to the term sainte, using the expression l'arche sainte,
which is a fixed phrase meaning "something that may not be touched"—quite like the English "sacred
cow," which in turn derivesfromritual practice in India. 1 have used the term "holy" not only because
"Holy Ark" is the standard expression in American English, but also to let the reader note the shift and
reflect on its possible implications (see p. btix).
lI8
A group lends its churinga to another with the idea that those latter will pass on to it some of the
virtues they have and that their presence will rejuvenate individuals and the collectivity (ibid., pp. 158ff.).
I19
Ibid., p. 136.
120
Each individual has a personal bond first of all to one special churinga that serves as a security for
his life and then to those he has inheritedfromhis relatives.
,21
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 154; Northern Tribes, p. 193. The churingas are so marked with
collective significance that they replace the "message sticks" that envoys carry when they go to summon
foreign groups to a ceremony (NativeTribes, pp. 141—142).
122
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 326. [Neither "solemnity" nor other words describing move-
ments appear at this place. Trans.] It should be noted that the bull roarers are treated in the same way
(Mathews, "Aboriginal Tribes" pp. 307-308).
l23
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 161, 250ff.
I24
Ibid., p. 138.
122 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

poses does n o t m a r k e d l y differ from i t : H e is o f the o p i n i o n that the c h u r i n g a

125
is regarded as an image o f the ancestors b o d y o r as the b o d y i t s e l f . Thus,
again, i t is feelings i n s p i r e d b y the ancestor a n d p r o j e c t e d o n t o the m a t e r i a l
object that m a k e i t i n t o a k i n d o f fetish. Yet b o t h c o n c e p t i o n s — w h i c h barely
differ except i n the l i t e r a l d e t a i l o f t h e m y t h — w e r e o b v i o u s l y f o r g e d after the
fact t o m a k e the sacredness i m p u t e d t o churingas i n t e l l i g i b l e . T h e r e is n o t h -
i n g i n t h e m a k e u p o f those pieces o f w o o d a n d stone, a n d i n t h e i r appear-
ance, that predestines t h e m t o b e i n g regarded as the seat o f an ancestral soul
o r the image o f t h e ancestor's b o d y . So that respect was n o t caused b y the
m y t h ; far from i t . I f m e n c o n c e i v e d this m y t h , i t was t o a c c o u n t f o r t h e r e l i -
gious respect that those things e l i c i t e d . L i k e so m a n y o t h e r m y t h i c a l e x p l a -
nations, this o n e resolves t h e q u e s t i o n o n l y b y repeating i t i n slightly different
t e r m s , f o r t o say that the c h u r i n g a is sacred, a n d that i t has such and such r e -
l a t i o n s h i p w i t h a sacred b e i n g , is n o t t o a c c o u n t f o r t h e fact b u t to state o n e
fact i n t w o different ways. Second, as Spencer a n d G i l l e n a d m i t , even a m o n g
the A r u n t a , there are churingas that are m a d e b y t h e elders o f t h e g r o u p , w i t h
126
the f u l l k n o w l e d g e o f a n d i n f u l l v i e w o f e v e r y o n e ; those o b v i o u s l y d o n o t
c o m e from the great ancestors. S t i l l , despite a f e w differences, they have t h e
same p o w e r as t h e others a n d are k e p t i n t h e same way. Finally, there are
w h o l e tribes i n w h i c h a c h u r i n g a is n o t at all t h o u g h t o f as b e i n g associated
1 2 7
with a spirit. Its r e l i g i o u s nature comes t o i t f r o m a n o t h e r source; a n d w h a t
w o u l d be t h e source i f n o t the t o t e m i c i m p r i n t i t bears? T h u s , the o u t w a r d
displays o f the r i t e are addressed t o that image, a n d that image sanctifies* t h e
object o n w h i c h i t is engraved.
A m o n g the A r u n t a a n d i n the n e i g h b o r i n g tribes, there exist t w o o t h e r
l i t u r g i c a l i n s t r u m e n t s that are clearly attached t o the t o t e m and t o the

*To express the idea "to make something sacred," Durkheim uses the word sanctifier. That idea should
be kept distinctfromother meanings of the verb "to sanctify."
125
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, pp. 76, 77, 82. For the Arunta, it is the actual body of the ancestor; for
the Loritja, it is only the body's image.
126
Just after the birth of a child, the mother shows the father where she believes the soul of the ances-
tor entered her. Accompanied by several relatives, the father goes to that place, and they look for the
churinga that they believe the ancestor dropped at the moment of reincarnating himself. If one is found,
it is probably because some elder of the totemic group put it there (the hypothesis of Spencer and Gillen).
If they do not find it, they make a new churinga according to a prescribed technique (Spencer and Gillen,
NativeTribes, p. 132; cf. Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, p. 80).
127
This is true of the Warramunga, the Urabunna, the Worgaia, the Umbaia, the Tjingilli, and the
Gnanji (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 258, 275—276). Then, say Spencer and Gillen, "they were
regarded as having especial value because of their association with a totem" (ibid., p. 276). There are ex-
amples of the same sort among the Arunta (NativeTribes, p. 156).
The Principal Totemic Beliefs 123

c h u r i n g a itself, w h i c h o r d i n a r i l y enters i n t o t h e i r m a k i n g : the nurtunja a n d

the waninga.
128
T h e nurtunja, w h i c h is f o u n d a m o n g the A r u n t a o f the n o r t h a n d t h e i r
1 2 9
immediate neighbors, is a v e r t i c a l s u p p o r t consisting o f e i t h e r a lance, sev-
1 3 0
eral lances t i e d t o g e t h e r i n a b u n d l e , o r s i m p l y a p o l e . B u n c h e s o f plants
are fastened a l l a r o u n d i t w i t h belts o r bands made o f hair. D o w n , arranged
either i n circles o r i n parallel lines r u n n i n g from t o p t o b o t t o m o f the sup-
p o r t , is attached t o the u p p e r e n d . T h e t o p is decorated w i t h feathers o f t h e
eaglehawk. ( T h i s is t h e c o m m o n e s t a n d m o s t t y p i c a l f o r m ; there are m a n y
131
variations i n p a r t i c u l a r cases.)
T h e waninga, w h i c h is f o u n d o n l y a m o n g the s o u t h e r n A r u n t a , the
U r a b u n n a , a n d the L o r i t j a , has n o o n e m o d e l either. R e d u c e d t o its m o s t b a -
sic c o m p o n e n t s , i t also has a v e r t i c a l s u p p o r t m a d e w i t h a stick a b o u t a f o o t
l o n g o r w i t h a lance several meters h i g h that is cross-cut, sometimes b y o n e
132
o r sometimes b y t w o p i e c e s . I n the first case, i t resembles a cross. D i a g o -
nally crossing the space b e t w e e n t h e arms o f the cross a n d the ends o f the
central axis are ties m a d e w i t h e i t h e r h u m a n h a i r o r the f u r o f an o p o s s u m o r
a b a n d i c o o t ; t h e y are pressed t i g h d y together, f o r m i n g a d i a m o n d - s h a p e d
w e b . W h e n there are t w o cross-bars, the belts g o from o n e t o the other, a n d
from there t o the t o p a n d b o t t o m o f t h e s u p p o r t . T h e y are sometimes c o v -
ered w i t h a coat o f d o w n t h i c k e n o u g h t o h i d e t h e m f r o m v i e w . T h e
133
w a n i n g a thus l o o k s q u i t e l i k e a flag.
H a v i n g t h e i r o w n role i n m a n y rites, nurtunjas a n d waningas are objects
o f religious respect e n t i r e l y l i k e t h e respect e v o k e d b y t h e churingas. M a k i n g
and e r e c t i n g t h e m is c a r r i e d o u t w i t h t h e greatest s o l e m n i t y . W h e t h e r fixed

128
Strehlow says Tnatanja (Aranda, vol. I, pp. 4—5).
129
The Kaitish, the Ilpirra, and the Unmatjera, but it is rare among the last group.
""Sometimes the pole is replaced with very long churingas placed end to end.
"'Sometimes a smaller nurtunja is suspended at the top of the main one. In other cases, the nurtunja
is given the form of a cross or a T. More rarely, the central support is absent (Spencer and Gillen, Native
Tribes, pp. 298-300, 360-364, 627).
132
Sometimes there are three such transverse ban.
133
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 231-234, 306-310, 627. In addition to the nurtunja and the
waninga, Spencer and Gillen distinguish a third sort of sacred pole or flag, the kauaua (Native Tribes, pp.
364, 370, 629), whose functions they admit not having been able to determine exacdy. They note only
that the kauaua "is regarded as something common to the members of all the totems." But according to
Strehlow (Aranda, vol. Ill, p. 23, n.2), the kauaua of which Spencer and Gillen speak is merely the nur-
tunja of the Wild Cat totem. Since that animal is the object of a tribal cult, it is understandable that the
veneration its nurtunja receives should be common to all the clans.
124 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

o n the g r o u n d o r c a r r i e d b y a celebrant, t h e y m a r k t h e central p o i n t o f the

c e r e m o n y ; the dances take place a n d t h e rites u n f o l d a r o u n d t h e m . D u r i n g
i n i t i a t i o n , the n o v i c e is l e d t o the f o o t o f a n u r t u n j a that has b e e n erected f o r
the occasion. " H e r e , " he is t o l d , "is the n u r t u n j a o f y o u r father; i t has already
served t o make m a n y y o u n g m e n . " A f t e r this, t h e n e o p h y t e m u s t kiss the n u r -
1 3 4
tunja. W i t h this kiss, he enters i n t o relations w i t h t h e r e l i g i o u s p r i n c i p l e
that is h e l d t o reside i n i t ; i t is a g e n u i n e c o m m u n i o n that is t o give the y o u n g
m a n the strength h e m u s t have t o e n d u r e the t e r r i b l e o p e r a t i o n o f s u b i n c i -
1 3 5
sion. I n a d d i t i o n , t h e n u r t u n j a plays an i m p o r t a n t r o l e i n t h e m y t h o l o g y o f
these societies. T h e m y t h s r e p o r t that, i n t h e m y t h i c a l age o f t h e great a n -
cestors, t h e t e r r i t o r y o f t h e t r i b e was crisscrossed i n all d i r e c t i o n s b y c o m p a -
1 3 6
nies m a d e u p exclusively o f i n d i v i d u a l s h a v i n g t h e same t o t e m . Each o f
those bands c a r r i e d a n u r t u n j a . W h e n a c o m p a n y stopped t o m a k e c a m p a n d
before t h e y dispersed t o h u n t , t h e p e o p l e set t h e i r n u r t u n j a i n t o the g r o u n d
1 3 7
a n d suspended the churingas f r o m the t o p . I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e y entrusted
i t w i t h t h e i r m o s t valuable possessions. A t t h e same t i m e , i t was a sort o f flag
that served as the r a l l y i n g p o i n t o f t h e g r o u p . O n e c a n n o t fail t o b e s t r u c k b y
1 3 8
t h e similarities o f the n u r t u n j a t o the sacred poles o f the O m a h a .
T h i s sacredness stems from o n e cause: I t is a m a t e r i a l representation o f the
clan. I n fact, the v e r t i c a l lines o r rings o f d o w n that cover i t , o r i n d e e d the
belts that j o i n the arms o f the w a n i n g a t o the central axis ( o f different colors,
as w e l l ) , are n o t arranged arbitrarily, at the w h i m o f those officiating. T h e y
must affect a f o r m that is s t r i c d y i m p o s e d b y t r a d i t i o n a n d that, i n the m i n d s
1 3 9
o f the natives, represents the t o t e m . H e r e w e n e e d w o n d e r n o longer, as i n
the case o f the churingas, i f the v e n e r a t i o n this c u l t i n s t r u m e n t receives
m e r e l y reflects that inspired b y the ancestors: I t is a r u l e that each n u r t u n j a o r
w a n i n g a lasts o n l y d u r i n g the c e r e m o n y i n w h i c h i t is used. A n entirely n e w
one is made each t i m e o n e is needed; w h e n the r i t e is finished, i t is s t r i p p e d
140
o f its ornaments, a n d the elements from w h i c h i t is made are scattered.

134
Spencer and Gülen, Northern Tribes, p. 342; NativeTribes, p. 309.
135
Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes, p. 255.
136
Ibid., chaps. 10 and 11.
I37
Ibid., pp. 138-144.
138
See [James Owen] Dorsey, "[A Study of] Siouan Cults," BAE, Eleventh Report [Washington, Gov-
ernment Printing Office, 1894], p. 413, and "Omaha Sociology," p. 234. While it is true that there is only
one sacred pole for the tribe, and yet one nurtunja for each clan, the principle is the same.
139
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 232, 308, 313, 334, etc.; Northern Tribes, pp. 182, 186, etc.
140
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 346. They do say, it is true, that the nurtunja represents the
lance of the ancestor who, in Alcheringatimes,was the head of each clan. But it is only a symbolic rep-
The Principal Totemic Beliefs 125

Thus i t is n o m o r e t h a n an i m a g e o f the t o t e m — i n d e e d a t e m p o r a r y i m a g e —
and therefore plays its religious role i n this r i g h t and i n this r i g h t only.
T h e c h u r i n g a , the n u r t u n j a , a n d the w a n i n g a o w e t h e i r religious nature
solely t o t h e fact that t h e y bear t h e t o t e m i c e m b l e m . W h a t is sacred is the
e m b l e m . I t retains this sacredness w h a t e v e r t h e o b j e c t o n w h i c h i t is r e p r e -
sented. I t is sometimes p a i n t e d o n rocks—these paintings b e i n g called
141
churinga ilkinia, sacred d e s i g n s . T h e decorations i n w h i c h the celebrants
and the c o n g r e g a t i o n a d o r n themselves d u r i n g r e l i g i o u s ceremonies have the
1 4 2
same name, a n d i t is f o r b i d d e n f o r c h i l d r e n a n d w o m e n t o see t h e m . In
certain rites, t h e t o t e m is sometimes d r a w n o n t h e g r o u n d . T h e v e r y t e c h -
n i q u e o f d o i n g so testifies t o t h e feelings that the design elicits and t o t h e
h i g h value that is i m p u t e d t o i t . T h e d r a w i n g is d o n e o n g r o u n d that has
1 4 3
been s p r i n k l e d a n d saturated b e f o r e h a n d w i t h h u m a n b l o o d ; w e w i l l see
b e l o w that t h e b l o o d itself is a sacred l i q u i d that is reserved exclusively f o r p i -
ous use. O n c e the i m a g e has b e e n made, the faithful r e m a i n seated o n the
1 4 4
g r o u n d i n f r o n t o f i t , i n an a t t i t u d e o f p u r e d e v o t i o n . P r o v i d e d w e assign a
sense a p p r o p r i a t e t o the m e n t a l i t y o f t h e p r i m i t i v e , o n e can say that they
w o r s h i p a n d g l o r i f y i t . * T h i s enables us t o u n d e r s t a n d w h y the t o t e m i c e m -
b l e m has r e m a i n e d a v e r y precious t h i n g t o the Indians o f N o r t h A m e r i c a : I t
is always s u r r o u n d e d b y a sort o f r e l i g i o u s aura.
I t is n o t w i t h o u t interest t o k n o w w h a t t o t e m i c representations are made
of, i n a d d i t i o n t o u n d e r s t a n d i n g h o w i t happens that t h e y are so sacred.
A m o n g the Indians o f N o r t h A m e r i c a , t o t e m i c representations are
painted, engraved, o r sculpted images that a t t e m p t t o reproduce the o u t w a r d
appearance o f t h e t o t e m i c a n i m a l as faithfully as possible. T h e techniques are
those that w e use today i n similar cases, except that i n general they are c r u d e r
t h a n o u r o w n . B u t i t is n o t the same i n Australia, a n d o f course i t is i n the
Australian societies that w e m u s t seek the o r i g i n o f these representations. A l -
t h o u g h the A u s t r a l i a n m a y s h o w h i m s e l f t o be fairly capable o f i m i t a t i n g the

réservation of that; it is not a sort of relic, like the churinga, which is thought to emanate from the an-
cestor himself. Here the secondary character of the interpretation is especially apparent.
*A condition de donner au mot un sense approprié à la mentalité du primitif, on peut dire qu'ils l'adorent. What
it is about the verb adorer that must be specially understood is not made explicit.
141
Ibid., pp. 614ff., esp. p. 617; Northern Tribes, p. 749.
u2
NativeTribes, p. 624.
143
Ibid., p. 179.
144
Ibid., p. 181. [The reference does not describe their demeanor; it says that they chant. Trans.]
126 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

1 4 5
forms o f things, at least i n a r u d i m e n t a r y w a y , the sacred decorations seem
t o e x h i b i t n o preoccupations o f this k i n d : T h e y consist chiefly o f g e o m e t r i c
designs made o n the churingas o r o n men's bodies. T h e y are straight o r
146
c u r v e d lines p a i n t e d i n various w a y s , together h a v i n g and o n l y capable o f
h a v i n g a c o n v e n t i o n a l m e a n i n g . T h e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n the d r a w i n g and the
t h i n g d r a w n is so r e m o t e a n d i n d i r e c t that the u n i n f o r m e d cannot see i t . p n l y
clan m e m b e r s can say w h a t m e a n i n g t h e y attach t o this o r that c o m b i n a t i o n
147
o f lines. I n general, m e n a n d w o m e n are represented b y semicircles; a n i -
148
mals, b y c o m p l e t e circles o r b y spirals; the tracks o f a m a n o r an a n i m a l , b y
lines o f points. T h e meanings o f the drawings thus p r o d u c e d are i n d e e d so ar-
b i t r a r y that the same d r a w i n g can have t w o different meanings f o r the people
o f t w o totems—representing a certain a n i m a l i n o n e place a n d another a n i m a l
o r a plant elsewhere. T h i s is perhaps even m o r e apparent i n the case o f the
nurtunjas and waningas; each o f w h i c h represents a different t o t e m . B u t the
f e w v e r y simple elements that enter i n t o t h e i r c o m p o s i t i o n cannot l e n d t h e m -
selves t o v e r y diverse c o m b i n a t i o n s . As a result, t w o nurtunjas can l o o k e x -
actly the same a n d yet convey t w o things as different as a g u m tree a n d an
1 4 9
emu. W h e n the n U r t u n j a is made, i t is g i v e n a m e a n i n g that i t retains d u r -
i n g the w h o l e ceremony, b u t a m e a n i n g that u l t i m a t e l y is set b y c o n v e n t i o n .
As these facts prove, w h i l e the Australian has q u i t e a strong i n c l i n a t i o n t o
represent his t o t e m , he does n o t d o so i n order t o have a p o r t r a i t before his eyes
that perpetually renews the sensation o f it; he does so s i m p l y because he feels the
need t o represent the idea he has b y means o f an o u t w a r d and physical sign, n o
matter w h a t that sign may be. W e cannot go further t o w a r d understanding w h a t
made the p r i m i t i v e w r i t e the idea he had o f his t o t e m o n his person and o n var-
ious objects, b u t i t has been i m p o r t a n t t o note straightaway the nature o f the
150
need that has g i v e n b i r t h t o these numerous representations.

U3
See some examples in Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes,fig.131. Among the designs there, several
are obviously intended to represent animals, plants, the heads of men, etc.—very schematically, of course.
146
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 617; Northern Tribes, pp. 716ÎF.
147
[Spencer and Gillen], Native Tribes, p. 145; Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, p. 80.
148
[Spencer and Gillen], NativeTribes, p. 151.
,49
Ibid., p. 346.
1S0
Moreover, these designs and paintings undoubtedly have an aesthetic quality as well; they are an
early form of art. Since they are also, and even most of all, a written language, itfollowsthat the origins
of drawing and those of writing merge into one another. Indeed, it seems that man must have begun to
draw less to fix onto wood or stone beautifulformsthat charmed the senses than to express his thought
materially (cf. Schoolcraft, Indian Tribes, vol. I, p. 405; Dorsey, Siouan Cults, pp. 394ff.).
 CHAPTER TWO

THE PRINCIPAL TOTEMIC

BELIEFS (CONTINUED)
The Totemic Animal and Man

B u t t o t e m i c images are n o t the o n l y sacred things. T h e r e are real beings

that are also t h e o b j e c t o f rites, because o f t h e i r relationship w i t h the
t o t e m . T h e y are, first a n d foremost, t h e creatures o f t h e t o t e m i c species a n d
the m e m b e r s o f t h e clan.

I
Since t h e designs that represent the t o t e m stir r e l i g i o u s feelings, i t is n a t u r a l
that the things represented s h o u l d have the same p r o p e r t y t o some degree.
T h e things represented are m a i n l y animals a n d plants. Since the profane
role o f plants a n d c e r t a i n l y that o f animals o r d i n a r i l y is t o serve as f o o d , the
sacredness o f the t o t e m i c a n i m a l o r p l a n t is signified b y the p r o h i b i t i o n
against e a t i n g i t . O f course, because t h e y are h o l y t h i n g s , * they can enter
i n t o the c o m p o s i t i o n o f c e r t a i n m y s t i c meals, a n d w e w i l l see i n fact that t h e y
sometimes serve as t r u e sacraments; i n general, however, t h e y cannot be used
for o r d i n a r y eating. A n y o n e w h o violates that p r o h i b i t i o n exposes h i m s e l f t o
e x t r e m e l y grave danger. T h i s is n o t t o say that the g r o u p always intervenes t o
p u n i s h every such i n f r a c t i o n artificially; the sacrilege is t h o u g h t t o b r i n g
about death automatically. A dreaded p r i n c i p l e that c a n n o t enter i n t o a p r o -
fane b o d y w i t h o u t d i s r u p t i n g o r d e s t r o y i n g i t is t h o u g h t t o reside w i t h i n the

* Choses saintes. I indicate Durkheim's alternation between sacré and saint. On these terms, see above p.
bdx, n. 101, and p. 121n.

127
128 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

1
t o t e m i c p l a n t o r a n i m a l . I n c e r t a i n tribes at least, o l d m e n are e x e m p t e d
2
f r o m that p r o h i b i t i o n ; later, w e w i l l see w h y .
3
B u t a l t h o u g h t h e p r o h i b i t i o n is absolute i n a great m a n y t r i b e s ( w i t h e x -
ceptions that w i l l be p o i n t e d o u t ) , u n q u e s t i o n a b l y i t tends t o w e a k e n as t h e
o l d t o t e m i c o r g a n i z a t i o n breaks d o w n . B u t t h e v e r y restrictions that persist
even t h e n s h o w that these attenuations have n o t b e e n easily accepted. F o r e x -
ample, w h e r e eating the t o t e m i c a n i m a l o r p l a n t is p e r m i t t e d , the eating is
still n o t e n t i r e l y free b u t is l i m i t e d t o small a m o u n t s at a time. T o exceed this
4
l i m i t is a r i t u a l offense and has grave consequences. Elsewhere, the restric-
t i o n remains i n t a c t f o r the parts that are considered t h e m o s t precious, that is,
5
the m o s t sacred—for example, the eggs o r t h e f a t . I n yet o t h e r places, u n r e -
stricted eating is t o l e r a t e d o n l y i f t h e a n i m a l eaten has n o t yet reached f u l l
6
m a t u r i t y . I n this case, the animal's sacredness is p r o b a b l y assumed t o be as yet
i n c o m p l e t e . T h u s , the b a r r i e r that isolates a n d protects t h e t o t e m i c b e i n g
gives w a y b u t slowly, a n d n o t w i t h o u t s t r o n g r e s i s t a n c e — w h i c h is evidence
o f w h a t i t m u s t o r i g i n a l l y have been.
I t is t r u e that Spencer a n d G i l l e n d o n o t believe such restrictions are sur-
vivals o f a o n c e - r i g o r o u s p r o h i b i t i o n that is g r a d u a l l y w e a k e n i n g , b u t instead
that t h e y are the p r e l u d e t o o n e j u s t b e g i n n i n g t o establish itself. O n c e u p o n

'See the example in [Rev. George] Taplin, "The Narrinyeri Tribe" [in James Dominick Woods, The
Native Tribes of South Australia, Adelaide, E. S. Wigg & Son, 1879], p. 63; [Alfred William] Howitt, Native
Tribes [of South-East Australia, London, Macmillan, 1904], pp. 146, 769; [Lorimer] Fison and [Alfred
William] Howitt, Kamilaroi and Kumai [Melbourne, G. Robertson, 1880], p. 169; [Walter Edmund]
Roth, Superstition, Magic and Medicine [in North Queensland Ethnography, Bulletin, no. 5, Brisbane, G. A.
Vaughn, 1903], §150; [W.] Wyatt, "Adelaide and Encounter Bay Tribes" [in Woods, The NativeTribes of
South Australia], p. 168 [H. E. A.] Meyer, "Manners and Customs of the Aborigines of Encounter Bay,"
[in Woods, The Native Tribes of South Australia], p. 186.
2
This is the case among the Warramunga. [Sir Baldwin Spencer and Francis James Gillen, Northern
Tribes of Central Australia, London, Macmillan, 1904], p. 168. [That discussion does not concern dietary
practices. Trans.]
3
For example, among the Warramunga, the Urabunna, the Wonghibon, the Yuin, the Wotjobaluk,
the Buandik, the Ngeumba, and others.
4
Among the Kaitish, if a member of the clan eats too much of his totem, the members of the other
phratry have recourse to a magical procedure that is thought to kill (ibid., p. 294; cf. [Sir Baldwin Spencer
and Francis James Gillen], Northern Tribes, p. 294, and NativeTribes [of Central Australia, London, Macmil-
lan, 1899], p. 204 [The discussion does not concern dietary practices. Trans.]; Langloh Parker [Catherine
Sommerville Field Parker], The Euahlayi Tribe, [London, A. Constable, 1905], p. 20).
5
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 202n.; [Carl] Strehlow, DieAranda- und Loritja-Stamme in Zentral¬
Australien, vol. II [Frankfurt, J. Baer, 1907], p. 58.
6
[Spencer and Gillen], Northern Tribes, p. 173.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs (Continued) 129

7
a t i m e , a c c o r d i n g t o these w r i t e r s , there was t o t a l f r e e d o m o f c o n s u m p t i o n ,
and the restrictions a p p l i e d today are fairly recent. T h e y believe t h e y have
found p r o o f o f t h e i r thesis i n the t w o f o l l o w i n g facts. First, there are s o l e m n
occasions w h e n t h e m e n o f t h e clan o r t h e i r c h i e f n o t o n l y m a y b u t m u s t eat
the t o t e m i c a n i m a l a n d p l a n t , as I have j u s t n o t e d . Second, the m y t h s r e p o r t
that the great f o u n d i n g ancestors o f the clans r e g u l a r l y ate t h e i r t o t e m . These
stories c a n n o t be u n d e r s t o o d , say they, except as t h e e c h o o f a t i m e w h e n r e -
strictions d i d n o t exist.
T h e fact that i t is r i t u a l l y o b l i g a t o r y t o partake o f the t o t e m d u r i n g cer-
tain r e l i g i o u s ceremonies (moderately, at that) i n n o w a y i m p l i e s that i t ever
served as o r d i n a r y f o o d . Q u i t e the contrary, t h e f o o d eaten d u r i n g m y s t i c a l
meals is sacred i n its essence a n d hence f o r b i d d e n t o t h e profane. As t o t h e
m y t h s , t o i m p u t e t o t h e m the value o f h i s t o r i c a l d o c u m e n t s so easily is t o f o l -
l o w a rather slipshod c r i t i c a l m e t h o d . As a r u l e , t h e o b j e c t o f m y t h s is t o i n -
terpret t h e e x i s t i n g rites rather t h a n t o c o m m e m o r a t e past events; t h e y are
m o r e an e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h e present t h a n t h e y are a history. I n this case, those
traditions i n w h i c h t h e legendary ancestors ate t h e i r t o t e m are i n perfect ac-
c o r d w i t h beliefs a n d rites that are still i n force. T h e o l d m e n , a n d others w h o
have attained h i g h r e l i g i o u s status, are n o t b o u n d b y t h e p r o h i b i t i o n s as are
8
o r d i n a r y m e n . T h e y m a y eat o f t h e h o l y t h i n g * because they are h o l y t h e m -
selves; m o r e o v e r , this r u l e is n o t p e c u l i a r t o t o t e m i s m alone b u t is f o u n d i n
the m o s t disparate r e l i g i o n s . Since t h e ancestral heroes w e r e v i r t u a l l y gods, i t
must have seemed all t h e m o r e n a t u r a l that t h e y s h o u l d have b e e n able t o eat
9
the sacred* f o o d , b u t that is n o reason f o r the same p r i v i l e g e t o have b e e n
10
c o n f e r r e d u p o n m e r e profane b e i n g s .

* Chose sainte.

^Aliment sacre.
7
Ibid., pp. 207ff.
"See above p. 128.
9
It should also be borne in mind that in the myths, the ancestors are never represented as feeding on
their totem routinely. Quite the contrary; this sort of consumption is the exception. According to
Strehlow, their everyday fare was the same as that of the corresponding animal (Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I,
p. 4).
'"Furthermore, this whole theory rests on a completely arbitrary hypothesis; Spencer and Gillen, like
[James George] Frazer, concede that the tribes of Central Australia, including the Arunta, represent the
most archaic and, consequendy, the purest form of totemism. I will say below why this conjecture seems
to me to be contrary to all likelihood. It is in fact probable that these authors would not so easily have ac-
cepted the thesis they defend if they had not refused to see totemism as a religion and thus had not failed
to recognize the sacredness of the totem.
130 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

H o w e v e r , i t is n e i t h e r c e r t a i n n o r even l i k e l y that the p r o h i b i t i o n was

ever absolute. I t seems always t o have b e e n superseded b y necessity—for e x -
11
ample, w h e n the native is s t a r v i n g a n d has n o t h i n g else t o eat. A l l the m o r e
is this the case w h e n the t o t e m is a k i n d o f f o o d that m a n cannot d o w i t h -
o u t . F o r example, m a n y tribes have a w a t e r t o t e m — a case i n p o i n t i n w h i c h
strict p r o h i b i t i o n clearly is impossible. B u t even i n this case, the concession
is subject t o restrictions, w h i c h goes t o s h o w that the concession deviates
f r o m an accepted p r i n c i p l e . A m o n g t h e K a i t i s h a n d the W a r r a m u n g a , a m a n
o f this t o t e m c a n n o t d r i n k w a t e r freely, is p r o h i b i t e d f r o m d r a w i n g i t himself,
a n d can receive i t o n l y f r o m t h e hands o f a t h i r d p e r s o n , w h o m u s t b e l o n g t o
1 2
the p h r a t r y o f w h i c h he is n o t a m e m b e r . T h e c o m p l e x i t y and inconve-
nience o f this p r o c e d u r e are y e t o t h e r ways o f r e c o g n i z i n g that access t o the
sacred t h i n g is n o t free. I n c e r t a i n tribes o f the center, the same r u l e applies
w h e n e v e r the t o t e m is eaten, w h e t h e r o u t o f necessity o r f o r any o t h e r
reason. I t s h o u l d be reiterated that w h e n this f o r m a l i t y itself c a n n o t be exe-
c u t e d — t h a t is, w h e n an i n d i v i d u a l is b y h i m s e l f o r is s u r r o u n d e d b y m e m -
bers o f his o w n p h r a t r y — h e m a y d o w i t h o u t any i n t e r m e d i a r y i f there is
u r g e n t need. I t is clear that the p r o h i b i t i o n can be m i t i g a t e d i n various ways.
S t i l l , t h e p r o h i b i t i o n rests o n ideas that are so deeply r o o t e d i n t h e m i n d
that i t o f t e n outlives its o r i g i n a l reasons f o r b e i n g . W e have seen that, i n all
p r o b a b i l i t y , the various clans o f a p h r a t r y are subdivisions o f an o r i g i n a l clan
that b r o k e up. T h u s there was a t i m e w h e n all the clans w e r e b u t one a n d h a d
the same t o t e m ; therefore, w h e n e v e r t h e m e m o r y o f that c o m m o n o r i g i n is
n o t c o m p l e t e l y erased, each clan c o n t i n u e s t o feel s o l i d a r i t y w i t h the others
a n d t o consider t h e i r totems as n o t f o r e i g n t o i t . F o r this reason, an i n d i v i d -
ual is n o t e n t i r e l y free t o eat the t o t e m s assigned t o the various clans o f the
p h r a t r y t o w h i c h h e belongs; h e m a y t o u c h the f o r b i d d e n p l a n t o r a n i m a l
13
o n l y i f i t has b e e n presented t o h i m b y a m e m b e r o f t h e o t h e r p h r a t r y .

"Taplin, 'The Narrinyeri," p. 64; Howitt, NativeTribes, pp. 145, 147; Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes,
p. 202; [George] Grey, Journals of Two Expeditions in North-West and Western Australia, vol. II, London, T.
and W. Boone, 1841; Curr, The Australian Race, vol. Ill, p. 462.
12
[Spencer and Gillen], Northern Tribes, pp. 160, 167. It is not enough for the intermediary to be of an-
other totem. As we will see, to some extent, any totem of a phratry is forbidden to other members of that
phratry who are of different totems.
13
Ibid., p. 167. We can better understand now how it happens that, when the prohibition is not ob-
served, it is the other phratry that carries out punishment for the sacrilege (see p. 128, n. 4 above). It is
because that phratry has the greatest interest in seeing that the rule is respected. It is believed likely, in fact,
that when the rule is violated, the totemic species will not reproduce abundandy. Since the members of
the other phratry are the ones who regularly eat it, they are the ones affected. This is why they avenge
themselves.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs (Continued) 131

A n o t h e r s u r v i v a l o f the same k i n d relates t o the m a t e r n a l t o t e m . T h e r e

are g o o d reasons f o r b e l i e v i n g that t o t e m s w e r e at first t r a n s m i t t e d t h r o u g h
the m a t e r n a l l i n e . A n d so, w h e r e v e r descent t h r o u g h the paternal l i n e has b e -
c o m e t h e c u s t o m , this m o s t l i k e l y has o c c u r r e d o n l y after a l o n g p e r i o d d u r -
i n g w h i c h the opposite p r i n c i p l e was i n use; h e n c e the c h i l d h a d the t o t e m
o f its m o t h e r a n d was subject t o all the p r o h i b i t i o n s attached thereto. N o w
a l t h o u g h i n c e r t a i n tribes today, the c h i l d i n h e r i t s the t o t e m o f its father,
s o m e t h i n g remains o f the p r o h i b i t i o n s that o r i g i n a l l y p r o t e c t e d the mother's
14
t o t e m : I t c a n n o t be p a r t a k e n o f freely. Y e t n o t h i n g else i n the present state
o f things corresponds t o that p r o h i b i t i o n .
A p r o h i b i t i o n against k i l l i n g t h e t o t e m ( o r p i c k i n g i t , i f i t is a plant) is
15
often added t o the p r o h i b i t i o n against e a t i n g . B u t , here again, there are
m a n y exceptions a n d m i t i g a t i o n s . F o r instance, there is the case o f neces-
1 6
s i t y — w h e n , f o r e x a m p l e , the t o t e m is a dangerous a n i m a l o r w h e n one
has n o t h i n g t o eat. T h e r e are even tribes that p r o h i b i t h u n t i n g the a n i m a l
w h o s e n a m e o n e bears f o r oneself, b u t nevertheless p e r m i t its k i l l i n g f o r
17
someone else. I n general, t h o u g h , the m a n n e r i n w h i c h the act is car-
r i e d o u t clearly indicates that there is s o m e t h i n g i l l i c i t a b o u t i t . O n e says
18
"excuse m e " as i f f o r an offense, displays sadness a n d r e p u g n a n c e , and

14
This is the case among the Loritja (Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, pp. 60, 61), the Worgaia, the Warra-
munga, the Walpari, the Mara, the Anula, the Binbinga (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 166, 171,
173). Among the Warramunga and the Walpari, it may be eaten but only if it is offered by a member of
the other phratry. Spencer and Gillen point out (p. 167 n.) that, in this respect, the paternal and maternal
totems are apparently subject to different rules. It is true that, in either case, the offer must come from the
other phratry. But when the totem in question is that of the father, the totem proper, that other phratry
is the one to which the totem does not belong; the inverse applies when it is the totem of the mother.
This is the case, most likely, because the principle was atfirstestablished for the father's, then extended
automatically to the mother's, even though the situation was different. Once it was instituted, the rule that
one could avoid the restriction protecting the totem only when the offer was made by someone of the
other phratry was applied without modification to the mother's totem.
15
For example, among the Warramunga (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 166), the Wotjobaluk,
the Buandik, and the Kurnai (Howitt, NativeTribes, pp. 146-147), and the Narrinyeri (Taplin, "The Nar-
rinyeri," p. 63).
16
And still not in all cases. The Arunta of the Mosquito totem must not kill that insect, even when it
is inconvenient not to, but must settle for flicking it away (Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, p. 58. Cf. [Rev.
George] Taplin, "The Narrinyeri," p. 63). [It is possible that, in certain of his footnotes, Dürkheim con-
flated two articles by Taplin, one in Curr and the other in Woods. Trans.]
,7
Among the Kaitish and the Unmafjera (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 160). Indeed some-
times an elder gives one of his churingas to a young man of a different totem, to enable the young man
to hunt the givers totemic animal more easily (ibid., p. 272).
18
Howitt, NativeTribes, p. 146; Grey,Journals ofTwo Expeditions, vol. II, p. 228. [Rev. Eugene Arnaud]
Casalis, The Bassutos [Capetown, C. Struik, 1965], p. 211. Among these latter, "one must be purified af-
ter committing such a sacrilege."
132 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

19
takes the necessary t o ensure that the a n i m a l suffers as l i t t l e as possible.
I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e basic p r o h i b i t i o n s , there are examples o f a p r o h i b i t i o n
against c o n t a c t b e t w e e n a m a n a n d his t o t e m . T h u s , a m o n g the O m a h a , n o
o n e o f t h e E l k clan m a y t o u c h any p a r t o f the male elk; a n d i n a subclan o f
20
the Buffalo, n o o n e m a y t o u c h this animal's h e a d . A m o n g the B e c h u a n a ,
2 1
n o o n e w o u l d dare t o wear t h e s k i n o f t h e a n i m a l that is his t o t e m . But
these cases are rare; a n d i t is n a t u r a l that t h e y s h o u l d be, since, n o r m a l l y a
m a n m u s t wear t h e image o f his t o t e m o r s o m e t h i n g r e m i n i s c e n t o f i t . T a t -
t o o i n g and t o t e m i c costumes w o u l d be i m p r a c t i c a l i f c o n t a c t was p r o h i b i t e d
altogether. I t s h o u l d be n o t i c e d , f u r t h e r m o r e , that this p r o h i b i t i o n is f o l -
l o w e d n o t i n A u s t r a l i a b u t o n l y i n societies w h e r e t o t e m i s m is already far
from its o r i g i n a l f o r m ; apparendy, t h e n , i t is o f recent o r i g i n a n d due perhaps
2 2
t o the i n f l u e n c e o f ideas that are n o t specifically t o t e m i c at a l l .
I f w e n o w c o m p a r e these various p r o h i b i t i o n s w i t h those a p p l i e d t o t h e
t o t e m i c e m b l e m , i t seems—contrary t o w h a t m i g h t be p r e d i c t e d — t h a t those
applied t o t h e t o t e m i c e m b l e m are t h e m o r e n u m e r o u s , strict, and r i g o r o u s l y
i m p e r a t i v e . A l l k i n d s o f figures representing the t o t e m are s u r r o u n d e d w i t h a
m a r k e d l y greater respect t h a n the b e i n g itself, w h o s e f o r m t h e figures i m i -
tate. C h u r i n g a s , nurtunjas, a n d waningas m u s t never be h a n d l e d b y w o m e n
o r u n i n i t i a t e d m e n , w h o are n o t p e r m i t t e d even t o g l i m p s e t h e m except
from a respectful distance and, at that, o n l y o n rare occasions. O n t h e o t h e r
h a n d , the p l a n t o r a n i m a l w h o s e name the c l a n bears m a y be seen a n d

"Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, pp. 58, 59, 61.

20
[James Owen] Dorsey, "Omaha Sociology," in Third Annual Report, BAE [Washington, Government
Printing Office, 1881-1882], pp. 225, 231.
21
Casalis [The Bassutos, p. 211].
22
Even among the Omaha, it is not certain that the prohibitions against contact, some examples of
which I have just reported, are specifically totemic in nature. Several of them have no direct relations with
the animal that serves as the clan's totem. Thus, in a subclan of the Eagle, the characteristic prohibition is
that against touching the head of a buffalo (Dorsey, "Omaha Sociology," p. 239); in another subclan of the
same totem, verdigris, charcoal, or something else must not be touched (p. 245).
I do not mention other prohibitions noted by Frazer, such as naming or looking at an animal or plant,
for those are even less clearly of totemic origin, except perhaps in the case of certain instances observed
among the Bechuana ([James George] Frazer, Totemism and Exogamy, [London, Macmillan, 1910], pp.
12—13). Frazer once accepted too easily (and on this point he has had imitators) that every prohibition
against eating or touching an animal necessarily arisesfromtotemic beliefs. However, there is one case in
Australia in which the sight of the totem appears to be forbidden. According to Strehlow (Aranda, vol. II,
p. 59), among the Arunta and the Loritja, a man whose totem is the moon must not look at it very long;
to do so would be to expose himself to death at the hands of an enemy. I believe this is a unique case.
Moreover we should bear in mind that the astronomical totems are probably not primitive in Australia, so
this prohibition might be the outcome of a complex elaboration. This hypothesis is supported by the fact
that, among the Euahlayi, the prohibition against looking at the moon applies to all mothers and children,
whatever their totems (Parker, Euahlayi, p. 53).
The Priticipal Totemic Beliefs (Continued) 133

t o u c h e d b y everyone. C h u r i n g a s are k e p t i n a sort o f t e m p l e , at t h e t h r e s h -

o l d o f w h i c h the d i n o f profane life settles i n t o silence; i t is the d o m a i n o f sa-
cred things.
U n l i k e the churingas, t o t e m i c animals a n d plants live o n profane g r o u n d
and are p a r t a n d parcel o f everyday life. A n d since t h e n u m b e r a n d i m p o r -
tance o f the restrictions that isolate a sacred t h i n g , w i t h d r a w i n g i t from c i r -
c u l a t i o n , c o r r e s p o n d t o t h e degree o f sacredness w i t h w h i c h i t is invested, w e
arrive at the remarkable result that the images of the totemic being are more sacred
than the totemic being itself M o r e o v e r , i t is the c h u r u n g a and the n u r t u n j a that
h o l d t h e highest r a n k i n the ceremonies o f the c u l t ; o n l y o n e x t r e m e l y rare
occasions does t h e a n i m a l appear i n t h e m . I n o n e r i t e , o f w h i c h I w i l l have
23
occasion t o s p e a k , i t is the basis o f a r e l i g i o u s m e a l b u t has n o active role.
T h e A r u n t a dance a r o u n d t h e n u r t u n j a , g a t h e r i n g before the image o f t h e i r
t o t e m a n d w o r s h i p i n g i t ; never is there a similar display before t h e t o t e m i c
b e i n g itself. I f this b e i n g was t h e h o l y t h i n g * par excellence, t h e n that b e i n g ,
the sacred plant o r a n i m a l , w o u l d be the o n e the y o u n g n o v i c e m u s t c o m -
m u n e w i t h w h e n b r o u g h t i n t o t h e sphere o f r e l i g i o u s life; w e have seen i n -
stead that the m o m e n t w h e n the n o v i c e enters the sanctuary o f the churingas
is the m o s t s o l e m n o f t h e i n i t i a t i o n . I t is w i t h t h e m a n d w i t h t h e n u r t u n j a
that he c o m m u n e s . So the representations o f the t o t e m are m o r e efficacious
t h a n the t o t e m itself.

II
W e m u s t n o w d e t e r m i n e the place o f m a n i n the system o f r e l i g i o u s things.
A w h o l e set o f received n o t i o n s a n d the p o w e r o f language itself i n c l i n e
us t o t h i n k o f o r d i n a r y m e n , the o r d i n a r y faithful, as essentially profane b e -
2 4
ings. T h i s c o n c e p t i o n m a y w e l l n o t be l i t e r a l l y t r u e o f any r e l i g i o n ; i t cer-
tainly does n o t a p p l y t o t o t e m i s m . E a c h m e m b e r o f the clan is invested w i t h
a sacredness that is n o t s i g n i f i c a n d y less t h a n the sacredness w e j u s t r e c o g -
n i z e d i n the a n i m a l . T h e reason f o r this personal sacredness is that the m a n
believes he is b o t h a m a n i n t h e usual sense o f the w o r d and an a n i m a l o r
plant o f the t o t e m i c species.

* Chose sainte.

^See Bk. Ill, chap. 2, §2.

24
There is perhaps no religion that regards man as an exclusively profane being. For the Christian,
there is something sacred about the soul that each of us carries within, and that constitutes the very
essence of our personality. As we will see, this idea of the soul is as old as religious thinking. But man's
own place in the hierarchy of sacred things is rather high.
134 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

I n fact, he bears its name. A t that stage, i d e n t i t y i n n a m e is presumed t o

entail an i d e n t i t y i n nature. H a v i n g the same n a m e is n o t t h o u g h t o f m e r e l y
as an o u t w a r d sign o f h a v i n g the same nature b u t as l o g i c a l l y presupposing i t .
F o r t h e p r i m i t i v e , the n a m e is n o t s i m p l y a w o r d , a m e r e c o m b i n a t i o n o f
sounds; i t is p a r t o f t h e b e i n g and, i n d e e d , an essential part. W h e n a m e m b e r
o f the K a n g a r o o clan calls h i m s e l f a kangaroo, he is i n a sense an a n i m a l o f
that species. " A m a n , " say Spencer a n d G i l l e n , "regards the b e i n g that is his
t o t e m as t h e same t h i n g as himself. A native w i t h w h o m w e w e r e discussing
the m a t t e r responded b y s h o w i n g us a p h o t o g r a p h w e h a d j u s t taken o f h i m :
' L o o k w h o is exacdy the same t h i n g as I . W e l l ! I t is the same w i t h t h e k a n -
2 5
garoo.' T h e kangaroo was his t o t e m . " T h u s , each i n d i v i d u a l has a d u a l n a -
ture: T w o beings coexist i n h i m , a m a n a n d an a n i m a l .
T o give a semblance o f i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y t o this duality, w h i c h t o us is so
strange, the p r i m i t i v e has c o n c e i v e d m y t h s that o f course e x p l a i n n o t h i n g
and o n l y displace the difficulty, b u t that, i n displacing i t , seem at least t o d i -
m i n i s h the l o g i c a l shock. W i t h variations o f detail, t h e y are all c o n s t r u c t e d
o n the same p l a n . T h e i r o b j e c t is t o establish genealogical relations b e t w e e n
the m a n a n d t h e t o t e m i c a n i m a l that m a k e the m a n t h e animal's k i n . B y that
shared (and v a r i o u s l y i m a g i n e d ) o r i g i n , p e o p l e believe t h e y are a c c o u n t i n g
for t h e i r shared nature. T h e N a r r i n y e r i , f o r example, have c o n c e i v e d the idea
that c e r t a i n o f the first m e n h a d t h e p o w e r t o t r a n s f o r m themselves i n t o a n -
26
imals. O t h e r A u s t r a l i a n societies place strange animals at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f
27
h u m a n i t y , animals f r o m w h i c h m e n descended i n some w a y o r o t h e r , or
28
t h e y place m i x e d beings i n t e r m e d i a t e b e t w e e n the t w o realms t h e r e , o r else
formless, barely representable creatures w i t h o u t d e f i n e d organs o r a p p e n d -
2 9
ages, a n d w h o s e various b o d y parts are barely d r a w n . M y t h i c a l powers,
sometimes c o n c e i v e d i n t h e f o r m o f animals, i n t e r v e n e d at that p o i n t , trans-

25
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 202.
26
Taplin, "The Narrinyeri," pp. 59—61.
27
Among certain Warramunga clans, for example (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 162).
28
Among the Urabunna (ibid., p. 147). Even when we are told that thosefirstbeings were men, in re-
ality they are only semihumans and participate in an animal nature at the same time. This is the case of
certain Unmatjera (ibid., pp. 153—154). Here are ways of thinking whose blurred distinctions [confusions]
unsettle us, but that must be accepted as they are. [Here and elsewhere in this text, the noun confusion and
the corresponding verb, confondre, convey blending. They express a form of conceptual practice, not a state
of mental disorder. See below, p. 241. Trans.] If we tried to introduce a tidiness that is alien to them, we
would distort them (cf. Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 119).
29
Among certain Arunta (Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes, pp. 388ff.); and among certain Unmatjera
(Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 153).
The Principal Totemic Beliefs (Continued) 135

forming i n t o m e n these a m b i g u o u s a n d unnameable beings that represent, as

30
Spencer a n d G i l l e n say, "a t r a n s i t i o n a l phase b e t w e e n m a n a n d a n i m a l . "
These transformations are presented t o us as t h e o u t c o m e o f v i o l e n t and
quasi-surgical operations. I t is w i t h b l o w s o f an axe or, w h e n the o p e r a t o r is
a b i r d , w i t h pecks o f the beak t h a t t h e h u m a n is t h o u g h t t o have b e e n
sculpted i n t h a t a m o r p h o u s mass, the arms a n d legs separated f r o m o n e a n -
31
other, the m o u t h a n d nostrils o p e n e d . S i m i l a r legends c r o p u p i n A m e r i c a ,
b u t because o f the m o r e d e v e l o p e d m e n t a l i t y o f those peoples, the represen-
tations they use are n o t confused a n d c o n f u s i n g i n the same way. H e r e , i t is a
legendary personage w h o , a c t i n g o n his o w n , m e t a m o r p h o s e d the clan's
3 2
eponymous animal i n t o m a n . T h e r e , the m y t h tries t o e x p l a i n h o w , b y a se-
ries o f m o r e o r less n a t u r a l events a n d a sort o f spontaneous e v o l u t i o n , the
3 3
a n i m a l t r a n s f o r m e d itself l i t t l e b y l i t t l e , f i n a l l y t a k i n g o n h u m a n f o r m .
, T r u e , there are societies ( H a i d a , T l i n g i t , T s h i m s h i a n ) i n w h i c h t h e idea
that m a n was b o r n o f an a n i m a l o r p l a n t is n o l o n g e r accepted. Yet, t h e idea
o f an affinity b e t w e e n the animals o f the t o t e m i c species a n d the m e m b e r s o f
the clan has s u r v i v e d , a n d i t is e x p l a i n e d i n m y t h s that differ from the p r e -
c e d i n g b u t are basically r e m i n i s c e n t o f t h e m . H e r e , t h e n , is one o f t h e i r f u n -
damental themes. T h e e p o n y m o u s ancestor is represented as a h u m a n b e i n g
b u t o n e w h o , f o l l o w i n g v a r i o u s ups a n d d o w n s , was i n d u c e d t o live f o r a
m o r e o r less l o n g t i m e a m o n g legendary animals o f the same species that gave

30
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 389. Cf. Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, pp. 2-7.
•"Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes, p. 389. Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, pp. 2ff. This mythical theme is un-
doubtedly an echo of the initiation rites. The purpose of the initiation is to make of the young man a
complete man, and it also implies surgical operations (circumcision, subincision, extraction of teeth, etc.).
It must have been natural for them to conceive the processes used to make thefirstmen according to the
same model.
32
This is true for the nine clans of the Moqui ([Henry Rowe] Schoolcraft, [Historical and Statistical In-
formation Respecting the History, Condition, and Prospects of the] Indian Tribes [of the United States, vol. IV,
Philadelphia, Lippincott, Grambo, 1851—1857], p. 86), the Crane clan of the Ojibway ([Lewis Henry]
Morgan, Ancient Society [London, Macmillan, 1877], p. 180), and the clans of the Nootka ([Franz] Boas,
"Second General Report on the Indians of British Columbia," in, BAAS, Vlth Rep. on the North-Western
Tribes of Canada [London, Offices of the Association, 1891], p. 43), etc.
33
Thus did the Turtle clan of the Iroquois take form. A group of tortoises had to leave the lake where
they lived andfindanother habitat. The heat made it difficult for one of them, who was larger than the
others, to endure the exercise. It struggled so violendy that it came out of its shell. Once begun, the
process of transformation continued by itself, and the turtle became a man who was the ancestor of
the clan (Erminnie A. Smith, "The Myths of the Iroquois," in Second Annual Report [BAE, Washington,
Government Printing Office, 1883], p. 77). The Crawfish [Ecrevisse] clan of the Choctaw is said to have
been formed in a similar way. Some men surprised a certain number of crawfish that lived in their vicin-
ity, took the crawfish home with them, taught them to speak and walk, and finally adopted them into
their society ([George] Catlin, [Letters and Notes on the Manners, Customs and Condition of the] North Amer-
ican Indians, vol. II [London, Tosswil and Myers, 1841], p. 128.
136 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

the clan its name. As a result o f these i n t i m a t e a n d p r o l o n g e d dealings, he b e -

came so l i k e his n e w c o m p a n i o n s that w h e n he r e t u r n e d t o the c o m m u n i t y
o f m e n , t h e y n o l o n g e r r e c o g n i z e d h i m . H e was therefore g i v e n the n a m e o f
the a n i m a l he resembled. F r o m his s o j o u r n i n t h e m y t h i c a l l a n d , he b r o u g h t
back t h e t o t e m i c e m b l e m , t o g e t h e r w i t h the p o w e r s a n d v i r t u e s t h o u g h t t o
3 4
be attached t o i t . I n this case as i n t h e p r e c e d i n g , t h e n , the m a n is t h o u g h t
t o participate i n the nature o f the a n i m a l , even t h o u g h that p a r t i c i p a t i o n is
3 5
imagined somewhat differendy
T h u s he t o o has s o m e t h i n g sacred a b o u t h i m . D i f f u s e d t h r o u g h o u t t h e
body, this q u a l i t y is especially e v i d e n t at c e r t a i n sites. S o m e organs and tissues
are especially i d e n t i f i e d w i t h i t : m o s t o f all, the b l o o d a n d the hair.
T o b e g i n w i t h , h u m a n b l o o d is such a h o l y * t h i n g that, a m o n g t h e tribes
o f central Australia, i t is v e r y o f t e n used t o consecrate the m o s t respected i n -
struments o f the c u l t . I n some cases, f o r example, the n u r t u n j a is r e l i g i o u s l y
3 6
a n o i n t e d from t o p t o b o t t o m w i t h h u m a n b l o o d . A m o n g the A r u n t a , the
m e n o f the E m u d r a w t h e sacred e m b l e m o n g r o u n d that is t h o r o u g h l y
3 7
soaked w i t h b l o o d . W e w i l l see f u r t h e r o n h o w streams o f b l o o d are p o u r e d

* Chose sainte.
34
Here, for example, is a legend of the Tsimshian. During a hunt, an Indian met a black bear who took
him home and taught him to catch salmon and build canoes. The man stayed with the bear for two years,
after which he returned to his native village. But because he was just like a bear, the people were afraid of
him. He could not talk and could eat only raw foods. Then he was rubbed with magical herbs, after
which he gradually regained his original form. Later, when he was in need, he called his friends the bears,
who came to his aid. He built a house and painted a bear on its facade. His sister made a blanket for the
dance, on which a bear was drawn. This is why the descendants of that sister had the bear as their emblem
([Franz] Boas, ["The Social Organization and Secret Societies of the] Kwakiutl [Indians," in RNM for
1895, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1897], p. 323. Cf. Boas, "First General Report on the
Indians of British Columbia," in BAAS [Fifth] Report [of the Committee] on the North Western Tribes of [the
Dominion of] Canada [London, Offices of the Association, 1890], pp. 23, 29ff.; [Charles] Hill Tout, "Re-
port on the Ethnology of the Stadumh of British Columbia," in JAI, vol. XXXV (1905), p. 150.
From this, we see the drawback of making mystic kinship between man and animal the distinguishing
feature of totemism, as M. Van Germep proposes ([A. Van Gennep], "Totémisme et méthode compara-
tive," RHR, vol. LVIII [juillet 1908], p. 55). Since this kinship is a mythical expression of facts that are
deeply rooted for other reasons, the essential traits of totemism do not disappear in its absence. Doubtless,
there are always close ties between the people of the clan and the totemic animal, but they are not neces-
sarily ties of blood, although they most commonly are conceived as such.
35
In some Tlingit myths, moreover, the relationship of descent between the man and the animal is af-
firmed more specifically. The clan is said to be the offspring of a mixed marriage, if such terms can be
used—that is, one in which either the man or the woman was an animal of the species whose name the
clan bears ([John Reed] Swanton, "Social Condition, Beliefs, [and Linguistic Relationship] of the Tlin-
git Indians," Twenty-Sixth Annual Report, BAE, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1908], pp.
415^118.
•^Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 284.
37
Ibid., p. 179.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs (Continued) 137

38
o n the rocks that represent t h e t o t e m i c plants o r a n i m a l s . T h e r e is n o r e l i -
39
gious c e r e m o n y i n w h i c h b l o o d does n o t have some role t o p l a y . Some-
times i n the course o f i n i t i a t i o n , adults o p e n t h e i r veins and s p r i n k l e the
novice w i t h t h e i r b l o o d , this b l o o d b e i n g such a sacred* t h i n g that w o m e n
40
are f o r b i d d e n t o be present w h i l e i t is flowing. L i k e the sight o f a c h u r i n g a ,
the sight o f this b l o o d is f o r b i d d e n t o t h e m . T h e b l o o d that the y o u n g n e o -
p h y t e loses d u r i n g the v i o l e n t operations he has t o u n d e r g o has altogether
4 1
e x c e p t i o n a l properties: I t is used i n v a r i o u s c o m m u n i o n s . A m o n g the
A r u n t a , the b l o o d that flows d u r i n g s u b i n c i s i o n is p i o u s l y c o l l e c t e d a n d
b u r i e d i n a place o n w h i c h a piece o f w o o d is set t o i n d i c a t e t o passersby the
4 2
sacredness o f the spot; n o w o m a n m u s t approach i t . I n the second place, the
religious nature o f b l o o d also explains w h y r e d ochre has a religious role a n d
is f r e q u e n t l y used i n ceremonies. T h e churingas are r u b b e d w i t h i t , a n d i t is
43
used i n r i t u a l d e c o r a t i o n s . T h i s is because o c h r e is regarded as a substance
a k i n t o b l o o d , b y v i r t u e o f its c o l o r . I n d e e d , several deposits o f o c h r e that are
f o u n d at different sites o n the t e r r i t o r y o f t h e A r u n t a are t h o u g h t t o be c o -
agulated b l o o d that c e r t a i n heroines o f t h e m y t h i c a l e p o c h a l l o w e d t o flow
4 4
onto the g r o u n d .
H a i r has similar properties. T h e natives o f central Australia w e a r sashes
made o f h u m a n hair. T h e r e l i g i o u s f u n c t i o n o f those n a r r o w bands, as already
45
n o t e d , is t o w r a p c e r t a i n c u l t o b j e c t s . Has a m a n l e n t o n e o f his churingas
t o another? As a s h o w o f g r a t i t u d e , the b o r r o w e r makes a present o f hair t o
the lender; t h e t w o sorts o f things are considered t o be o f t h e same o r d e r a n d
46
o f equivalent v a l u e . A c c o r d i n g l y , the o p e r a t i o n o f hair c u t t i n g is a r i t u a l act

* Chose sacrée.
38
See Bk. Ill, chap. 2. Cf. Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 184, 201.
39
Ibid., pp. 204, 262, 284.
""Among the Dieri and the Parnkalla. See Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 658, 661, 668, 669-671.
""Among the Warramunga, the blood of circumcision is drunk by the mother (Spencer and Gillen,
Northern Tribes, p. 352). Among the Binbinga, the blood that soils the knife used in the subincision must
be licked by the initiate (p. 368). In general, the blood that comes from the genitals is deemed to be ex-
ceptionally sacred (Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 464; Northern Tribes, p. 598).
42
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 268.
43
Ibid„ pp. 144, 568.
44
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 442, 464. And this myth is common in Australia.
45
Ibid., p. 627.
46
Ibid., p. 466.
138 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

that is a c c o m p a n i e d b y special ceremonies. T h e i n d i v i d u a l h a v i n g his hair

c u t m u s t c r o u c h o n the g r o u n d w i t h his face t u r n e d i n the d i r e c t i o n o f the
place w h e r e m y t h i c a l ancestors f r o m his mother's side are t h o u g h t t o have
47
camped.
F o r the same reason, as s o o n as a m a n dies, his hair is c u t a n d p u t i n a se-
c l u d e d place, f o r n e i t h e r w o m e n n o r u n i n i t i a t e d m e n s h o u l d see i t ; a n d i t is
48
there, far f r o m profane eyes, that the sashes are m a d e .
O n e c o u l d p o i n t o u t o t h e r organic tissues that, t o v a r y i n g degrees, d i s -
play similar p r o p e r t i e s — t h e sideburns, the f o r e s k i n , t h e fat o f t h e liver, and
49
others. B u t there is n o p o i n t i n p i l i n g u p examples. T h e f o r e g o i n g are suf-
f i c i e n t t o prove the existence i n m a n o f s o m e t h i n g that keeps the profane at
a distance a n d has r e l i g i o u s efficacy. I n o t h e r w o r d s , the h u m a n b o d y c o n -
ceals i n its depths a sacred p r i n c i p l e that erupts o n t o the surface i n p a r t i c u l a r
circumstances. T h i s p r i n c i p l e is n o t different i n k i n d f r o m the o n e that gives
the t o t e m its religious character. W e have j u s t seen, i n fact, that the various
substances i n w h i c h i t is i n c a r n a t e d t o t h e highest degree enter i n t o the r i t -
ual c o m p o s i t i o n o f t h e i n s t r u m e n t s o f the c u l t (nurtunjas, t o t e m i c designs),
o r are used i n a n o i n t i n g s f o r t h e p u r p o s e o f increasing t h e virtues o f either
the churingas o r the sacred rocks. T h e s e are things o f t h e same k i n d .
T h e r e l i g i o u s d i g n i t y that, i n this sense, is i n h e r e n t i n each m e m b e r o f
the clan is n o t equal i n all. M e n possess i t t o a h i g h e r degree t h a n w o m e n ,
5 0
w h o are l i k e profane beings i n c o m p a r i s o n t o m e n . T h u s , w h e n e v e r there
is an assembly o f e i t h e r t h e t o t e m i c g r o u p o r t h e t r i b e , the m e n f o r m a camp
51
distinct from t h e w o m e n ' s c a m p a n d closed t o t h e m : T h e m e n are set a p a r t .

47
Ibid. It is believed that if all these formalities are not stricdy observed, grave calamities for the indi-
vidual will result.
""Ibid., p. 538; Northern Tribes, p. 604.
49
Once detached by circumcision, the foreskin is sometimes hidden from sight, like the blood, and it
has special virtues—for example, ensuring the fertility of certain plant and animal species (Northern Tribes,
pp. 353—354). The sideburns are assimilated to the hair and treated like it (pp. 544, 604). Moreover, they
play a role in the myths (p. 158). The sacred character of fat arises from the use made of it in certain fu-
neral rites.
50
This is not to say that the woman is absolutely profane. In the myths, at least among the Arunta, she
plays a far more important religious role than is hers in reality (Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes [pp.
195—196]). Even now, she takes part in certain initiation rites. Finally, her blood has religious virtues (see
NativeTribes, p. 464; cf. [Emile Durkheim], "La Prohibition de l'inceste et ses origines," AS, vol. I [1898],
pp. 51ff.).
The exogamic prohibitions derive from this complex situation of the woman. I will not speak of those
here, because they are more direcdy relevant to the subject of family organization and marriage.
51
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 460.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs (Continued) 139

B u t m e n differ t o o i n the w a y the r e l i g i o u s q u a l i t y stands o u t . Since y o u n g ,

u n i n i t i a t e d m e n are t o t a l l y w i t h o u t i t , t h e y are n o t a d m i t t e d t o the cere-
monies. I t reaches m a x i m u m i n t e n s i t y a m o n g o l d m e n . O l d m e n are so sa-
cred that t h e y are p e r m i t t e d c e r t a i n things that are f o r b i d d e n t o o r d i n a r y
m e n : T h e y can eat the t o t e m i c a n i m a l m o r e freely, and, as w e have seen,
there are even tribes i n w h i c h t h e y are e x e m p t from all dietary restrictions.
T h e r e f o r e w e m u s t b e careful n o t t o see t o t e m i s m as a k i n d o f zoolatry.
Since m a n belongs t o t h e sacred w o r l d , his a t t i t u d e t o w a r d the animals o r
plants w h o s e n a m e he bears is b y n o means the a t t i t u d e a believer has t o w a r d
his g o d . R a t h e r , t h e i r relations are those o f t w o beings w h o are basically at
the same level a n d o f equal value. T h e m o s t o n e can say, at least i n some
cases, is that the a n i m a l seems t o o c c u p y a s l i g h d y h i g h e r rank a m o n g sacred
things. T h u s , t h e t o t e m is sometimes called the father o r grandfather o f the
m e n o f the clan, w h i c h seems t o i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e y feel t h e y are i n a state o f
5 2
moral dependency u p o n i t . Y e t as o f t e n h a p p e n s — a n d perhaps m o s t often
o f a l l — t h e phrases used d e n o t e a f e e l i n g o f e q u a l i t y instead. T h e t o t e m i c a n -
5 3
i m a l is called t h e friend o r the elder b r o t h e r o f its h u m a n k i n . To sum up,
the ties b e t w e e n t h e m a n d h i m far m o r e closely resemble those that b i n d
m e m b e r s o f the same f a m i l y : A n i m a l s a n d m e n are m a d e o f the same flesh,
54
as the B u a n d i k say. B y reason o f that k i n s h i p , m a n sees t h e animals o f t h e
t o t e m i c species as k i n d l y associates, w h o s e h e l p he believes he can c o u n t o n .
5 5
H e calls t h e m t o his a i d , a n d t h e y c o m e t o g u i d e his h a n d i n t h e h u n t a n d
56
t o avert dangers that h e m a y e n c o u n t e r . I n exchange, he treats t h e m c o n -
5 7
siderately a n d does n o t b r u t a l i z e t h e m , b u t t h e care w i t h w h i c h he treats
t h e m i n n o w a y resembles a c u l t .

52
Among the Wakelbura, according to Howitt, NatiueTrihes, pp. [147—148]; among the Bechuana, ac-
cording to Casalis, The Basutos, p. [211].
"Among the Buandik and the Kurnai, Howitt, ibid., pp. 147-148; among the Arunta, Strehlow,
Aranda, vol. II, p. 58.
54
Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. [147-148].
55
On the Tully River, according to [Walter Edmund] Roth (Superstition, Magic and Medicine [Brisbane,
G. A. Vaughn, Government Printer, 1903], North Queensland Ethnography [Bulletin] no. 5, §74), when a
native goes to bed or rises in the morning, he pronounces the name of the animal after whom he himself
is named in a rather soft voice. The aim of this practice is to make the man skillful or lucky in the hunt
or to avoid the dangers associated with that animal. For example, a man who has a species of snake as his
totem is protectedfrombites if this invocation has been consistendy done.
56
Taplin, "The Narrinyeri," p. 64; Howitt, NatiueTrihes, p. 147; Roth, "Superstition, Magic and Med-
icine," no. 5, §74.
"Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, p. 58.
140 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

Sometimes m a n even appears t o have a sort o f m y s t i c a l p r o p e r t y r i g h t

over his t o t e m . T h e p r o h i b i t i o n against k i l l i n g a n d eating i t o f necessity ap-
plies o n l y t o t h e m e m b e r s o f the clan; i t c a n n o t e x t e n d t o outsiders w i t h o u t
m a k i n g life impossible as a practical matter. I n a t r i b e such as the A r u n t a ,
w h e r e there are a great m a n y different totems, i f i t was f o r b i d d e n t o eat n o t
o n l y t h e a n i m a l o r p l a n t w h o s e n a m e o n e bears, b u t also all t h e animals and
all the plants that serve o t h e r clans as t o t e m s , t h e f o o d resources w o u l d be r e -
d u c e d t o n o n e . S t i l l , there are tribes i n w h i c h u n r e s t r i c t e d eating o f the
t o t e m i c a n i m a l o r p l a n t is n o t a l l o w e d , even b y outsiders. A m o n g the W a k e l -
bura, this eating s h o u l d n o t o c c u r i n the presence o f p e o p l e b e l o n g i n g t o the
5 8
totem. Elsewhere, t h e i r p e r m i s s i o n is r e q u i r e d . F o r example, a m o n g the
K a i t i s h a n d the U n m a t j e r a , w h e n a m a n o f t h e E m u clan, f i n d i n g h i m s e l f i n
a l o c a l i t y o c c u p i e d b y a grass-seed clan, gathers some o f these seeds, h e m u s t
go f i n d the c h i e f before e a t i n g any, a n d say t o h i m : " I have gathered these
seeds i n y o u r l a n d . " T o w h i c h t h e c h i e f replies: " I t is g o o d ; y o u m a y eat
t h e m . " B u t i f t h e E m u m a n ate before asking p e r m i s s i o n , i t is believed that
5 9
he w o u l d fall i l l a n d possibly even d i e . I n some cases, the c h i e f o f t h e g r o u p
must take a small part o f the f o o d and eat i t himself: I t is a k i n d o f tax that
6 0
m u s t be p a i d . F o r the same reason, the c h u r i n g a confers u p o n the h u n t e r a
c e r t a i n p o w e r over t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g a n i m a l . B y r u b b i n g his b o d y w i t h a
61
euro c h u r i n g a , f o r example, h e has a b e t t e r chance o f b a g g i n g e u r o s . This
proves that p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n t h e nature o f a t o t e m i c b e i n g confers a sort o f
e m i n e n t d o m a i n over i t . Finally, there is a t r i b e i n N o r t h Q u e e n s l a n d , the
K a r i n g b o o l , i n w h i c h the p e o p l e o f the t o t e m have the exclusive r i g h t t o k i l l
t h e t o t e m i c a n i m a l or, i f the t o t e m is a tree, t o strip its b a r k . T h e i r c o o p e r a -
t i o n is indispensable t o any outsider w h o wants t o use the flesh o f that a n i -
62
m a l o r the w o o d o f that tree f o r personal e n d s . T h u s , they play the role o f
o w n e r s , t h o u g h , as is o b v i o u s , the p r o p e r t y is o f a v e r y p a r t i c u l a r sort, w h i c h
w e have d i f f i c u l t y i m a g i n i n g .

^Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 148.

"[Spencer and Gillen], Northern Tribes, pp. 159-160.

M
Ibid.
61
Ibid., p. 255, and Native Tribes, pp. 202-203.
62
A. L. P. Cameron, "On Two Queensland Tribes," in Science of Man, Australasian Anthropological Jour-
nal, vol. VII, 1904, p. 28, col. 1.
 CHAPTER THREE

THE PRINCIPAL TOTEMIC

BELIEFS (CONTINUED)
The Cosmological System of Totemism
and the Notion of Kind*

e are b e g i n n i n g t o see that t o t e m i s m is a far m o r e c o m p l e x r e l i g i o n

W t h a n i t appeared at first glance t o be. W e have already distinguished
three categories o f things that i t recognizes as sacred i n v a r y i n g degrees: t h e
t o t e m i c e m b l e m , t h e p l a n t o r a n i m a l w h o s e appearance that e m b l e m i m i -
tates, a n d the m e m b e r s o f t h e clan. B u t this list is n o t yet c o m p l e t e . A r e l i -
g i o n is n o t m e r e l y a c o l l e c t i o n o f d i s c o n n e c t e d beliefs a b o u t v e r y special
objects such as those j u s t m e n t i o n e d . T o a greater o r lesser degree, a l l k n o w n
religions have b e e n systems o f ideas that t e n d t o embrace the universality o f
things a n d t o g i v e us a representation o f the w o r l d as a w h o l e . I f t o t e m i s m is
t o be o p e n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n as a r e l i g i o n comparable t o others, i t t o o m u s t
offer a c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e universe. I t meets this c r i t e r i o n .

I
T h e reason this aspect o f t o t e m i s m has b e e n w i d e l y neglected is that the clan
has b e e n t o o n a r r o w l y c o n c e i v e d . I n general, the clan has b e e n v i e w e d as
m e r e l y a g r o u p o f h u m a n beings, m e r e l y a s u b d i v i s i o n o f the t r i b e . As such,
i t seems, the clan c o u l d o n l y be m a d e u p o f m e n . B u t w h e n w e reason this
way, w e substitute o u r E u r o p e a n ideas f o r those t h e p r i m i t i v e has a b o u t t h e
w o r l d a n d society. F o r t h e A u s t r a l i a n , things themselves—all o f the things
that m a k e u p the universe—are p a r t o f t h e t r i b e . Since t h e y are constituents
o f i t and, i n a sense, f u l l - f l e d g e d m e m b e r s , t h e y have a d e f i n i t e place i n the
scheme o f society, j u s t as m e n do. " T h e savage o f S o u t h Australia," M . F i s o n

* Genre is here rendered as "kind" or "genus," according to context, but usually not as "class," so as to
avoid confusion with other uses of that term, in biology and sociology.

141
142 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

says, "considers the universe as a large t r i b e t o o n e o f w h o s e divisions he b e -

longs; a n d all things that are classified i n the same g r o u p as he, b o t h animate
1
a n d i n a n i m a t e , are parts o f the b o d y o f w h i c h he h i m s e l f is a p a r t . " B y v i r t u e
o f this p r i n c i p l e , w h e n t h e t r i b e is d i v i d e d i n t o t w o phratries, all k n o w n b e -
ings are d i v i d e d b e t w e e n t h e m . " A l l o f nature," says Palmer o f the tribes o f
the B e l l i n g e r R i v e r , "is d i v i d e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e names o f phratries. . . . T h e
sun, the m o o n a n d the stars. . . b e l o n g t o this o r that p h r a t r y j u s t as t h e
2
Blacks themselves d o . " T h e P o r t M a c K a y t r i b e i n Q u e e n s l a n d is made u p o f
two phratries that c a r r y the names Y u n g a r o o a n d W o o t a r o o , and i t is the
same i n t h e n e i g h b o r i n g tribes. A c c o r d i n g t o B r i d g m a n n , " A l l animate a n d
i n a n i m a t e things are d i v i d e d b y these tribes i n t o t w o classes called Y u n g a r o o
3
and W o o t a r o o . " B u t t h e classification does n o t stop there. T h e m e n o f each
p h r a t r y are d i v i d e d a m o n g a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f clans; similarly, the things as-
signed t o each p h r a t r y are d i v i d e d i n t u r n a m o n g t h e clans that c o m p r i s e i t .
S u c h a n d such tree, f o r example, w i l l be ascribed t o the K a n g a r o o clan a n d
to i t alone, a n d thus, l i k e t h e h u m a n m e m b e r s o f that clan, w i l l have the
K a n g a r o o t o t e m ; such a n d such o t h e r w i l l b e l o n g t o t h e Snake clan; the
clouds w i l l b e classified i n a p a r t i c u l a r t o t e m , t h e sun i n another, and so o n .
T h u s , the k n o w n beings w i l l be f o u n d t o have t h e i r places o n a k i n d o f table,
a systematic classification, that includes the w h o l e o f nature.
I have r e p r o d u c e d a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f these classification systems else-
4
where; here I w i l l repeat o n l y some o f those examples. O n e o f the best
k n o w n is t h e system that has b e e n s t u d i e d i n the M o u n t G a m b i e r t r i b e . T h i s
t r i b e has t w o phratries, o n e called K u m i t e a n d t h e o t h e r K r o k i , each d i v i d e d
i n t o five clans. N o w , " E v e r y t h i n g i n nature belongs t o o n e o r the o t h e r o f
5
those t e n clans." F i s o n a n d H o w i t t say that all those things are " i n c l u d e d " i n
one. I n fact, t h e y are classified u n d e r t e n t o t e m s , l i k e species o f the respec-

'[Lorimer Fison and Alfred William Howitt], Kamilaroi and Kurnai: [Group Marriage and Relationship,
and Marriage by Elopement; Drawn Chiefly from the Usage of the Australian Aborigines; also The Kurnai Tribe;
Their Customs in Peace and War, Melbourne, G. Robertson, 1880], p. 170.
2
[Edward Palmer], "Notes on Some Australian Tribes" [JAI], vol. XIII [1884], p. 300.
3
[Edward Micklethwaite] Curr, The Australian Race: [Its Origin, Languages, Customs, Place of Landing in
Australia and the Routes by Which It Spread Itself over Tiiat Continent, vol. Ill, Melbourne, J. Ferres,
1886-1887], p. 45; [Robert] Brough Smyth, The Aborigines of Victoria, vol. I [Melbourne, J. Ferres, 1878],
p. 91 [The quoted material is not verbatim. The text reads this way: "Blacks seem to have an idea that
these classes are universal laws of nature, so they divide everything among them." Trans.]; Fison and
Howitt, Kamilaroi and Kumai, p. 168.
4
[Emile] Durkheim and [Marcel] Mauss, "De Quelques formes primitives de classification. [Contri-
bution a l'etude des representations collectives]" in AS, vol. VI [1903], pp. Iff.
5
Curr, The Australian Race, vol. Ill, p. 461.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs (Continued) 143

PHRATRIES CLANS THINGS CLASSIFIED IN E A C H CLAN

^Fish-hawk Smoke, honeysuckle, certain trees, etc.

/ ,-Pelican Blackwood trees, dogs, fire, frost, etc.
Kumitei'
\\ "Crow Rain, thunder, lightning, clouds, hail, winter,
\\ etc.
s
\ Black cockatoo Stars, moon, etc.
V
A nonvenomous snake Fish, seal, conger eel, stringy-bark tree, etc.

^Tea tree Duck, crawfish, owl, etc.

^ ' _ _ - - An edible root -Bustard, quail, a sort of kangaroo, etc.
Kroki^ ^ crestless white cockatoo- -Kangaroo, summer, sun, wind, autumn, etc.
" - There are no details
about the fourth and fifth
Kroki clans.

tive genera. T h i s is s h o w n b y the above chart, c o n s t r u c t e d f r o m data c o l -

6
lected by C u r r , and by Fison and H o w i t t .
T h e list o f things attached t o each clan is, q u i t e i n c o m p l e t e ; C u r r h i m -
self w a r n s us that he has c o n f i n e d h i m s e l f t o e n u m e r a t i n g o n l y some o f t h e m .
7
Today, however, thanks t o the w o r k o f M a t h e w s a n d H o w i t t , w e have m o r e
extensive i n f o r m a t i o n o n the classification a d o p t e d b y the W o t j o b a l u k t r i b e ,
and that i n f o r m a t i o n enables us t o u n d e r s t a n d b e t t e r h o w a system o f this
k i n d can embrace the w h o l e universe k n o w n t o t h e natives. T h e W o t j o b a l u k
themselves are d i v i d e d i n t o t w o phratries, called G u r o g i t y a n d Gumaty
8
( K r o k i t c h a n d G a m u t c h , a c c o r d i n g t o H o w i t t ) . T o a v o i d an o v e r l y l o n g list,
I w i l l e n u m e r a t e (after M a t h e w s ) o n l y the things classified i n each clan o f the
G u r o g i t y phratry.

6
Curr and Fison got their information from the same person, D. S. Stewart.
'[Robert Hamilton] Mathews, ["Ethnological Notes on the] Aboriginal Tribes of New South Wales
and Victoria," in RSNSW vol. XXXVIII (1904) [pp. 287-288]. [Alfred William] Howitt, Hie Native
Tribes [of South-East Australia, New York, Macmillan, 1904], p. 121.
8
The feminine form of nouns given by Mathews is Gurogigurk and Gamatykurk. These are the forms
that Howitt has rendered with a slighdy different spelling. Also, these names are equivalent to those in use
in the Mount Gambier tribe (Kumite and Kroki).
144 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

Classified i n t h e Y a m clan are t h e plains turkey, t h e native cat, the

mopoke, the dyim-dyim o w l , t h e mallee c h i c k e n , t h e rosella p a r r o t , and the pee-
9
wee. I n the M u s s e l clan: the gray e m u , t h e p o r c u p i n e , t h e c u r l e w , the w h i t e
c o c k a t o o , t h e w o o d d u c k , the mallee lizard, t h e s t i n k i n g t u r d e , t h e flying
squirrel, t h e r i n g - t a i l e d opossum, t h e b r o n z e - w i n g p i g e o n , a n d the wijuggia.
I n the S u n clan: t h e b a n d i c o o t , the m o o n , the rat kangaroo, t h e black a n d
w h i t e magpies, the ngurt h a w k , the g u m tree g r u b , the u mimoisa (wattle tree)
1 0
g r u b , and the planet Venus. I n the W a r m W i n d c l a n : the gray-headed ea-
g l e h a w k , the carpet snake, t h e s m o k e r p a r r o t , t h e shell parakeet, the murrakan
h a w k , the dikkomur snake, the r i n g - n e c k p a r r o t , t h e mirudai snake, the
shingle-back lizard.
I f w e i m a g i n e that there are m a n y o t h e r clans ( H o w i t t names a d o z e n o f
t h e m , w h i l e M a t h e w s names f o u r t e e n a n d w a r n s that his list is v e r y i n c o m -
11
plete), w e w i l l see h o w all the things t h a t interest t h e native as a m a t t e r o f
course find a place i n these classifications.
S i m i l a r arrangements have b e e n observed i n the m o s t dissimilar parts o f
the A u s t r a l i a n c o n t i n e n t : i n s o u t h e r n Australia, i n t h e state o f V i c t o r i a , a n d
12
i n N e w S o u t h Wales ( a m o n g the E u a h l a y i ) ; v e r y o b v i o u s traces o f t h e m are
13
f o u n d a m o n g the tribes o f t h e c e n t e r . I n Q u e e n s l a n d , w h e r e t h e clans seem
t o have disappeared a n d w h e r e the m a r r i a g e classes are t h e o n l y subdivisions
o f the phratry, t h i n g s are d i s t r i b u t e d b e t w e e n t h e classes. H e n c e , the W a k e l -
b u r a are d i v i d e d i n t o t w o phratries, M a l l e r a a n d W u t a r u . T h e classes o f t h e
first are called K u r g i l l a a n d B a n b e ; those o f the second, W u n g o and O b u . T o
the B a n b e b e l o n g the opossum, t h e kangaroo, t h e d o g , the h o n e y o f the
small bee, etc. T o t h e W u n g o are ascribed t h e e m u , t h e b a n d i c o o t , t h e black
d u c k , the black snake, t h e b r o w n snake; t o the O b u , t h e carpet snake, the

9
The indigenous name of this clan is Dyalup, which Mathews does not translate. This word seems to
be identical to "Jallup," by which Howitt designates a subclan of that same tribe and which he translates
as "mussel." For this reason, I think I can chance this translation.
10
This is Howitt s translation; Mathews translates this word (Wartwuri) as "heat of the midday sun."
"Mathews's table and Howitt s disagree on more than one important point. It even appears that the
clans ascribed by Howitt to the Kroki phratry are counted by Mathews in the Gamutch phratry, and vice
versa. This is evidence of the very great difficulties that such studies present. However these discrepancies
have no import for the question being treated.
12
Mrs. Langloh Parker [Catherine Sommerville Field Parker], 77ie Euahlayi Tribe [London, A. Consta-
ble, 1905], pp. 12ff.
"These facts are to be found below.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs (Continued) 145

h o n e y o f s t i n g i n g bees, etc.; t o the K u r g i l l a , the p o r c u p i n e , the plains turkey,

14
water, r a i n , fire, t h u n d e r , e t c .
T h e same o r g a n i z a t i o n is f o u n d a m o n g the Indians o f N o r t h A m e r i c a .
T h e Z u n i have a system o f classification w h o s e basic o u t l i n e is comparable i n
every respect t o those j u s t described. T h a t o f the O m a h a rests o n the same
1 5
principles as that o f the W o t i o b a l u k . Echoes o f t h e same ideas persist even i n
the m o r e advanced societies. A m o n g the H a i d a , all the gods and m y t h i c a l b e -
ings that g o v e r n the various p h e n o m e n a o f nature are also classified i n o n e o f
the tribe's t w o phratries, j u s t as m e n are. S o m e are Eagles and the others,
1 6
Crows. T h e gods that g o v e r n things are b u t a n o t h e r aspect o f t h e things they
17
govern. T h i s m y t h o l o g i c a l classification, t h e n , is b u t a different f o r m o f
the p r e c e d i n g ones. H e n c e , w e can be c o n f i d e n t that this w a y o f c o n c e i v i n g
the w o r l d is q u i t e i n d e p e n d e n t o f e t h n i c o r geographical particularity. A t the
same time, however, i t emerges q u i t e clearly that this w a y o f c o n c e i v i n g the
w o r l d is tightly b o u n d u p w i t h the w h o l e system o f t o t e m i c beliefs.

II
I n the w o r k t o w h i c h I have already a l l u d e d several times, I s h o w e d h o w
these facts i l l u m i n a t e the m a n n e r i n w h i c h t h e idea o f genus o r class t o o k
f o r m a m o n g h u m a n s . T h e s e classifications are i n d e e d the first that w e m e e t
i n history. W e j u s t saw that t h e y are m o d e l e d o n social o r g a n i z a t i o n , o r rather
that t h e y have t a k e n the actual f r a m e w o r k o f society as t h e i r o w n . I t was the
phratries that served as genera a n d t h e clans as species. I t is because m e n
f o r m e d groups that t h e y w e r e able t o g r o u p things: A l l t h e y d i d was m a k e
r o o m f o r things i n the groups t h e y themselves already f o r m e d . A n d i f these
various classes o f things w e r e n o t s i m p l y j u x t a p o s e d t o o n e another, but
arranged instead a c c o r d i n g t o a u n i f i e d p l a n , that is because t h e same social
groups t o w h i c h t h e y are assimilated are themselves u n i f i e d and, t h r o u g h that

14
Curr [Australian Race], vol. Ill, p. 27. Howitt, NatiueTribes, p. 112.1 confine myself to citing the most
characteristic facts. The paper already mentioned, "Classification primitive," can be referred to for details.
15
Durkheim and Mauss, "Classification primitive," pp. 34ff.
16
[John Reed] Swanton, [Contributions to the Ethnology of] the Haida [Leiden, E. J. Brill, 1905], pp.
13—14, 17, 22. [Actually, this English text says "raven." Since all ravens are crows but not all crows are
ravens, I have rendered Durkheim's corbeau as "crow" throughout. Trans.]
17
This is particularly evident among the Haida. According to Swanton, every animal has two aspects.
From one point of view, it is an ordinary creature that can be hunted and eaten, but at the same time, it
is a supernatural being with the outward form of an animal, and to which man is subject. The mythical
beings that correspond to various cosmic phenomena have the same ambiguity (ibid., pp. 14, 16, 25).
146 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

u n i o n , f o r m an organic w h o l e : t h e t r i b e . T h e u n i t y o f these first l o g i c a l sys-

tems m e r e l y reproduces that o f society. T h u s w e have o u r first o p p o r t u n i t y
t o test the p r o p o s i t i o n p u t f o r w a r d at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f this w o r k a n d t o as-
sure ourselves that the f u n d a m e n t a l n o t i o n s o f t h e i n t e l l e c t , the basic cate-
gories o f t h o u g h t , can be t h e p r o d u c t o f social factors. T h e p r e c e d i n g shows
that this is i n d e e d the case f o r the n o t i o n o f category itself.
I d o n o t m e a n t o d e n y that the i n d i v i d u a l consciousness, even o n its o w n ,
has the capacity t o perceive resemblances b e t w e e n t h e particular things i t
conceives of. T o the contrary, i t is clear that even the m o s t p r i m i t i v e a n d s i m -
ple classifications already presuppose that faculty. T h e Australian does n o t
place things at r a n d o m i n the same o r different clans. I n h i m as i n us, similar
images attract a n d opposite ones repel o n e another, and h e classifies the c o r -
r e s p o n d i n g things i n o n e o r the o t h e r a c c o r d i n g t o his sense o f these affinities.
M o r e o v e r , w e can see i n some cases t h e reasoning that inspires t h e m . I t
is q u i t e probable that the i n i t i a l , a n d f u n d a m e n t a l , f r a m e w o r k s f o r these
classification systems w e r e c o n s t i t u t e d b y t h e t w o phratries and that c o n -
sequently t h e y began as d i c h o t o m o u s . W h e n a classification has o n l y t w o
genera, they are almost necessarily c o n c e i v e d as a n t i t h e t i c a l . T h e y are used
first as a means o f clearly separating those things b e t w e e n w h i c h the contrast
is m o s t p r o n o u n c e d . S o m e are placed t o the r i g h t , t h e others t o the left. T h e
A u s t r a l i a n classifications are o f this k i n d . I f t h e w h i t e c o c k a t o o is classified i n
o n e phratry, t h e black c o c k a t o o is i n the o t h e r ; i f the sun is t o o n e side, the
18
m o o n a n d stars are o n the opposite s i d e . V e r y o f t e n , the beings that serve
19
the t w o phratries as totems have opposite c o l o r s . S o m e o f these oppositions
are f o u n d even outside Australia. W h e r e o n e o f the phratries is i n charge o f
2 0
peace, the o t h e r is i n charge o f w a r ; i f o n e has w a t e r as its t o t e m , t h e o t h e r
2 1
has l a n d . T h i s is p r o b a b l y w h y t h e t w o phratries have o f t e n been c o n s i d -
ered n a t u r a l l y antagonistic. I t is accepted that a rivalry, even an innate h o s t i l -

18
See p. 142 above. This is the case among the Gournditch-mara (Howitt, NativeTribes, p. 124), among
the tribes observed by Cameron near Mordake, and among the Wotjobaluk (Howitt, Native Tribes, pp.
125, 250).
,9
J[ohn] Mathew, Two Representative Tribes [of Queensland], London, T. F. Unwin, 1910, p. 139;
[Northcote Whitridge] Thomas, Kinship [Organizations] and [Group] Marriage in [Australia], Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1906, pp. 53—54.
20
For example, among the Osage, see [James Owens] Dorsey, "Siouan Sociology," in XVth Annual
Rep. [BAE, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1897], pp. 2332".
21
At Mabuiag, an island in the Torres Strait ([Alfred C ] Haddon, Head Hunters [Black, White, and
Brown, London, Methuen, 1901], p. 132). The same opposition is also to be found between the two phra-
tries of the Arunta: One comprises people of water, the other people of land ([Carl] Strehlow, [Die
Aranda- und Loritja-Stamme in Zentral-Australien], vol. I [Frankfurt, J. Baer, 1907], p. 6).
Tlie Principal Totemic Beliefs (Continued) 147

2 2
ity, exists b e t w e e n t h e m . O n c e the l o g i c a l contrast has replicated itself as a
23
k i n d o f social c o n f l i c t , t h e o p p o s i t i o n o f things is e x t e n d e d t o persons.
Inside each phratry, o n the o t h e r h a n d , the things that seem t o have the
greatest affinity w i t h the t h i n g s e r v i n g as the t o t e m have b e e n classified w i t h
it i n the same clan. F o r e x a m p l e , the m o o n has b e e n placed w i t h the b l a c k
c o c k a t o o ; the sun, b y contrast, w i t h the w h i t e c o c k a t o o , a l o n g w i t h the at-
mosphere a n d the w i n d . H e r e is a n o t h e r example: T h e t o t e m i c a n i m a l is
2 4
g r o u p e d w i t h e v e r y t h i n g that serves as its f o o d , plus the animals w i t h
25
w h i c h i t is m o s t closely associated. O f course, w e c a n n o t always u n d e r s t a n d
the obscure p s y c h o l o g y that has presided over m a n y o f these j o i n i n g s a n d
separations. B u t t h e p r e c e d i n g examples are sufficient t o s h o w that a c e r t a i n
i n t u i t i o n o f the similarities a n d differences presented b y things has played a
role i n creating these classifications.
B u t a f e e l i n g o f s i m i l a r i t y is o n e t h i n g ; the n o t i o n o f k i n d is another.
K i n d is the e x t e r n a l f r a m e w o r k w h o s e c o n t e n t is f o r m e d , i n part, b y objects
perceived t o be l i k e o n e another. T h e c o n t e n t c a n n o t itself p r o v i d e the
f r a m e w o r k i n w h i c h i t is placed. T h e c o n t e n t is m a d e u p o f vague and fluctu-
ating images caused b y t h e s u p e r i m p o s i t i o n a n d p a r t i a l fusion o f a definite
number of individual images that are f o u n d t o have elements i n c o m m o n . B y

22
Among the Iroquois, the two phratries hold tournaments of a sort ([Lewis Henry] Morgan, Ancient
Society [London, Macmillan, 1877], p. 94). Among the Haida, Swanton says, the members of the two
phratries of the Eagle and the Crow "are often regarded as avowed enemies. Husbands and wives (who
must be of different phratries) do not hesitate to betray one another" (Swanton, The Haida, p. 62). In Aus-
tralia, this hostility is expressed in the myths. The two animals that serve as the totems of the two phra-
tries are often represented as being perpetually at war with one another (see J[ohn] Mathew, Eaglehawk
and Crow: [A Study ofAustralian Aborigines, London, D. Nutt. 1899], pp. 14ff.). In games, each phratry is
the natural competitor of the other (Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 770).
23
Thus, Mr. Thomas mistakenly criticized my theory on the origin of phratries as unable to explain
their opposition (Kinship and Marriage in Australia, p. 69). Still, I do not think it necessary to relate that op-
position to the opposition between the profane and the sacred (see [Robert] Hertz, "La Prééminence de
la main droite," in RP, vol. LXVIII (December 1909), p. 559). The things that belong to one phratry are
not profane for the other; both are part of the same religious system (see p. 156 below).
24
For example, the Tea Tree clan includes the vegetation and consequendy herbivorous animals (see
Fison and Howitt, Kamilaroi and Kurnai, p. 169). Such, probably, is the explanation of a particularity that
Boas notes in the totemic emblems of North America. "Among the Tlinkit," he says, "and in all the other
tribes of the coast, the emblem of a group includes the animals that are food for the one whose name the
group bears." ([Franz] Boas, ["First General Report on the Indians of British Columbia," in BA45], Fifth
Report of the Committee [on the North-Westem Tribes of the Dominion of Canada, London, Offices of the As-
sociation, 1890], p. 25).
25
Thus, among the Arunta, the frogs are associated with the Gum Tree totem, because they are often
found in the cavities of that tree; the water is connected with the water fowl; the kangaroo with a sort of
parakeet that is commonly seenflyingaround it ([Sir Baldwin] Spencer and [Francis James] Gillen, The
NativeTribes [of Central Australia, London, Macmillan, 1899], pp. 146-147, 448).
148 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

contrast, the framework is a d e f i n i t e f o r m h a v i n g fixed c o n t o u r s , b u t can be

applied t o an i n d e f i n i t e n u m b e r o f t h i n g s , w h e t h e r perceived o r n o t a n d
w h e t h e r e x i s t i n g o r possible. I n d e e d , the p o t e n t i a l scope o f every genus is i n -
finitely greater t h a n the circle o f objects w h o s e resemblance w e have b e c o m e
aware o f t h r o u g h d i r e c t experience. T h i s is w h y a w h o l e s c h o o l o f t h i n k e r s
refuse t o i d e n t i f y t h e idea o f k i n d w i t h that o f generic image, a n d n o t w i t h -
o u t reason. A g e n e r i c i m a g e is o n l y the residual representation that similar
representations leave i n us w h e n t h e y present themselves i n consciousness at
the same t i m e , a n d its b o u n d a r i e s are i n d e t e r m i n a t e ; b u t a genus is a l o g i c a l
s y m b o l b y means o f w h i c h w e t h i n k clearly a b o u t these similarities a n d o t h -
ers l i k e t h e m . Besides, o u r best evidence o f the g u l f b e t w e e n those n o t i o n s is
that t h e a n i m a l is capable o f f o r m i n g g e n e r i c images, whereas i t does n o t
k n o w the art o f t h i n k i n g i n t e r m s o f genera a n d species.
T h e idea o f genus is a t o o l o f t h o u g h t that o b v i o u s l y was c o n s t r u c t e d b y
m e n . B u t t o c o n s t r u c t i t , w e h a d t o have at least a m o d e l , f o r h o w c o u l d that
idea have b e e n b o r n i f there h a d b e e n n o t h i n g w i t h i n us o r outside us that
c o u l d have suggested it? T o answer that i t is g i v e n t o us a p r i o r i is n o t t o a n -
swer; as has b e e n said, that lazy s o l u t i o n is the death o f analysis. I t is n o t clear
w h e r e w e w o u l d have f o u n d that indispensable m o d e l i f n o t i n the p a n o r a m a
o f collective life. A genus is i n fact an ideal, y e t clearly d e f i n e d , g r o u p i n g o f
things w i t h i n t e r n a l b o n d s a m o n g t h e m that are analogous t o the bonds o f
kinship. T h e o n l y g r o u p i n g s o f that k i n d w i t h w h i c h e x p e r i e n c e acquaints us
are those that m e n f o r m b y c o m i n g together. M a t e r i a l things can f o r m c o l -
lections, heaps, o r m e c h a n i c a l assemblages w i t h o u t i n t e r n a l unity, b u t n o t
groups i n the sense I have j u s t g i v e n t h e w o r d . A heap o f sand o r a p i l e o f
stones is i n n o w a y comparable t o the sort o f w e l l - d e f i n e d a n d o r g a n i z e d so-
ciety that is a genus. I n all probability, t h e n , w e w o u l d never have t h o u g h t o f
g a t h e r i n g the beings o f t h e universe i n t o h o m o g e n e o u s groups, called genera,
i f w e h a d n o t h a d the e x a m p l e o f h u m a n societies before o u r eyes—if,
i n d e e d , w e h a d n o t at first g o n e so far i n m a k i n g things m e m b e r s o f the
society o f m e n , that h u m a n a n d l o g i c a l g r o u p i n g s w e r e n o t at first d i s t i n -
26
guished.

26
One sign of that original distinction is the fact that, like the social divisions with which they were
originally merged, genera sometimes have a territorial base assigned to them. Thus, among the
Wotjobaluk in Australia, and among the Zufii in America, things are thought of as being distributed
among the different regions of space, as are the clans. The regional division of things and that of clans co-
incide (see Durkheim and Mauss, "Classification primitive," pp. 34ff). Even up to and including relatively
advanced peoples, for example in China, the classifications retain something of this spatial character (pp.
55ff).
 The Principal Totemic Beliefs (Continued) 149

F r o m a n o t h e r standpoint, a classification is also a system w h o s e parts are

arranged i n a h i e r a r c h i c a l order. S o m e are d o m i n a n t features, a n d others are
subordinated t o those. T h e species a n d t h e i r distinctive properties are sub-
s u m e d u n d e r genera h a v i n g t h e i r o w n d i s t i n c t i v e properties; a n d t h e differ-
ent species o f t h e same genus are c o n c e i v e d as b e i n g o n a par w i t h one
another. Is the s t a n d p o i n t o f comprehensiveness the preferred one? I n that
case, things are represented i n an inverse order, t h e m o s t p a r t i c u l a r species
and the richest i n r e a l i t y b e i n g placed at the t o p , a n d at t h e b o t t o m the m o s t
general ones a n d t h e poorest i n detail. B u t c o n c e i v i n g o f t h e m h i e r a r c h i c a l l y
is unavoidable e i t h e r way. A n d w e m u s t g u a r d against t h i n k i n g that the w o r d
has o n l y m e t a p h o r i c a l m e a n i n g here. T h e p u r p o s e o f a classification is t o es-
tablish relations o f s u b o r d i n a t i o n a n d c o o r d i n a t i o n , a n d m a n w o u l d n o t even
have t h o u g h t o f o r d e r i n g his k n o w l e d g e i n that w a y i f he had n o t already
, k n o w n w h a t a h i e r a r c h y is. N e i t h e r t h e p a n o r a m a o f physical nature n o r the
mechanisms o f m e n t a l association c o u l d possibly g i v e us t h e idea o f i t . H i e r -
archy is exclusively a social t h i n g . O n l y i n society d o superiors, subordinates,
and equals exist. T h e r e f o r e , even i f t h e facts w e r e n o t sufficiendy conclusive,
the analysis o f those n o t i o n s w o u l d b e sufficient i n i t s e l f t o reveal t h e i r
o r i g i n . W e have taken t h e m from society a n d p r o j e c t e d t h e m i n t o o u r r e p -
resentation o f the w o r l d . Society f u r n i s h e d the canvas o n w h i c h l o g i c a l
t h o u g h t has w o r k e d .

Ill
T h e relevance o f these p r i m i t i v e classifications t o t h e o r i g i n o f religious
t h o u g h t is n o less direct. T h e y i n fact i m p l y that all t h e t h i n g s t h e r e b y classi-
fied i n t h e same clan o r t h e same p h r a t r y are closely a k i n t o o n e a n o t h e r a n d
to that w h i c h serves as the t o t e m o f the clan o r o f t h e phratry. W h e n the
Australian o f t h e P o r t M a c K a y t r i b e says that t h e sun, snakes, etc. are o f the
Y u n g a r o o p h r a t r y , he does n o t s i m p l y m e a n t o apply t o a l l those disparate b e -
ings a c o m m o n , b u t p u r e l y c o n v e n t i o n a l , label; t h e w o r d has an objective
m e a n i n g f o r h i m . H e believes that, really, " t h e alligators are Y u n g a r o o , the
m o o n W o o t a r o o a n d so o n f o r t h e constellations, t h e trees, the plants, a n d so
2 7
forth. A n i n t e r n a l tie binds t h e m t o t h e g r o u p i n w h i c h they are classified,
2 8
and they are regular m e m b e r s o f i t . T h e y are said t o b e l o n g t o that g r o u p ,

27
[George] Bridgmann, in Brough Smyth, The Aborigines ofVictoria, vol. I, p. 91.
28
Fison and Howitt, Kamilaroi and Kurnai, p. 168; Howitt, "Further Notes on the Australian Class Sys-
tems,"^/, vol. XVIII (1889), p. 60.
150 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

j u s t as d o the h u m a n i n d i v i d u a l s w h o are p a r t o f i t , a n d so a relationship o f

the same k i n d j o i n s the h u m a n i n d i v i d u a l s . M a n sees the things o f his clan as
relatives a n d associates; he calls t h e m friends a n d considers t h e m t o be m a d e
2 9
o f the same flesh as h e . H e n c e , there are elective affinities a n d q u i t e special
relations o f c o m p a t i b i l i t y b e t w e e n t h e m a n d h i m . T h i n g s a n d m e n attract
one another, i n some sense understand one another, a n d are naturally at-
t u n e d . F o r example, w h e n a W a k e l b u r a o f t h e M a l l e r a p h r a t r y is b u r i e d , the
scaffold o n w h i c h the b o d y is exposed " m u s t be m a d e f r o m the w o o d o f any
30
tree b e l o n g i n g t o the M a l l e r a p h r a t r y . " T h e same applies t o the branches
that cover the corpse. I f t h e deceased is o f the B a n b e class, a B a n b e tree must
be used. I n the same t r i b e , a m a g i c i a n can use i n his art o n l y things that b e -
31
l o n g t o his p h r a t r y . Because the others are f o r e i g n t o h i m , he c a n n o t m a k e
t h e m obey. I n this way, a b o n d o f mystical s y m p a t h y j o i n s each i n d i v i d u a l t o
o t h e r beings that are associated w i t h h i m , l i v i n g o r n o t . F r o m this arises the
b e l i e f that he can i n f e r w h a t he w i l l d o o r is d o i n g f r o m w h a t t h e y do.
A m o n g this same g r o u p , t h e W a k e l b u r a , w h e n an i n d i v i d u a l dreams that he
has k i l l e d an a n i m a l b e l o n g i n g t o such a n d such a social d i v i s i o n , he expects
32
t o m e e t a m a n o f that same d i v i s i o n the n e x t day. Conversely, the things as-
signed t o a clan o r a p h r a t r y c a n n o t be used against m e m b e r s o f that clan o r
phratry. A m o n g the W o t j o b a l u k , each p h r a t r y has its o w n trees. T o h u n t an
a n i m a l o f t h e G u r o g i t y , t h e y can o n l y use weapons m a d e o f w o o d taken f r o m
trees o f the o t h e r phratry, a n d v i c e versa; o t h e r w i s e the h u n t e r is sure t o miss
3 3
his m a r k . T h e native is c o n v i n c e d that the a r r o w w o u l d t u r n away f r o m the
target b y itself and, i n a m a n n e r o f speaking, refuse t o t o u c h an a n i m a l w h o
is a relative a n d a f r i e n d .
B y t h e i r j o i n i n g , t h e n , the p e o p l e o f the clan a n d the things classified i n
i t f o r m a u n i f i e d system, w i t h all its parts a l l i e d a n d v i b r a t i n g sympathetically.
T h i s o r g a n i z a t i o n , w h i c h m i g h t at first have seemed t o us p u r e l y l o g i c a l , is
m o r a l at t h e same t i m e . T h e same p r i n c i p l e b o t h animates i t a n d makes i t c o -
here: T h a t p r i n c i p l e is t h e t o t e m . Just as a m a n w h o belongs t o the C r o w clan
has s o m e t h i n g o f that a n i m a l i n h i m , so t o o the r a i n . Since r a i n is o f t h e same
clan and belongs t o the same t o t e m , i t is also a n d necessarily considered as
" b e i n g the same t h i n g as a crow." F o r the same reason, the m o o n is a black

29
Curr, Australian Race, vol. Ill, p. 461, concerning the Mount Gambier tribe.
^[Alfred William] Howitt, "On Some Australian Beliefs," JAI, vol. XIII [1884], p. 191 n. 1.
31
[Alfred William] Howitt, "Notes on Australian Message-Sticks and Messengers," JAI, vol. XVIII
(1889), p. 326; "Further Notes," p. 61 n. 3.
32
Curr, Australian Race, vol. Ill, p. 28.
33
Mathews, "Aboriginal Tribes," p. 294.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs (Continued) 151

cockatoo, the sun a w h i t e c o c k a t o o , a n d every b l a c k w o o d tree a pelican, and

so f o r t h . T h u s , all t h e beings classified i n a single c l a n — m e n , animals, plants,
i n a n i m a t e objects—are o n l y m o d a l i t i e s o f t h e t o t e m i c b e i n g . T h i s is the
m e a n i n g o f the f o r m u l a I have already r e p o r t e d . W h a t makes t h e m g e n u i n e
k i n is this: A l l really are o f the same flesh, i n the sense that they all participate
i n t h e nature o f the t o t e m i c a n i m a l . M o r e o v e r , t h e adjectives applied t o t h e m
3 4
are the same as those a p p l i e d t o t h e t o t e m . T h e W o t j o b a l u k call b o t h the
3 5
t o t e m a n d the things subsumed u n d e r i t b y the same name, M i r . A m o n g the
A r u n t a , w h e r e , as w e w i l l see, there are still traces o f classification, i t is t r u e
that different w o r d s designate the t o t e m a n d t h e beings attached t o i t ; h o w -
ever, the n a m e g i v e n t o these latter bespeaks the close relations that j o i n t h e m
t o t h e t o t e m i c a n i m a l . T h e y are said t o be its intimates, its associates, and its
3 6
friends; t h e y are t h o u g h t t o be inseparable f r o m i t . T h e s e things are felt t o
be closely a k i n .
A t t h e same t i m e , w e k n o w that the t o t e m i c a n i m a l is a sacred b e i n g .
T h e r e f o r e , because t h e y are i n a sense animals o f the same species, j u s t as m a n
is, so all t h e things that are classified i n the clan o f w h i c h i t is the e m b l e m
are o f t h e same character. T h e y themselves are also sacred, and t h e classifica-
tions that situate t h e m i n r e l a t i o n t o the o t h e r things o f the universe at the
same t i m e assign t h e m a place w i t h i n t h e r e l i g i o u s system as a w h o l e . T h i s
is w h y t h e animals o r plants a m o n g t h e m c a n n o t be freely eaten b y the
h u m a n m e m b e r s o f t h e clan. T h u s , i n the M o u n t G a m b i e r t r i b e , the people
w h o s e t o t e m is the n o n v e n o m o u s snake m u s t abstain n o t o n l y f r o m the flesh
3 7
o f that snake; t h e m e a t o f seals, c o n g e r eels, etc. is also p r o h i b i t e d t o t h e m .
If, d r i v e n b y necessity, t h e y p e r m i t themselves t o partake o f those things,
they m u s t at least d i m i n i s h the sacrilege b y e x p i a t o r y rites, j u s t as i f those
38 39
things w e r e the t o t e m , p r o p e r . A m o n g the E u a h l a y i , w h e r e use b u t n o t
abuse o f the t o t e m is p e r m i t t e d , t h e same r u l e applies t o t h e o t h e r things o f
the clan. A m o n g the A r u n t a , t h e p r o h i b i t i o n that protects the t o t e m i c a n i -
4 0
m a l extends t o o t h e r animals associated w i t h i t ; a n d i n any case, the latter

34
Cf. Curr, Australian Race, vol. Ill, p. 461, and Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 146. The terms Tooman and
Wingo are applicable to both.
35
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 123.

-^Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 447ff.; cf. Strehlow, Aranda, vol. Ill, p. xiiff.
37
Fison and Howitt, Kamilaroi and Kurnai, p. 169.
38
Curr, Australian Race, vol. Ill, p. 462.
39
Parker, Euahlayi, p. 20.
40
[Sir Baldwin] Spencer and [Francis James] Gillen, Northern Tribes [of Central Australia, London,
Macmillan, 1904], p. 151; Native Tribes, p. 447; Strehlow, Aranda, vol. Ill, p. xii.
152 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

41
are o w e d special c o n s i d e r a t i o n . T h e feelings i n s p i r e d b y b o t h are i d e n t i -
42
cal.
B u t the fact that o n occasion t h e y play the same r o l e is even better e v i -
dence that all the things w e see attached t o a t o t e m are n o t f u n d a m e n t a l l y
different f r o m i t and, i n consequence, have a r e l i g i o u s nature. T h e s e are
accessory a n d secondary t o t e m s , o r subtotems, t o use a w o r d that t o d a y is
43
consecrated b y usage. W i t h i n a clan, smaller groups constandy f o r m u n d e r
the i n f l u e n c e o f friendships a n d personal affinities. W i t h t h e i r m o r e l i m i t e d
m e m b e r s h i p , these smaller groups t e n d t o live i n relative a u t o n o m y a n d t o
f o r m w h a t a m o u n t s t o a n e w s u b d i v i s i o n o r subclan w i t h i n t h e clan. T o dis-
t i n g u i s h a n d i n d i v i d u a l i z e itself, this subclan has n e e d o f its o w n t o t e m —
4 4
v o i l a , the s u b t o t e m . T h e totems o f these secondary groups are chosen from
a m o n g those various things that are classified u n d e r the p r i n c i p a l t o t e m , so
they are v i r t u a l t o t e m s — l i t e r a l l y , f o r t h e least circumstance is all i t takes t o
m a k e t h e m b e c o m e actual ones. T h e y have a latent t o t e m i c nature that b e -
comes manifest as s o o n as circumstances p e r m i t o r r e q u i r e i t . I n this way, o n e
i n d i v i d u a l sometimes has t w o totems: a p r i n c i p a l t o t e m that is shared b y the
w h o l e clan a n d a s u b t o t e m that is specific t o the subclan o f w h i c h he is part.
These are s o m e w h a t analogous t o the nomen a n d t h e cognomen o f the R o -
45
3
mans.

•"Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 449.

42
However, there are certain tribes of Queensland in which the things thus assigned to a social group
are not forbidden to the members of that group. Such, for example, is the case of the Wakelbura. It should
be borne in mind that the marriage classes serve in this society as frameworks for classification (see p. 144
above). Not only can the people of a class eat the animals ascribed to that class, but they cannot eat others.
All other food is forbidden to them (Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 113; Curr, Australian Race, vol. Ill, p. 27).
Nonetheless, we must take care not to conclude that these animals are considered profane. To be
noted is that the individual not only may but must eat them, since he is forbidden to eat anything else.
This imperativeness of the prescription is a sure sign that we are in the presence of things that are religious
in nature. But the religiousness that marks them has given birth to a positive obligation rather than to that
negative obligation which is the prohibition. Perhaps, indeed, it is not impossible to see how that devia-
tion could have happened. We have seen above (see p. 140) that every individual is thought to have a sort
of property right over his totem and, in consequence, over the things that come under it. If special cir-
cumstances influenced the development of that aspect of the totemic relation, then people would come
naturally to believe that only the members of a clan could use their totem and all that is assimilated to it;
that the others, by contrast, did not have the right to touch it. Under these circumstances, a clan could
feed itself only with things ascribed to the clan.
43
Mrs. Parker uses the expression "multiplex totems."
44
As examples, see the Euahlayi tribe in the book of Mrs. Parker (pp. 15ff.) and the Worjobaluk
(Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 121ff.); cf. the previously cited article of Mathews.
45
See examples in Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 122.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs (Continued) 153

Sometimes, i n d e e d , w e see that a subclan emancipates itself c o m p l e t e l y

and becomes an a u t o n o m o u s g r o u p , an i n d e p e n d e n t clan. T h e s u b t o t e m
t h e n becomes a t o t e m i n the f u l l sense. O n e t r i b e i n w h i c h this process o f
segmentation has b e e n taken v i r t u a l l y t o its o u t e r m o s t l i m i t is the A r u n t a
tribe. T h e i n f o r m a t i o n c o n t a i n e d i n the first b o o k o f Spencer a n d G ü l e n i n -
4 6
dicated b a c k t h e n that there w e r e some 6 0 t o t e m s a m o n g the A r u n t a , but
the m o r e recent research o f S t r e h l o w has established that the n u m b e r is m u c h
47
larger. H e counts n o t less t h a n 4 4 2 t o t e m s . Spencer a n d G ü l e n w e r e i n n o
way exaggerating w h e n t h e y said that " i n t h e l a n d o c c u p i e d b y the natives,
there is n o object, animate o r i n a n i m a t e , that does n o t give its n a m e t o some
48
totemic group o f individuals." T h a t m u l t i t u d e o f t o t e m s , w h i c h is p r o d i -
gious w h e n c o m p a r e d w i t h t h e size o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n , comes o f the fact that,
u n d e r the i n f l u e n c e o f p a r t i c u l a r circumstances, the o r i g i n a l clans have d i -
v i d e d a n d s u b d i v i d e d i n f i n i t e l y ; as a result, almost all t h e subtotems have
gained t h e status o f t o t e m s .
Strehlow's studies have d e f i n i t i v e l y s h o w n this. Spencer and G ü l e n c i t e d
49
o n l y a f e w isolated cases o f allied t o t e m s . S t r e h l o w established that this was
actually a universal f o r m o f o r g a n i z a t i o n . H e d r e w u p a table o n w h i c h a l -
most aU the t o t e m s o f the A r u n t a are classified a c c o r d i n g t o this p r i n c i p l e . A l l
50
are attached t o some sixty p r i n c i p a l totems as e i t h e r allies o r a u x d i a r i e s .
51
T h e allied t o t e m s are h e l d t o be at the service o f t h e p r i n c i p a l o n e . This
state o f relative s u b o r d i n a t i o n is p r o b a b l y t h e echo o f a t i m e w h e n today's
"aUies" w e r e o n l y subtotems, a n d therefore a t i m e w h e n t h e t r i b e h a d o n l y a

*See Durkheim and Mauss, "Classification primitive," p. 28 n. 2.

"Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, pp. 61-72.
48
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 112.
49
See especially ibid., p. 447, and Northern Tribes, p. 151.
3
°Strehlow, Aranda, vol. Ill, pp. xiii-[xvii]. Sometimes the same secondary totems are attached to two
or three principal totems at once. This is probably because Strehlow could not establish with certainty
which of those totems was truly the main one.
Two interesting facts, which emerge from this table, confirm certain propositions I have already set
forth. First, with very few exceptions, almost all the principal totems are animals. Next, the stars are never
anything but secondary or allied totems. This is further evidence that originally the preference was to
choose totems from the animal kingdom, and that the allied totems were not promoted to the status of
totems until later.
51
According to myth, in legendary times the allied totems served as food for the people of the princi-
pal totem and, if they were trees, provided shelter (Strehlow, Aranda, vol. Ill, p. xii; Spencer and Gillen,
Native Tribes, p. 403). However, the fact that the allied totem is thought to have been eaten does not im-
ply that it is considered profane. It is believed that, in mythical times, the principal totem was eaten by the
ancestors who founded the clan.
154 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

small n u m b e r o f clans s u b d i v i d e d i n t o subclans. N u m e r o u s survivals c o n f i r m

that hypothesis. T h e t w o groups that are allied i n this w a y often have the
same t o t e m i c e m b l e m . T h e oneness o f that e m b l e m is i n e x p l i c a b l e unless the
5 2
t w o groups w e r e o r i g i n a l l y o n e . Elsewhere, the k i n s h i p o f the t w o clans is
s h o w n b y the role a n d interest that each o f t h e m takes i n the rites o f the
other. T h e t w o cults are still n o t c o m p l e t e l y separate, m o s t l i k e l y because i n i -
5 3
tially t h e y w e r e c o m p l e t e l y m e r g e d . T r a d i t i o n explains t h e tie that binds
54
t h e m b y i m a g i n i n g h o w , l o n g ago, the t w o clans l i v e d v e r y near each o t h e r .
I n o t h e r cases, m y t h even states e x p l i c i t l y that t h e o n e was d e r i v e d f r o m t h e
other. T h e y say that the allied a n i m a l o n c e u p o n a t i m e b e l o n g e d t o the
species that is still the p r i n c i p a l t o t e m a n d was n o t differentiated u n t i l a later
e p o c h . I n this way, the c h a n t u n g a birds, w h i c h n o w are associated w i t h t h e
w i t c h e t t y g r u b , w e r e w i t c h e t t y grubs i n legendary times a n d later trans-
f o r m e d themselves i n t o birds. T w o species that are n o w attached t o the t o t e m
5 5
o f the h o n e y ant w e r e h o n e y ants i n the past, a n d so f o r t h . F u r t h e r , that
t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f a s u b t o t e m i n t o a t o t e m happens i m p e r c e p t i b l y , w i t h the
result that the status is i l l d e f i n e d i n some cases, a n d i t is n o t easy t o say
5 6
w h e t h e r o n e is d e a l i n g w i t h a p r i n c i p a l o r a secondary t o t e m . As H o w i t t
says r e g a r d i n g t h e W o t j o b a l u k , there are subtotems that are totems i n the
5 7
process o f f o r m a t i o n . I n this way, t h e various things classified i n a t o t e m are
l i k e m a n y n u c l e i a r o u n d w h i c h n e w t o t e m i c cults can f o r m . T h i s is the best
evidence o f the r e l i g i o u s feelings t h e y inspire. I f t h e y d i d n o t have this sa-
credness, they c o u l d n o t so easily be p r o m o t e d t o t h e same status as those sa-
c r e d things par excellence, t h e totems proper.
T h u s , the circle o f r e l i g i o u s things extends w e l l b e y o n d w h a t at first
seemed t o be its b o u n d a r i e s . N o t o n l y are the t o t e m i c animals and t h e m e m -
bers o f t h e clan enclosed w i t h i n that circle; b u t since there is n o t h i n g k n o w n
that is n o t classified w i t h i n a clan a n d u n d e r a t o t e m , there is also n o t h i n g
that does n o t receive a r e f l e c t i o n o f that religiousness, t o some degree. W h e n

a2
Thus, in the Wild Cat clan, the designs carved on the churinga represent thefloweringtree called
hakea, which today is a distinct totem (Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes [pp. 147—148]). Strehlow (Aranda,
vol. Ill, p. xii n. 4) says that this is common.
"Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 182; Native Tribes, pp. 151, 297.
54
Native Tribes, pp. 151, 158.
55
Ibid„ pp. 447-449.
56
lt is in this way that Spencer and Gillen speak to us of the pigeon called Inturita sometimes as a prin-
cipal totem (NativeTribes [p. 410]), and sometimes as an allied totem (p. 448).
"Howitt, "Further Notes," pp. 63-64.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs (Continued) 155

actual gods appear i n the r e l i g i o n s that f o r m later, each o f t h e m w i l l be set

over a p a r t i c u l a r category o f n a t u r a l p h e n o m e n a — t h i s o n e the sea, that o n e
the air, a n o t h e r the fruit harvest, a n d so o n , a n d each o f those provinces o f
nature w i l l be t h o u g h t o f as d r a w i n g t h e life that is w i t h i n i t from the g o d t o
w h i c h i t is subject. S u c h a d i s t r i b u t i o n o f nature a m o n g various deities is p r e -
cisely w h a t constitutes the representation o f t h e universe that r e l i g i o n s give
us. So l o n g as h u m a n i t y has n o t m o v e d b e y o n d the phase o f t o t e m i s m , the
role the v a r i o u s totems o f t h e t r i b e play is precisely t h e o n e that w i l l later b e -
l o n g t o d i v i n e personalities. I n the M o u n t G a m b i e r t r i b e , w h i c h I have taken
as the m a i n example, there are t e n clans, a n d so the w h o l e w o r l d is d i v i d e d
i n t o t e n classes, o r rather i n t o t e n families, each o r i g i n a t i n g i n a special
t o t e m . T h e things classified i n a clan take t h e i r reality from that o r i g i n , f o r
they are c o n c e i v e d o f as various modes o f the t o t e m i c b e i n g — a c c o r d i n g t o
our e x a m p l e , r a i n , t h u n d e r , l i g h t n i n g , clouds, h a i l , a n d w i n t e r are regarded
as various k i n d s o f crow. T a k e n together, these t e n families o f things c o n s t i -
tute a systematic a n d c o m p l e t e representation o f t h e w o r l d , and that repre-
sentation is r e l i g i o u s , since r e l i g i o u s n o t i o n s f u r n i s h t h e p r i n c i p l e o f i t . Far
from b e i n g restricted t o o n e o r t w o categories o f beings, t h e n , t h e d o m a i n o f
t o t e m i c r e l i g i o n extends t o t h e farthest l i m i t s o f the k n o w n universe. L i k e
the r e l i g i o n o f Greece, i t places t h e d i v i n e e v e r y w h e r e . T h e w e l l - k n o w n f o r -
m u l a I l a v T a TrXirjpTi 8eiov* can serve as its m o t t o as w e l l .
To be i n a p o s i t i o n t o conceive t o t e m i s m i n this way, w e must m o d i f y the
l o n g s t a n d i n g n o t i o n o f i t o n o n e f u n d a m e n t a l p o i n t . U n t i l the discoveries o f
recent years, t o t e m i s m was d e f i n e d as the r e l i g i o n o f the clan and was t h o u g h t
to consist e n t i r e l y i n t h e c u l t o f a p a r t i c u l a r t o t e m . F r o m this p o i n t o f v i e w , i t
seemed that there w e r e as m a n y i n d e p e n d e n t t o t e m i c religions as there w e r e
different clans. M o r e o v e r , that n o t i o n was i n h a r m o n y w i t h the c o m m o n l y
58
h e l d n o t i o n o f the clan: I t is seen as an a u t o n o m o u s s o c i e t y , m o r e o r less
closed t o similar societies o r h a v i n g o n l y e x t e r n a l a n d superficial relations
w i t h t h e m . B u t the reality is m o r e c o m p l e x . C e r t a i n l y the c u l t o f each t o t e m
has its h o m e i n t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g clan; i t is celebrated there and o n l y there;
the m e m b e r s o f t h e clan are responsible f o r i t ; i t is t r a n s m i t t e d b y t h e m from
one g e n e r a t i o n t o another, a l o n g w i t h the beliefs o n w h i c h i t is based.
O n the o t h e r h a n d , t h e various t o t e m i c cults that are p r a c t i c e d w i t h i n a
single t r i b e d o n o t develop i n parallel a n d i n i g n o r a n c e o f one another, as

*Everything is full of gods. Trans.

58
Thus it happens that the clan has often been confounded with the tribe. Curr especially has been
guilty of this confusion, which often imports problems into ethnographers' descriptions ([The Australian
Race], vol. I, pp. 61ff.).
156 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

t h o u g h each was a c o m p l e t e r e l i g i o n a n d sufficient u n t o itself. Instead, t h e y

i m p l y o n e another. E a c h is o n l y o n e p a r t o f the same w h o l e , an e l e m e n t o f
the same r e l i g i o n . T h e m e n o f a clan i n n o w a y regard the beliefs o f the
n e i g h b o r i n g clans w i t h the indifference, skepticism, o r h o s t i l i t y that is o r d i -
n a r i l y i n s p i r e d b y a r e l i g i o n t o w h i c h o n e is a stranger; t h e y themselves share
the beliefs. T h e C r o w p e o p l e are also c o n v i n c e d that t h e Snake people have
a m y t h i c a l snake as t h e i r ancestor a n d o w e special qualities a n d capacities t o
that o r i g i n . H a v e w e n o t seen that, u n d e r c e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s at least, a m a n
eats a t o t e m that is n o t his o w n o n l y after h a v i n g observed r i t u a l formalities?
F o r example, he requests p e r m i s s i o n f r o m the i n d i v i d u a l s o f that t o t e m , i f
there are any present. T h i s is so because that f o o d is n o t m e r e l y profane f o r
h i m either. H e , t o o , accepts that there are affinities b e t w e e n the m e m b e r s o f
a clan he is n o t p a r t o f a n d t h e a n i m a l w h o s e n a m e t h e y bear. M o r e o v e r , that
c o m m o n a l i t y o f b e l i e f is sometimes manifested i n t h e c u l t . A l t h o u g h , i n
p r i n c i p l e , the rites that c o n c e r n a t o t e m can be p e r f o r m e d o n l y b y p e o p l e o f
that t o t e m , i t is nonetheless v e r y c o m m o n f o r representatives o f different
clans t o be present. I n d e e d , sometimes t h e i r role is n o t o n e o f mere spectat¬
i n g . A l t h o u g h o f course t h e y are n o t t h e celebrants, t h e y decorate those w h o
are, a n d t h e y prepare the service. T h e y , t o o , have an interest i n the rite's b e -
i n g c o n d u c t e d ; hence, i n c e r t a i n tribes i t is t h e y w h o i n v i t e the p r o p e r clan
59
t o c o n d u c t the c e r e m o n y . I n d e e d , there is a w h o l e cycle o f rites that m u s t
take place i n the presence o f t h e assembled t r i b e : the t o t e m i c ceremonies o f
6 0
initiation.
I n s u m , t o t e m i c o r g a n i z a t i o n as j u s t described clearly m u s t result f r o m a
sort o f consensus a m o n g all the m e m b e r s o f the t r i b e , w i t h o u t d i s t i n c t i o n .
Each clan c a n n o t possibly have d e v e l o p e d its beliefs i n an absolutely i n d e -
p e n d e n t m a n n e r ; t h e cults o f t h e various t o t e m s c o m p l e m e n t one a n o t h e r
exactly, a n d so t h e y m u s t necessarily have b e e n i n some sense adjusted t o o n e
another. I n fact, as w e have seen, a single t o t e m d i d n o t o r d i n a r i l y repeat i t -
self i n the same t r i b e , a n d the w h o l e universe was d i v i d e d a m o n g the totems
thus c o n s t i t u t e d i n such a w a y that t h e same o b j e c t s h o u l d n o t be f o u n d i n
t w o different clans. So systematic a d i v i s i o n w o u l d have b e e n impossible t o
achieve w i t h o u t a tacit o r c o n c e r t e d agreement i n w h i c h the w h o l e t r i b e
w o u l d have had t o participate. T h e w h o l e set o f beliefs t h a t was b o r n i n this
6 1
w a y is i n part (but o n l y i n part) an affair o f the t r i b e .

59
This is the case,forexample, of the Warramunga (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 298).
'"See, for example, Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 380 et passim.
61
One could even ask whether tribal totems do not sometimes exist. Thus, among the Arunta, the
wild cat is the totem of a particular clan and yet is forbidden to the whole tribe; even the people of other
The Principal Totemic Beliefs (Continued) 157

T o summarize: I n d e v e l o p i n g an adequate c o n c e p t i o n o f t o t e m i s m , w e
must n o t enclose ourselves w i t h i n the boundaries o f the clan b u t consider the
tribe as a w h o l e . Each clan's o w n c u l t enjoys great a u t o n o m y . Indeed, w e can
anticipate even n o w that the active f e r m e n t o f religious life w i l l be f o u n d i n the
clan. O n the o t h e r h a n d , all these cults are u n i f i e d , a n d t o t e m i c r e l i g i o n is the
c o m p l e x system f o r m e d b y that u n i o n , j u s t as G r e e k p o l y t h e i s m was f o r m e d
b y the u n i o n o f all the cults that w e r e addressed t o the various deities. I have
s h o w n that w h e n t o t e m i s m is u n d e r s t o o d i n this way, i t t o o has a cosmology.

clans may eat it only in moderation (Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 168). But I believe it would be
an exaggeration to speak of a tribal totem in that instance, for it does not followfromthe prohibition
against eating it freely that the animal is a totem. A prohibition may have other causes. Undoubtedly, the
religious unity of the tribe is real, but that unity is affirmed with the aid of other symbols. Further on, I
will show what those symbols are (Bk. II, chap. 9).
 CHAPTER FOUR

THE PRINCIPAL TOTEMIC

BELIEFS (END)
The Individual Totem and the Sexual Totem

T hus far, I have e x a m i n e d t o t e m i s m solely as a p u b l i c i n s t i t u t i o n . T h e o n l y

totems discussed have b e e n those shared b y a clan, a phratry, or, i n a sense,
1
the t r i b e . T h e i n d i v i d u a l h a d a part i n t h e m o n l y as a m e m b e r o f the g r o u p .
B u t w e understand that there is n o r e l i g i o n w i t h o u t an i n d i v i d u a l aspect. T h i s
general observation applies t o t o t e m i s m . A p a r t from the i m p e r s o n a l a n d c o l -
lective totems that are foremost, there are others that b e l o n g t o each i n d i v i d -
ual, that express his personality, a n d w h o s e c u l t he celebrates privately.

I
I n some A u s t r a l i a n tribes a n d i n m o s t o f t h e I n d i a n societies o f N o r t h A m e r -
2
i c a , each i n d i v i d u a l maintains a personal relationship w i t h a p a r t i c u l a r o b -
j e c t , w h i c h is comparable t o the relationship that each clan maintains w i t h its
t o t e m . T h a t object is sometimes an i n a n i m a t e b e i n g o r s o m e t h i n g m a n -
made, b u t i t is o f t e n an a n i m a l . I n some cases, o n l y a p a r t i c u l a r part o f the
3
body, such as the head, the feet, o r the liver, has the same f u n c t i o n .
T h e n a m e o f the t h i n g also serves as the n a m e o f the i n d i v i d u a l . I t is his
personal name, a first n a m e that is added t o his collective t o t e m , j u s t as the

'The totems are the tribe's property in the sense that the tribe as a whole has an interest in the cult
each clan owes to its totem.
2
Frazer has made a full compilation of the texts about individual totemism in North America ([James
George Frazer], Totemism and Exogamy, vol. Ill [London, Macmillan, 1910], pp. 370—456).
3
For example, among the Hurons, the Iroquois, and the Algonquins ([Pierre François Xavier de]
Charlevoix, Histoire [et description générale de la Nouvelle Frame], vol. VI [Paris, Chez la Veuve Ganeau,
1744], pp. 67—70; [Gabriel] Sagard, Le Grand voyage au pays des Hurons [Paris, Tross, 1865], p. 160), and
among the Thompson Indians ([James Alexander] Teit, "The Thompson Indians of British Columbia,"
AMNH, vol. II (1900), p. 355).

158
The Principal Totemic Beliefs (End) 159

praenomen o f t h e R o m a n s is added t o the nomen gentilicium. I t is t r u e that this

4
is d o c u m e n t e d f o r o n l y a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f societies, b u t i t is p r o b a b l y
widespread. I n d e e d , I w i l l presently s h o w that the t h i n g a n d the i n d i v i d u a l
are o f the same k i n d . I d e n t i t y o f k i n d entails i d e n t i t y o f name. B e i n g g i v e n
i n the course o f especially i m p o r t a n t r e l i g i o u s ceremonies, this forename has
a q u a l i t y o f sacredness. I t is n o t p r o n o u n c e d i n the o r d i n a r y circumstances o f
profane life. S o m e t i m e s , i n d e e d , the w o r d used i n everyday language t o des-
5
ignate t h e t h i n g is s o m e w h a t m o d i f i e d f o r that special use —this, because the
w o r d s o f everyday language are e x c l u d e d f r o m r e l i g i o u s life.
I n t h e A m e r i c a n tribes, at least, an e m b l e m is added t o this name, w h i c h
belongs t o each i n d i v i d u a l a n d i n various ways represents the t h i n g designated
by the name. F o r example, each M a n d a n wears the skin o f the a n i m a l w h o s e
6 7
namesake he i s . I f i t is a b i r d , he adorns h i m s e l f w i t h the bird's feathers. The
8
H u r o n s and the A l g o n q u i n s t a t t o o its image o n t h e i r b o d i e s . I t is represented
9
o n his w e a p o n s . A m o n g the tribes o f the N o r t h w e s t , the i n d i v i d u a l e m b l e m
is carved o r sculpted o n utensils, houses, a n d so f o r t h , as is the collective e m -
1 0
b l e m o f the c l a n . T h e i n d i v i d u a l e m b l e m serves as a m a r k o f personal p r o p -
11
erty. O f t e n the t w o coats o f arms are c o m b i n e d , w h i c h p a r t l y explains w h y
12
the t o t e m i c escutcheons s h o w such v a r i e t y a m o n g these p e o p l e s .
T h e r e are the closest o f b o n d s b e t w e e n the i n d i v i d u a l a n d t h e a n i m a l

4
This is the case for the Yuin ([Alfred William] Howitt, The Native Tribes [of South-East Australia, New
York, Macmillan, 1904], p. 133); the Kurnai (Native Tribes, p. 135); several tribes of Queensland ([Walter
Edmund] Roth, Superstition, Magic and Medicine, North Queensland Ethnography, Bulletin no. 5 [Brisbane,
G. A. Vaughn, 1903], p. 19; [Alfred C ] Haddon, Head-Hunters, [Black, White, and Brown, London,
Methuen, 1901], p. 193); among the Delaware ([John Gottlieb Ernestus] Heckewelder, "An Account of
the History [Manners and Customs] of the Indian Nations [Who Once Inhabited Pennsylvania"],
HLCAPS, vol. I [1819], p. 238); among the Thompson Indians (Teit, "Thompson Indians," p. 355); and
among the Salish Stadumh ([Charles] Hill Tout, "Report on the Ethnology of the Stadumh of British
Columbia," _//17, vol. XXXV [1905], pp. 147ÎF.).
5
Hill Tout, "Ethnology of the Stadumh," p. 154.
6
[George] Cadin, Illustration of the Manners, Customs [and Condition of the North American Indians, 2
vols.], London [H. G. Bohn], 1876, vol. I, p. 36.
7
[George] Cadin, [Nouvelles des missions dAmérique, extraits des] lettres édifiantes et curieuses, 6th ed.
[Paris, Martial, 1883], pp. 172ff.
8
Charlevoix, Histoire de la nouvelle France, vol. VI, p. 69.

'[James Owen] Dorsey, "A Study of Siouan Cults," in XIth Annual Report [BAE, Washington, Gov-
ernment Printing Office, 1894], p. 443.
"'[Franz] Boas, ["The Social Organization and Secret Societies of the] Kwakiud [Indians," in RNMfor
1895, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1897], p. 323.
"Hill Tout, "Ethnology of the Stadumh," p. 154.
12
Boas, "Kwakiutl," p. 323.
160 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

w h o s e n a m e he bears. T h e nature o f the a n i m a l is p a r t a n d parcel o f the m a n ,

w h o has its qualities as w e l l as its faults. F o r example, i t is t h o u g h t that a m a n
w i t h t h e eagle as his i n d i v i d u a l e m b l e m possesses t h e gift o f seeing t h e future;
i f he carries t h e n a m e o f the bear, i t is said t h a k h e is l i k e l y t o be w o u n d e d i n
13
fights, t h e bear b e i n g slow, heavy, a n d easily t r a p p e d ; i f t h e a n i m a l is d e -
1 4
spised, t h e m a n is t h e o b j e c t o f the same c o n t e m p t . Indeed, the kinship be-
t w e e n t h e t w o is so great that i n c e r t a i n circumstances, especially danger, t h e
1 5
m a n is t h o u g h t capable o f assuming t h e animal's f o r m . Inversely, t h e a n i m a l
16
is regarded as t h e man's d o u b l e , his alter e g o . T h e association b e t w e e n t h e
t w o is so close that t h e i r destinies are o f t e n considered t o be i n t e r d e p e n d e n t :
17
N o t h i n g can h a p p e n t o o n e w i t h o u t repercussions felt b y t h e o t h e r . I f the
a n i m a l dies, t h e life o f t h e m a n is threatened. H e n c e a v e r y c o m m o n r u l e is
that o n e m u s t n e i t h e r k i l l t h e a n i m a l n o r , especially, eat its flesh. W h e n a p -
p l i e d t o t h e clan, this p r o h i b i t i o n carries w i t h i t a l l sorts o f allowances a n d
18
c o m p r o m i s e s , b u t i n this case i t is far m o r e categorical a n d a b s o l u t e .
F o r its part, t h e a n i m a l protects t h e m a n a n d is a k i n d o f p a t r o n . I t alerts
1 9
h i m t o possible dangers a n d t o means o f escaping t h e m ; i t is said t o be t h e
20
man's friend. I n fact, since i t is o f t e n p r e s u m e d t o have m i r a c u l o u s powers,

u
Miss [Alice C ] Fletcher, "The Import of the Totem, A Studyfromthe Omaha Tribe, RSI [Wash-
ington, Government Printing Office], 1897, p. 583. Similar facts will be found in Teit, "Thompson In-
dians," pp. 354, 356; Peter Jones, History of the Ojibway Indians: [With Especial Reference to Their Conversion
to Christianity, London, A. W. Bennet, 1869], p. 87.
14
This is, for example, the case of the dog among the Salish Stadumh because of the servile state in
which he lives (Hill Tout, "Ethnology of the Stadumh," p. 153).
15
Langloh Parker [Catherine Sommerville Field Parker], [The] Euahlayi [Tribe] [London, A. Consta-
ble, 1905], p. 21.
16
"The spirit of a man," says Mrs. Parker (ibid.), "is in his Yunbeai (individual totem) and his Yunbeai
is in him."
"Parker, Euahlayi, p. 20. It is the same among certain Salish ([Charles] Hill Tout, "Ethnological Re-
port on the Stseelis and Skaulits Tribes [of the Halokmelem Division of the Salish of British Columbia],"
JAI, vol. XXXIV [1904], p. 324). This is common among the Indians of Central America ([Daniel G.]
Brinton, "Nagualism: A Study in Native American Folk-lore and History," APS, vol. XXXIII [1894],
p. 32).
18
Parker, Euahlayi, p. 20; Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 147; Dorsey, "Siouan Cults," p. 443. Incidentally,
Frazer has surveyed the American cases and has established the universality of this prohibition (Totemism
and Exogamy, vol. Ill, p. 450). True, we have seen that in America the individual had to begin by killing
the animal whose skin was used to make what the ethnographers call his "medicine bag." But this custom
has been found only infivetribes; it is probably a late and altered form of the institution.
19
Howitt, NativeTribes, pp. 135, 147, 387, and "On Australian Medicine Men,"J,4i, vol. XVI (1887),
p. 34; [James Alexander] Teit, "The Shuswap" [AMNH, Leiden, E.J. Brill, 1908], p. 607.
20
[Rev. A.] Meyer, "Manners and Customs of the Aborigines of the Encounter Bay Tribe," in [James
Dominick] Woods [The Native Tribes of South Australia, Adelaide, E. S. Wigg. 1879], p. 197.
The Principal Totemic Beliefs (End) 161

i t passes those o n t o its h u m a n partner, w h o believes t h e m t o be p r o o f against

2 1
bullets, arrows, a n d every sort o f b l o w . T h e i n d i v i d u a l has such confidence
i n the efficacy o f his p r o t e c t o r that he braves t h e greatest dangers a n d p e r -
f o r m s the m o s t b r e a t h t a k i n g feats o f prowess w i t h serene fearlessness. F a i t h
22
gives h i m the necessary courage a n d s t r e n g t h . Nevertheless, the man's ties
w i t h his p a t r o n are n o t ones o f dependency, p u r e a n d simple. T h e m a n , for
his part, can act u p o n t h e a n i m a l . H e gives i t orders a n d has p o w e r over i t . A
K u r n a i w h o s e f r i e n d a n d ally is the shark believes that, w i t h an i n c a n t a t i o n ,
23
he can disperse sharks that threaten a b o a t . I n o t h e r cases, the tie c o n t r a c t e d
i n this w a y is t h o u g h t t o b e s t o w u p o n t h e m a n a special capacity f o r success
2 4
i n h u n t i n g the a n i m a l .
B y t h e i r v e r y nature, these relations seem strongly t o i m p l y that the b e i n g
w i t h w h i c h each i n d i v i d u a l is thus associated can itself be o n l y an i n d i v i d u a l ,
n o t a species. N o o n e has a species as alter ego. I n some cases, i n fact i t q u i t e
2 5
clearly is such a n d such a d e f i n i t e tree, r o c k , o r stone that plays this r o l e .
W h e n e v e r i t is an a n i m a l , o r w h e n e v e r the lives o f the a n i m a l and the m a n are
considered t o be b o u n d u p together, such is necessarily the case. I t is n o t pos-
sible t o be j o i n e d w i t h a w h o l e species i n an interdependence o f this k i n d , b e -
cause there is n o day, o r f o r that m a t t e r n o instant, i n w h i c h the species does
n o t lose o n e o f its m e m b e r s . Still, the p r i m i t i v e has a c e r t a i n i n a b i l i t y t o c o n -
ceive o f the i n d i v i d u a l apart f r o m the species. T h e b o n d that unites h i m w i t h
the o n e extends altogether naturally t o the o t h e r ; he has the same feeling f o r
2 6
b o t h . T h u s i t comes about that the w h o l e species is sacred t o h i m .

21
[Franz] Boas, "Second General Report on the Indians of British Columbia," in [ByL4S], Vlth Re-
port on the North- WesternTribes of Canada [London, Offices of the Association, 1891], p. 93; Teit, "Thomp-
son Indians," p. 336; Boas, "Kwakiud," p. 394.
^Corroborating evidence is to be found in Hill Tout, "Ethnology of the Stadumh," pp. 144—145. Cf.
Parker, Euahlayi, p. 29.
"According to information given Frazer by Howitt in a personal letter (Totemism and Exogamy, vol. I,
p. 495, n.2).
24
Hill Tout, "Stseelis and Skaulits Tribes," p. 324.
25
Howitt, "Australian Medicine Men," JAI, vol. XVI, p. 34; [Joseph François] Lafitau, Moeurs des
sauvages américains, vol. I [Paris, Saugrain l'ainé, 1724], p. 370; Charlevoix, Histoire de la Nouvelle France,
vol. VI, p. 68. The same is true of the atai and the tamaniu at Mota ([Robert Henry] Codrington, The
Melanesians, [Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1891], pp. 250-251).
26
Consequendy, the line of demarcation that Frazer thought he could establish between these animal
protectors and the fetishes does not exist. He thought fetishism would begin where the protector being is
an individual object and not a class (Frazer, Totemism and Exogamy, p. 56); as we know from as early as the
tribes of Australia, however, a specific animal sometimes plays this role (see Howitt, "[On] Australian
Medicine Men; [or Doctors and Wizards of Some Australian Tribes], JAI, vol. XVI, [1887], p. 34). The
truth is that the notions of fetish and fetishism do not correspond to anything definite.
162 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

T h i s p r o t e c t o r b e i n g is called b y different names i n different societies:

2 7
nagual a m o n g the Indians o f M e x i c o , manitou a m o n g the A l g o n q u i n s , okki
2 8 29 30
a m o n g the H u r o n s , snam a m o n g c e r t a i n S a l i s h a n d sulia a m o n g o t h e r s ,
3 1 3 2
budjan a m o n g the Y u i n , yunbeai a m o n g t h e E u a h l a y i , a n d so o n . Because
o f the i m p o r t a n c e these beliefs a n d practices have a m o n g the Indians o f
N o r t h A m e r i c a , some have p r o p o s e d t o create the w o r d nagualism o r mani-
3 3
touism t o designate t h e m . B u t b y g i v i n g t h e m a special a n d distinctive
name, w e m a y w e l l m i s c o n s t r u e t h e i r relationship w i t h t o t e m i s m . I n fact, the
same p r i n c i p l e s are a p p l i e d , i n o n e case t o the clan, i n t h e o t h e r t o the i n d i -
v i d u a l . I n b o t h , the b e l i e f is the same: T h e r e are l i v i n g ties b e t w e e n things
a n d m e n , a n d the things are e n d o w e d w i t h special powers f r o m w h i c h the
h u m a n allies b e n e f i t . T h e c u s t o m is also t h e same: G i v i n g t h e m a n the n a m e
o f the t h i n g w i t h w h i c h he is associated, a n d a d d i n g an e m b l e m t o this name.
T h e t o t e m is the p a t r o n o f the clan, j u s t as t h e p a t r o n o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l is a
personal t o t e m . So there is g o o d reason f o r the t e r m i n o l o g y t o make this
k i n s h i p b e t w e e n the t w o systems visible. T h i s is w h y , w i t h Frazer, I w i l l call
the c u l t that each i n d i v i d u a l renders t o his p a t r o n individual totemism. Use o f
this t e r m i n o l o g y is f u r t h e r j u s t i f i e d b y t h e fact that i n some cases the p r i m i -
tive h i m s e l f uses t h e same w o r d t o designate t h e t o t e m o f the clan a n d the a n -
3 4
imal protector o f the i n d i v i d u a l . T y l o r and P o w e l l have rejected i t a n d
called f o r different t e r m s f o r the t w o sorts o f r e l i g i o u s i n s t i t u t i o n s because,
i n t h e i r v i e w , the c o l l e c t i v e t o t e m is o n l y a n a m e , a shared label w i t h o u t r e -

27
Brinton, "Nagualism," APS, vol. XXXIII [1894], p. 32.
28
Charlevoix, Histoire de la Nouvelle France, p. 67.
29
Hill Tout, "Ethnology of the Statlumh," p. 142.
30
Hill Tout, "Stseelis and Skaulits Tribes," pp. 31 Iff.
31
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 133.
32
Parker, Euahlayi, p. 20.
33
[Edwin Sidney Hardand], "An American View of Totemism, [A Note on Major Powell's Article] in
Man, vol. II (1902), 84, pp. 113—115 [This does not mention "nagualism," and says "manitu," not "man-
ituism." Trans.]; [Edward Burnett] Tylor, "Note on the Haida Totem-Post Lately Erected in the Pitt River
Museum at Oxford," Man, vol. II, (1902), pp. 1—3, [Again, there is no mention of "nagualism." Trans.];
[Andrew] Lang expressed similar ideas in Social Origins [London, Longmans, 1903], pp. 133—135. Finally,
in a revision of his earlier view, Frazer himself now believes that it is best to designate collective totems
and guardian spirits by different names until the relationship that exists between them is better known
(Totemism and Exogamy, vol. Ill, p. 456).
34
This is the case in Australia among the Yuin (Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 81) and among the Narrinyeri
(Meyer, "The Encounter Bay Tribe," in Woods, Native Tribes of South Australia, pp. 197ff.).
The Principal Totemic Beliefs (End) 163

35
ligious characteristics. B u t to the contrary, w e k n o w that i t is a sacred t h i n g
to an even greater degree t h a n the a n i m a l p r o t e c t o r . As this study develops,
the e x t e n t t o w h i c h the t w o sorts o f t o t e m i s m are inseparable will be
3 6
shown.
Nonetheless, h o w e v e r great the k i n s h i p b e t w e e n these t w o institutions,
there are i m p o r t a n t differences b e t w e e n t h e m . Whereas the clan considers i t -
self t o be the offspring o f the t o t e m i c a n i m a l o r plant, the i n d i v i d u a l does n o t
believe he has any relation o f descent w i t h his personal t o t e m . I t is a f r i e n d , a
partner, and a protector, b u t i t is n o t a relative. T h e i n d i v i d u a l makes use o f the
virtues i t is h e l d to possess, b u t he is n o t o f the same b l o o d . Second, the m e m -
bers o f a clan p e r m i t n e i g h b o r i n g clans t o eat the a n i m a l w h o s e name they c o l -
lectively bear, p r o v i d e d that the necessary formalities are observed. B y contrast,
the i n d i v i d u a l n o t o n l y respects the species t o w h i c h his personal t o t e m b e -
longs b u t also does his u t m o s t t o defend i t against strangers, at least wherever
the destinies o f the m a n and the a n i m a l are t h o u g h t t o be b o u n d u p together.
These t w o k i n d s o f totems differ m o s t i n the m a n n e r b y w h i c h t h e y are
acquired.
T h e c o l l e c t i v e t o t e m belongs t o the legal status o f every i n d i v i d u a l . G e n -
erally speaking, i t is hereditary; at any rate, i t is b i r t h that designates i t and
men's w i l l has n o role. T h e c h i l d sometimes has t h e t o t e m o f its m o t h e r
( K a m i l a r o i , D i e r i , U r a b u n n a , etc.), sometimes that o f its father ( N a r r i n y e r i ,
Warramunga, etc.), a n d sometimes the t o t e m t h a t is m o s t i m p o r t a n t at
the place w h e r e his m o t h e r c o n c e i v e d ( A r u n t a , L o r i t j a ) . B u t the i n d i v i d u a l
37
t o t e m is a c q u i r e d b y a deliberate a c t : D e t e r m i n i n g i t requires a series o f
rites. T h e m e t h o d m o s t w i d e l y used a m o n g the Indians o f A m e r i c a is the
f o l l o w i n g : T o w a r d p u b e r t y , as the t i m e o f i n i t i a t i o n approaches, the y o u n g

35
"The totem no more resembles the patron of the individual," says Tylor, "than an escutcheon re-
sembles an image of a saint." ("The Haida Totem-Post," p. 2.) Likewise, today Frazer rallies to Tylor's
opinion, because he now denies that the totem of the clan is in any way religious (Totemism and Exogamy,
vol. HI, p. 452).
36
See below, Bk. 2, chap. 9.
"However, according to a passage in Mathews, the individual totem is hereditary among the
Wotjobaluk. "Each individual," he says, "lays claim to an animal, a plant, or an inanimate object as its spe-
cial and personal totem, which he inherits from his mother" ([Robert Hamilton] Mathews, ["Ethnolog-
ical Notes on the Aboriginal Tribes of New South Wales and Victoria"], RSNSW, vol. XXXVIII (1904),
p. 291). But it is obvious that if all the children of the same family had the totem of their mother as their
personal totem, neither they nor their mother would have personal totems. Mathews probably means that
each individual chooses his individual totem from among a group of things attributed to the mother's clan.
We will see, in fact, that each clan has its own individual totems that are its exclusive property and that the
members of other clans cannot use them. In this sense, birth in some measure (but in that measure only)
defines the personal totem.
164 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

m a n w i t h d r a w s t o a place apart—a forest, f o r example. T h e r e , d u r i n g a p e -

r i o d that varies f r o m a f e w days t o several years, he submits t o all k i n d s o f e x -
ercises that are e x h a u s t i n g a n d c o n t r a r y t o his nature. H e fasts, m o r t i f i e s
himself, a n d mutilates himself. S o m e t i m e s he wanders, u t t e r i n g t e r r i b l e
screams a n d h o w l s ; sometimes he stays still, stretched o u t o n the g r o u n d ,
g r o a n i n g . H e dances sometimes, prays sometimes, a n d sometimes calls o u t t o
his o r d i n a r y deities. P r o c e e d i n g i n this way, h e f i n a l l y w o r k s h i m s e l f i n t o a
state o f intense s u p e r - e x c i t e m e n t that is v e r y close t o d e l i r i u m . W h e n he has
reached this p a r o x y s m , his m e n t a l representations easily take o n a h a l l u c i n a -
t o r y character. " W h e n , " says H e c k e w e l d e r , "a b o y is o n the eve o f b e i n g i n i -
tiated, he is subjected t o an a l t e r n a t i n g r e g i m e o f fasting and m e d i c a l
treatment; he abstains from all f o o d , h e swallows the m o s t p o w e r f u l a n d r e -
pulsive drugs; o n occasion, h e d r i n k s i n t o x i c a t i n g c o n c o c t i o n s u n t i l his m i n d
is g e n u i n e l y i n a state o f c o n f u s i o n . A t that m o m e n t , he has o r believes he has
visions, e x t r a o r d i n a r y dreams t o w h i c h the entire exercise has n a t u r a l l y p r e -
disposed h i m . H e imagines h i m s e l f flying t h r o u g h the air, m o v i n g u n d e r the
g r o u n d , j u m p i n g over valleys f r o m o n e s u m m i t t o the other, f i g h t i n g a n d d e -
38
feating giants a n d m o n s t e r s . " U n d e r these c o n d i t i o n s , i f w h i l e d r e a m i n g o r
awake h e sees ( o r t h i n k s he sees, w h i c h a m o u n t s t o t h e same t h i n g ) an a n i -
m a l appearing t o h i m that seems t o s h o w f r i e n d l y i n t e n t i o n s , h e w i l l i m a g -
3 9
i n e he has discovered the p a t r o n that he has b e e n w a i t i n g f o r .
40
T h i s process is rarely used i n A u s t r a l i a . T h e r e , the personal t o t e m seems
4 1 4 2
instead t o be i m p o s e d b y a t h i r d person, either at b i r t h o r at i n i t i a t i o n . I t is
usually a relative w h o plays this role, o r i t can be a person w i t h special powers,
such as an o l d m a n o r a m a g i c i a n . D i v i n a t i o n is sometimes used for this p u r -
pose. A t C h a r l o t t e Bay, at C a p e B e d f o r d , o r o n the Proserpine R i v e r , f o r
example, the g r a n d m o t h e r o r another o l d w o m a n takes a small part o f the

38
Heckewelder, "Manners and Customs of the Indian Nations," HLCAPS, vol. I, p. 238.
39
See Dorsey, "Siouan Cults," p. 507; Catlin, North American Indians, vol. I, p. 37; Fletcher, "The Im-
port of the Totem," in Smithsonian Rep. for 1897, p. 580; Teit, "Thompson Indians," pp. 317—320; Hill
Tout, "Ethnology of the Stadumh," p. 144.
40
Still, one finds examples. The Kurnai magicians see their personal totems revealed in dreams
(Howitt, NativeTribes, p. 387, and "Australian Medicine Men," p. 34). The men of Cape Bedford believe
that when an old man dreams of something during the night, that thing is the personal totem of the first
person he will meet the next day (Roth, Superstition, Magic, and Medicine, p. 19). But it is probable that only
complementary and accessory personal totems are acquired by this method; for, as I say in the text, within
that same tribe, a different process is used at initiation.
41
In certain tribes about which Roth speaks (Superstition, Magic and Medicine); and in certain tribes in
the vicinity of Maryborough (Howitt, NativeTribes, p. 147).
42
Among the Wiradjuri (Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 406, and "Australian Medicine Men," p. 50).
The Principal Totemic Beliefs (End) 165

u m b i l i c a l c o r d attached t o the placenta a n d w h i r l s i t q u i t e forcefully. D u r i n g

this t i m e , o t h e r o l d w o m e n seated i n a circle propose different names, o n e af-
ter the other. T h e n a m e that is p r o n o u n c e d j u s t at the m o m e n t the c o r d
43
breaks is a d o p t e d . A m o n g t h e Yaraikanna o f Cape Y o r k , the y o u n g n o v i c e is
given a h t t l e w a t e r t o rinse his m o u t h after his t o o t h has b e e n p u l l e d , a n d he
is asked t o spit i n t o a b u c k e t f i l l e d w i t h water. T h e o l d m e n carefully e x a m i n e
the k i n d o f c l o t that is f o r m e d b y the b l o o d a n d saliva he has spat o u t , a n d the
natural object o f w h i c h its shape r e m i n d s t h e m becomes the personal t o t e m o f
4 4
the y o u n g m a n . I n o t h e r cases, the t o t e m is t r a n s m i t t e d d i r e c d y from o n e i n -
45
d i v i d u a l t o another, f o r example, from father t o son o r uncle t o n e p h e w .
T h i s m e t h o d is also used i n A m e r i c a . I n an example that H i l l T o u t reports, the
46
operator was a s h a m a n w h o w a n t e d t o transmit his t o t e m to his n e p h e w :

The uncle took the symbolic emblem o f his snam (personal totem), w h i c h
i n this case was the dried skin o f a bird. H e asked his nephew to blow o n i t ,
then he himself d i d likewise and pronounced some secret words. I t then
seemed to Paul (which was the nephew's name) that the skin became a l i v -
ing bird that began to fly around them for several moments before disap-
pearing. Paul received instructions to procure the skin o f a bird o f the same
species that very day, and to wear i t ; this he did. T h e following night, he
had a dream i n w h i c h the snam appeared to h i m i n the f o r m o f a human be-
ing w h o revealed to h i m the secret name by w h i c h i t might be summoned,
47
and w h o promised h i m its protection.

N o t o n l y is t h e i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m a c q u i r e d , n o t g i v e n , b u t m o r e t h a n that,
the a c q u i s i t i o n o f o n e is n o t o b l i g a t o r y e v e r y w h e r e . T h e r e are m a n y A u s -
4 8
tralian tribes i n w h i c h that c u s t o m seems t o be c o m p l e t e l y u n k n o w n . And

"Ibid.
44
Haddon, Head Hunters, pp. 193ff.
45
Among the Wiradjuri, [Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 406, and "On Australian Medicine Men," in JAI,
vol. XVI, p. 50],
•"In general, it seems clear that these transmissions from father to son occur only when the father is a
shaman or a magician. This is also the case among the Thompson Indians (Teit, "The Thompson Indi-
ans," p. 320) and among the Wiradjuri, to whom reference has been made.
47
Hill Tout ("Ethnology of the Stadumh," pp. 146—147). The basic rite is the one that consists of
blowing on the skin. If it had not been done correcdy, the transmission would not have occurred because
the breath is the soul. When both blow on the skin of the animal, the magician and the recipient exhale
parts of their souls, and these parts interpenetrate one another while communing with the nature of the
animal, which is also (in the form of its symbol) a participant in the ceremony.
48
[Northcote Whitridge] Thomas, "Further Remarks on Mr. Hill Tout's Views on Totemism," in
Man, vol. IV (1904), 53, p. 85.
166 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

even w h e r e i t does exist, i t is o f t e n o p t i o n a l . A m o n g t h e E u a h l a y i , all the m a -

gicians have i n d i v i d u a l totems f r o m w h i c h t h e y get t h e i r p o w e r s , b u t a great
m a n y l a y m e n have n o n e at all. I t is a favor t h e m a g i c i a n can dispense b u t o n e
he reserves f o r his friends a n d favorites a n d f o r those w h o aspire t o b e c o m e
49
his colleagues. L i k e w i s e , a m o n g c e r t a i n Salish, o n l y i n d i v i d u a l s w h o w a n t
t o excel i n w a r o r h u n t i n g , o r w h o aspire t o b e c o m e shamans, e q u i p t h e m -
50
selves w i t h protectors o f this s o r t . T h u s , at least a m o n g c e r t a i n peoples, the
i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m seems t o be regarded m o r e as an advantage o r a c o n v e -
nience t h a n as a necessity. I t is g o o d t o o b t a i n one, b u t there is n o o b l i g a t i o n
t o d o so. O n the o t h e r h a n d , there is n o o b l i g a t i o n t o settle f o r o n l y one. I f
o n e wants t o be better p r o t e c t e d , n o t h i n g stands i n the w a y o f t r y i n g t o o b -
51
t a i n several; a n d inversely, i f the p r o t e c t o r o n e has played its role p o o r l y , i t
52
can be r e p l a c e d .
B u t w h i l e there is s o m e t h i n g m o r e o p t i o n a l a n d free a b o u t i n d i v i d u a l
t o t e m i s m , i t has staying p o w e r that t h e t o t e m i s m o f t h e clan c a n n o t m a t c h .
O n e o f H i l l Tout's m a i n i n f o r m a n t s was a b a p t i z e d Salish. A l t h o u g h he h a d
sincerely a b a n d o n e d all the beliefs o f his ancestors a n d h a d b e c o m e a m o d e l
53
catechist, his f a i t h i n the efficacy o f personal totems r e m a i n e d u n s h a k a b l e .
Similarly, a l t h o u g h n o visible traces o f collective t o t e m i s m are left i n the c i v -
i l i z e d c o u n t r i e s , a n o t i o n o f s o l i d a r i t y b e t w e e n each i n d i v i d u a l and an a n i -
m a l , p l a n t , o r some o t h e r e x t e r n a l o b j e c t is t h e basis o f customs that can still
54
be observed i n several E u r o p e a n c o u n t r i e s .

II
B e t w e e n i n d i v i d u a l a n d c o l l e c t i v e t o t e m i s m , there is an i n t e r m e d i a t e f o r m
that has s o m e t h i n g o f b o t h : sexual t o t e m i s m . F o u n d o n l y i n Australia a n d i n
a small n u m b e r o f tribes, i t has b e e n r e p o r t e d m a i n l y i n V i c t o r i a and i n N e w

49
Langloh Parker, Euahlayi, pp. 20, 29.
50
Hill Tout, "Ethnology of the Statlumh," pp. 143, 146; "Stseelis and Skaulits Tribes," p. 324.
51
Parker, Euahlayi, p. 30; Teit, "The Thompson Indians," p. 320; Hill Tout, "Ethnology of the
Statlumh," p. 144.
"Charlevoix, Histoire de la Nouvelle France, vol. VI, p. 69.

"Hill Tout, "Ethnology of the Stadumh," p. 145.

54
Thus, at the birth of a child, people plant a tree on which they lavish pious care, for they believe that
its fate and the infant's are conjoined. In his Golden Bough, Frazer reported numerous customs or beliefs
that express the same idea in various ways (Cf. [Edwin Sidney] Hartland, Legend of Perseus, vol. II [Lon-
don, D. Nutt, 1894-1896], pp. 1-55).
The Principal Totemic Beliefs (End) 167

55
South Wales. T r u e , M a t h e w s claims t o have observed i t i n every p a r t o f
5 6
Australia he v i s i t e d b u t w i t h o u t p r o v i d i n g specifics t o s u p p o r t his c l a i m .
A m o n g these different peoples, all the m e n o f t h e t r i b e , o n the o n e h a n d ,
and, o n t h e other, all t h e w o m e n f o r m w h a t a m o u n t s t o t w o d i s t i n c t and
even antagonistic societies, n o m a t t e r w h a t clan t h e y b e l o n g to. E a c h o f these
t w o sexual c o r p o r a t i o n s believes itself t o be j o i n e d b y mystical ties t o a spe-
cific a n i m a l . A m o n g the K u r n a i , all the m e n consider themselves as brothers
o f the e m u - w r e n (Yeerung), all the w o m e n as sisters o f t h e l i n n e t ( D j e e t g u n ) ;
all the m e n are Y e e r u n g a n d all t h e w o m e n D j e e t g u n . A m o n g t h e W o t -
j o b a l u k a n d the W i r a d j u r i , respectively, this r o l e is played b y t h e bat a n d t h e
n i g h t j a r (a sort o f screech o w l ) . I n o t h e r tribes, the w o o d p e c k e r replaces the
nightjar. E a c h sex sees t h e a n i m a l t o w h i c h i t is k i n as a p r o t e c t o r that m u s t
5 7
be treated w i t h great respect. T o k i l l o r eat i t is therefore f o r b i d d e n .
T h i s a n i m a l p r o t e c t o r plays the same r o l e w i t h respect t o each sexual so-
c i e t y that t h e t o t e m o f the clan plays w i t h respect t o t h e clan. H e n c e the
58
phrase "sexual t o t e m i s m , " w h i c h I take f r o m F r a z e r , is w a r r a n t e d . I n par-
ticular, this n e w sort o f t o t e m resembles that o f the clan as w e l l , i n t h e sense
that i t t o o is collective. I t belongs w i t h o u t d i s t i n c t i o n t o all i n d i v i d u a l s o f t h e
same sex. I t resembles t h e clan t o t e m also i n t h a t i t i m p l i e s a relationship o f
descent a n d c o m m o n b l o o d b e t w e e n t h e a n i m a l p a t r o n a n d the c o r r e s p o n d -
i n g sex. A m o n g the K u r n a i , all t h e m e n are said t o be descended from
5 9
Y e e r u n g a n d all t h e w o m e n from D j e e t g u n . T h e first observer t o have d e -
scribed that c u r i o u s i n s t i t u t i o n , as early as 1834, used the f o l l o w i n g terms:
" T i l m u n , a small b i r d the size o f a t h r u s h (a sort o f w o o d p e c k e r ) , is c o n s i d -
ered b y the w o m e n as h a v i n g b e e n the first t o m a k e w o m e n . T h e s e birds are

55
Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 148ff. [Lorimer] Fison and [Alfred William] Howitt, Kamilaroi and Kurnai
[Melbourne, G. Robertson, 1880], pp. 194, 201ff. [James] Dawson, Australian Aborigines [Melbourne, G.
Robertson, 1881], p. 52. Petrie reports it also in Queensland ([Constance Campbell Petrie], Tom Petrie's
Reminiscences of Early Queensland [Ferguson, Watson, 1904], pp. 62, 118).
56
Mathews, "Aboriginal Tribes," p. 339. Should one see a trace of sexual totemism in the following
custom of the Warramunga? Before a dead person is buried, a bone from the arm is kept. If it is a woman's,
feathers of the emu are added to the bark in which it is shrouded; if a man's, the feathers of an owl ([Sir
Baldwin Spencer and F.James Gillen, Northern Tribes of Central Australia, London, Macmillan, 1904], p.
169).
"There is even a case cited in which each sexual group Has two sexual totems; in this way would the
Wiradjuri have joined the sexual totems of the Kurnai (emu-wren and linnet) with those of the
Wotjobaluk (bat and nightjar wood owl). See Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 150.
58
Frazer, Totemism and Exogamy, p. 51.
59
Fison and Howitt, Kamilaroi and Kurnai, p. 215.
168 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

60
held i n veneration by w o m e n only." T h u s i t was a great ancestor. Seen from
a n o t h e r p o i n t o f v i e w , this t o t e m resembles the i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m , i n that each
m e m b e r o f the sexual g r o u p is b e l i e v e d t o be personally allied w i t h a d e f i n i t e
i n d i v i d u a l o f the c o r r e s p o n d i n g a n i m a l species. T h e t w o lives are so closely
l i n k e d that the death o f the a n i m a l b r i n g s a b o u t that o f t h e h u m a n . " T h e life
6 1
o f a bat," say the W o t j o b a l u k , "is t h e life o f a m a n . " T h i s is w h y each sex
n o t o n l y h o n o r s its t o t e m b u t also forces the m e m b e r s o f t h e o t h e r sex t o d o
so as w e l l . A n y v i o l a t i o n o f this p r o h i b i t i o n gives rise t o real a n d b l o o d y b a t -
6 2
des b e t w e e n m e n a n d w o m e n .
I n s u m , w h a t is t r u l y u n i q u e a b o u t these totems is that, i n a sense, t h e y
a m o u n t t o t r i b a l t o t e m s . I n d e e d , t h e y arise f r o m t h e fact that people c o n -
ceive o f the w h o l e t r i b e as b e i n g t h e o f f s p r i n g o f a legendary c o u p l e . S u c h a
b e l i e f seems t o i m p l y that the sense o f t r i b e has b e c o m e s t r o n g e n o u g h t o
o v e r c o m e t h e p a r t i c u l a r i s m o f the clans t o some e x t e n t . A s t o t h e reasons that
separate o r i g i n s are assigned t o m e n a n d w o m e n , o n e m u s t p r o b a b l y l o o k t o
63
the fact that the sexes live a p a r t .
I t w o u l d b e i n t e r e s t i n g t o k n o w h o w , i n the m i n d o f an A u s t r a l i a n , sex-
u a l totems are related t o clan t o t e m s — w h a t relations there are b e t w e e n the
t w o ancestors that are placed at t h e o r i g i n o f the t r i b e a n d those from w h i c h
each p a r t i c u l a r clan is t h o u g h t t o descend. B u t t h e e t h n o g r a p h i c data w e
have at present d o n o t p e r m i t us t o resolve that q u e s t i o n . F u r t h e r m o r e , the
natives m a y never have asked that q u e s t i o n o f themselves, h o w e v e r natural
a n d even necessary i t m a y seem t o us, f o r t h e y d o n o t feel t h e n e e d t o c o o r -
6 4
dinate a n d systematize t h e i r beliefs t o t h e same e x t e n t w e d o .

^hrelkeld, cited by Mathews, "The Aboriginal Tribes," p. 339.

"Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 148, 151.
62
Fison and Howitt, Kamilaroi and Kurnai, pp. 200-203; Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 149; Petrie, Reminis-
cences, p. 62. Among the Kurnai, these bloody struggles often end in marriages, to which they are a kind
of ritual prologue. Sometimes the battles become mere games (Tom Petrie's Reminiscences).
63
On this point, see my study [Emile Durkheim] "La Prohibition de l'inceste et ses origines," in AS,
vol. I (1898), pp. 44ff.
"However we will see below (Chap. 9) that there is a relationship between sexual totems and the high
gods.
 C H A P T E R FIVE

ORIGINS OF THESE BELIEFS

Critical Examination of the Theories

T he beliefs I have j u s t r e v i e w e d are clearly r e l i g i o u s i n nature, f o r t h e y i n -

v o l v e a classification o f things as sacred a n d profane. S p i r i t u a l beings are
doubdess n o t at issue. I n the course o f m y e x p o s i t i o n , I have h a d n o n e e d
even t o say the w o r d s "spirits," "genies," o r " d i v i n e personages." H o w e v e r , i f ,
f o r this reason, some w r i t e r s (about w h o m I shall have m o r e t o say) have r e -
fused t o see t o t e m i s m as a r e l i g i o n , i t is because t h e y have b e e n o p e r a t i n g
w i t h a m i s t a k e n idea o f the religious p h e n o m e n o n .
A t t h e same t i m e , r e l i g i o n is guaranteed t o be the m o s t p r i m i t i v e that can
be observed n o w a n d i n all p r o b a b i l i t y the m o s t p r i m i t i v e that has ever e x -
isted, f o r i t is inseparable f r o m social o r g a n i z a t i o n based u p o n clans. I have
s h o w n that t o t e m i s m can o n l y be d e f i n e d i n t e r m s o f that social o r g a n i z a t i o n
and, f u r t h e r m o r e , that clans, i n the f o r m t h e y take i n a great m a n y A u s t r a l i a n
societies, c o u l d n o t have c o m e i n t o b e i n g w i t h o u t t h e t o t e m . T h e m e m b e r s
o f a single clan are j o i n e d t o one a n o t h e r b y n e i t h e r c o m m o n residence n o r
c o m m o n b l o o d , since t h e y are n o t necessarily consanguineous a n d are o f t e n
scattered t h r o u g h o u t the t r i b a l t e r r i t o r y . T h e i r u n i t y arises solely f r o m h a v -
i n g the same n a m e a n d the same e m b l e m , from b e l i e v i n g they have the same
relations w i t h the same categories o f things, a n d from p r a c t i c i n g the same
r i t e s — i n o t h e r w o r d s , from t h e fact that t h e y c o m m u n e i n the same t o t e m i c
c u l t . T h u s , at least insofar as t h e clan is n o t i d e n t i c a l w i t h the l o c a l g r o u p ,
t o t e m i s m a n d the clan i m p l y o n e another. O r g a n i z a t i o n based o n clans is t h e
simplest w e k n o w , f o r i t exists i n a l l its essentials the m o m e n t a society has
t w o p r i m a r y clans. I t f o l l o w s that there c a n n o t be a s i m p l e r society, so l o n g
as n o n e w i t h o n l y a single clan has yet b e e n f o u n d — a n d I believe n o trace o f
that has b e e n u p t o n o w . A r e l i g i o n so closely allied w i t h the social system
that is s i m p l e r t h a n all others can be regarded as t h e m o s t elementary w e can
k n o w . I f w e can f i n d o u t the o r i g i n o f t h e beliefs j u s t analyzed, w e m a y w e l l
discover b y t h e same stroke w h a t k i n d l e d r e l i g i o u s f e e l i n g i n h u m a n i t y .

169
170 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

I t is useful, before addressing this p r o b l e m , t o e x a m i n e the m o s t a u t h o r -

itative solutions t h a t have b e e n offered.

I
W e start w i t h a g r o u p o f scholars w h o believe t h e y can e x p l a i n t o t e m i s m by
1 2
d e r i v i n g i t from an earlier r e l i g i o n . F o r T y l o r a n d f o r W i l k e n , t o t e m i s m is
a special f o r m o f t h e ancestor c u l t . F o r t h e m , t r a n s m i g r a t i o n o f s o u l s — w i d e -
spread, t o be sure—is the d o c t r i n e that served as a t r a n s i t i o n b e t w e e n these
t w o r e l i g i o u s systems. A great m a n y peoples believe that the s o u l does n o t re-
m a i n eternally d i s e m b o d i e d after death b u t comes again t o animate some l i v -
i n g b o d y . Besides, "as t h e p s y c h o l o g y o f the i n f e r i o r races establishes no
clear-cut l i n e o f d e m a r c a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e souls o f m e n a n d those o f animals,
i t has n o t r o u b l e a c c e p t i n g the t r a n s m i g r a t i o n o f h u m a n souls i n t o t h e b o d -
3 4
ies o f animals." T y l o r cites a n u m b e r o f such cases. U n d e r these c i r c u m -
stances, the r e l i g i o u s respect i n s p i r e d b y t h e ancestor is q u i t e naturally
transferred t o the a n i m a l w i t h w h i c h i t is t h e n c e f o r t h assimilated. T h e a n i -
m a l thus s e r v i n g all that ancestor's descendants as t h e vessel o f a revered b e -
i n g becomes a sacred t h i n g a n d the o b j e c t o f a c u l t — i n short, a t o t e m f o r the
clan that is t h e ancestor's issue.
Facts r e p o r t e d b y W i l k e n a b o u t the societies o f t h e M a l a y A r c h i p e l a g o
w o u l d t e n d t o prove t h a t this is i n d e e d t h e w a y i n w h i c h t o t e m i c beliefs de-
v e l o p e d there. I n Java a n d Sumatra, crocodiles are especially h o n o r e d ; people
v i e w t h e m as b e n e v o l e n t p r o t e c t o r s a n d m a k e offerings t o t h e m . T h e cult
that is also rendered t o t h e m stems from the b e l i e f that t h e y incarnate the
souls o f ancestors. T h e Malays o f t h e P h i l i p p i n e s consider the c r o c o d i l e t o be
t h e i r grandfather. T h e t i g e r is treated i n the same way, f o r the same reasons.
5
S i m i l a r beliefs have b e e n f o u n d a m o n g the B a n t u peoples. I n Melanesia, an

'[Edward Burnett Tylor], Primitive Culture, vol. I [New York, Henry Holt, 1874], [vol. I,] p. 402, vol.
II, p. 237, and "Remarks on Totemism, with Special Reference to Some Modern Theories [Respecting]
It," in JAI, vol. XXVIII [1899, pp. 133-148], and vol. I, new series, p. 138.
2
[Albertus Christian Kruijt Wilken], HetAnimisme bij den Volken van den indischen Archipel ['s Graven-
hage, M. Nijhoff, 1906], pp. 69-75.
3
Tylor, Primitive Culture [vol. II, p. 6].

"Ibid. [vol. II, pp. 6-18].

5
G. McCall Theal, Records of South-Eastern Africa, vol. VII. I know this work only through an article
by James George] Frazer, "South African Totemism," which appeared in Man [vol. I], 1901, no. I l l [pp.
135-136].
Origins of These Beliefs 171

i n f l u e n t i a l m a n w h o is at the p o i n t o f death sometimes announces his desire

to be r e i n c a r n a t e d i n such a n d such an a n i m a l o r plant. I t is easy t o see that
some p a r t i c u l a r object chosen f o r his p o s t h u m o u s residence thereafter be-
6
comes sacred f o r his w h o l e f a m i l y . Far i n d e e d f r o m b e i n g a p r i m i t i v e fact,
t h e n , t o t e m i s m w o u l d t h e n be m e r e l y the p r o d u c t o f a m o r e c o m p l e x p r e -
7
decessor r e l i g i o n .
T h e societies f r o m w h i c h these examples are d r a w n have already attained
a relatively h i g h level o f c u l t u r e ; at any rate, t h e y have g o n e b e y o n d the phase
8
o f p u r e t o t e m i s m . I n those societies, there are families, n o t t o t e m i c clans.
I n d e e d , the m a j o r i t y o f the animals that are g i v e n religious h o n o r s are v e n -
erated n o t b y specific f a m i l y groups b u t b y entire tribes. T h u s , even i f these
beliefs a n d practices m a y be related t o the ancient t o t e m i c cults, t h e y are
9
hardly w e l l suited t o revealing the o r i g i n s o f those cults t o us, since n o w
they represent those cults o n l y i n altered f o r m s . I t is n o t b y c o n s i d e r i n g an
i n s t i t u t i o n w h e n i t is i n f u l l decline that w e can g a i n an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f
h o w i t was f o r m e d . I f w e w i s h t o k n o w h o w t o t e m i s m was b o r n , i t m u s t be
observed n e i t h e r i n Java n o r i n Sumatra n o r i n Melanesia, b u t i n Australia.
10
H e r e w e find n e i t h e r t h e c u l t o f t h e d e a d n o r the d o c t r i n e o f t r a n s m i g r a -
t i o n . O f course, the m y t h i c a l heroes w h o f o u n d e d t h e c l a n are b e l i e v e d t o be
regularly reincarnated—but in human bodies only. As w e w i l l see, each b i r t h is
the result o f such a r e i n c a r n a t i o n . T h u s , i f the animals o f t h e t o t e m i c species
are the objects o f rites, i t is n o t because ancestral spirits are h e l d t o reside i n
t h e m . W h i l e i t is t r u e that these first ancestors are o f t e n d e p i c t e d i n a n i m a l
f o r m (and this representation, w h i c h is v e r y c o m m o n , is an i m p o r t a n t fact
that w i l l have t o be e x p l a i n e d ) , b e l i e f i n metempsychosis c o u l d n o t have
g i v e n rise t o i t i n t h e societies o f Australia, since t h a t b e l i e f is u n k n o w n there.
M o r e o v e r , far f r o m b e i n g able t o e x p l a i n t o t e m i s m , the b e l i e f itself p r e -
supposes o n e o f the f u n d a m e n t a l p r i n c i p l e s o n w h i c h t o t e m i s m rests; that is,

6
[Robert Henry] Codrington, The Melanesians [Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1891], pp. 32-[33], and a
personal letter of the same author cited by Tylor in "Remarks on Totemism," p. 147.
7
Such also, with minor differences, is the solution adopted by [Wilhelm] Wundt (Mythus und Religion
[3 vols., as vol. II, parts 1-3 of Völkerpsychologie, Eine Untersuchung der Entwicklungsgesetze von Sprache,
Mythus und Sitte, Leipzig, W. Englemann, 1900-1909], vol. II, p. 269).
8
It is true that, for Tylor, the clan is but an enlarged family, so in his way of thinking, what can be said
of the one group applies to the other ("Remarks on Totemism," p. 157). But this idea is highly question-
able. Only the clan presupposes the totem, which has its full meaning only in and through the clan.
9
In the same vein, [Andrew] Lang, Social Origins [London, Longmans, 1903], p. 150.
10
See above, p. 59.
172 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

i t assumes the v e r y t h i n g that m u s t be e x p l a i n e d . I n fact, i t i m p l i e s , j u s t as

t o t e m i s m i m p l i e s , a c o n c e p t o f m e n as b e i n g closely a k i n t o animals. I f these
t w o realms w e r e clearly d i s t i n g u i s h e d i n people's m i n d s , the s o u l w o u l d n o t
be t h o u g h t capable o f passing so easily f r o m o n e i n t o the other. I n d e e d , the
b o d y o f the a n i m a l w o u l d have t o be considered its t r u e h o m e l a n d , because
the h u m a n s o u l is p r e s u m e d t o g o there t h e m o m e n t i t regains its f r e e d o m .
T h e d o c t r i n e o f t r a n s m i g r a t i o n i n d e e d postulates this singular affinity b u t b y
n o means explains i t . T h e o n l y e x p l a n a t i o n T y l o r offers is that o n occasion
c e r t a i n traits o f the man's a n a t o m y a n d p s y c h o l o g y r e m i n d p e o p l e o f the a n -
i m a l . " T h e savage," he says, "observes the h a l f - h u m a n traits, actions, a n d
characteristics o f animals w i t h sympathetic w o n d e r m e n t . Is t h e a n i m a l n o t
the v e r y i n c a r n a t i o n , w e m i g h t say, o f qualities that are f a m i l i a r t o m a n ; a n d
w h e n w e a p p l y epithets l i k e l i o n , bear, f o x , o w l , p a r r o t , v i p e r , a n d w o r m t o
certain m e n , are w e n o t e p i t o m i z i n g i n a w o r d c e r t a i n traits characteristic o f
11
a human life?" B u t i f o n e does c o m e u p o n any o f these resemblances, they
are a m b i g u o u s a n d rare. M a n l o o k s l i k e his relatives a n d his friends m o s t o f
all, n o t l i k e plants o r animals. S u c h rare a n d d u b i o u s similarities c o u l d n o t
defeat such consistent and o b v i o u s ones, n o r c o u l d t h e y encourage m a n t o
i m a g i n e h i m s e l f a n d his ancestors i n f o r m s that f l y i n the face o f all his e v e r y -
day experience. So t h e q u e s t i o n remains, a n d since i t is n o t solved, t o t e m i s m
12
c a n n o t be said t o have b e e n e x p l a i n e d .
Finally, this w h o l e t h e o r y rests o n a f u n d a m e n t a l m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g . F o r
T y l o r as f o r W u n d t , t o t e m i s m is n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n a special case o f a n i m a l

"Tylor, Primitive Culture, vol. II, p. 17. [Cf. Tylor's English text: "The half-human features and actions
and characters of animals are watched with wondering sympathy by the savage, as by the child. The beast
is the very incarnation of familiar qualities of man: and such names as lion, bear, fox, owl, parrot, viper,
worm, when we apply them as epithets to men, condense into a word some leading features of a human
life." Trans.]
12
[Wilhelm] Wundt, who took up Tylor's theory in its basic outlines, tried to explain this mysterious
relation of man and animal otherwise—with sight of the decomposing corpse supposedly suggesting the
idea of it. Having seen the worms that come out of the body, they believed that the soul was incarnated
in them and departed with them. So the worms and by extension the reptiles (snakes, lizards, etc.) would
be the first animals to have served as vessels for the souls of the dead; consequendy, they would also have
been the first to be venerated and to play the role of totems. Only later would other animals, and even
plants and inanimate objects, have been elevated to the same rank. But this hypothesis does not rest on
even the beginnings of a proof. Wundt claims (Mythus und Religion, vol. II, p. 269) that the reptiles are
much more common totems than the other animals, from which he concludes that they are the most
primitive. But it is impossible for me to see what can justify that assertion, in support of which the author
does not adduce a single fact. It in no way emergesfromthe lists of totems collected, whether in Australia
or in America, that any animal species, anywhere, has had a preponderant role. Totems varyfromone re-
gion to another with the state of thefloraand fauna. Moreover, if the original set of totems had been so
narrowly restricted, it is not clear how totemism would have been able to satisfy the fundamental princi-
ple that two clans or subclans of a single tribe must have different totems.
Origins of These Beliefs 173

1 3
worship. W e k n o w , q u i t e t o the contrary, that i t m u s t be seen as s o m e t h i n g
14
e n t i r e l y different from a sort o f z o o l a t r y . T h e a n i m a l is n o t w o r s h i p p e d .
A n d far from b e i n g s u b o r d i n a t e d t o i t as a believer is t o his g o d , t h e m a n is
almost its equal a n d sometimes even treats i t as his p r o p e r t y . I f the animals o f
the t o t e m i c species really w e r e t h o u g h t o f as i n c a r n a t i n g t h e ancestors, m e m -
bers o f o t h e r clans w o u l d n o t be a l l o w e d t o eat t h e i r flesh freely. I n reality,
the c u l t is n o t addressed t o t h e a n i m a l itself b u t t o the e m b l e m , that is, t o t h e
image o f t h e t o t e m . I n fact, there is n o c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n this r e l i g i o n o f
the e m b l e m a n d t h e c u l t o f t h e ancestors.
Whereas T y l o r reduces t o t e m i s m t o the c u l t o f t h e ancestors, Jevons ties
15
i t t o the c u l t o f n a t u r e . T h i s is h o w he does so.
I n the g r i p o f c o n f u s i o n b r o u g h t u p o n h i m b y irregularities i n t h e course
o f n a t u r a l p h e n o m e n a , m a n supposedly p o p u l a t e d t h e w o r l d w i t h supernat-
16
ural beings. H a v i n g d o n e this, he felt the n e e d t o c o m e t o t e r m s w i t h the
awesome forces w i t h w h i c h he h a d s u r r o u n d e d himself. H e u n d e r s t o o d that
the best w a y t o a v o i d b e i n g c r u s h e d b y t h e m was t o ally h i m s e l f w i t h c e r t a i n
o f t h e m , thereby g a r n e r i n g t h e i r help. A t that m o m e n t i n history, he k n e w
n o o t h e r f o r m o f alliance a n d association t h a n that created b y k i n s h i p . A l l the
m e m b e r s o f the same clan h e l p o n e a n o t h e r because t h e y are k i n o r ( w h a t
a m o u n t s t o the same t h i n g ) because t h e y consider o n e a n o t h e r as k i n ; o n t h e
o t h e r h a n d , different clans treat o n e a n o t h e r as enemies because t h e y are o f
different b l o o d . So the o n l y w a y t o arrange t h e s u p p o r t o f supernatural b e -
ings was t o adopt t h e m a n d t o have oneself a d o p t e d b y t h e m as k i n . T h e
w e l l - k n o w n procedures o f b l o o d covenant enabled m a n t o o b t a i n this result
easily. B u t since, at that m o m e n t , t h e i n d i v i d u a l d i d n o t yet have his o w n p e r -
sonality, because he was v i e w e d o n l y as a c e r t a i n p a r t o f his g r o u p — t h a t is,
his c l a n — i t was n o t the i n d i v i d u a l b u t t h e clan as a u n i t that c o n t r a c t e d t h e
k i n s h i p j o i n t l y . F o r the same reason, the i n d i v i d u a l d i d n o t contract i t w i t h a
p a r t i c u l a r o b j e c t b u t w i t h t h e n a t u r a l g r o u p , that is, w i t h t h e species t o w h i c h
the o b j e c t b e l o n g e d . M a n t h i n k s o f t h e w o r l d as he t h i n k s o f h i m s e l f and, j u s t
as he does n o t t h i n k o f h i m s e l f as b e i n g separate f r o m his clan, so h e c a n n o t

""Certain animals are sometimes worshipped," says Tylor, "because they are regarded as the incarna-
tion of the divine soul of the ancestors; this belief constitutes a sort of common denominator between the
cult rendered to the shades and the cult rendered to the animals" (Primitive Culture, vol. II, p. 305; cf. 309
in fine). Similarly, Wundt presents totemism as a branch of animalism (Mythus und Religion, vol. II, p. 234).
14
See above, p. 139.
15
[Frank Byron] Jevons, Introduction to the History of Religion [London, Methuen, 1902, pp. 96ff.].
16
See above, p. 25.
174 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

t h i n k o f a t h i n g as b e i n g separate f r o m t h e species t o w h i c h i t belongs. A c -

c o r d i n g t o Jevons, a species o f things that is u n i t e d w i t h a clan b y ties o f k i n -
ship is a t o t e m .
I t is c e r t a i n that t o t e m i s m involves a close association b e t w e e n a clan a n d
a d e f i n i t e category o f objects. B u t t h e n o t i o n Jevons puts f o r w a r d — t h a t such
an association was c o n t r a c t e d deliberately, i n f u l l awareness o f the goal
sought—seems i n l i t t l e a c c o r d w i t h w h a t h i s t o r y teaches us. R e l i g i o n s are
c o m p l e x things, a n d the needs t h e y satisfy are so n u m e r o u s a n d so obscure
that t h e y c a n n o t possibly have o r i g i n a t e d i n a w e l l - c o n s i d e r e d act o f w i l l .
M o r e o v e r , this hypothesis b o t h sins b y o v e r s i m p l i f i c a t i o n a n d abounds i n u n -
l i k e l i h o o d s . M a n is said t o have t r i e d t o garner the help o f the supernatural
beings t o w h i c h things are subordinate. B u t i n that case, he o u g h t t o have a d -
dressed h i m s e l f t o t h e m o s t p o w e r f u l a m o n g t h e m , t o those w h o s e p r o t e c -
17
t i o n was l i k e l y t o p r o d u c e the m a x i m u m r e s u l t . Instead, the beings w i t h
w h i c h he has c e m e n t e d this m y s t i c a l k i n s h i p m o s t often i n c l u d e the h u m -
blest that exist. F u r t h e r m o r e , i f i t t r u l y was o n l y a m a t t e r o f creating allies
a n d defenders, m a n w o u l d have t r i e d t o have as m a n y as possible; there is n o
such t h i n g as b e i n g t o o w e l l p r o t e c t e d . Yet each clan r o u t i n e l y contents itself
w i t h a single t o t e m — t h a t is, w i t h a single p r o t e c t o r — l e a v i n g t h e o t h e r clans
to enjoy t h e i r o w n i n perfect f r e e d o m . E a c h g r o u p s t r i c d y encloses itself
w i t h i n its o w n r e l i g i o u s d o m a i n , never t r y i n g t o encroach u p o n that o f its
n e i g h b o r s . W i t h i n t h e t e r m s o f t h e hypothesis w e are e x a m i n i n g , such dis-
c r e t i o n a n d restraint are u n i n t e l l i g i b l e .

II
F u r t h e r , all o f these theories w r o n g l y o m i t a q u e s t i o n that is central t o the
subject as a w h o l e . W e have seen that there are t w o sorts o f t o t e m i s m : that o f
the i n d i v i d u a l a n d that o f the clan. T h e close links b e t w e e n t h e m are t o o o b -
vious f o r t h e m t o be unrelated. So, i t is appropriate t o ask w h e t h e r the o n e is
n o t d e r i v e d from the o t h e r and, i f the answer is yes, t o ask w h i c h is the m o r e
p r i m i t i v e . A c c o r d i n g t o the s o l u t i o n adopted, the p r o b l e m o f h o w t o t e m i s m
o r i g i n a t e d w i l l be framed i n different terms. T h i s q u e s t i o n is all the m o r e
pressing since i t is o f v e r y general interest. I n d i v i d u a l t o t e m i s m is the i n d i v i d -
ual aspect o f the t o t e m i c c u l t . T h u s , i f i t came first, w e m u s t say that r e l i g i o n

17
Jevons himself recognizes this. "There is good reason to presume," he says, "that in the choice of an
ally, man would have preferred . . . the species that possessed the greatest power" (History of Religions, p.
101).
Origins of These Beliefs 175

was b o r n i n the i n d i v i d u a l consciousness, that i t responds above all t o i n d i -

v i d u a l aspirations, a n d that i t has taken a collective f o r m o n l y secondarily.
T h e simplistic reasoning that still t o o o f t e n guides ethnographers a n d so-
ciologists, i n this case as i n others, was b o u n d t o lead a n u m b e r o f scholars t o
e x p l a i n the c o m p l e x b y the simple a n d the t o t e m o f the g r o u p b y that o f the
18
i n d i v i d u a l . A n d i n d e e d , the t h e o r y argued b y Frazer i n his Golden Bough,
1 9 20 21 2 2
by H i l l T o u t , Miss Fletcher, Boas, and Swanton, is o f this k i n d . M o r e -
over, since r e l i g i o n is w i d e l y v i e w e d as an altogether private a n d personal
t h i n g , this t h e o r y has t h e advantage o f b e i n g i n accord w i t h the idea m a n y
p e o p l e have o f r e l i g i o n . W i t h i n this perspective, the t o t e m o f t h e clan can
o n l y be an i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m that has spread. A p r o m i n e n t m a n w h o has e x -
p e r i e n c e d the value o f a t o t e m he freely chose f o r h i m s e l f transmits i t t o his
descendants. M u l t i p l y i n g as t i m e goes o n , these descendants eventually f o r m
t h e e x t e n d e d f a m i l y that is the clan; thus does t h e t o t e m b e c o m e collective.
H i l l T o u t t h o u g h t he f o u n d s u p p o r t f o r t h a t t h e o r y i n the w a y t o t e m i s m
is u n d e r s t o o d i n c e r t a i n societies o f t h e A m e r i c a n N o r t h w e s t , n o t a b l y b y the
Salish a n d the T h o m p s o n R i v e r Indians. B o t h i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m i s m a n d the
t o t e m i s m o f t h e clan are f o u n d a m o n g these peoples, b u t they either d o n o t
coexist i n the same t r i b e o r are u n e q u a l l y d e v e l o p e d w h e n t h e y do. T h e y
v a r y i n inverse p r o p o r t i o n w i t h o n e another. W h e r e the clan t o t e m tends t o
be t h e general r u l e , i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m tends t o disappear, a n d v i c e versa. Is this
n o t t o say that the first is a m o r e recent f o r m o f t h e second, w h i c h replaces
2 3
a n d thus excludes i t ? M y t h o l o g y appears t o c o n f i r m this i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . I n
t h e same societies, i t t u r n s o u t , the ancestor o f the clan is n o t a t o t e m i c a n i -
mal, b u t the f o u n d e r o f the g r o u p is usually d e p i c t e d as a h u m a n b e i n g w h o

18
Qames George Frazer, The Golden Bough:A Study in Magic and Religion, 2d ed., vol. Ill, New York,
Macmillan, 1894], pp. 416ff.; see esp. p. 419 n. 5. In more recent articles, to be analyzed below, Frazer has
put forward a different theory that nevertheless does not completely exclude from his thinking the one
presented in the Golden Bough.

"[Charles Hill Tout], "The Origin of the Totemism of the Aborigines of British Columbia," RSC,
vol. VII, §2 (2d series), (1901) pp. 3ff. Similarly, "Report on the Ethnology of the Statlumh," JAI, vol.
XXXV (1905), p. 141. Hill Tout has answered various objections that have been made against his theory
in volume IX of the RSC, pp. 61-99.
20
Alice C. Fletcher, "The Import of the Totem: [A Study from the Omaha Tribe]," RSI for 1897
(Washington, Government Printing Office, 1898), pp.- 577-586.
21
Franz Boas, "The Social Organization and Secret Societies of the Kwakiud Indians" [in RNMfor
1895, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1897], pp. 323ff., 336-338, 393.
22
[John Reed Swanton], "The Development of the Clan System [and of Secret Societies among the
North-Western Tribes]," in AA, vol. VI (new ser., 1904), pp. 477-864.
23
Hill Tout, "Ethnology of the Stadumh," p. 142.
176 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

at some p o i n t entered i n t o relations a n d close dealings w i t h a m y t h i c a l a n i -

mal, f r o m w h i c h he is h e l d t o have a c q u i r e d his t o t e m i c e m b l e m . T h i s
e m b l e m , w i t h the special p o w e r s that are attached t o i t , is t h e n passed b y i n -
h e r i t a n c e t o the descendants o f t h e m y t h i c a l hero. H e n c e these peoples
themselves appear t o see the c o l l e c t i v e t o t e m as an i n d i v i d u a l o n e that was
24
passed o n i n a single f a m i l y . F u r t h e r m o r e , even t o d a y a father sometimes
transmits his o w n t o t e m t o his c h i l d r e n . So t o i m a g i n e that t h e collective
t o t e m has h a d this same o r i g i n universally is n o m o r e t h a n t o state that s o m e -
25
t h i n g still observable i n t h e present was the same i n t h e p a s t .
Still t o be e x p l a i n e d is t h e o r i g i n o f i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m i s m . T h e response
t o this q u e s t i o n varies a m o n g authors.
H i l l T o u t v i e w s i t as a special case o f fetishism. F o r h i m , i t is the i n d i v i d -
ual w h o , f e e l i n g h i m s e l f s u r r o u n d e d b y dreaded spirits, feels t h e same e m o -
t i o n that Jevons a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e clan: T o sustain himself, h e seeks some
p o w e r f u l p r o t e c t o r i n t h e h i d d e n w o r l d . T h u s is the c u s t o m o f the personal
26
t o t e m established. F o r Frazer, this same i n s t i t u t i o n is a subterfuge, a m i l i -
t a r y ruse m e n i n v e n t t o escape c e r t a i n dangers. W e k n o w that, a c c o r d i n g t o
a v e r y c o m m o n b e l i e f i n a great m a n y l o w e r societies, t h e h u m a n s o u l can
t e m p o r a r i l y leave the b o d y i n w h i c h i t lives, w i t h o u t i l l effects; n o m a t t e r
h o w far away f r o m the b o d y i t m a y go, i t goes o n a n i m a t i n g t h a t b o d y b y a
k i n d o f a c t i o n at a distance. B u t at c e r t a i n c r i t i c a l m o m e n t s w h e n life is
t h o u g h t t o be p a r t i c u l a r l y threatened, there m a y be s o m e t h i n g t o g a i n b y
w i t h d r a w i n g t h e s o u l from t h e b o d y a n d d e p o s i t i n g i t i n a place o r t h i n g
w h e r e i t w o u l d be safer. T h e r e are, i n fact, various m e t h o d s o f e x t r a c t i n g the
soul, t h e r e b y r e m o v i n g i t from some real o r i m a g i n a r y danger.
For example, w h e n p e o p l e are o n t h e p o i n t o f e n t e r i n g a n e w l y b u i l t
house, a m a g i c i a n extracts t h e i r souls a n d places t h e m i n a bag, f o r r e t u r n t o
the o w n e r s o n c e t h e t h r e s h o l d has b e e n crossed. T h i s is d o n e because the
m o m e n t o f e n t e r i n g a n e w house is e x c e p t i o n a l l y c r i t i c a l . T h e r e is a r i s k o f
d i s t u r b i n g a n d thus o f f e n d i n g t h e spirits that live i n the g r o u n d , especially
u n d e r t h e d o o r sill, a n d i f a m a n d i d n o t take precautions, t h e y c o u l d m a k e
h i m pay dearly f o r his boldness. O n c e the danger is past, o n c e he has b e e n
able t o prevent t h e i r anger, a n d even garner t h e i r s u p p o r t b y c o n d u c t i n g cer-

24
Ibid., p. 150. Cf. [Franz Boas, "First General Report on the Indians of British Columbia," in BAAS,
Fifth Report of the Committee on the North-Western Tribes of the Dominion of Canada (London, Offices of the
Association, 1890),] p. 24. I have reported a myth of this sort above.
25
Hill Tout, "Ethnology of the Stadumh," p. 147.
26
Hill Tout, "Totemism of the Aborigines," p. 12.
Origins of These Beliefs 177

27
t a i n rites, the souls can safely r e t u r n t o t h e i r usual p l a c e . T h i s same belief,
H i l l T o u t t h i n k s , gave rise t o the i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m . T o p r o t e c t themselves
f r o m m a g i c a l charms, m e n t h o u g h t i t p r u d e n t t o h i d e t h e i r souls i n the
a n o n y m o u s c r o w d o f an a n i m a l o r p l a n t species. B u t h a v i n g set u p such deal-
ings, each i n d i v i d u a l f o u n d h i m s e l f closely j o i n e d w i t h the a n i m a l o r p l a n t i n
w h i c h his l i f e - p r i n c i p l e presumably resided. T w o beings so closely j o i n e d
e n d e d u p b y b e i n g considered m o r e o r less indistinguishable: T h e y w e r e
t h o u g h t t o participate i n o n e another's nature. O n c e accepted, this b e l i e f
eased a n d activated the t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f the personal t o t e m i n t o a h e r e d i -
tary t o t e m and, thereafter, i n t o a collective one, f o r i t seemed altogether o b -
v i o u s that this k i n s h i p o f nature m u s t be t r a n s m i t t e d b y h e r e d i t y f r o m father
to c h i l d r e n .
I w i l l n o t t a r r y l o n g i n discussing these t w o explanations o f the i n d i v i d -
ual t o t e m . T h e y are i n g e n i o u s i n t e l l e c t u a l c o n s t r u c t i o n s , b u t t h e y are t o t a l l y
w i t h o u t e m p i r i c a l s u p p o r t . F o r t o t e m i s m t o be r e d u c i b l e t o fetishism, i t
w o u l d have t o be established that fetishism preceded t o t e m i s m . N o t o n l y is
n o evidence g i v e n t o prove this hypothesis, b u t i t is also c o n t r a d i c t e d b y all
w e k n o w . T h e i l l - d e f i n e d c o l l e c t i o n o f rites that are g i v e n t h e n a m e fetishism
seems t o appear o n l y a m o n g peoples w h o have already a r r i v e d at a c e r t a i n
level o f c i v i l i z a t i o n ; i t is a k i n d o f c u l t that is u n k n o w n i n Australia. T h e
28
c h u r i n g a has b e e n called a f e t i s h , t r u e e n o u g h , b u t even i f that character-
i z a t i o n was w a r r a n t e d , i t c o u l d n o t demonstrate the p r i o r i t y that is assumed.
Q u i t e t o the contrary, the c h u r i n g a presupposes t o t e m i s m , since i n its v e r y
essence i t is an i n s t r u m e n t o f the t o t e m i c c u l t a n d since i t owes the v i r t u e s
ascribed t o i t t o t o t e m i c beliefs alone.
T u r n i n g n o w t o Frazer's theory, this a u t h o r assumes a k i n d o f t h o r o u g h -
g o i n g i d i o c y o n t h e part o f the p r i m i t i v e that t h e facts d o n o t a l l o w us t o as-
c r i b e t o h i m . H e does have a l o g i c , strange t h o u g h i t m a y sometimes seem t o
us. S h o r t o f b e i n g u t t e r l y w i t h o u t l o g i c , he c o u l d n o t be g u i l t y o f t h e rea-
s o n i n g that is i m p u t e d t o h i m . N o t h i n g was m o r e natural t h a n f o r h i m t o
have b e l i e v e d that he c o u l d ensure t h e survival o f his soul b y h i d i n g i t i n a se-
cret a n d inaccessible place, as so m a n y heroes o f m y t h s a n d legends are said
to have d o n e . B u t h o w c o u l d he have j u d g e d his soul t o be safer i n an a n i -
mal's b o d y t h a n i n his o w n ? O f course, the chances are that i t c o u l d m o r e

27
Frazer, The Golden Bough vol. Ill, pp. 351fF. Wilken had already noted similar facts in "De Simon-
sage," in De Gids, 1890; "De Betrekking tusschen Menschen-Dieren en Plantenleve," in Indische Gids,
1884, 1888; Ueber das Haaropfer, in Revue coloniale Internationale, pp. 1886-1887.
28
For example, [Erhard] Eylmann in Die Eingeborenen der Kolonie Sudaustralien [Berlin, D. Reimer,
1908], p. 199.
178 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

easily have escaped the spells o f the m a g i c i a n b y b e i n g lost i n the species, b u t

i t thereby f o u n d itself at the same t i m e a s i t t i n g d u c k f o r hunters. H i d i n g i t
i n a physical f o r m that exposed i t t o danger at all times was an o d d w a y to
2 9
shelter i t . M o s t o f all, i t is i n c o n c e i v a b l e that w h o l e peoples s h o u l d have
30
b e e n able t o give themselves over t o such an e c c e n t r i c i t y . Finally, i n a great
m a n y cases, the f u n c t i o n o f the i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m is manifesdy v e r y different
f r o m the f u n c t i o n Frazer ascribes t o i t . First a n d foremost, i t is a means o f
3 1
c o n f e r r i n g unusual powers u p o n magicians, hunters, a n d w a r r i o r s . So far as
the s o l i d a r i t y o f t h e m a n w i t h t h e t h i n g is c o n c e r n e d (given all the drawbacks
o f s o l i d a r i t y ) , i t is accepted as an unavoidable consequence o f t h e r i t e , b u t is
n o t desired i n a n d o f itself.
A n o t h e r reason n o t t o t a r r y over this controversy is that i t is beside the
p o i n t . W h a t is i m p o r t a n t t o k n o w , above a l l , is w h e t h e r the i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m
really is t h e p r i m i t i v e fact from w h i c h the c o l l e c t i v e t o t e m derives. D e p e n d -
i n g u p o n o u r answer, w e w i l l have t o l o o k i n t w o opposite directions f o r the
seat o f religious life.
T h e r e is such a c o n f l u e n c e o f decisive facts against the hypothesis o f H i l l
T o u t , M i s s Fletcher, Boas, a n d Frazer that o n e w o n d e r s h o w i t c o u l d have
b e e n accepted so easily a n d so w i d e l y .
First, w e k n o w that m a n o f t e n has a pressing interest n o t o n l y i n re-
specting t h e animals o f the species that serves as his personal t o t e m b u t also
i n h a v i n g i t respected b y his f e l l o w m e n : H i s o w n life is at stake. T h u s , even

29
Mrs. Parker says of the Euahlayi that if the Yunbeai "confers exceptional power, it also exposes one
to exceptional dangers, for all that injures the animal injures the man" ([Catherine Somerville Field
Parker, The Euahlayi Tribe, London, A. Constable, 1905], p. 29).
^In an earlier work ("The Origin of Totemism," in FR (May, 1899), pp. 844—845), Frazer raises the
objection himself. He says, "If I left my soul in the body of a rabbit, and if my brother John (member of
a different clan) kills, roasts, and eats that rabbit, what happens to my soul? To prevent this danger, my
brother John has to know this situation of my soul, and in consequence, when he kills a rabbit, he must
be careful to take that soul out of it and give it back to me before cooking the animal and making it his
dinner." Frazer believes he finds this practice customary in the tribes of central Australia. Each year, dur-
ing a rite that I will describe below, when the animals of the new generation reach maturity, the first game
killed is presented to the men of the totem, who eat a little; and it is only afterward that the men of the
other clans may eat it freely. This, says Frazer, is a means of returning to the men of the totem the soul
that they may have entrusted to those animals. But apart from the fact that this interpretation of the rite
is completely arbitrary, it is difficult not to find this method of protection extraordinary. The ceremony is
annual, allowing many days to pass after the moment the animal was killed. During thistime,what has
become of the soul it guarded and of the individual whose life-principle of life that soul is? But it is point-
less to emphasize all that is unlikely about that explanation.
31
Parker, Euahlayi, p. 20; [Alfred William] Howitt, "Australian Medicine Men," in JAI, vol. XVI
(1887), 34, [49-50]; Hill Tout, "Ethnology of the Statlumh," p. 146.
Origins of These Beliefs 179

i f collective t o t e m i s m was n o t the generalized f o r m o f the i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m ,

i t s h o u l d rest o n t h e same p r i n c i p l e . N o t o n l y s h o u l d the people o f a clan ab-
stain f r o m k i l l i n g a n d e a t i n g t h e i r t o t e m i c a n i m a l themselves, b u t t h e y s h o u l d
also d o e v e r y t h i n g i n t h e i r p o w e r t o i m p o s e this same r e s t r i c t i o n u p o n o t h -
ers. A s i t t u r n s o u t , far f r o m i m p o s i n g any such p r i v a t i o n o n the w h o l e t r i b e ,
each clan (by means o f t h e rites t h a t I w i l l later describe) takes steps t o ensure
that the p l a n t o r a n i m a l w h o s e n a m e i t bears increases a n d prospers, so as t o
p r o v i d e abundant f o o d t o t h e o t h e r clans. T h u s i t s h o u l d at least be g r a n t e d
that i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m i s m p r o f o u n d l y t r a n s f o r m e d itself i n b e c o m i n g c o l l e c -
tive a n d that this t r a n s f o r m a t i o n m u s t be e x p l a i n e d .
Second, h o w can this hypothesis e x p l a i n w h y , except w h e r e t o t e m i s m is
i n decline, t w o clans o f t h e same t r i b e always have different totems? N o t h i n g
w o u l d seem t o prevent t w o o r several m e m b e r s o f a single t r i b e f r o m c h o o s -
i n g personal totems f r o m t h e same a n i m a l species, despite t h e i r h a v i n g n o tie
o f k i n s h i p , a n d t h e n passing i t o n t o t h e i r descendants. D o e s i t n o t h a p p e n
today that t w o d i s t i n c t families bear the same name? T h e strictly regulated
m a n n e r i n w h i c h totems a n d subtotems are d i s t r i b u t e d b e t w e e n the t w o
phratries first, a n d t h e n a m o n g t h e v a r i o u s clans o f each phratry, o b v i o u s l y
presupposes a societal consensus a n d a c o l l e c t i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n . I n o t h e r
w o r d s , t o t e m i s m is s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n an i n d i v i d u a l practice that has
spontaneously generalized itself.
F u r t h e r m o r e , c o l l e c t i v e t o t e m i s m can be r e d u c e d t o i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m i s m
o n l y i f the differences b e t w e e n t h e m are m i s c o n s t r u e d . T h e one is assigned
t o the c h i l d b y b i r t h a n d is an e l e m e n t o f his c i v i l status. T h e o t h e r is ac-
q u i r e d i n the course o f life a n d presupposes t h e p e r f o r m a n c e o f a specific r i t e
as w e l l as a change o f state. S o m e t h i n k t h e y are lessening this distance b y i n -
serting b e t w e e n t h e m , as a k i n d o f m i d d l e t e r m , the r i g h t that anyone w h o
has a t o t e m supposedly has t o t r a n s m i t i t t o w h o m e v e r he pleases. B u t w h e r -
ever o n e observes t h e m , such transfers are rare a n d relatively e x c e p t i o n a l ;
they can be d o n e o n l y b y magicians o r o t h e r persons gifted w i t h special
32
powers, and, i n any event, t h e y can take place o n l y b y means o f r i t u a l cer-
emonies t h a t effect the change. So i t w o u l d t h e n b e necessary t o e x p l a i n h o w
s o m e t h i n g that was the prerogative o f c e r t a i n p e o p l e later became the r i g h t
o f all; h o w s o m e t h i n g that i m p l i e d a p r o f o u n d change i n the r e l i g i o u s and
m o r a l c o n s t i t u t i o n o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l c o u l d have b e c o m e an e l e m e n t o f that

32
According to Hill Tout himself, "The gift or transmission (of a personal totem) can only be effectu-
ated by certain persons like shamans or men who possess great mystical power" ("Ethnology of the
Statlumh," p. 146). Cf. Parker, Euahlayi, pp. 29-30.
180 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

c o n s t i t u t i o n ; and, finally, h o w a transmission that at first was the o u t c o m e o f

a r i t e , was considered thereafter t o p r o d u c e itself, inescapably a n d w i t h o u t
the i n t e r v e n t i o n o f any h u m a n w i l l .
I n s u p p o r t o f his i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , H i l l T o u t alleges that c e r t a i n m y t h s i m -
p u t e an i n d i v i d u a l o r i g i n t o the t o t e m o f t h e clan. T h e y t e l l h o w the t o t e m i c
e m b l e m was a c q u i r e d b y a p a r t i c u l a r i n d i v i d u a l w h o t h e n t r a n s m i t t e d i t t o
his descendants. T h e s e m y t h s , however, are t a k e n f r o m I n d i a n tribes i n
N o r t h A m e r i c a , that is, f r o m societies that have attained a rather h i g h level
o f c u l t u r e . H o w c o u l d a m y t h o l o g y so far r e m o v e d from its o r i g i n s enable us
to reconstruct the o r i g i n a l f o r m o f an i n s t i t u t i o n w i t h any confidence? T h e
l i k e l i h o o d is that i n t e r v e n i n g causes gready d i s t o r t e d t h e m e m o r y that these
m e n c o u l d have k e p t . M o r e t h a n that, i t is v e r y easy t o set against these m y t h s
o t h e r m y t h s t h a t seem m o r e p r i m i t i v e a n d w h o s e m e a n i n g is e n t i r e l y differ-
ent. I n t h e m y t h s , t h e t o t e m is represented as t h e v e r y b e i n g from w h i c h the
clan is descended. H e n c e i t constitutes the substance o f the clan; i n d i v i d u a l s
c a r r y i t from b i r t h , and, far from h a v i n g c o m e t o t h e m from outside t h e m -
3 3
selves, i t is part o f t h e i r flesh a n d b l o o d . Furthermore, the very myths o n
w h i c h H i l l T o u t relies themselves e c h o that a n c i e n t idea. T h e eponymous
f o u n d e r o f t h e clan does i n d e e d have the f o r m o f a m a n , b u t i t is a m a n
t h o u g h t t o have e n d e d u p r e s e m b l i n g a d e f i n i t e species o f animals after h a v -
i n g l i v e d a m o n g t h e m . T h i s p r o b a b l y h a p p e n e d because there came a t i m e
w h e n m i n d s became t o o sophisticated t o g o o n accepting, as t h e y h a d i n the
past, that m e n c o u l d be an animal's offspring. T h e y therefore substituted a
h u m a n b e i n g f o r the a n i m a l ancestor, t h e idea o f w h i c h h a d b e c o m e u n t e n -
able; b u t t h e y i m a g i n e d t h e m a n as h a v i n g a c q u i r e d c e r t a i n a n i m a l features
b y i m i t a t i o n o r b y o t h e r means. T h u s , even this recent m y t h o l o g y bears the
m a r k o f a m o r e distant e p o c h w h e n t h e t o t e m o f the clan was n o t at a l l c o n -
ceived o f as a sort o f i n d i v i d u a l c r e a t i o n .
B u t this hypothesis does n o t m e r e l y raise serious l o g i c a l difficulties; i t is
also d i r e c t l y c o n t r a d i c t e d b y t h e facts that f o l l o w .
I f i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m i s m was t h e p r i m i t i v e fact, t h e n the m o r e p r i m i t i v e
the societies, t h e m o r e d e v e l o p e d a n d m o r e apparent i t s h o u l d be; a n d i n -
versely, w e w o u l d expect t o see i t lose g r o u n d t o t h e c o l l e c t i v e t o t e m a m o n g
the m o r e advanced peoples a n d t h e n disappear. T h e o p p o s i t e is t r u e . T h e
A u s t r a l i a n tribes are far m o r e b a c k w a r d t h a n those o f N o r t h A m e r i c a , b u t
Australia is the classic locale o f collective t o t e m i s m . In the great majority of

33
Cf. [Edwin Sidney] Hardand, "Totemism and Some Recent Discoveries," Folklore, vol. XI [1900],
pp. 59ff.
Origins of These Beliefs 181

tribes, it reigns alone, whereas there is none, to my knowledge, in which individual

34
totemism is practiced alone. I n d i v i d u a l t o t e m i s m i n its characteristic form is
35
found i n an i n f i n i t e s i m a l n u m b e r o f t r i b e s . A n d w h e r e i t is f o u n d , i t is m o s t
o f t e n i n o n l y a r u d i m e n t a r y state, consisting o f i n d i v i d u a l and o p t i o n a l prac-
tices w i t h o u t w i d e r scope. O n l y magicians k n o w the art o f creating mystical
relationships w i t h the a n i m a l species t o w h i c h t h e y are n o t naturally related.
3 6
O r d i n a r y folk d o n o t enjoy this p r i v i l e g e . I n A m e r i c a , o n the o t h e r h a n d ,
the collective t o t e m is i n f u l l decline, a n d i n t h e societies o f t h e N o r t h w e s t
particularly, i t n o l o n g e r has a n y t h i n g m o r e t h a n a rather u n o b t r u s i v e r e l i -
gious character. Inversely, the i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m plays a large role a m o n g these
same peoples, w h e r e i t is c r e d i t e d w i t h great efficacy a n d has b e c o m e an a u -
t h e n t i c a l l y p u b l i c i n s t i t u t i o n . T h i s is so because i t is characteristic o f a m o r e
advanced c i v i l i z a t i o n . T h i s , n o d o u b t , is h o w t h e i n v e r s i o n b e t w e e n these
t w o f o r m s o f t o t e m i s m that H i l l T o u t t h o u g h t he saw is t o be u n d e r s t o o d . I f
i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m i s m is almost e n t i r e l y absent w h e r e collective t o t e m i s m is
f u l l y developed, i t is n o t because t h e second gave w a y t o the first b u t the
o t h e r w a y a r o u n d : because n o t all the c o n d i t i o n s necessary t o its existence
have b e e n m e t .
Still m o r e conclusive is the fact that i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m i s m , far f r o m h a v -
i n g g i v e n rise t o the t o t e m i s m o f the clan, presupposes t h e clan. I n d i v i d u a l
t o t e m i s m was b o r n i n a n d moves w i t h i n the f r a m e w o r k o f collective t o t e m -
i s m , f o r m i n g an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f i t . I n fact, i n t h e v e r y societies w h e r e i t is
p r e p o n d e r a n t , t h e novices m a y n o t take j u s t any a n i m a l as t h e i r personal
t o t e m ; t h e y are n o t p e r m i t t e d t o m a k e t h e i r choices outside a c e r t a i n n u m -
ber o f p a r t i c u l a r species assigned t o each clan. O n the o t h e r h a n d , the species
that b e l o n g t o each clan thus b e c o m e its exclusive p r o p e r t y ; the m e m b e r s o f
3 7
a f o r e i g n clan m a y n o t u s u r p t h e m . T h o s e species are t h o u g h t o f as h a v i n g
close ties o f dependence w i t h t h e one that serves as the t o t e m o f the entire
clan. I n d e e d , i n some cases, these relationships are detectable, such as those

M
Except perhaps among the Kurnai, but in that tribe, there are sexual as well as personal totems.
55
Among the Wotjobaluk, the Buandik, the Wiradjuri, the Yuin and the tribes neighboring Mary-
borough (Queensland). See [Alfred William] Howitt, Native Tribes [of South-East Australia, New York,
Macmillan, 1904], pp. 114-147; [Robert Hamilton] Mathews, "Ethnological Notes on the Aboriginal
Tribes of New South Wales and Victoria", RSNSW vol. XXXVIII (1904), p. 291. Cf. [Northcote
Whitridge] Thomas, "Further Notes on Mr. Hill Tout's Views of Totemism," in Man [vol. IV], 1904, 53,
p. 85.
''This is true for the Euahlayi and for phenomena of personal totemism noted by Howitt in "Aus-
tralian Medicine Men," pp. 34, 45, 49—50.
"Fletcher, "The Import of the Totem," p. 586; Boas, "The Kwakiud Indians," p. 322. Similarly, Boas,
"First Report on the Indians of British Columbia," p. 25; Hill Tout, "Ethnology of the Stadumh," p. 148.
182 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

i n w h i c h the i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m represents a part o r a p a r t i c u l a r aspect o f the

3 8
collective t o t e m . A m o n g the W o t j o b a l u k , each m e m b e r o f the clan c o n -
3 9
siders the personal totems o f his fellows as b e i n g s o m e w h a t his o w n ; hence
these are m o s t p r o b a b l y subtotems. Just as the species presupposes t h e genus,
so the s u b t o t e m presupposes t h e t o t e m . T h e r e f o r e , t h e first f o r m o f i n d i v i d -
ual r e l i g i o n that w e m e e t i n h i s t o r y appears t o us n o t as t h e active p r i n c i p l e
o f the p u b l i c r e l i g i o n b u t as m e r e l y an aspect o f i t . Far f r o m b e i n g t h e seed
o f the collective c u l t , t h e c u l t that the i n d i v i d u a l organizes f o r himself, a n d
w i t h i n his i n n e r self, is i n a sense t h e c o l l e c t i v e c u l t adapted t o the needs o f
the i n d i v i d u a l .

Ill
4 0
I n a m o r e recent b o o k , w h i c h was suggested t o h i m b y the b o o k s o f
Spencer a n d G i l l e n , Frazer t r i e d t o replace the e x p l a n a t i o n o f t o t e m i s m that
he o r i g i n a l l y proposed (and that I have j u s t discussed) w i t h a n e w one. T h i s
n e w e x p l a n a t i o n rests o n the postulate that the t o t e m i s m o f the A r u n t a is the

38
The proper names of different gentes, says Boas of the Tlinkit, are derived from their respective
totems, each .gens having its special names. The connection between the name and the totem (collective)
is sometimes not very apparent, but it always exists (Boas, "First Report on the Indians of British Co-
lumbia," p. 25). The phenomenon of individual names' being the property of the clan, and distinctive to
it as surely as its totem, is also observed among the Iroquois ([Lewis Henry] Morgan, Ancient Society: [Or
Researches in the Lines of Human Progress from Savagery through Barbarism to Civilization, London, Macmillan,
1877], p. 78); among the Wyandot ([John Wesley] Powell, "Wyandot Government," First Annual Report,
[1879-1880], BAE, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1881], p. 59); among the Shawnee, the
Sauk, the Fox (Morgan, Ancient Society, pp. 72, 76—77); among the Omaha ([James Owen] Dorsey,
"Omaha Sociology," in Third Annual Report [(1881-1882)] [BAE, Washington, Government Printing Of-
fice, 1884] pp. 227ff.). We know what relation exists between given names and personal totems (see
L

above, p. 159.)
39
"For example," says Mathews, "if you ask a Wartwurt man what his totem is, he willfirsttell you his
personal totem, but, most likely, he will then enumerate the other personal totems of his clan" ("The
Aboriginal Tribes," p. 291).
"•"[James George] Frazer, "The Beginnings of Religion and Totemism among the Australian Aborig-
ines," in FR [vol. LXXXIV, old series, vol. LXVIII, new series] (July 1905), pp. 162ff., and (September
1905), p. 452. Cf. Frazer "The Origin of Totemism," FR, vol. LXXI, old series, vol. LXV, new series
(April 1899), pp. 648ff. and (May 1899), pp. 835ff. These latter articles, which are a little older, differ from
the more recent on one point, but the core is not fundamentally different. Both are reproduced in
Totemism and Exogamy, vol. I [London, Macmillan, 1910], pp. 89—172. See, in the same vein, [Sir Bald-
win] Spencer and [Francis James] Gillen, "Some Remarks on Totemism as Applied to Australian Tribes,"
JAI, vol. XXVIII (1899), pp. 275—280, and the comments of Frazer on the same subject, Totemism and Ex-
ogamy, London, Macmillan, 1910, pp. 281—286.
Origins of These Beliefs 183

m o s t p r i m i t i v e w e k n o w . Frazer even goes so far as t o say that i t barely differs

4 1
f r o m t h e t r u l y and absolutely o r i g i n a l t y p e .
W h a t is n o t e w o r t h y a b o u t this e x p l a n a t i o n is that the totems are attached
n e i t h e r t o persons n o r t o d e f i n i t e groups o f persons b u t t o places. E a c h t o t e m
does i n d e e d have its center i n a p a r t i c u l a r place. I t is there that the souls o f
t h e first ancestors w h o f o r m e d t h e t o t e m i c g r o u p at the b e g i n n i n g o f time
are t h o u g h t t o have t h e i r p r e f e r r e d residence. T h e r e is t h e sanctuary w h e r e
the churingas are k e p t ; there, t h e c u l t is celebrated. T h i s geographic d i s t r i -
b u t i o n o f t o t e m s also d e t e r m i n e s the m a n n e r i n w h i c h the clans r e c r u i t t h e i r
m e m b e r s . T h e child's t o t e m is thus n e i t h e r its father's n o r its mother's b u t the
o n e w h o s e center is at the place w h e r e its m o t h e r believes she felt the first
s y m p t o m s o f h e r c o m i n g m o t h e r h o o d . T h e A r u n t a does n o t k n o w the p r e -
42
cise relations that c o n n e c t the fact o f b e g e t t i n g t o t h e sexual a c t , i t is said,
b u t attributes every c o n c e p t i o n t o a k i n d o f mystic i m p r e g n a t i o n . A c c o r d i n g
t o h i m , c o n c e p t i o n i m p l i e s that an ancestral s o u l has g o n e i n t o the b o d y o f a
w o m a n , there t o b e c o m e t h e p r i n c i p l e o f a n e w life. T h u s , w h e n the w o m a n
feels t h e first stirrings o f t h e i n f a n t , she i m a g i n e s that she has j u s t b e e n e n -
t e r e d b y o n e o f t h e souls w h o s e p r i m a r y residence is at t h e place w h e r e she
finds herself. A n d since t h e c h i l d b o r n thereafter is n o n e o t h e r t h a n that a n -
cestor reincarnate, i t necessarily has the same t o t e m , w h i c h is t o say that its
clan is d e t e r m i n e d b y the l o c a l i t y w h e r e he is h e l d t o have b e e n mystically
conceived.
T h i s l o c a l t o t e m i s m w o u l d t h e n be t h e o r i g i n a l f o r m o f t o t e m i s m , o r at
m o s t b u t a v e r y s h o r t step away from i t . Frazer explains its o r i g i n thus.
A t the precise instant w h e n the w o m a n feels she is pregnant, she m u s t be
t h i n k i n g that t h e s p i r i t w i t h w h i c h she believes herself possessed has c o m e t o
h e r from the objects s u r r o u n d i n g her, a n d i n p a r t i c u l a r from one t h a t was at-
t r a c t i n g h e r a t t e n t i o n at that instant. I f she has b e e n busy c o l l e c t i n g some
p l a n t o r l o o k i n g after an a n i m a l , she w i l l believe that t h e soul o f this a n i m a l
o r that p l a n t has passed i n t o her. First a m o n g t h e things t o w h i c h she w o u l d
be especially i n c l i n e d t o a t t r i b u t e h e r p r e g n a n c y are the foods she has j u s t
eaten. I f she has r e c e n d y h a d e m u o r y a m , she w i l l be i n n o d o u b t that an
e m u o r a y a m has b e e n b o r n a n d is d e v e l o p i n g i n her. T h a t b e i n g t h e case,

•""Perhaps we may... say that it is but one removefromthe original pattern, the absolutely primi-
tive type of totemism" (Frazer, "The Beginnings," p. 455).
42
On this point, the testimony of [Carl] Strehlow confirms that of Spencer and Gillen ([Die Aranda-
und Loritja-Stamme in Zentral-Australien], vol. 11 [New York, Dover, 1968], p. 52). In the opposite vein, see
[Andrew] Lang, The Secret of the Totem [London, Longmans, 1905], p. 190.
184 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

o n e understands w h y , i n t u r n , the baby s h o u l d be considered a k i n d o f y a m

or e m u , w h y he s h o u l d regard h i m s e l f as a k i n s m a n o f animals o r plants o f the
same species, w h y he s h o u l d s h o w t h e m f r i e n d s h i p a n d c o n s i d e r a t i o n , w h y
4 3
he s h o u l d bar h i m s e l f f r o m eating t h e m , a n d so f o r t h . From then on,
t o t e m i s m exists i n its f u n d a m e n t a l features. Since, supposedly, the native's
idea o f c o n c e p t i o n gave b i r t h t o t o t e m i s m , Frazer calls this p r i m e v a l t o t e m -
ism " c o n c e p t i o n a l . "
A l l the o t h e r f o r m s o f t o t e m i s m w o u l d t h e n d e r i v e from this first type.
" I f several w o m e n , o n e after another, perceive t h e first signs o f m a t e r n i t y i n
the same place a n d the same circumstances, that place w i l l be regarded as b e -
i n g h a u n t e d b y spirits o f a p a r t i c u l a r sort; a n d so, i n time, t h e r e g i o n w i l l be
44
e n d o w e d w i t h t o t e m i c centers a n d d i v i d e d i n t o t o t e m i c d i s t r i c t s . " T h i s is
how, o n Frazer's a c c o u n t , the l o c a l t o t e m i s m o f t h e A r u n t a was b o r n . F o r the
totems t o b e c o m e detached from t h e i r t e r r i t o r i a l base, all i t w i l l take is to
i m a g i n e that instead o f r e m a i n i n g i m m u t a b l y f i x e d i n o n e place, t h e ances-
tral souls can m o v e freely over the w h o l e t e r r i t o r y a n d f o l l o w the travels o f
the m e n a n d w o m e n w h o are o f t h e same t o t e m as they. I n that fashion, i t
w i l l be possible f o r a w o m a n t o be i m p r e g n a t e d b y a s p i r i t o f her o w n t o t e m
or her husband's, even t h o u g h she is l i v i n g i n a different t o t e m i c d i s t r i c t . D e -
p e n d i n g o n w h e t h e r i t is t h e husband's t o t e m o r the wife's that is i m a g i n e d
to be t r a d i n g the y o u n g c o u p l e , o n the l o o k o u t f o r o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o reincar-
nate itself, the child's t o t e m w i l l be t h a t o f its father o r m o t h e r . I n fact, the
G n a n j i a n d t h e U m b a i a , o n the o n e h a n d , a n d t h e U r a b u n n a , o n the other,
d o i n d e e d e x p l a i n t h e i r systems o f descent i n this way.
B u t l i k e Tylor's, this t h e o r y begs t h e q u e s t i o n . I f i t is t o be i m a g i n a b l e
that h u m a n souls are the souls o f animals o r plants, i t m u s t already be believed
that m a n takes w h a t is m o s t f u n d a m e n t a l t o h i m from e i t h e r the a n i m a l o r
p l a n t w o r l d . T h i s b e l i e f is precisely o n e o f those o n w h i c h t o t e m i s m is based,
so t o p u t i t f o r w a r d as self-evident is t o assume w h a t m u s t be e x p l a i n e d .
M o r e o v e r , the religious character o f the t o t e m is w h o l l y unexplainable
i n terms o f this v i e w , f o r the vague b e l i e f i n an obscure k i n s h i p o f m a n and
a n i m a l is n o t e n o u g h t o f o u n d a c u l t . T h i s m e r g i n g o f d i s t i n c t realms c a n n o t
lead t o d i v i d i n g t h e w o r l d b e t w e e n t h e sacred a n d the profane. I t is t r u e that

43
A closely related idea had already been expressed by [Alfred C ] Haddon in his "Address to the An-
thropological Section" (BAAS, 1902, 8ff.). He assumes that each local group originally had a food that
was especially its own. The plant or animal that thus served as the principal item of consumption would
have become the totem of the group. All these explanations imply that the prohibitions against eating the
totemic animal were not original and were even preceded by the opposite prescription.
44
Frazer, "The Beginnings," p. 458.
Origins of These Beliefs 185

Frazer is self-consistent a n d refuses t o see t o t e m i s m as a r e l i g i o n — o n the

g r o u n d s that there are n e i t h e r s p i r i t u a l beings n o r prayers n o r i n v o c a t i o n s n o r
offerings, a n d so o n . A c c o r d i n g t o h i m , i t is o n l y a system o f m a g i c , b y w h i c h
he means a c r u d e a n d erroneous sort o f science, a first t r y at d i s c o v e r i n g the
45
laws o f t h i n g s . B u t w e k n o w w h a t is w r o n g w i t h this idea o f r e l i g i o n a n d
m a g i c . T h e r e is r e l i g i o n as s o o n as t h e sacred is d i s t i n g u i s h e d from the p r o -
fane, a n d w e have seen t h a t t o t e m i s m is a vast system o f sacred t h i n g s . So t o
46
e x p l a i n i t is t o s h o w h o w those things came t o acquire that t r a i t . T y l o r does
n o t even set this p r o b l e m .
W h a t b r i n g s a b o u t the d o w n f a l l o f this system is that the postulate o n
w h i c h i t rests is untenable. A l l o f Frazers a r g u m e n t a t i o n assumes that the l o -
cal t o t e m i s m o f t h e A r u n t a is t h e m o s t p r i m i t i v e k n o w n , a n d i n p a r t i c u l a r
that i t is d i s t i n c t l y p r i o r t o h e r e d i t a r y t o t e m i s m , w h e t h e r m a t r i l i n e a l o r p a -
t r i l i n e a l . B y f o l l o w i n g o n l y the facts available i n the first w o r k o f Spencer a n d
G i l l e n , I have b e e n able t o c o n j e c t u r e that there m u s t have b e e n a m o m e n t
i n the h i s t o r y o f t h e A r u n t a p e o p l e w h e n the totems w e r e t r a n s m i t t e d b y i n -
h e r i t a n c e f r o m t h e m o t h e r t o the c h i l d r e n instead o f b e i n g attached t o l o c a l -
47 4 8
ities. T h i s c o n j e c t u r e is d e f i n i t i v e l y p r o v e d b y the n e w facts t h a t S t r e h l o w
49
discovered a n d t h a t c o n f i r m p r e v i o u s observations b y S c h u l z e . I n fact, these
t w o authors i n f o r m us that, even n o w , i n a d d i t i o n t o his l o c a l t o t e m , each
A r u n t a has a n o t h e r that is i n d e p e n d e n t o f any geographic c o n d i t i o n a n d b e -
longs t o h i m b y b i r t h : that o f his m o t h e r . L i k e the first, this second t o t e m is
considered b y t h e natives as a f r i e n d l y a n d p r o t e c t i v e p o w e r that provides f o r
t h e i r f o o d , w a r n s t h e m o f possible dangers, a n d so f o r t h . T h e y are p e r m i t t e d
t o take part i n its c u l t . W h e n t h e y are b u r i e d , the b o d y is so arranged that the

45
Frazer, "The Origin of Totemism," p. 835, and "The Beginnings," pp. 162ff.
46
All the while seeing totemism as nothing but a system of magic, Frazer recognizes that one some-
times finds in magic the first seeds of religion properly so called ("The Beginnings," p. 163). On the way
in which he thinks religion developed out of magic, see Golden Bough, 2d ed., vol. I, pp. 75-78 n. 2.
47
[Emile Durkheim], "Sur le totémisme," AS, vol. V (1902), pp. 82—121. Cf. on this same question,
[Edwin Sidney] Hartland, "Presidential Address [Totemism and Some Recent Discoveries,]" Folklore, vol.
XI [(1900)] p. 75; [Andrew] Lang, "A Theory of Arunta Totemism," Man [vol. IV] (1904), no. 44, [pp.
67-69]; Lang, "Conceptional Totemism and Exogamy," Man, vol. VII, 1907, 55, pp. 88—90; Lang, The
Secret of the Totem, ch. IV; [Northcote W.] Thomas, "Arunta Totemism [a Note on Mr. Lang's Theory],"
Man, vol. IV, (1904), 68, pp. 99—101; P. W. Schmidt, "Die Stellung der Aranda unter den australischen
Stammen, in ZE, vol. XL (1908), pp. 866ff.
48
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, pp. 57-58.
49
[Rev. Louis] Schulze, "Aborigines of the Upper and Middle Finke River," RSSA, vol. XVI, 1891,
pp. 238-239.
186 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

face is t u r n e d t o w a r d t h e r e g i o n w h e r e t h e mother's t o t e m i c center is this,

because the center is also i n some respect that o f the deceased. A n d thus, i t is
g i v e n the n a m e tmara altjira, w h i c h means, " c a m p o f the t o t e m that is associ-
ated w i t h me." H e n c e i t is c e r t a i n that, a m o n g the A r u n t a , h e r e d i t a r y
t o t e m i s m i n t h e m a t e r n a l l i n e d i d n o t c o m e later t h a n l o c a l t o t e m i s m b u t ,
q u i t e the contrary, m u s t have preceded i t . T o d a y t h e m a t e r n a l t o t e m has n o
m o r e t h a n an accessory a n d c o m p l e m e n t a r y r o l e ; i t is a second t o t e m , a n d
this explains w h y i t c o u l d have escaped such careful a n d w e l l - i n f o r m e d o b -
servers as Spencer a n d G i l l e n . B u t f o r that t o t e m t o have b e e n able t o m a i n -
t a i n itself i n this second r a n k , used side b y side w i t h t h e l o c a l t o t e m , there
must have b e e n a t i m e w h e n i t o c c u p i e d t h e first r a n k i n r e l i g i o u s life. I t is
i n p a r t a t o t e m that has lapsed, b u t o n e that harks b a c k t o an era w h e n the
t o t e m i c o r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e A r u n t a was v e r y different f r o m today's. T h u s is
5 0
Frazer's entire c o n s t r u c t i o n u n d e r m i n e d at its f o u n d a t i o n .

IV
A l t h o u g h A n d r e w L a n g has v i g o r o u s l y attacked Frazer's t h e o r y , his o w n , as
5 1
p r o p o s e d i n recent w o r k s , is close t o i t o n m o r e t h a n o n e p o i n t . I n d e e d ,
l i k e Frazer, he takes the w h o l e o f t o t e m i s m t o consist o f b e l i e f i n a sort o f
consubstantiality b e t w e e n m a n a n d a n i m a l , b u t h e explains i t differently.
H e derives i t e n t i r e l y from t h e fact that t h e t o t e m is a name. A c c o r d i n g
52
t o h i m , from the m o m e n t o r g a n i z e d h u m a n groups c o m e i n t o e x i s t e n c e ,
each feels the n e e d t o d i s t i n g u i s h itself f r o m the n e i g h b o r i n g groups w i t h
w h i c h i t is i n c o n t a c t and, t o this end, gives t h e m different names. N a m e s
taken f r o m t h e e n v i r o n i n g flora a n d fauna are preferred, because animals a n d
plants can easily be designated b y means o f gestures o r represented b y d r a w -

50
It is true that Frazer says, in the conclusion of Totemism and Exogamy (vol. IV, pp. 58—59), that there
exists a soil more ancient totemism than that of the Arunta. It is that which [W. H. R.] Rivers observed
on the Banks Islands ("Totemism in Polynesia and Melanesia," JAI vol. XXXIX [1909], p. 172. Among
the Arunta, it is an ancestor spirit that is held to impregnate the mother; on the Banks Islands, it is an an-
imal or plant spirit, as the theory supposes. But as the ancestral spirits of the Arunta have an animal or
plant form, the difference is upheld. Hence, I have not treated it in my exposition.
51
Lang, Social Origins, esp. chap. 8, "The Origin of Totem Names and Beliefs"; and The Secret of the
Totem.

"Especially in his Social Origins, Lang uses conjecture to try to reconstruct the form these original
groups must have had. It seems unnecessary to restate those hypotheses, which do not affect his theory of
totemism.
Origins of These Beliefs 187

53
ings. T h e m o r e o r less exact resemblances that m e n can have w i t h o n e o r
a n o t h e r o f those objects defines t h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h these collective n a m -
54
ings are d i s t r i b u t e d a m o n g t h e g r o u p s .
I t is w e l l k n o w n that " f o r p r i m i t i v e m i n d s , names a n d the things desig-
nated b y those names are j o i n e d i n a m y s t i c a n d transcendental r e l a t i o n -
55
ship." F o r e x a m p l e , t h e n a m e an i n d i v i d u a l bears is n o t regarded s i m p l y as
a w o r d o r a c o n v e n t i o n a l sign b u t as an essential p a r t o f the i n d i v i d u a l h i m -
self. T h u s , w h e n i t is the n a m e o f an a n i m a l , t h e m a n w h o bears i t must n e c -
essarily believe that he possesses the m o s t characteristic traits o f that a n i m a l .
T h i s idea g a i n e d credence t h e m o r e easily as the h i s t o r i c a l o r i g i n s o f these
namings receded i n t o the past a n d gradually disappeared f r o m people's m e m -
ories. M y t h s f o r m e d t o m a k e this strange a m b i g u i t y o f h u m a n nature easier
t o envisage. T o e x p l a i n i t , p e o p l e t h o u g h t o f t h e a n i m a l as the man's ances-
t o r o r o f b o t h as descendants o f a c o m m o n ancestor. T h u s w e r e c o n c e i v e d
t h e b o n d s o f k i n s h i p that are said t o j o i n each clan w i t h the species w h o s e
n a m e i t bears. O n c e the o r i g i n s o f that m y t h i c a l k i n s h i p are e x p l a i n e d , i t
seems t o o u r a u t h o r that t h e m y s t e r y o f t o t e m i s m is g o n e .
B u t , t h e n , f r o m w h a t does t h e r e l i g i o u s character o f t o t e m i c beliefs a n d
practices arise? M a n ' s b e l i e f that h e is an a n i m a l o f some species does n o t e x -
p l a i n w h y he i m p u t e s a m a z i n g v i r t u e s t o that species or, m o s t o f all, w h y he
renders a g e n u i n e c u l t t o t h e images that s y m b o l i z e i t . T o this q u e s t i o n L a n g
offers the same response as Frazer: H e denies that t o t e m i s m is a r e l i g i o n . " I
f i n d i n Australia," h e says, " n o e x a m p l e o f r e l i g i o u s practices such as p r a y i n g
5 6
to, feeding, o r b u r y i n g t h e t o t e m . " O n l y i n a later age and after i t was a l -
ready o r g a n i z e d was t o t e m i s m , so t o speak, attracted t o and absorbed i n t o a
5 7
system o f p r o p e r l y r e l i g i o u s ideas. A c c o r d i n g t o an o b s e r v a t i o n b y H o w i t t ,
w h e n t h e natives set o u t t o e x p l a i n the t o t e m i c i n s t i t u t i o n s , t h e y a t t r i b u t e
t h e m n e i t h e r t o the t o t e m s themselves, n o r t o a m a n , b u t t o some supernat-
u r a l b e i n g such as B u n j i l o r B a i a m e . " I f , " says L a n g , " w e accept this testi-
m o n y , o n e source o f t h e r e l i g i o u s character o f t o t e m i s m stands revealed t o us.

53
On this point, Lang is close to the theory ofJulius Pikler (see [Julius] Pikler and [Felix] Szomlo, Der
Urspmng des Totemismus. Ein Beitrag zur materialistischen Geschichtstheorie [Berlin, K. Hoffmann, 1900], p.
36). The difference between the two hypotheses is that Pikler ascribes greater importance to the picto-
graphic representation of the name than to the name itself.
54
Lang, Social Origins, p. 166.
55
Lang, The Secret of the Totem, pp. 116-117, 121.
56
Ibid., p. 136.
"Howitt, "Further Notes on the Australian Class Systems," JAI [vol. XVIII, 1889], pp. 53-54; cf. Na-
tive Tribes, pp. 89, 488, 498.
188 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

T o t e m i s m obeys t h e decrees o f B u n j i l , as t h e Cretans o b e y e d the decrees o f

Zeus at M i n o s . " A c c o r d i n g t o L a n g , the n o t i o n o f h i g h gods was f o r m e d
outside the t o t e m i c system. T h e r e f o r e this system is n o t i n i t s e l f a r e l i g i o n ;
i t became c o l o r e d w i t h religiousness o n l y t h r o u g h contact w i t h a r e l i g i o n ,
p r o p e r l y so called.
B u t those v e r y m y t h s are i n c o n f l i c t w i t h Lang's idea o f t o t e m i s m . I f the
Australians h a d seen t h e t o t e m as n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n a h u m a n and profane
t h i n g , t h e y w o u l d n o t have i m a g i n e d m a k i n g a d i v i n e i n s t i t u t i o n o u t o f i t . I f ,
o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e y felt the n e e d t o relate the t o t e m t o a deity, t h e y d i d
so because t h e y a c k n o w l e d g e d its sacredness. T h e s e m y t h o l o g i c a l i n t e r p r e t a -
tions thus display, b u t d o n o t e x p l a i n , the r e l i g i o u s nature o f t o t e m i s m .
Besides, L a n g h i m s e l f realizes that this s o l u t i o n c a n n o t possibly d o . H e
58
admits that t o t e m i c things are treated w i t h r e l i g i o u s r e s p e c t and that, i n
particular, the b l o o d o f the a n i m a l (like t h a t o f the m a n , i n c i d e n t a l l y ) is the
object o f m u l t i p l e p r o h i b i t i o n s o r o f taboos, as he says, that this m o r e o r less
5 9
late m y t h o l o g y c a n n o t e x p l a i n . W h e r e , t h e n , d o t h e y c o m e from? L a n g a n -
swers the q u e s t i o n i n these terms: " A s s o o n as t h e groups w i t h names o f a n -
imals h a d d e v e l o p e d universally h e l d beliefs a b o u t w a k a n a n d mana, o r a b o u t
the mystical and sacred q u a l i t y o f t h e b l o o d , the various t o t e m i c taboos must
60
also have m a d e t h e i r appearance." As w e w i l l see i n the n e x t chapter, t h e
w o r d s wakan a n d mana i m p l y the idea o f sacred i t s e l f (the first is taken from
the language o f t h e S i o u x , t h e second from that o f t h e M e l a n e s i a n peoples).
T o e x p l a i n this sacredness o f t o t e m i c things b y p o s t u l a t i n g i t is t o answer the
q u e s t i o n w i t h t h e q u e s t i o n . W h a t s h o u l d be s h o w n is w h e r e this n o t i o n o f
w a k a n comes from, a n d h o w i t is a p p l i e d t o t h e t o t e m a n d t o a l l that derives
f r o m the t o t e m . So l o n g as these t w o p r o b l e m s g o u n s o l v e d , n o t h i n g is e x -
plained.

V
61
I have r e v i e w e d these p r i n c i p a l explanations o f t o t e m i c b e l i e f s , trying to do
j u s t i c e t o each o n e i n d i v i d u a l l y . N o w that this e x a m i n a t i o n is c o m p l e t e d , I
can n o t e that all are subject t o the same c r i t i c i s m .

58
"With reverence," as Lang says (The Secret of the Totem, p. 111).
59
To these taboos, Lang adds those that are at the basis of the practices of exogamy.
60
Lang, ibid., pp. 136-137.
61
I have not spoken about Spencer's theory. This is because it is only a special case of the general the-
ory by which he explains the transformation of the cult of the dead into a cult of nature. Having already
set it forth, I would be repeating myself here.
Origins of These Beliefs 189

I f w e restrict o u r i n q u i r y t o w h a t these formulas literally say, they seem

t o fall i n t o t w o categories. S o m e (Frazer's a n d L a n g s ) deny the religious
character o f t o t e m i s m , b u t that a m o u n t s t o d e n y i n g the facts. O t h e r s ac-
k n o w l e d g e this r e l i g i o u s character b u t believe t h e y can e x p l a i n i t b y d e r i v i n g
i t f r o m an earlier r e l i g i o n , t r e a t i n g t o t e m i s m as its offspring. I n reality, this
d i s t i n c t i o n is m o r e apparent t h a n real, the first category b e i n g c o n t a i n e d
w i t h i n the second. N e i t h e r Frazer n o r L a n g has b e e n able t o h o l d o n t o his
p r i n c i p l e e n t i r e l y a n d e x p l a i n t o t e m i s m as i f i t was n o t a r e l i g i o n . T h e nature
o f the facts f o r c e d t h e m t o slide n o t i o n s o f a r e l i g i o u s nature i n t o t h e i r e x -
planations. W e have j u s t seen h o w L a n g h a d t o b r i n g i n the idea o f the sa-
cred, the b e d r o c k idea o f any r e l i g i o n . F o r his part, Frazer o v e r d y calls o n the
ideas o f s o u l a n d s p i r i t i n t h e t w o theories he proposed, o n e after the other.
I n his v i e w , t o t e m i s m arises e i t h e r f r o m t h e fact that m e n b e l i e v e d t h e y c o u l d
safely place t h e i r souls i n e x t e r n a l objects o r f r o m the fact that they a t t r i b u t e d
c o n c e p t i o n t o a k i n d o f d i s e m b o d i e d i m p r e g n a t i o n , the agent o f w h i c h is a
spirit. Since the s o u l and, even m o r e , t h e s p i r i t are sacred things a n d objects
o f rites, t h e ideas that express t h e m are f u n d a m e n t a l l y r e l i g i o u s . I n conse-
quence, i t is i n v a i n t h a t Frazer makes t o t e m i s m o u t t o be m e r e l y a system o f
m a g i c , f o r he t o o manages t o e x p l a i n i t o n l y i n terms o f a n o t h e r r e l i g i o n .
B u t I have s h o w n t h e inadequacies o f n a t u r i s m a n d a n i m i s m . O n e c a n -
n o t use t h e m , as T y l o r a n d Jevons d i d , w i t h o u t e x p o s i n g oneself t o t h e same
objections. A n d yet n e i t h e r Frazer n o r L a n g seems even t o glimpse t h e p o s -
62
sibility o f another hypothesis. F r o m a n o t h e r standpoint, w e see that t o -
t e m i s m is closely allied w i t h the m o s t p r i m i t i v e social o r g a n i z a t i o n that is
k n o w n a n d even, i n all p r o b a b i l i t y , that is conceivable. T h e r e f o r e , t o assume
i t t o have b e e n preceded b y a n o t h e r r e l i g i o n different f r o m i t o n l y i n degree
is t o leave b e h i n d t h e data o f o b s e r v a t i o n a n d enter t h e d o m a i n o f arbitrary
a n d u n v e r i f i a b l e conjectures. I f w e w i s h t o stay i n a c c o r d w i t h the results p r e -
v i o u s l y o b t a i n e d , w e m u s t , w h i l e a f f i r m i n g t h e r e l i g i o u s nature o f t o t e m i s m ,
refrain f r o m r e d u c i n g i t t o a r e l i g i o n different from i t . T h i s is n o t because
there c o u l d be any q u e s t i o n o f designating n o n r e l i g i o u s ideas as its causes.
B u t a m o n g t h e representations that are p a r t o f its o r i g i n , and o f w h i c h i t is
t h e result, there m a y be some that b y themselves i n v o k e its r e l i g i o u s charac-
ter, a n d i n v o k e i t direcdy. T h e s e are the ones w e m u s t l o o k for.

62
Except that Lang derives the idea of high gods from another source. It is supposedly due, as I have
said, to a sort of primitive revelation. But Lang does not include this idea in his explanation of totemism.
 C H A P T E R SIX

ORIGINS OF THESE BELIEFS

(CONTINUED)
The Notion of Totemic Principle, or Mana,
and the Idea of Force*

S i n c e i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m i s m comes after that o f the clan a n d i n fact seems t o

be d e r i v e d f r o m i t , clan t o t e m i s m m u s t be taken u p first. Before g o i n g
further, however, since m y analysis thus far has b r o k e n i t d o w n i n t o a m u l t i -
p l i c i t y o f beliefs that m a y appear disparate, I m u s t t r y t o visualize its i n t e r n a l
coherence.

I
W e have seen that t o t e m i s m places figurative representations o f the t o t e m i n
the first rank o f t h e things i t considers sacred; t h e n c o m e t h e animals o r
plants w h o s e n a m e the c l a n bears, a n d finally the m e m b e r s o f t h e clan. Since
all these things are sacred i n the same r i g h t , albeit u n e q u a l l y so, t h e i r r e l i -
giousness c a n n o t arise f r o m any o f t h e p a r t i c u l a r traits t h a t d i s t i n g u i s h t h e m
f r o m o n e another. I f a g i v e n a n i m a l o r p l a n t is the object o f reverent fear, that
reverence is n o t e v o k e d b y its p a r t i c u l a r traits. T h e m e m b e r s o f the clan have
the same status, albeit t o a s l i g h d y lesser degree, a n d the m e r e image o f this
same p l a n t o r a n i m a l evokes even m o r e m a r k e d respect. O b v i o u s l y the s i m i -
lar feelings that these dissimilar k i n d s o f t h i n g s evoke i n t h e consciousness o f
the faithful, a n d t h a t c o n s t i t u t e t h e i r sacredness, can derive o n l y f r o m a p r i n -
ciple that is shared b y all a l i k e — t o t e m i c e m b l e m s , p e o p l e o f t h e clan, and i n -
dividuals o f the t o t e m i c species. T h i s is t h e c o m m o n p r i n c i p l e t o w h i c h t h e

*It may be that, here, the shiftfromnotion to idée connotes a difference in clarity and distinctness. It
may also be that Dürkheims shifts among those terms, plus conception and concept, sometimes amount to
no more than stylistic variation. I have left the question open in this chapter by rendering each with its
English counterpart.

190
Origins of These Beliefs (Continued) 191

c u l t is i n reality addressed. I n o t h e r w o r d s , t o t e m i s m is n o t t h e r e l i g i o n o f
c e r t a i n animals, c e r t a i n m e n , o r c e r t a i n images; i t is the r e l i g i o n o f a k i n d o f
a n o n y m o u s a n d i m p e r s o n a l force that is i d e n t i f i a b l e i n each o f these beings
b u t i d e n t i c a l t o n o n e o f t h e m . N o n e possesses i t entirely, and all participate
i n i t . S u c h is its i n d e p e n d e n c e f r o m the p a r t i c u l a r subjects i n w h i c h i t is i n -
carnated that i t b o t h precedes a n d outlives t h e m . T h e i n d i v i d u a l s die; the
generations pass o n a n d are replaced b y others; b u t this force remains always
present, alive, a n d t h e same. I t animates the generations o f today as i t a n i -
m a t e d those o f yesterday a n d w i l l animate those o f t o m o r r o w . T a k i n g the
w o r d " g o d " i n a v e r y b r o a d sense, o n e c o u l d say that i t is the g o d that each
t o t e m i c c u l t w o r s h i p s . B u t i t is an i m p e r s o n a l g o d , w i t h o u t name, w i t h o u t
history, i m m a n e n t i n t h e w o r l d , diffused i n a numberless m u l t i t u d e o f things.
A n d yet w e still have o n l y an i n c o m p l e t e idea o f the true u b i q u i t y that
quasi-divine e n t i t y has. I t does n o t m e r e l y pervade the w h o l e t o t e m i c species,
the w h o l e clan, a n d all the objects that symbolize the t o t e m ; the scope o f its
influence is w i d e r still. W e have seen that, above and b e y o n d those e m i n e n t l y
sacred things, all the things that are ascribed t o the clan as dependents o f the
p r i n c i p a l t o t e m have some measure o f the same sacredness. Because certain o f
t h e m are protected b y restrictions a n d others have definite functions i n the c u l t
ceremonies, they t o o are t o some degree religious. T h i s q u a l i t y o f religiousness
does n o t differ i n k i n d from that o f the t o t e m u n d e r w h i c h they are classified;
i t necessarily derives from the same p r i n c i p l e . T h i s is so because—to repeat the
m e t a p h o r i c a l expression I j u s t used—the t o t e m i c g o d is i n t h e m , j u s t as i t is i n
the t o t e m i c species a n d i n the people o f the clan. T h a t i t is the soul o f so m a n y
different beings shows h o w different i t is from the beings i n w h i c h i t resides.
B u t the A u s t r a l i a n does n o t conceive o f this i m p e r s o n a l force abstractly.
Influences that w e w i l l have t o seek o u t l e d h i m t o conceive o f i t i n the f o r m
o f an a n i m a l o r p l a n t , that is, i n the f o r m o f a m a t e r i a l t h i n g . H e r e , i n reality,
is w h a t the t o t e m a m o u n t s t o : I t is the tangible f o r m i n w h i c h that i n t a n g i -
ble substance is represented i n the i m a g i n a t i o n ; diffused t h r o u g h all sorts o f
disparate beings, that energy alone is the real o b j e c t o f t h e c u l t . W e are n o w
i n a b e t t e r p o s i t i o n t o c o m p r e h e n d w h a t the native means w h e n he affirms,
for example, that t h e p e o p l e o f t h e C r o w p h r a t r y are crows. H e does n o t e x -
actly m e a n that t h e y are crows i n the everyday e m p i r i c a l sense o f t h e w o r d ,
b u t that the same p r i n c i p l e is f o u n d i n all o f t h e m . T h a t p r i n c i p l e constitutes
w h a t they all m o s t f u n d a m e n t a l l y are, is shared b e t w e e n p e o p l e a n d animals
o f t h e same name, a n d is c o n c e p t u a l i z e d as h a v i n g the o u t w a r d f o r m o f the
crow. I n this w a y the universe, as t o t e m i s m conceives i t , is pervaded a n d e n -
l i v e n e d b y a n u m b e r o f forces that the i m a g i n a t i o n represents i n f o r m s that,
w i t h o n l y a f e w exceptions, are b o r r o w e d f r o m either the a n i m a l o r the p l a n t
192 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

k i n g d o m . T h e r e are as m a n y o f these forces as there are clans i n the t r i b e , a n d

each o f t h e m pervades c e r t a i n categories o f things o f w h i c h i t is the essence
a n d the l i f e - p r i n c i p l e .
W h e n I speak o f these p r i n c i p l e s as forces, I d o n o t use the w o r d i n a
m e t a p h o r i c a l sense; t h e y behave l i k e real forces. I n a sense, t h e y are even
physical forces that b r i n g a b o u t physical effects mechanically. D o e s an i n d i -
v i d u a l c o m e i n t o c o n t a c t w i t h t h e m w i t h o u t h a v i n g taken p r o p e r p r e c a u -
tions? H e receives a s h o c k that has b e e n c o m p a r e d w i t h the effect o f an
electrical charge. T h e y sometimes appear t o be c o n c e i v e d o f m o r e o r less as
1
fluids t h a t escape v i a t h e e x t r e m i t i e s . W h e n t h e y enter i n t o a b o d y that is
n o t m e a n t t o receive t h e m , t h e y cause sickness a n d death b y a w h o l l y m e -
2
chanical r e a c t i o n . O u t s i d e m a n , t h e y play t h e role o f l i f e - p r i n c i p l e ; as w e
3
w i l l see, b y a c t i n g u p o n t h e m , the r e p r o d u c t i o n o f species is ensured. A l l life
is based o n t h e m .
A n d i n a d d i t i o n t o t h e i r physical nature, t h e y have a m o r a l nature. W h e n
a native is asked w h y he follows his rites, he replies that ancestors have always
4
d o n e so and that he must f o l l o w t h e i r e x a m p l e . I f he conducts h i m s e l f w i t h
t o t e m i c beings i n this o r that way, i t is n o t o n l y because t h e forces that reside
i n t h e m are inaccessible a n d f o r b i d d i n g i n a physical sense, b u t also because h e
feels m o r a l l y obligated so t o c o n d u c t himself; he feels h e is o b e y i n g a sort o f
imperative, f m f i l l i n g a duty. H e n o t o n l y fears b u t also respects t h e sacred b e -
ings. M o r e o v e r , the t o t e m is a source o f the clan's m o r a l life. A l l the beings
that participate i n the same t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e consider themselves, b y that
v e r y fact, t o be m o r a l l y b o u n d t o o n e another; they have d e f i n i t e obligations
o f assistance, vengeance, a n d so o n , t o w a r d each other, a n d i t is these that c o n -
stitute k i n s h i p . T h u s , the t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e is at o n c e a physical force a n d a
m o r a l p o w e r , a n d w e w i l l see that i t is easily t r a n s f o r m e d i n t o d i v i n i t y proper.
T h i s is b y n o means specific t o t o t e m i s m . E v e n i n the m o s t advanced r e -
l i g i o n s , there is perhaps n o g o d that has failed t o r e t a i n some o f this a m b i g u -
i t y a n d that does n o t p e r f o r m b o t h cosmic a n d m o r a l f u n c t i o n s . A t the same
t i m e as i t is a s p i r i t u a l d i s c i p l i n e , every r e l i g i o n is a sort o f t e c h n i q u e that

'In a Kwakiutl myth, for example, an ancestor hero pierces the head of an enemy by stretching forth
hisfingers([Franz] Boas, ["First General Report on the Indians of British Columbia,"] in BAAS, Vth Re-
port of the Committee on the Northern Tribes of the Dominion of Canada [London, Offices of the Association,
1890], p. 30).
2
References in support of this assertion will be found on p. 128, n. 1, and p. 325, n. 98.
3
See Bk III, chap. 2.
4
See, for example, [Alfred William] Howitt, Native Tribes, [of South-East Australia, New York, Macmil-
lan, 1904], p. 482; [C. W.] Schvirmann, "The Aboriginal Tribes of Port Lincoln," in [James Dominick]
Woods, [The] NativeTribes of S.Australia [Adelaide, E. S. Wigg, 1879], p. 231.
Origins of These Beliefs (Continued) 193

helps m a n t o c o n f r o n t t h e w o r l d m o r e c o n f i d e n t l y . E v e n f o r the C h r i s t i a n , is
G o d the Father n o t the guardian o f physical order, as w e l l as the legislator a n d
j u d g e o f h u m a n conduct?

II
Perhaps some w i l l ask w h e t h e r , b y i n t e r p r e t i n g t o t e m i s m i n this way, I a m
n o t i m p u t i n g ideas t o t h e p r i m i t i v e that are b e y o n d his i n t e l l e c t . I n t r u t h , I
a m n o t i n a p o s i t i o n t o state p o s i t i v e l y that he i m a g i n e s these forces w i t h the
relative c l a r i t y that I have h a d t o give t h e m i n m y analysis. I can s h o w q u i t e
clearly that this idea is i m p l i c i t i n t h e beliefs t a k e n as a w h o l e a n d that i t is
central t o t h e m , b u t I c a n n o t say t o w h a t e x t e n t i t is e x p l i c i t l y conscious or,
o n the o t h e r h a n d , o n l y i m p l i c i t a n d vaguely felt. T h e r e is n o w a y t o specify
the degree o f c l a r i t y that an idea such as this o n e can have i n consciousnesses
obscure* t o us. A t any rate, w h a t shows q u i t e w e l l that the idea is i n n o w a y
b e y o n d t h e p r i m i t i v e , a n d even c o n f i r m s t h e result I have j u s t a r r i v e d at, is
this: W h e t h e r i n societies a k i n t o the A u s t r a l i a n tribes o r i n those v e r y tribes,
w e f i n d — a n d i n e x p l i c i t f o r m — c o n c e p t i o n s that differ o n l y i n degree a n d
nuance f r o m t h e f o r e g o i n g .
T h e native r e l i g i o n s o f Samoa have c e r t a i n l y passed the t o t e m i c phase.
T h e y have g e n u i n e gods w i t h names o f t h e i r o w n and, t o some degree, dis-
tinctive personal traits. Yet the relics o f t o t e m i s m are h a r d t o dispute. I n fact,
each g o d is attached t o a t e r r i t o r i a l o r f a m i l i a l g r o u p , j u s t as the t o t e m has its
5
c l a n . E a c h o f these gods is c o n c e i v e d o f as i m m a n e n t i n a d e f i n i t e a n i m a l
species. I t c e r t a i n l y does n o t reside i n any p a r t i c u l a r subject. I t is i n all at the
same t i m e , pervasive t h r o u g h o u t the species. W h e n an a n i m a l dies, t h e p e o -
ple o f t h e g r o u p t h a t venerate i t m o u r n a n d render i t t h e i r pious respects b e -
cause a g o d inhabits i t , b u t the g o d has n o t d i e d . L i k e the species, i t is eternal.
N o r , i n d e e d , is t h e g o d confused w i t h t h e p r e c e d i n g g e n e r a t i o n , f o r i t was
already the s o u l o f t h e o n e t h a t preceded, j u s t as as i t w i l l be the s o u l o f t h e
6
o n e t o f o l l o w . T h u s , i t has a l l t h e characteristics o f t h e t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e b u t

* Consciences obscures. Whether the obscurity is in the mind of the observed or the observer is ambigu-
ous. Swain, who says "obscure minds" (p. 219), seems to have opted for the mind of the observed. I opted
for the observer's, in light of the next sentence and the general context provided by the chapter.
5
[James George] Frazer even takes upfromSamoa many facts that he presents as characteristically
totemic (see Totemism [and Exogamy, London, Macmillan, 1910], pp. 6, 12—15, 24, etc.). True enough, I
have said that Frazer was not always sufEciendy critical in his choice of examples. But obviously such nu-
merous borrowings would have been impossible if in Samoa there really had not been important survivals
from totemism.
6
See [George] Turner, Samoa [London, Macmillan, 1884], p. 21, and chaps. IV and V.
194 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

a t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e that t h e i m a g i n a t i o n has d e v e l o p e d i n s o m e w h a t personal

f o r m s . E v e n so, this personal q u a l i t y s h o u l d n o t be o v e r b l o w n , as i t is hardly
c o m p a t i b l e w i t h the qualities o f pervasiveness a n d u b i q u i t y . I f the c o n t o u r s
o f the t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e w e r e clearly d e f i n e d , i t w o u l d n o t be able to spread
as i t does a n d infuse a m u l t i t u d e o f things.
I n this case, the n o t i o n o f i m p e r s o n a l religious force is u n q u e s t i o n a b l y
b e g i n n i n g t o change. I n o t h e r cases, however, i t is m a i n t a i n e d i n its abstract
p u r i t y a n d even achieves d i s t i n c d y greater generality t h a n i n Australia. A l -
t h o u g h the t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e s t o w h i c h the various clans o f the same t r i b e
address themselves are d i s t i n c t f r o m o n e another, t h e y r e m a i n f u n d a m e n t a l l y
comparable t o o n e another, f o r t h e y all play the same role i n t h e i r respective
domains. T h e r e are societies that attained the sense o f this shared nature and
t h e n advanced t o the idea o f a single religious force that unifies t h e universe,
all that is; all t h e o t h e r sacred p r i n c i p l e s are b u t modalities o f that force. A n d
since those societies are still t h o r o u g h l y i m b u e d w i t h t o t e m i s m a n d b o u n d t o
a social o r g a n i z a t i o n i d e n t i c a l t o that o f the A u s t r a l i a n peoples, t o t e m i s m
m a y be said t o have c a r r i e d that idea i n its w o m b .
T h i s can be observed i n m a n y A m e r i c a n tribes, especially i n those b e -
l o n g i n g t o the great f a m i l y o f the S i o u x : O m a h a , P o n k a , Kansas, Osage,
A s s i n i b o i n , D a k o t a , I o w a , W i n n e b a g o , M a n d a n , Hidatsa, a n d the others.
7 8
Several o f these societies, such as the O m a h a a n d t h e I o w a , are still o r g a -
n i z e d i n clans; others w e r e n o t l o n g ago and, D o r s e y says, " a l l the foundations
9
o f the t o t e m i c system, j u s t as i n o t h e r societies o f the S i o u x , " are still i d e n t i -
fiable i n t h e m . A m o n g these peoples, there is a p r e e m i n e n t p o w e r above all
w
the p a r t i c u l a r gods m e n w o r s h i p , w h i c h t h e y call wakan —all the rest b e i n g ,
i n a sense, derivations o f i t . Because o f the p r e e m i n e n t status assigned t o this
p r i n c i p l e i n t h e S i o u x p a n t h e o n , i t has sometimes b e e n seen as a k i n d o f sov-
ereign g o d , a J u p i t e r o r a Y a h w e h , and travelers have o f t e n translated wakan as
"great spirit." T h i s was a p r o f o u n d m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f its t r u e nature.
W a k a n is n o t i n any w a y a personal b e i n g ; t h e natives d o n o t i m a g i n e i t
i n d e f i n i t e f o r m s . " T h e y say," reports an observer c i t e d b y Dorsey, " t h a t they

7
Alice [C] Fletcher, "A Study of the Omaha Tribe: [The Import of the Totem"], in RSI for 1897
[Washington, Government Printing Office, 1898], pp. [582-583].
8
[James Owen] Dorsey, "Siouan Sociology," in Fifteenth Annual Report, BAE [Washington, Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1897], p. 238.
9
Ibid., p. 221.
10
P>jggs and [James Owen] Dorsey, Dakota English Dictionary, in CNAE, vol. VII [Washington, Gov-
ernment Printing Office, 1890], p. 508. Several observers cited by Dorsey identify the word wakan with
the words wakanda and wakanta, which are derived from it but have a more precise meaning.
Origins of These Beliefs (Continued) 195

1 1
have never seen wakanda, so t h e y c a n n o t p r e t e n d t o personify i t . " I t cannot
even be d e f i n e d b y specific attributes a n d qualities. " N o t e r m , " says R i g g s ,
" c a n express t h e m e a n i n g o f the w o r d a m o n g the D a k o t a . I t embraces all
12
mystery, all secret p o w e r , all d i v i n i t y . " A l l the beings that the D a k o t a revere,
" t h e earth, the f o u r w i n d s , t h e sun, t h e m o o n , t h e stars, are manifestations o f
that m y s t e r i o u s life a n d p o w e r " that circulates t h r o u g h all things. I t is i m a g -
i n e d as t h e w i n d , as a b r e a t h that has its seat at t h e f o u r cardinal p o i n t s a n d
1 3 14
moves e v e r y t h i n g . I t is t h e v o i c e that is heard w h e n t h e t h u n d e r r e s o u n d s ;
1 5
the sun, m o o n , a n d stars are w a k a n . B u t e n u m e r a t i o n cannot exhaust this
i n f i n i t e l y c o m p l e x n o t i o n . I t is n o t a d e f i n e d o r definable p o w e r , t h e p o w e r
t o d o this o r that; i t is P o w e r i n t h e absolute, w i t h o u t q u a l i f i c a t i o n o r l i m i t a -
t i o n o f any k i n d . T h e various d i v i n e p o w e r s are o n l y p a r t i c u l a r manifesta-
t i o n s a n d personifications; each o f t h e m is this p o w e r seen i n o n e o f its m a n y
16
aspects. T h i s l e d o n e observer t o say t h a t " i t is basically a p r o t e a n g o d ,
17
c h a n g i n g its attributes a n d f u n c t i o n s a c c o r d i n g t o c i r c u m s t a n c e . " A n d the
gods are n o t the o n l y beings i t animates. I t is t h e p r i n c i p l e o f all that lives, all
that acts, all that moves. " A l l life is w a k a n . A n d so i t is f o r all that manifests
any p o w e r — w h e t h e r i t be positive a c t i o n , l i k e t h e w i n d s a n d the clouds
18
gathering i n the sky, o r passive resistance, l i k e the r o c k at the side o f the p a t h . "
T h e same idea is f o u n d a m o n g t h e I r o q u o i s , w h o s e social o r g a n i z a t i o n is
still m o r e m a r k e d l y t o t e m i c . T h e w o r d orenda that is used t o express i t is e x -
acdy equivalent t o t h e w a k a n o f t h e S i o u x . " I t is a m y s t i c power," says H e -
w i t t , " t h a t t h e savage conceives o f as i n h e r e n t i n all t h e objects that m a k e u p
the e n v i r o n m e n t i n w h i c h he l i v e s . . . , i n rocks, streams, plants and trees,

"[James Owen] Dorsey, "A Study of Siouan Cults," in Eleventh Annual Report, [vol. XI], §21, BAE
[Washington, Government Printing Office, 1893], p. 372. Miss Fletcher, while no less clearly recognizing
the impersonal character of wakanda, adds that a certain anthropomorphism has slowly become grafted
on to this idea. But this anthropomorphism concerns the various manifestations of wakanda. The rock or
tree where they think they feel the presence of wakanda are addressed as if they were personal beings, but
the wakanda itself is not personified (RSI for 1897, p. 579).
12
[Stephen Return] Riggs, Tah-Koo Wah-Kon [or the Gospel among the Dakotas, Boston, Congregational
Publishing Society, 1869], pp. 56—57, cited after Dorsey "Siouan Cults," §95, p. 433.
13
Dorsey, "Siouan Cults," §33, p. 380.
14
Ibid„ §35 [p. 381].
15
Ibid., §28, p. 376; §30, p. 378; cf. §138, p. 449.
16
Ibid., §95, p. 432.
17
Ibid., §92, p. 431.
18
Ibid., §95, p. 433.
196 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

animals a n d m a n , w i n d s a n d storms, clouds, t h u n d e r , flashes o f l i g h t n i n g ,

19
etc." T h i s p o w e r is "regarded b y the u n d e v e l o p e d i n t e l l e c t o f m a n as the ef-
f i c i e n t cause o f all the p h e n o m e n a a n d o f all the activities that are o c c u r r i n g
2 0
around h i m . " A sorcerer o r a shaman has orenda, as does a m a n w h o is suc-
cessful i n his affairs. Basically n o t h i n g i n the w o r l d is w i t h o u t its o w n share
o f orenda, b u t the shares are u n e q u a l . S o m e b e i n g s — m e n o r things—are f a -
v o r e d , a n d others are relatively disadvantaged; all o f life is made u p o f s t r u g -
gles a m o n g these o r e n d a o f u n e q u a l intensity. T h e m o s t intense subjugate t h e
weakest. D o e s a m a n w i n o u t over his c o m p e t i t o r s i n t h e h u n t o r i n war? I t
is because he has m o r e orenda. I f an a n i m a l escapes t h e h u n t e r w h o chases
h i m , i t is because t h e animal's orenda was greater t h a n t h e hunter's.
T h e same idea is f o u n d a m o n g the Shoshone, w i t h t h e name pokunt;
21 2 2
a m o n g the A l g o n q u i n s , manitou; mauala a m o n g t h e K w a k i u d ; yek a m o n g
2 3 2 4
the T l i n g i t ; a n d sgdna a m o n g t h e H a i d a . B u t i t is n o t peculiar t o the I n -
dians o f A m e r i c a ; i t was first s t u d i e d i n Melanesia. O n c e r t a i n M e l a n e s i a n is-
lands, i t is t r u e , t h e social o r g a n i z a t i o n is n o l o n g e r based o n t o t e m i s m , b u t
2 5
t o t e m i s m is still visible o n all o f t h e m — n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g w h a t C o d r i n g t o n
has said o n the subject. W e find a m o n g these peoples, u n d e r the name
"mana," a n o t i o n that is exacdy equivalent t o t h e w a k a n o f the S i o u x a n d t h e
o r e n d a o f the I r o q u o i s . H e r e is C o d r i n g t o n ' s d e f i n i t i o n o f i t :

The Melanesians believe i n the existence o f a force absolutely distinct from

any physical force, that works i n all kinds o f ways, for good or evil, and that
it is i n man's best interest to take i n hand and control: That force is mana. I

19
[J. N. B. Hewitt], "Orenda and a Definition of Religion," in AA, vol. IV (1903), p. 33.
20
lbid., p. 36.
21
Tesa, Studi delThavenet,p. 17.
22
[Franz] Boas, ["The Social Organization and Secret Societies of the] Kwakiud [Indians," in RNMfor
1895, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1897], p. 695.
23
[John Reed] Swanton, "Social Condition, Beliefs [and Linguistic Relationship] of the Tlingit Indi-
ans," Twenty-Sixth Report BAE [Washington, Government Printing Office, 1905], p. 451 n. 3.
24
[John Reed] Swanton, Contributions to the Ethnology of the Haida [Leiden, E.J. Brill, 1905], p. 14. Cf.
Tlingit Indians, p. 479.
25
In certain Melanesian societies (Banks Islands, northern New Hebrides), the two exogamic phratries
that characterize Australian organization crop up again ([R. H. Codrington, 77ie Melanesians [Oxford,
Clarendon Press, 1891], pp. 23ff.). In Florida, there are true totems, called butos (p. 31). An interesting dis-
cussion on this point is to be found in A. Lang, Social Origins [London, Longmans, 1903], pp. 176ff. Cf.
on the same subject, and in the same vein, W. H. R. Rivers, "Totemism in Polynesia and Melanesia," in
JAI, vol. XXXIX [1909], pp. 156ff.
Origins of These Beliefs (Continued) 197

believe I understand the meaning this t e r m has for the natives. . . . I t is a

force, a nonmaterial and, i n a sense, supernatural influence; but i t reveals i t -
self by physical force, or else by any k i n d o f power and superiority that man
possesses. Mana is by no means fixed o n a definite object; i t can be carried
by any sort o f thing. . . . The whole religion o f the Melanesian consists i n
26
procuring mana for himself, for his o w n benefit or someone else's.

Is this n o t t h e same n o t i o n o f a diffuse a n d a n o n y m o u s force w h o s e seed i n

A u s t r a l i a n t o t e m i s m w e w e r e u n c o v e r i n g a m o m e n t ago? T h e i m p e r s o n a l i t y
is t h e same. As C o d r i n g t o n says, w e m u s t a v o i d seeing i t as a k i n d o f supreme
b e i n g ; such an idea "is absolutely a l i e n " t o M e l a n e s i a n t h o u g h t . T h e u b i q -
u i t y is t h e same. M a n a has n o d e f i n i t e l o c a t i o n a n d is e v e r y w h e r e . A l l f o r m s
o f life, a n d all the active potencies o f m e n , l i v i n g things, o r m e r e minerals are
27
ascribed t o its i n f l u e n c e .
T h e r e f o r e , i t is b y n o means reckless t o i m p u t e t o the A u s t r a l i a n societies
an idea such as the o n e I have d r a w n from m y analysis o f t o t e m i c beliefs: T h e
same idea is t o be f o u n d , t h o u g h at a h i g h e r level o f generalization a n d ab-
straction, i n r e l i g i o n s w h o s e roots g o back t o A u s t r a l i a n t h o u g h t a n d t h a t v i s -
i b l y bear its m a r k . T h e t w o c o n c e p t i o n s are o b v i o u s l y a k i n , d i f f e r i n g o n l y i n
scale. W h e r e a s m a n a is diffused t h r o u g h o u t t h e w h o l e universe, w h a t I have
called the g o d ( o r m o r e accurately, t h e t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e ) is l o c a l i z e d i n a
b r o a d b u t nonetheless m o r e l i m i t e d circle o f creatures a n d things o f various
species. I t is mana, b u t a rather m o r e specialized m a n a — e v e n t h o u g h , i n the
e n d , this specialization m a y o n l y be q u i t e relative.
T h e r e are cases, m o r e o v e r , i n w h i c h this k i n r e l a t i o n becomes especially
apparent. A m o n g t h e O m a h a , all k i n d s o f i n d i v i d u a l a n d collective totems
28
exist; b o t h are f o r m s o f w a k a n . " T h e Indian's f a i t h i n t h e efficacy o f the
t o t e m , " says M i s s Fletcher, "was based o n his c o n c e p t i o n o f nature a n d life.
T h a t c o n c e p t i o n was c o m p l e x a n d i n v o l v e d t w o k e y ideas. First, all things,
animate a n d i n a n i m a t e , are i m b u e d w i t h a c o m m o n l i f e - p r i n c i p l e ; a n d sec-
29
o n d , this life is c o n t i n u o u s . " T h i s c o m m o n l i f e - p r i n c i p l e is w a k a n . T h e
t o t e m is the means b y w h i c h t h e i n d i v i d u a l is p u t i n t o u c h w i t h that source
o f energy. I f the t o t e m has p o w e r s , i t has t h e m because i t incarnates w a k a n .

26
Codrington, The Melanesians, p. 118 n. 1; [Richard Heinrich Robert] Parkinson, Dreissigjahre in der
Siidsee [Stuttgart, Strecker und Schroeder, 1907], pp. 178, 392, 394, etc.
27
An analysis of this idea is to be found in [Henri] Hubert and [Marcel] Mauss, ["Esquisse d'une]
théorie générale de la magie," AS, vol. VII [1904], p. 108.
28
There are totems not only of clans but also of brotherhoods (Fletcher, "Import of the Totem,"
pp. 581ff.).
29
Ibid. [pp. 578-579].
198 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

I f the m a n w h o has v i o l a t e d the p r o h i b i t i o n s that p r o t e c t his t o t e m is s t r i c k e n

b y illness o r death, i t is because the m y s t e r i o u s force that he r a n afoul of,
w a k a n , reacted against h i m w i t h an i n t e n s i t y p r o p o r t i o n a t e t o the shock i t
30
suffered. Inversely, j u s t as the t o t e m is w a k a n , so t h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h
w a k a n is c o n c e i v e d sometimes recalls its t o t e m i c o r i g i n s . As Say tells us,
a m o n g the D a k o t a , t h e wahconda is manifested sometimes i n the f o r m o f a
3 1
gray bear, sometimes a b i s o n , a beaver, o r o t h e r a n i m a l . This formulation
cannot, o f course, be unreservedly accepted. Since w a k a n resists all p e r s o n i -
f i c a t i o n , i t is u n l i k e l y t o have b e e n c o n c e i v e d o f i n its abstract generality b y
means o f precise symbols. H o w e v e r , Say's o b s e r v a t i o n p r o b a b l y is applicable
t o the p a r t i c u l a r f o r m s i t takes as i t becomes specialized a m i d the concrete re-
ality o f life. I f there t r u l y was a t i m e w h e n those specializations o f w a k a n e v -
i d e n c e d such a m a r k e d affinity w i t h a n i m a l f o r m , that w o u l d be f u r t h e r
32
p r o o f o f the close ties b e t w e e n that n o t i o n a n d t o t e m i c b e l i e f s .

Besides, o n e can e x p l a i n w h y the idea o f m a n a c o u l d n o t attain the d e -

gree o f abstraction a n d generalization i n Australia that i t d i d i n m o r e a d -
vanced societies. T h e reason is n o t m e r e l y some insufficient capacity o f the
A u s t r a l i a n t o t h i n k abstractly a n d generalize; i t is above all t h e nature o f the
social m i l i e u that i m p o s e d this p a r t i c u l a r i s m . As l o n g as t o t e m i s m remains
t h e basis o f c u l t o r g a n i z a t i o n , the clan maintains an a u t o n o m y w i t h i n the r e -
l i g i o u s society that, a l t h o u g h n o t absolute, nonetheless remains v e r y p r o -
n o u n c e d . U n d o u b t e d l y , o n e can say i n a sense that each t o t e m i c g r o u p is
o n l y a chapel o f the t r i b a l C h u r c h , * b u t a chapel t h a t enjoys b r o a d i n d e p e n -
dence. A l t h o u g h t h e c u l t that is celebrated w i t h i n the clan does n o t f o r m a
w h o l e sufficient u n t o itself, the relations i t has w i t h the others are m e r e l y e x -
ternal. T h e cults are j u x t a p o s e d b u t n o t i n t e r p e n e t r a t i n g . T h e t o t e m o f a clan
is f u l l y sacred o n l y f o r that clan. As a result, t h e g r o u p o f things assigned t o
each clan, a n d that are p a r t o f the clan i n t h e same r i g h t as t h e m e n , has the
same i n d i v i d u a l i t y a n d t h e same a u t o n o m y . E a c h o f t h e m is i m a g i n e d as b e -
i n g i r r e d u c i b l e t o similar groups that are radically d i s c o n t i n u o u s w i t h i t and
as c o n s t i t u t i n g w h a t a m o u n t s t o a d i s t i n c t r e a l m . U n d e r these c o n d i t i o n s , i t
w o u l d o c c u r t o n o o n e that these heterogeneous w o r l d s w e r e o n l y different

*Here again, Dürkheim capitalizes.

'"Ibid., p. 583. Among the Dakota, the totem is called wakan. See Riggs and Dorsey, Dakota Texts and
Grammar, in CNAE [vol. IX, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1893], p. 219.
'"'James's Account of Long's Expedition in the Rocky Mountains," vol. I, p. 268 (cited by Dorsey in
"Siouan Cults," §92, p. 431).
32
I do not mean to argue that in principle every theriomorphic representation of religious forces is the
mark of a preexisting totemism. But in terms of societies where totemism is still apparent, as in the case
of the Dakota, it is natural to think that these conceptions are not unknown to it.
Origins of These Beliefs (Continued) 199

manifestations o f o n e a n d the same f u n d a m e n t a l force. I t must have b e e n as-

s u m e d instead that a specifically different m a n a c o r r e s p o n d e d t o each o f
t h e m , the p o w e r o f w h i c h c o u l d n o t e x t e n d b e y o n d the clan a n d t h e things
assigned t o i t . T h e n o t i o n o f o n e universal m a n a c o u l d be b o r n o n l y w h e n a
r e l i g i o n o f the t r i b e d e v e l o p e d above the clan cults a n d absorbed t h e m m o r e
o r less c o m p l e t e l y . I t is o n l y w i t h the sense o f t r i b a l u n i t y that a sense o f the
3 3
w o r l d ' s u n i t y arose. I w i l l s h o w later o n that the societies o f Australia w e r e
already a c q u a i n t e d w i t h a c u l t shared b y t h e entire t r i b e . B u t a l t h o u g h that
c u l t represents the highest f o r m o f the A u s t r a l i a n r e l i g i o n s , i t d i d n o t succeed
i n r u p t u r i n g the p r i n c i p l e s o n w h i c h t h e y rest a n d t r a n s f o r m i n g t h e m .
T o t e m i s m is basically a federative r e l i g i o n that c a n n o t g o b e y o n d a c e r t a i n
level o f c e n t r a l i z a t i o n w i t h o u t ceasing t o be itself.
O n e characteristic fact i l l u m i n a t e s t h e p r o f o u n d reason w h y the n o t i o n
o f m a n a has b e e n k e p t so specialized i n Australia. T h e religious forces
p r o p e r — t h o s e t h o u g h t o f as totems—are n o t the o n l y ones the A u s t r a l i a n
believes he m u s t r e c k o n w i t h . T h e r e are also the forces t h a t the m a g i c i a n es-
pecially has at his disposal. Whereas the r e l i g i o u s forces are considered t o be
salutary a n d b e n e f i c e n t i n p r i n c i p l e , t h e f u n c t i o n o f m a g i c forces is above all
t o cause death a n d illness. T h e y differ b o t h i n t h e nature o f t h e i r effects a n d
i n the relations t h e y have w i t h social o r g a n i z a t i o n . A t o t e m always belongs t o
a clan; m a g i c , o n the o t h e r h a n d , is a t r i b a l a n d even an i n t e r t r i b a l i n s t i t u t i o n .
M a g i c a l forces d o n o t p a r t i c u l a r l y b e l o n g t o any d e f i n i t e g r o u p o f t h e t r i b e .
T o use those forces, i t is e n o u g h t o have the efficacious recipes. Similarly,
everyone is v u l n e r a b l e t o t h e i r effects a n d so m u s t t r y t o guard against t h e m .
These are nebulous forces that are n o t attached t o any definite social d i v i s i o n
a n d can even e x t e n d t h e i r i n f l u e n c e b e y o n d the t r i b e . I t is n o t e w o r t h y that,
a m o n g t h e A r u n t a a n d t h e L o r i t j a , t h e y are c o n c e i v e d o f s i m p l y as aspects
a n d p a r t i c u l a r f o r m s o f o n e a n d t h e same force, called i n A r u n t a Amngquiltha
34
o r Arunkulta. " I t is," say Spencer a n d G i l l e n , "a t e r m o f rather vague m e a n -
i n g ; b u t , basically, o n e always finds t h e idea o f a supernatural p o w e r e n d o w e d
w i t h an e v i l nature. . . . T h i s w o r d is a p p l i e d i n d i s c r i m i n a t e l y e i t h e r t o the
e v i l i n f l u e n c e that comes from an o b j e c t o r t o t h e v e r y o b j e c t i n w h i c h i t
35
t e m p o r a r i l y o r p e r m a n e n d y resides." " B y A r u n k u l t a , " says Strehlow, " t h e

"See Bk. II, chap. 9 §4, pp. 288-298.

34
The first spelling is that of [Sir Baldwin] Spencer and [Francis James] Gillen; the second, [Carl]
Strehlow's.
35
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes [of Central Australia, London, Macmillan, 1899], p. 548, n. 1.
Granted, Spencer and Gillen add, "The best way of rendering the idea would be to say that the
arungquiltha object is possessed by an evil spirit." But thatfreetranslation is an unwarranted interpreta-
tion by them. The notion of arungquiltha in no way implies the existence of spiritual beings. This point
emergesfromStrehlow's context and definition.
200 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

native means a force that suddenly suspends life a n d b r i n g s death to

36
w h o m e v e r i t enters." T h i s t e r m is a p p l i e d t o bones, t o the pieces o f w o o d
that give o f f e v i l spells, a n d t o a n i m a l o r p l a n t poisons. I t is v e r y d e f i n i t e l y a
h a r m f u l mana. G r e y m e n t i o n s a c o m p l e t e l y i d e n t i c a l n o t i o n i n the tribes he
37
has o b s e r v e d . A m o n g these dissimilar peoples, t h e n , t h e p r o p e r l y religious
forces d o n o t manage t o break free o f a c e r t a i n heterogeneity, b u t the m a g i -
cal forces are c o n c e i v e d o f as b e i n g all o f the same nature; t h e y are c o n c e i v e d
o f generically. T h e reason is this: Since the m a g i c a l forces h o v e r above the d i -
visions and subdivisions o f t h e social o r g a n i z a t i o n , they m o v e i n a h o m o g e -
neous a n d c o n t i n u o u s space w h e r e t h e y d o n o t e n c o u n t e r anything to
differentiate t h e m . O n the o t h e r h a n d , since r e l i g i o u s forces are localized
w i t h i n d e f i n i t e a n d d i s t i n c t social settings, they b e c o m e differentiated a n d
specialized a c c o r d i n g t o the setting i n w h i c h t h e y h a p p e n t o be.
F r o m this w e see t o w h a t e x t e n t the n o t i o n o f i m p e r s o n a l religious force
is i n the letter a n d spirit o f A u s t r a l i a n t o t e m i s m , f o r i t constitutes itself dis-
tincdy as s o o n as n o c o n t r a r y cause opposes i t . G r a n t e d , the a r u n g q u i l t h a is
a p u r e l y m a g i c a l force. B u t m a g i c forces a n d r e l i g i o u s forces are n o t different
38
i n t h e i r essence. I n d e e d , they are sometimes designated b y the same w o r d .
I n Melanesia, the m a g i c i a n a n d his c h a r m s have m a n a j u s t as d o the agents
3 9 4 0
a n d rites o f the regular c u l t . A m o n g the I r o q u o i s , the w o r d " o r e n d a " is
used i n the same way. T h e r e f o r e , w e can l e g i t i m a t e l y i n f e r t h e nature o f each
41
from that o f the o t h e r .

36
Strehlow, Die Aranda- [und Loritja-Stamme in Zentral-Australien], vol. II [Frankfurt, J. Baer, 1907],
p. 76n.
37
With the name Boyl-ya ([George] Grey, Journals of Two Expeditions [in North- West and Western
Australia], vol. II [London, T. W. Boone, 1841], pp. 337-338).
38
See above, p. 400. Moreover, Spencer and Gillen implicidy recognize this when they say that the
arungquiltha is "a supernatural force." Cf. Hubert and Mauss, "Théorie générale," p. 119.
39
Codrington, The Melanesians, pp. 191ff.
""Hewitt, "Orenda," p. 38.
41
One may even ask whether a concept analogous to wakan or mana is altogether lacking in Australia.
As it happens, the word "churinga" (or Tjurunga, in Strehlow's spelling) has closely related meaning
among the Arunta. Spencer and Gillen say that this term designates "all that is secret or sacred. It is ap-
plied as much to an object as to the quality it possesses" (Native Tribes, p. 648). This is almost the defini-
tion of mana. Sometimes, indeed, Spencer and Gillen use that word to designate religious power or force
in general. In describing a ceremony among the Kaitish, they say that the celebrant is "full of churinga,"
that is, they continue, full of "the magical power that emanates from the objects called churingas." How-
ever, it does not seem that the notion of churinga is constituted in Australia with the clarity and precision
that the notion of mana has in Melanesia or that wakan has among the Sioux.
Origins of These Beliefs (Continued) 201

III
T h e result t o w h i c h the p r e c e d i n g analysis has l e d us is relevant n o t o n l y t o the
h i s t o r y o f t o t e m i s m b u t also t o the f o r m a t i o n o f religious t h o u g h t generally.
O n the g r o u n d s that m a n is at first r u l e d m a i n l y b y his senses a n d b y sen-
suous representations, i t has o f t e n b e e n a r g u e d that he began b y i m a g i n i n g
the d i v i n e i n the concrete f o r m o f d e f i n i t e a n d personal beings. T h e facts d o
n o t c o n f i r m that p r e s u m p t i o n . I have j u s t described a l o g i c a l l y u n i f i e d set o f
r e l i g i o u s beliefs that I have g o o d reason t o consider v e r y p r i m i t i v e , a n d yet I
have n o t e n c o u n t e r e d personalities o f this k i n d . T h e t o t e m i c c u l t p r o p e r is
addressed n e i t h e r t o such a n d such d e f i n i t e animals n o r t o such a n d such def-
42
i n i t e plants b u t t o a sort o f diffuse p o w e r that permeates t h i n g s . E v e n i n the
advanced r e l i g i o n s that have arisen o u t o f t o t e m i s m , l i k e those w e see ap-
p e a r i n g a m o n g t h e Indians o f N o r t h A m e r i c a , that idea, far f r o m b e i n g ef-
faced, becomes m o r e conscious o f itself, expressing i t s e l f w i t h a c l a r i t y i t d i d
n o t p r e v i o u s l y have, a n d at the same t i m e t a k i n g o n greater generality. T h a t
idea dominates t h e w h o l e r e l i g i o u s system.
S u c h is the basic m a t e r i a l from w h i c h w e r e made the various beings that
r e l i g i o n s o f all times have w o r s h i p p e d a n d sanctified. T h e spirits, d e m o n s ,
genies, a n d gods o f every degree are o n l y the c o n c r e t e f o r m s t a k e n b y this
4 3
energy (this " p o t e n t i a l i t y , " as H e w i t t calls i t ) as i t became i n d i v i d u a l i z e d
a n d f i x e d u p o n some d e f i n i t e o b j e c t o r p o i n t i n space, a n d condensed a r o u n d
some b e i n g t h a t is ideal o r legendary, yet c o n c e i v e d o f as real i n p o p u l a r
i m a g i n a t i o n . A D a k o t a i n t e r v i e w e d b y M i s s Fletcher described this essential
consubstantiality i n language f u l l o f b o l d images:

A l l that moves stops at one place or another, at one moment or another.

T h e bird that flies stops somewhere to make its nest, somewhere else to rest
from flight. T h e man w h o walks stops w h e n he pleases. The same is true
for the deity. T h e sun, so bright and magnificent, is one place where the
deity has stopped. T h e trees and the animals are others. T h e Indian thinks
o f these places and sends his prayers there, that they may reach the place
44
where god has stopped and thus obtain succor and benediction.

I n o t h e r w o r d s , w a k a n (for that is w h a t he was t a l k i n g about) goes a n d comes

t h r o u g h the w o r l d , a n d the sacred t h i n g s are the places w h e r e i t has a l i g h t e d .
42
Certainly, we will see below (Bk. II, chaps. 8 and 9) that the idea of mythic personality is not alto-
gether foreign to totemism. But I will show that these conceptions result from secondary formations. Far
from being the basis of the beliefs just analyzed, they derive from those beliefs.
"Hewitt, "Orenda," p. 38.
44
"Report of the Peabody Museum," vol. Ill, p. 276n. (cited by Dorsey, "Siouan Cults," p. 435).
202 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

H e r e w e f i n d ourselves far f r o m n a t u r i s m a n d a n i m i s m alike. I f the sun,

m o o n , a n d stars have b e e n w o r s h i p p e d , t h e y have n o t o w e d this h o n o r t o
t h e i r i n h e r e n t nature o r d i s t i n c t i v e properties b u t t o the fact that t h e y w e r e
c o n c e i v e d o f as p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n that force w h i c h alone gives things t h e i r sa-
credness a n d is f o u n d i n m a n y o t h e r beings, even the v e r y smallest. T h e souls
o f t h e dead have b e e n objects o f rites n o t because t h e y are considered t o be
made o f some f l u i d a n d ethereal substance a n d n o t because t h e y resemble the
shadow o f a b o d y o r its r e f l e c t i o n o n t h e face o f the deep. Lightness and flu-
i d i t y are n o t e n o u g h t o confer sacredness o n t h e m ; t h e y have b e e n invested
w i t h that h o n o r o n l y insofar as t h e y possessed some o f t h a t v e r y force, the
f o u n t o f all that is r e l i g i o u s .
W h y w e c o u l d n o t define r e l i g i o n b y the idea o f m y t h i c a l personalities,
gods, o r spirits n o w becomes clearer. T h a t w a y o f i m a g i n i n g religious t h i n g s
is b y n o means i n h e r e n t i n t h e i r nature. A t the o r i g i n a n d basis o f r e l i g i o u s
t h o u g h t , w e f i n d n o t d e f i n i t e a n d d i s t i n c t objects o r beings t h a t i n themselves
possess sacredness b u t i n d e f i n i t e p o w e r s a n d a n o n y m o u s forces. T h e y are
m o r e o r less n u m e r o u s i n different societies (sometimes, i n d e e d , t h e y are
o n l y o n e force), a n d t h e i r i m p e r s o n a l i t y is exactly comparable t o that o f t h e
physical forces w h o s e manifestations are s t u d i e d b y the sciences o f nature.
T u r n i n g t o p a r t i c u l a r sacred t h i n g s , those are b u t i n d i v i d u a l i z e d f o r m s o f this
basic p r i n c i p l e . T h u s , i t is n o t s u r p r i s i n g that even i n r e l i g i o n s i n w h i c h gods
i n d i s p u t a b l y exist, there are rites that are efficacious b y themselves, i n d e p e n -
d e n t o f d i v i n e a c t i o n . T h i s is so because that force can attach t o w o r d s s p o k e n
a n d gestures made, as w e l l as t o m a t e r i a l substances. V o i c e a n d m o v e m e n t can
serve as its vehicle, a n d i t can p r o d u c e its effects t h r o u g h t h e m w i t h o u t h e l p
from any g o d o r spirit. I n d e e d , let t h a t force b e c o m e p r i m a r i l y c o n c e n t r a t e d
45
i n a r i t e , a n d t h r o u g h i t that r i t e w i l l b e c o m e t h e creator o f d e i t i e s . T h i s is
also w h y there is perhaps n o d i v i n e personality w i t h o u t an i m p e r s o n a l ele-
m e n t . E v e n those w h o m o s t clearly i m a g i n e d i v i n e p e r s o n a l i t y i n a concrete
a n d t a n g i b l e f o r m i m a g i n e i t at t h e same t i m e as an abstract p o w e r that can
be d e f i n e d o n l y b y the nature o f its effects, as a force that deploys i t s e l f i n
space a n d that is i n each o f its effects, at least i n part. I t is t h e p o w e r t o p r o -
duce the r a i n o r the w i n d , the harvest o r t h e l i g h t o f day; Z e u s is i n each d r o p
46
o f r a i n that falls, j u s t as Ceres is i n each sheaf o f the h a r v e s t . Indeed, more
o f t e n t h a n n o t , this efficacy is so i n c o m p l e t e l y d e f i n e d t h a t the believer can

45
See above, p. 33.
"'Expressions such as Zeus uei, or Ceres succiditur, show that this conception lived on in Greece and
in Rome. Moreover [Hermann] Usener, in his Gottemamen: [Versuch einer Lehre von der religiosen De-
briffebildung, Bonn, F. Cohen, 1896], has clearly shown that the gods of Greece, as of Rome, were origi-
nally impersonal forces that were only thought of in terms of their attributes.
Origins of These Beliefs (Continued) 203

have o n l y a v e r y vague n o t i o n o f i t . M o r e o v e r , this vagueness has made p o s -

sible t h e u n i o n s a n d divisions i n t h e course o f w h i c h t h e gods w e r e frag-
m e n t e d , d i s m e m b e r e d , a n d c o m b i n e d i n all sorts o f ways. T h e r e is perhaps
not a single r e l i g i o n i n w h i c h the o r i g i n a l mana, w h e t h e r u n i t a r y o r c o m -
p o u n d , has f u l l y e v o l v e d i n t o a w e l l - d e f i n e d n u m b e r o f discrete beings that
are sealed o f f from o n e another. E a c h o f those beings retains a nebulous sort
o f i m p e r s o n a l i t y that enables i t t o enter i n t o n e w c o m b i n a t i o n s — i t has t h a t
capacity n o t s i m p l y because i t remains as a relic b u t because i t is i n t h e nature
o f religious forces t o be incapable o f f u l l i n d i v i d u a l i z a t i o n .
T h i s c o n c e p t i o n , w h i c h t h e study o f t o t e m i s m alone suggested t o m e , is
f u r t h e r r e c o m m e n d e d b y the fact that, o f late, several scholars have b e e n l e d
to i t i n d e p e n d e n t l y , i n the course o f q u i t e different research. T h e r e is an
e m e r g i n g t e n d e n c y t o w a r d spontaneous agreement o n this p o i n t , w h i c h is
w o r t h n o t i n g f o r i t creates a p r e s u m p t i o n o f o b j e c t i v i t y .
As early as 1 8 9 9 , 1 was a r g u i n g the necessity o f n o t p u t t i n g any n o t i o n o f
4 7
mythical personality i n t o the definition o f r e l i g i o n . I n 1900, M a r r e t t called
a t t e n t i o n t o the existence o f a phase i n r e l i g i o n that he called preanimist, i n
w h i c h t h e rites w e r e addressed t o i m p e r s o n a l forces, such as M e l a n e s i a n
4 8
m a n a o r t h e w a k a n o f the O m a h a a n d the D a k o t a . Nevertheless, M a r r e t t
d i d n o t g o so far as t o h o l d that, always a n d i n all cases, the n o t i o n o f spirit
l o g i c a l l y o r c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y comes after that o f m a n a o r is d e r i v e d from i t .
I n d e e d , h e seemed disposed t o a l l o w that i t is sometimes f o r m e d i n d e p e n -
49
dently, a n d hence that r e l i g i o u s t h o u g h t flows from a d o u b l e s o u r c e . On
the o t h e r h a n d , he c o n c e i v e d m a n a as a p r o p e r t y i n h e r e n t i n t h i n g s , as an e l -
e m e n t o f t h e i r specific character. A c c o r d i n g t o h i m , m a n a is s i m p l y the trait
we i m p u t e t o a n y t h i n g that departs from the o r d i n a r y , t o e v e r y t h i n g that
50
makes us feel a d m i r a t i o n o r f e a r . T h i s was t a n t a m o u n t t o r e h a b i l i t a t i n g t h e
51
naturist t h e o r y .
A s h o r t t i m e later, H u b e r t a n d Mauss, setting o u t t o devise a general t h e -

47
[Emile Durkheim, "De la] Définition des phénomènes religieux," AS, vol. II [1897-1898],
pp. 14-16.
48
[R. R. Marrett], "Preanimistic Religion," in Folk-lore, vol. XI (1900), pp. 162-182.
49
Ibid., p. 179. In a more recent work, "The Conception of Mana" (in TICHR, vol. II [Oxford,
Clarendon Press, 1908], pp. 54£F), Marrett tends even more to subordinate the animist conception to the
notion of mana. However, his thought remains hesitant and reserved on this point.
50
Ibid„ p. 168.
51
This return of preanimism to naturism is still more marked in a communication by Clodd at the
Third Congress on the History of Religions ("Preanimistic Stages in Religion," in TICHR, vol. I,
pp. 33).
204 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

o r y o f m a g i c , established that m a g i c as a w h o l e is based o n the n o t i o n o f

52
mana. G i v e n the close k i n s h i p o f m a g i c a l rites w i t h r e l i g i o u s ones, w e
m i g h t expect t h e same t h e o r y t o be applicable t o r e l i g i o n . Preuss argued this
53
i n a series o f articles that appeared i n Globus t h e same year. R e l y i n g o n facts
he h a d d r a w n m a i n l y from A m e r i c a n c i v i l i z a t i o n s , Preuss set o u t t o s h o w that
t h e ideas o f soul a n d s p i r i t w e r e f o r m e d o n l y after those o f i m p e r s o n a l p o w e r
a n d force, that soul a n d s p i r i t are o n l y transformations o f i m p e r s o n a l p o w e r
a n d force, a n d that u n t i l fairly recent times, those latter r e t a i n e d the m a r k o f
t h e i r o r i g i n a l i m p e r s o n a l i t y . H e d i d i n d e e d s h o w that, even i n the advanced
religions, s p i r i t a n d s o u l are c o n c e i v e d o f i n t h e f o r m o f vague discharges
spontaneously e m i t t e d from the t h i n g s i n w h i c h t h e m a n a resides, and s o m e -
times t e n d i n g t o escape u s i n g all available routes: m o u t h , nose, and every
o t h e r b o d y o p e n i n g , breath, gaze, speech, a n d so o n . A t t h e same t i m e ,
Preuss s h o w e d t h e i r p r o t e a n quality, t h e e x t r e m e plasticity that enables t h e m
54
t o serve t h e m o s t v a r i e d uses, i n succession a n d almost s i m u l t a n e o u s l y . True
e n o u g h , i f that author's t e r m i n o l o g y was taken literally, o n e m i g h t t h i n k
those forces are, f o r h i m , o f a m a g i c a l a n d n o t a r e l i g i o u s nature. H e calls
t h e m charms (Zauber, Zauberkräfte). B u t since he shows t h e m t o be active i n
rites that are f u n d a m e n t a l l y r e l i g i o u s , f o r e x a m p l e , the great M e x i c a n cere-
5 5
m o n i e s , i t is e v i d e n t that, b y u s i n g such t e r m s , h e does n o t m e a n t o place
those forces outside r e l i g i o n . I f he uses t h e m , i t is p r o b a b l y f o r w a n t o f o t h -
ers that better i n d i c a t e t h e i r i m p e r s o n a l i t y a n d the sort o f m e c h a n i s m b y
w h i c h they operate.
56
T h u s , the same idea is t e n d i n g t o appear f r o m all q u a r t e r s . The i m -
pression increasingly is that t h e m y t h o l o g i c a l c o n s t r u c t i o n s , even t h e m o s t
57
e l e m e n t a r y ones, are s e c o n d a r y p r o d u c t s o v e r g r o w i n g a substratum o f b e -
liefs—simpler a n d m o r e obscure, vaguer a n d m o r e f u n d a m e n t a l — t h a t c o n -
52
Hubert and Mauss, "Théorie générale de la magie," pp. 108ff.
53
[Konrad Theodor] Preuss, "Der Ursprung der Religion und Kunst," in Globus, vol. LXXXVI
(1904), pp. 321, 355, 376, 389; vol. LXXXVII, pp. 333, 347, 380, 394, [419].
54
Ibid., vol. LXXXVII, p. 381.
55
He clearly opposes them to all influences that are profane in nature (ibid., vol. LXXXVI, p. 379a).
''They are found even in the recent theories of Frazer. If this scholar refuses to ascribe a religious char-
acter to totemism so as to make it a kind of magic, he does so precisely because the forces that the totemic
cult puts into operation are impersonal, like those the magician manipulates. Frazer recognizes the fun-
damental fact I have just established, but he draws a different conclusion from it than I do, because, ac-
cording to him, there is religion only if there are mythical personalities.
"However, I do not take this word in the same sense as Preuss and Marrett. According to them, there
was a definite moment in religious evolution when men knew neither souls nor spirits, a preanimist phase.
This hypothesis is highly questionable. I will offer further explanation on this point below (Bk. II, chaps.
8 and 9).
Origins of These Beliefs (Continued) 205

stitute t h e firm f o u n d a t i o n s o n w h i c h the r e l i g i o u s systems w e r e b u i l t . T h i s

is the p r i m i t i v e s t r a t u m that t h e analysis o f t o t e m i s m has enabled us t o reach.
T h e v a r i o u s w r i t e r s w h o s e research I have j u s t m e n t i o n e d a r r i v e d at that
c o n c e p t i o n u s i n g facts taken f r o m q u i t e disparate r e l i g i o n s , some o f w h i c h
c o r r e s p o n d t o an already w e l l - a d v a n c e d c i v i l i z a t i o n — t h e religions o f M e x -
i c o , f o r example, w h i c h Preuss used a great deal. I t m i g h t t h e n be asked
w h e t h e r the t h e o r y was applicable t o the simplest r e l i g i o n s as w e l l . B u t since
o n e can descend n o f u r t h e r t h a n t o t e m i s m , w e r u n n o risk o f error. A t the
same t i m e , w e m a y possibly have f o u n d the o r i g i n a l n o t i o n f r o m w h i c h the
5 8
ideas o f w a k a n a n d m a n a are d e r i v e d : t h e n o t i o n o f t h e t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e .

IV
T h e role that n o t i o n has played i n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f religious ideas is n o t
the o n l y reason f o r its p r i m a r y i m p o r t a n c e . I t has a secular aspect that gives
i t relevance f o r t h e h i s t o r y o f scientific t h o u g h t as w e l l . I t is the n o t i o n o f
force i n its earliest f o r m .
I n t h e w o r l d as t h e S i o u x conceive i t , w a k a n plays the same role as t h e
forces b y w h i c h science explains the v a r i e d p h e n o m e n a o f nature. T h i s is n o t
t o say that i t is t h o u g h t o f i n the f o r m o f an exclusively physical energy; w e
w i l l see i n the n e x t chapter that, instead, the elements used t o f o r m an idea
o f i t are taken from the m o s t disparate realms. B u t precisely that c o m p o s i t e
nature enables i t t o b e used as a p r i n c i p l e o f universal e x p l a n a t i o n . T h e w h o l e
5 9
o f life comes from i t ; " a l l life is w a k a n " ; and b y the w o r d " l i f e " m u s t be u n -
d e r s t o o d all that acts a n d reacts a n d all that moves a n d is m o v e d , as m u c h i n
the m i n e r a l k i n g d o m as i n the b i o l o g i c a l one. W a k a n is the cause o f all the
m o v e m e n t that takes place i n t h e universe. W e have also seen that the orenda
o f t h e I r o q u o i s is " t h e efficient cause o f all t h e p h e n o m e n a , and all t h e a c t i v -
ities, that manifest themselves a r o u n d m a n . " I t is a p o w e r " i n h e r e n t i n all
60
bodies a n d all t h i n g s . " I t is orenda that makes t h e w i n d b l o w , the sun shine
a n d w a r m the earth, t h e plants g r o w , the animals m u l t i p l y , and that makes

58
On this same question, see the article of Alessandro Bruno, "Sui fenomeni magico-religiosi delle
comunita primitive," in Rivista italiana di Sociotogia, vol. XII, fasc. IV-V, pp. 568ff., and an unpublished pa-
per by W. Bogoras at the XlVth Congress of Americanists, held at Stuttgart in 1904. This paper is ana-
lyzed by Preuss in Globus, vol. LXXXVI, p. 201.
59
"A11 things," says Miss Fletcher, "are pervaded by a common principle of life." "Import of the
Totem," p. 579.
""Hewitt, "Orenda," p. 36.
206 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

man strong, skillful, and i n t e l l i g e n t . W h e n the I r o q u o i s says that the life o f all
nature is the p r o d u c t o f conflicts b e t w e e n the u n e q u a l l y intense orenda o f
different beings, he is expressing i n his language t h e m o d e r n idea that the
w o r l d is a system o f forces that l i m i t , c o n t a i n , a n d e q u i l i b r a t e o n e another.
T h e M e l a n e s i a n i m p u t e s t h e same sort o f efficacy t o mana. I t is thanks t o
his mana that a m a n succeeds i n h u n t i n g o r i n war, t h a t his gardens p r o d u c e
a g o o d y i e l d , that his herds prosper. Because i t is f u l l o f mana, the a r r o w
6 1
reaches its m a r k , a net takes m a n y fish, a canoe holds t h e sea w e l l , a n d so
o n . I t is t r u e that i f c e r t a i n o f C o d r i n g t o n ' s phrases w e r e taken literally, m a n a
w o u l d be the cause t o w h i c h p e o p l e specifically ascribe " a l l that exceeds the
62
p o w e r o f m a n , all that is outside the o r d i n a r y course o f n a t u r e . " But it
emerges f r o m the v e r y examples he cites that the sphere o f m a n a is a g o o d
deal broader t h a n that. I n reality, i t serves t o e x p l a i n usual a n d everyday p h e -
n o m e n a . T h e r e is n o t h i n g s u p e r h u m a n o r supernatural i n t h e fact that a b o a t
sails o r a h u n t e r takes game. A m o n g those events o f everyday life, there are
some so insignificant a n d so f a m i l i a r that t h e y g o b y u n p e r c e i v e d : N o o n e
takes n o t e o f t h e m , and, consequendy, n o o n e feels a n e e d t o e x p l a i n t h e m .
T h e c o n c e p t o f mana is a p p l i e d o n l y t o those that are i m p o r t a n t e n o u g h t o
p r o v o k e reflection, t o a w a k e n a m o d i c u m o f interest a n d curiosity. F o r all
that, however, they are n o t m i r a c u l o u s . A n d w h a t is t r u e o f m a n a as w e l l as
orenda o r w a k a n is equally t r u e o f the t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e . B y that p r i n c i p l e
are m a i n t a i n e d the lives o f the clan's p e o p l e , the lives o f t h e animals o r plants
o f the t o t e m i c species, the lives o f a l l things that are classified u n d e r the
t o t e m a n d participate i n its nature.
T h u s the idea o f force is o f r e l i g i o u s o r i g i n . F r o m r e l i g i o n , p h i l o s o p h y
first a n d later the sciences b o r r o w e d i t . S u c h is the i n t u i t i o n C o m t e already
h a d w h e n he called metaphysics t h e h e i r o f " t h e o l o g y . " B u t his c o n c l u s i o n
was that, because o f its metaphysical o r i g i n s , the idea o f force was fated t o
disappear from science, a n d he d e n i e d i t any objective m e a n i n g . I w i l l show,
to the contrary, that r e l i g i o u s forces are real, n o m a t t e r h o w i m p e r f e c t t h e
symbols w i t h w h o s e h e l p t h e y w e r e c o n c e i v e d of. F r o m this i t w i l l f o l l o w
that the same is t r u e f o r t h e c o n c e p t o f force i n general.

61
Codrington, The Melanestans, pp. 118—120.
62
Ibid., p. 119.
 CHAPTER SEVEN

ORIGINS OF THESE BELIEFS

(CONCLUSION)
Origin of the Notion of Totemic Principle, or Mana

T he p r o p o s i t i o n established i n the p r e c e d i n g chapter defines the terms i n

w h i c h t h e p r o b l e m o f h o w t o t e m i s m o r i g i n a t e d m u s t be posed. T h e
central n o t i o n o f t o t e m i s m is that o f a q u a s i - d i v i n e p r i n c i p l e that is i m m a -
n e n t i n c e r t a i n categories o f m e n a n d things a n d t h o u g h t o f i n the f o r m o f
an a n i m a l o r plant. I n essence, therefore, t o e x p l a i n this r e l i g i o n is t o e x p l a i n
this belief-—that is, t o discover w h a t c o u l d have l e d m e n t o construct i t a n d
w i t h w h a t b u i l d i n g blocks.

I
I t is manifestly n o t w i t h the feelings t h e things that serve as totems are capa-
ble o f arousing i n men's m i n d s . I have s h o w n that these are o f t e n i n s i g n i f i -
cant. I n the sort o f i m p r e s s i o n lizards, caterpillars, rats, ants, frogs, turkeys,
breams, p l u m trees, cockatoos, a n d so f o r t h m a k e u p o n m a n (to cite o n l y the
names that c o m e u p f r e q u e n t l y o n lists o f A u s t r a l i a n totems), there is n o t h -
i n g that i n any w a y resembles g r a n d a n d p o w e r f u l religious e m o t i o n s or
c o u l d stamp u p o n t h e m a q u a l i t y o f sacredness. T h e same cannot be said o f
stars and great a t m o s p h e r i c p h e n o m e n a , w h i c h d o have all that is r e q u i r e d t o
seize men's i m a g i n a t i o n s . A s i t happens, however, these serve v e r y rarely as
1
totems; i n d e e d , t h e i r use f o r this p u r p o s e was p r o b a b l y a late d e v e l o p m e n t .
T h u s i t was n o t the i n t r i n s i c nature o f t h e t h i n g w h o s e n a m e t h e clan b o r e
that set i t apart as t h e object o f w o r s h i p . F u r t h e r m o r e , i f the e m o t i o n e l i c i t e d
b y the t h i n g itself really was t h e d e t e r m i n i n g cause o f t o t e m i c rites a n d b e -
liefs, t h e n this t h i n g w o u l d also be the sacred b e i n g par excellence, a n d the
'See above, p. 102.

207
208 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

animals a n d plants used as t o t e m s w o u l d play the l e a d i n g r o l e i n religious life.

B u t w e k n o w that the focus o f t h e c u l t is elsewhere. I t is s y m b o l i c represen-
tations o f this o r that p l a n t o r a n i m a l . I t is t o t e m i c emblems a n d symbols o f
all k i n d s that possess the greatest sanctity. A n d so i t is i n t o t e m i c emblems a n d
symbols that the r e l i g i o u s source is t o be f o u n d , w h i l e the real objects repre-
sented b y those e m b l e m s receive o n l y a r e f l e c t i o n .
2
T h e t o t e m is above all a s y m b o l , a tangible expression o f s o m e t h i n g else.
B u t o f what?
I t f o l l o w s f r o m t h e same analysis that t h e t o t e m expresses a n d symbolizes
t w o different k i n d s o f things. F r o m o n e p o i n t o f v i e w , i t is t h e o u t w a r d a n d
visible f o r m o f w h a t I have called t h e t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e o r g o d ; and f r o m a n -
other, i t is also the s y m b o l o f a p a r t i c u l a r society that is called t h e clan. I t is
the flag o f the clan, the sign b y w h i c h each clan is d i s t i n g u i s h e d f r o m the
others, the visible m a r k o f its distinctiveness, a n d a m a r k that is b o r n e b y
e v e r y t h i n g that i n any w a y belongs t o t h e clan: m e n , animals, a n d things.
T h u s , i f the t o t e m is t h e s y m b o l o f b o t h t h e g o d a n d t h e society, is this n o t
because the g o d a n d t h e society are o n e a n d t h e same? H o w c o u l d the e m -
b l e m o f t h e g r o u p have taken t h e f o r m o f that q u a s i - d i v i n i t y i f t h e g r o u p and
t h e d i v i n i t y w e r e t w o d i s t i n c t realities? T h u s t h e g o d o f t h e clan, the t o t e m i c
p r i n c i p l e , can be n o n e o t h e r t h a n the clan itself, b u t t h e clan transfigured and
i m a g i n e d i n t h e physical f o r m o f t h e p l a n t o r a n i m a l that serves as t o t e m .
H o w c o u l d that apotheosis have c o m e a b o u t , a n d w h y s h o u l d i t have
c o m e a b o u t i n that fashion?

II
Society i n general, s i m p l y b y its effect o n men's m i n d s , u n d o u b t e d l y has all
that is r e q u i r e d t o arouse the sensation o f t h e d i v i n e . A society is t o its m e m -
bers w h a t a g o d is t o its faithful. * A g o d is first o f all a b e i n g that m a n c o n -
ceives o f as s u p e r i o r t o h i m s e l f i n some respects a n d o n e o n w h o m he
believes he depends. W h e t h e r that b e i n g is a conscious personality, l i k e Zeus
o r Y a h w e h , o r a play o f abstract forces as i n t o t e m i s m , the faithful believe

*Le fidèle. To avoid translating this term, which connotes loyal adherence, as "the believer," thereby
leaving no room for a contrast with le croyant, which connotes belief, I have usually rendered it as "the
faithful." Durkheim analyzes the stance of what one might call the "unbelieving faithful." See Bk. Ill,
chap. 3, §2.
2
In the small book cited above, [Julius] Pikler, [Der Ursprung der Totemismus. Ein Beitrag zur materialis¬
chen Geschichtheorie, Berlin, K. Hoffmann, 1900] has already expressed, in a somewhat dialectical fashion,
the belief that this fundamentally is what the totem is.
Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 209

t h e y are b o u n d t o c e r t a i n ways o f a c t i n g that t h e nature o f the sacred p r i n c i -

ple t h e y are d e a l i n g w i t h has i m p o s e d u p o n t h e m . S o c i e t y also fosters i n us
the sense o f p e r p e t u a l dependence. Precisely because society has its o w n spe-
cific nature that is different f r o m o u r nature as i n d i v i d u a l s , i t pursues ends
that are also specifically its o w n ; b u t because i t can achieve those ends o n l y
b y w o r k i n g t h r o u g h us, i t categorically demands o u r c o o p e r a t i o n . Society
requires us t o m a k e ourselves its servants, f o r g e t f u l o f o u r o w n interests. A n d
i t subjects us t o all sorts o f restraints, p r i v a t i o n s , a n d sacrifices w i t h o u t w h i c h
social life w o u l d be impossible. A n d so, at every instant, w e m u s t s u b m i t t o
rules o f a c t i o n a n d t h o u g h t that w e have n e i t h e r m a d e n o r w a n t e d a n d that
sometimes are c o n t r a r y t o o u r i n c l i n a t i o n s a n d t o o u r m o s t basic instincts.
I f society c o u l d exact those concessions a n d sacrifices o n l y b y physical
constraint, i t c o u l d arouse i n us o n l y t h e sense o f a physical force t o w h i c h
w e have n o c h o i c e b u t t o y i e l d , a n d n o t that o f a m o r a l p o w e r such as r e l i -
g i o n s venerate. I n reality, h o w e v e r , the h o l d society has over consciousness
owes far less t o t h e prerogative its physical s u p e r i o r i t y gives i t t h a n t o the
m o r a l a u t h o r i t y w i t h w h i c h i t is invested. ,We defer t o society's orders n o t
s i m p l y because i t is e q u i p p e d t o o v e r c o m e o u r resistance b u t , first a n d f o r e -
m o s t , because i t is t h e object o f g e n u i n e respect.
A n i n d i v i d u a l o r collective subject is said t o inspire respect w h e n the r e p -
resentation that expresses i t i n consciousness has such p o w e r that i t calls f o r t h
o r i n h i b i t s c o n d u c t automatically, irrespective of any utilitarian calculation of help-
ful or harmful results. W h e n w e o b e y s o m e o n e o u t o f respect f o r the m o r a l a u -
t h o r i t y that w e have accorded t o h i m , w e d o n o t f o l l o w his instructions
because t h e y seem wise b u t because a c e r t a i n psychic energy i n t r i n s i c t o t h e
idea w e have o f that person bends o u r w i l l a n d t u r n s i t i n t h e d i r e c t i o n i n d i -
cated. W h e n that i n w a r d a n d w h o l l y m e n t a l pressure moves w i t h i n us, respect
is the e m o t i o n w e feel. W e are t h e n m o v e d n o t b y the advantages o r disad-
vantages o f t h e c o n d u c t that is r e c o m m e n d e d t o us o r d e m a n d e d o f us b u t b y
the w a y w e conceive o f the o n e w h o r e c o m m e n d s o r demands that c o n d u c t .
T h i s is w h y a c o m m a n d generally takes o n short, sharp f o r m s o f address that
leave n o r o o m f o r hesitation. I t is also w h y , t o the e x t e n t that c o m m a n d is
c o m m a n d a n d w o r k s b y its o w n strength, i t precludes any idea o f d e l i b e r a t i o n
o r c a l c u l a t i o n , b u t instead is m a d e effective b y the v e r y i n t e n s i t y o f the m e n -
tal state i n w h i c h i t is g i v e n . T h a t i n t e n s i t y is w h a t w e call m o r a l influence.
T h e ways o f a c t i n g t o w h i c h society is s t r o n g l y e n o u g h attached t o i m -
pose t h e m o n its m e m b e r s are f o r that reason m a r k e d w i t h a d i s t i n g u i s h i n g
sign that calls f o r t h respect. Because these ways o f a c t i n g have b e e n w o r k e d
o u t i n c o m m o n , the i n t e n s i t y w i t h w h i c h t h e y are t h o u g h t i n each i n d i v i d -
ual m i n d finds resonance i n all t h e others, a n d v i c e versa. T h e representations
210 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

that translate t h e m w i t h i n each o f us thereby g a i n an i n t e n s i t y that m e r e p r i -

vate states o f consciousness can i n n o w a y m a t c h . T h o s e ways o f a c t i n g gather
strength f r o m t h e countless i n d i v i d u a l representations that have served t o
f o r m each o f t h e m . I t is society that speaks t h r o u g h the m o u t h s o f those w h o
a f f i r m t h e m i n o u r presence; i t is society that w e hear w h e n w e hear t h e m ;
3
a n d t h e v o i c e o f all itself has a t o n e that an i n d i v i d u a l v o i c e c a n n o t have. T h e
v e r y forcefulness w i t h w h i c h society acts against dissidence, w h e t h e r b y
4
m o r a l censure o r physical repression, helps t o strengthen this d o m i n a n c e ,
a n d at t h e same time forcefully p r o c l a i m s t h e ardor o f the shared c o n v i c t i o n .
I n short, w h e n s o m e t h i n g is the o b j e c t o f a state o f o p i n i o n , the representa-
t i o n o f the t h i n g that each i n d i v i d u a l has draws such p o w e r f r o m its o r i g i n s ,
from the c o n d i t i o n s i n w h i c h i t o r i g i n a t e d , that i t is felt even b y those w h o
d o n o t y i e l d t o i t . * T h e m e n t a l representation o f a t h i n g that is t h e o b j e c t o f
a state o f o p i n i o n has a t e n d e n c y t o repress a n d h o l d at bay those representa-
t i o n s that c o n t r a d i c t i t ; i t c o m m a n d s instead those actions that f u l f i l l i t . I t ac-
complishes this n o t b y the reality o r threat o f physical c o e r c i o n b u t b y the
r a d i a t i o n o f the m e n t a l energy i t contains. T h e h a l l m a r k o f m o r a l a u t h o r i t y
is that its psychic properties alone give i t p o w e r . O p i n i o n , e m i n e n d y a social
t h i n g , is o n e source o f a u t h o r i t y . I n d e e d , the q u e s t i o n arises w h e t h e r a u -
5
t h o r i t y is n o t the daughter o f o p i n i o n . S o m e w i l l o b j e c t that science is o f -
ten the antagonist o f o p i n i o n , t h e errors o f w h i c h i t combats a n d corrects.
B u t science can succeed i n this task o n l y i f i t has sufficient a u t h o r i t y , a n d i t
can g a i n such a u t h o r i t y o n l y from o p i n i o n itself. A l l the scientific d e m o n -
strations i n the w o r l d w o u l d have n o i n f l u e n c e i f a p e o p l e h a d n o faith i n sci-
ence. E v e n today, i f i t s h o u l d h a p p e n t h a t science resisted a v e r y p o w e r f u l
c u r r e n t o f p u b l i c o p i n i o n , i t w o u l d r u n the r i s k o f seeing its c r e d i b i l i t y
6
eroded.

Tor example, the thief acknowledges a "state of opinion" by taking precautions not to be discovered.
As this example suggests, once upon a time Durkheim's term opinion could have been translated as "pub-
lic opinion" without confusion, but not in America today. Our present usage connotes the discrete bits
of "opinion" that pollsters elicit through replies to questionnaires. Trans.
3
See my [De la] Division du travail social: Etude sur l'organisation de sociétés supérieures, 3d ed. [Paris, F. Al-
can, 1902], pp. 64ff.
4
Ibid., p. 76.
5
This is the case at least for all moral authority that is recognized as such by a group.
6
1 hope this analysis and those that follow will put an end to an erroneous interpretation of my ideas,
which has more than once led to misunderstanding. Because I have made constraint the external feature by
which social facts can be most easily recognized and distinguishedfromindividual psychological ones,
some have believed that I consider physical constraint to be the entire essence of social life. In reality, I
have never regarded constraint as anything more than the visible, tangible expression of an underlying, in-
ner fact that is wholly ideal: moral authority. The question for sociology—if there can be said to be one so-
Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 211

Because social pressure makes itself felt t h r o u g h m e n t a l channels, i t was

b o u n d t o give m a n the idea that outside h i m there are o n e o r several powers,
m o r a l yet m i g h t y , t o w h i c h h e is subject. Since they speak t o h i m i n a t o n e
o f c o m m a n d , a n d sometimes even t e l l h i m t o v i o l a t e his m o s t natural i n c h -
nations, m a n was b o u n d t o i m a g i n e t h e m as b e i n g e x t e r n a l t o h i m . T h e
m y t h o l o g i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s w o u l d doubdess n o t have b e e n b o r n i f m a n
c o u l d easily see that those influences u p o n h i m c o m e from society. B u t the
o r d i n a r y observer c a n n o t see w h e r e t h e i n f l u e n c e o f society comes from. I t
moves a l o n g channels t h a t are t o o obscure a n d c i r c u i t o u s , and uses psychic
mechanisms that are t o o c o m p l e x , t o be easily traced t o t h e source. So l o n g
as scientific analysis has n o t yet t a u g h t h i m , m a n is w e l l aware that he is acted
u p o n b u t n o t b y w h o m . T h u s he h a d t o b u i l d o u t o f n o t h i n g the idea o f
those powers w i t h w h i c h he feels c o n n e c t e d . F r o m this w e can b e g i n t o p e r -
ceive h o w he was l e d t o i m a g i n e those powers i n f o r m s that are n o t t h e i r
o w n a n d t o transfigure t h e m i n t h o u g h t .
A g o d is n o t o n l y an a u t h o r i t y t o w h i c h w e are subject b u t also a force
t h a t buttresses o u r o w n . T h e m a n w h o has o b e y e d his g o d , and w h o f o r this
reason t h i n k s he has his g o d w i t h h i m , approaches t h e w o r l d w i t h confidence
a n d a sense o f h e i g h t e n e d energy. I n t h e same way, society's w o r k i n g s d o n o t
stop at d e m a n d i n g sacrifices, p r i v a t i o n s , a n d efforts from us. T h e force o f the
c o l l e c t i v i t y is n o t w h o l l y e x t e r n a l ; i t does n o t m o v e us e n t i r e l y from outside.
7
I n d e e d , because society can exist o n l y i n a n d b y means o f i n d i v i d u a l m i n d s ,
i t m u s t enter i n t o us a n d b e c o m e o r g a n i z e d w i t h i n us. T h a t force thus b e -
comes an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f o u r b e i n g and, b y the same stroke, uplifts i t and
brings i t to maturity. *
T h i s s t i m u l a t i n g a n d i n v i g o r a t i n g effect o f society is p a r t i c u l a r l y apparent
i n c e r t a i n circumstances. I n the m i d s t o f an assembly that becomes w o r k e d

ciological question—is to seek, throughout the variousformsof external constraint, the correspondingly
various kinds of moral authority and to discover what causes have given rise to the latter. Specifically, the
main object of the question treated in the present work is to discover in what form the particular kind of
moral authority that is inherent in all that is religious was born, and what it is made of. Further, it will be
seen below that in making social pressure one of the distinguishing features of sociological phenomena, I
do not mean to say that this is the only one. I will exhibit another aspect of collective life, virtually the
opposite of this one, but no less real. (See p. 213.)
* L'élève et le grandit. This phrase can also mean "uplifts and enlarges" it. Swain chose the verbs "ele-
vate" and "magnify." Dürkheim may have intended both the physical and the moral meanings: "to lift" as
well as "to bring up" or "rear"; to "enlarge" as well as to "raise in stature" or "bring to maturity."
7
Which does not mean, of course, that collective consciousness does not have specific traits (Dürk-
heim, "Représentations individuelles et représentations collectives," RMM, vol. VI ([1898]), pp. 273ff.).
212 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

up, w e b e c o m e capable o f feelings a n d c o n d u c t o f w h i c h w e are incapable

w h e n left t o o u r i n d i v i d u a l resources. W h e n i t is dissolved a n d w e are again
o n o u r o w n , w e fall b a c k t o o u r o r d i n a r y level a n d can t h e n take t h e f u l l
measure o f h o w far above ourselves w e w e r e . H i s t o r y abounds w i t h e x a m -
ples. Suffice i t t o t h i n k a b o u t the n i g h t o f A u g u s t 4 * , w h e n an assembly was
suddenly c a r r i e d away i n an act o f sacrifice a n d a b n e g a t i o n that each o f its
m e m b e r s h a d refused t o m a k e t h e n i g h t before a n d b y w h i c h all w e r e sur-
8
p r i s e d the m o r n i n g after. F o r this reason all parties—be t h e y p o l i t i c a l , e c o -
n o m i c , o r d e n o m i n a t i o n a l — s e e t o i t that p e r i o d i c c o n v e n t i o n s are h e l d , at
w h i c h t h e i r followers can r e n e w t h e i r c o m m o n f a i t h b y m a k i n g a p u b l i c
d e m o n s t r a t i o n o f i t together. T o strengthen e m o t i o n s that w o u l d dissipate i f
left alone, t h e o n e t h i n g needful is t o b r i n g all those w h o share t h e m i n t o
m o r e i n t i m a t e a n d m o r e d y n a m i c relationship.
I n the same way, w è can also e x p l a i n the c u r i o u s posture that is so char-
acteristic o f a m a n w h o is speaking t o a c r o w d — i f h e has achieved c o m m u -
n i o n w i t h i t . H i s language becomes h i g h - f l o w n i n a w a y that w o u l d b e
r i d i c u l o u s i n o r d i n a r y circumstances; his gestures take o n an o v e r b e a r i n g
quality; his v e r y t h o u g h t becomes i m p a t i e n t o f l i m i t s a n d slips easily i n t o
every k i n d o f extreme. T h i s is because he feels f i l l e d t o o v e r f l o w i n g , as t h o u g h
w i t h a p h e n o m e n a l oversupply o f forces that spill over a n d t e n d t o spread
a r o u n d h i m . Sometimes he even feels possessed b y a m o r a l force greater t h a n
he, o f w h i c h he is o n l y the interpreter. T h i s is t h e h a l l m a r k o f w h a t has o f t e n
b e e n called the d e m o n o f o r a t o r i c a l i n s p i r a t i o n . T h i s e x t r a o r d i n a r y surplus o f
forces is q u i t e real and comes t o h i m f r o m t h e v e r y g r o u p he is addressing.
T h e feelings he arouses as he speaks r e t u r n t o h i m enlarged a n d a m p l i f i e d , r e -
i n f o r c i n g his o w n t o the same degree. T h e passionate energies that he arouses
reecho i n t u r n w i t h i n h i m , a n d t h e y increase his d y n a m i s m . I t is t h e n n o
l o n g e r a m e r e i n d i v i d u a l w h o speaks b u t a g r o u p i n c a r n a t e d a n d personified.
A p a r t from these passing o r i n t e r m i t t e n t states, there are m o r e lasting
ones i n w h i c h the f o r t i f y i n g a c t i o n o f society makes itself felt w i t h l o n g e r -
t e r m consequences a n d o f t e n w i t h m o r e s t r i k i n g effect. U n d e r the i n f l u e n c e

'Dürkheim is probably alluding to the night of 4 August 1789, when Frances new National Assem-
bly ratified the total destruction of the feudal regime.
8
The proof of this is the length and passion of the debates at which legal form was given to the reso-
lutions in principle that were taken in a moment of collective enthusiasm. More than one, among clergy
and nobility alike, called that famous night "dupes' night," or, with Rivarol, the "Saint Bartholomew's of
the landed estates." [This apparendy alludes to two events. The Journée des Dupes was the day, not the
night, of 30 November 1630, when Cardinal Richelieu's enemies came to believe the cardinal had lost
the king's ear for good and had fallen in disgrace; they were proved wrong. La St. Barthélémy was a mas-
sacre of Protestants 23-24 August 1527, which led to civil war. Trans.] See [Otto] Stoll, Suggestion und
Hypnotismus in der Völkerpsychologie, 2d ed. [Leipzig, Veit, 1904], p. 618 n. 2.
 Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 213

o f some great collective s h o c k i n c e r t a i n h i s t o r i c a l p e r i o d s , social interactions

b e c o m e m u c h m o r e frequent a n d active. I n d i v i d u a l s seek o n e a n o t h e r o u t
a n d c o m e t o g e t h e r m o r e . T h e result is t h e general effervescence that is char-
acteristic o f r e v o l u t i o n a r y o r creative epochs. T h e result o f that h e i g h t e n e d
a c t i v i t y is a general s t i m u l a t i o n o f i n d i v i d u a l energies. People live differently
a n d m o r e intensely t h a n i n n o r m a l t i m e s . * T h e changes are n o t s i m p l y o f
nuance a n d degree; m a n h i m s e l f becomes s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n w h a t he
was. H e is s t i r r e d b y passions so intense that t h e y can be satisfied o n l y b y v i -
o l e n t a n d e x t r e m e acts: b y acts o f s u p e r h u m a n h e r o i s m o r b l o o d y barbarism.
9
T h i s explains t h e Crusades, f o r example, as w e l l as so m a n y s u b l i m e o r sav-
1 0
age m o m e n t s i n the F r e n c h R e v o l u t i o n . W e see t h e m o s t m e d i o c r e o r
harmless b o u r g e o i s t r a n s f o r m e d b y t h e general e x a l t a t i o n i n t o a hero o r an
11
executioner. A n d t h e m e n t a l processes are so clearly t h e same as those at t h e
r o o t o f r e l i g i o n that the i n d i v i d u a l s themselves c o n c e i v e d the pressure t h e y
y i e l d e d t o i n e x p l i c i d y r e l i g i o u s t e r m s . T h e Crusaders believed t h e y felt G o d
present a m o n g t h e m , c a l l i n g o n t h e m t o g o f o r t h a n d c o n q u e r the H o l y
12
L a n d , a n d J o a n o f A r c b e l i e v e d she was o b e y i n g celestial v o i c e s .
T h i s s t i m u l a t i n g a c t i o n o f society is n o t felt i n e x c e p t i o n a l circumstances
alone. T h e r e is v i r t u a l l y n o instant o f o u r lives i n w h i c h a c e r t a i n r u s h o f e n -
ergy fails t o c o m e t o us from outside ourselves. I n all k i n d s o f acts that ex¬
- press the u n d e r s t a n d i n g , esteem, a n d affection o f his n e i g h b o r , there is a lift
that the m a n w h o does his d u t y feels, usually w i t h o u t b e i n g aware o f i t . B u t
that lift sustains h i m ; t h e f e e l i n g society has f o r h i m uplifts the f e e l i n g he has
for himself. Because he is i n m o r a l h a r m o n y w i t h his n e i g h b o r , he gains n e w
confidence, courage, a n d boldness i n a c t i o n — q u i t e l i k e the m a n o f f a i t h
who believes h e feels t h e eyes o f his g o d t u r n e d b e n e v o l e n d y t o w a r d h i m .
T h u s is p r o d u c e d w h a t a m o u n t s t o a p e r p e t u a l u p l i f t o f o u r m o r a l b e i n g .
Since i t varies a c c o r d i n g t o a m u l t i t u d e o f e x t e r n a l c o n d i t i o n s — w h e t h e r o u r
relations w i t h t h e social groups t h a t s u r r o u n d us are m o r e o r less active a n d
w h a t those groups a r e — w e c a n n o t h e l p b u t feel that this m o r a l t o n i n g u p has
an e x t e r n a l cause, t h o u g h w e d o n o t see w h e r e t h a t cause is o r w h a t i t is. So
w e readily conceive o f i t i n t h e f o r m o f a m o r a l p o w e r that, w h i l e i m m a n e n t
i n us, also represents s o m e t h i n g i n us t h a t is o t h e r t h a n ourselves. T h i s is

*On vitplus et autrement qu'en temps normal.

'Ibid., pp. 353ff.

'"Ibid., pp. 619, 635.
"Ibid., pp. 622S".
12
Feelings of fear or sadness can also develop and intensify under the same influences. As we will see,
those feelings correspond to a whole aspect ofreligiouslife (Bk. Ill, chap. 5).
214 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

man's m o r a l consciousness a n d his conscience.* A n d i t is o n l y w i t h the a i d

o f religious symbols that m o s t have ever m a n a g e d t o conceive o f i t w i t h any
c l a r i t y at a l l .
I n a d d i t i o n t o those free forces that c o n t i n u o u s l y r e n e w o u r o w n , there
are o t h e r forces congealed i n the techniques w e use a n d i n traditions o f all
k i n d s . W e speak a language w e d i d n o t create; w e use i n s t r u m e n t s w e d i d n o t
i n v e n t ; w e c l a i m r i g h t s w e d i d n o t establish; each g e n e r a t i o n i n h e r i t s a trea-
sury o f k n o w l e d g e that i t d i d n o t i t s e l f amass; a n d so o n . W e o w e these v a r -
i e d benefits o f c i v i l i z a t i o n t o society, a n d a l t h o u g h i n general w e d o n o t see
w h e r e t h e y c o m e f r o m , w e k n o w at least that t h e y are n o t o f o u r o w n m a k -
i n g . I t is these things that g i v e m a n his distinctiveness a m o n g all creatures, f o r
m a n is m a n o n l y because he is c i v i l i z e d . T h u s he c o u l d n o t escape the sense
o f m i g h t y causes e x i s t i n g outside h i m , w h i c h are the source o f his character-
istic nature a n d w h i c h , l i k e b e n e v o l e n t forces, h e l p a n d p r o t e c t h i m a n d
guarantee h i m a p r i v i l e g e d fate. H e n a t u r a l l y a c c o r d e d t o those powers a r e -
spect c o m m e n s u r a t e w i t h the great value o f the benefits that he a t t r i b u t e d t o
1 3
them.
T h u s t h e e n v i r o n m e n t i n w h i c h w e live seems p o p u l a t e d w i t h forces at
once d e m a n d i n g a n d h e l p f u l , majestic a n d k i n d , a n d w i t h w h i c h w e are i n
t o u c h . Because w e feel the w e i g h t o f t h e m , w e have n o c h o i c e b u t t o locate
t h e m outside ourselves, as w e d o f o r the objective causes o f o u r sensations.
B u t from a n o t h e r p o i n t o f v i e w , the feelings t h e y p r o v o k e i n us are q u a l i t a -
tively different from those w e have f o r m e r e l y physical things. So l o n g as these
perceptions are n o m o r e t h a n the e m p i r i c a l characteristics that o r d i n a r y e x -
p e r i e n c e makes manifest, a n d so l o n g as the r e l i g i o u s i m a g i n a t i o n has n o t yet
transfigured t h e m , w e feel n o t h i n g l i k e respect f o r t h e m , a n d t h e y have n o t h -
i n g o f w h a t i t takes t o lift us above ourselves. T h e r e f o r e t h e representations
that express t h e m seem t o us v e r y different f r o m those that collective i n f l u -
ences awaken i n us. T h e t w o sorts o f representation f o r m t w o k i n d s o f m e n -
tal state, a n d t h e y are as separate a n d d i s t i n c t as the t w o f o r m s o f life t o w h i c h
they c o r r e s p o n d . A s a result, w e feel as t h o u g h w e are i n t o u c h w i t h t w o dis-
t i n c t sorts o f reality w i t h a clear l i n e o f d e m a r c a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e m : the w o r l d
o f profane things o n o n e side, the w o r l d o f sacred things o n t h e other.

* Conscience. To bring out that the French conscience refers simultaneously to intellectual cognition
and moral obligation, I have used both "conscience" and "consciousness."
"Such is the other aspect of society, which seems to us demanding as well as good and kindly. It dom-
inates us; it helps us. If I have defined social fact more by thefirstcharacteristic than by the second, it is
because the dominance is more easily observable and because it is expressed by external and visible signs;
but I am far from ever having intended to deny the reality of the second. ([Emile Durkheim,] Les Règles
de la méthode sociologique, 2d ed. [Paris, Alcan, 1901], preface, p. xx n.l).
Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 215

F u r t h e r m o r e , n o w as i n the past, w e see that society never stops creating

n e w sacred things. I f society s h o u l d h a p p e n t o b e c o m e infatuated w i t h a m a n ,
b e l i e v i n g i t has f o u n d i n h i m its deepest aspirations as w e l l as the means o f f u l -
f i l l i n g t h e m , t h e n that m a n w i l l be p u t i n a class b y h i m s e l f and v i r t u a l l y d e -
i f i e d . O p i n i o n w i l l confer o n h i m a g r a n d e u r that is similar i n every w a y t o
the g r a n d e u r that protects the gods. T h i s has h a p p e n e d t o m a n y sovereigns i n
w h o m t h e i r epochs h a d f a i t h a n d w h o , i f n o t d e i f i e d o u t r i g h t , w e r e l o o k e d
u p o n as d i r e c t representatives o f the godhead. A clear i n d i c a t i o n that this
apotheosis is the w o r k o f society alone is that society has often consecrated
m e n w h o s e personal w o r t h d i d n o t w a r r a n t i t . M o r e o v e r , the r o u t i n e defer-
ence that m e n invested w i t h h i g h social positions receive is n o t qualitatively
different f r o m r e l i g i o u s respect. T h e same m o v e m e n t s express i t : standing at
a distance from a h i g h personage; t a k i n g special precautions i n a p p r o a c h i n g
h i m ; u s i n g a different language t o speak w i t h h i m a n d gestures o t h e r t h a n
those that w i l l d o f o r o r d i n a r y m o r t a l s . One's feeling i n these circumstances
is so closely a k i n t o r e l i g i o u s feeling that m a n y d o n o t distinguish b e t w e e n
t h e m . Sacredness is ascribed t o princes, nobles, a n d p o l i t i c a l leaders i n order
t o a c c o u n t f o r the special regard t h e y enjoy. I n Melanesia and Polynesia, f o r
example, p e o p l e say that a m a n o f i n f l u e n c e possesses m a n a and i m p u t e his
14
i n f l u e n c e t o this m a n a . I t is clear, nonetheless, that his p o s i t i o n comes t o
h i m o n l y from the i m p o r t a n c e that o p i n i o n gives h i m . T h u s , b o t h the m o r a l
p o w e r c o n f e r r e d b y o p i n i o n a n d t h e m o r a l p o w e r w i t h w h i c h sacred beings
are invested are o f f u n d a m e n t a l l y the same o r i g i n a n d c o m p o s e d o f the same
elements. F o r this reason, o n e w o r d can be used t o designate b o t h .
Just as society consecrates m e n , so i t also consecrates things, i n c l u d i n g
ideas. W h e n a b e l i e f is shared u n a n i m o u s l y b y a p e o p l e , t o t o u c h i t — t h a t is,
t o d e n y o r q u e s t i o n i t — i s f o r b i d d e n , f o r the reasons already stated. T h e p r o -
h i b i t i o n against c r i t i q u e is a p r o h i b i t i o n l i k e any o t h e r a n d proves that o n e is
face t o face w i t h a sacred t h i n g . E v e n today, great t h o u g h t h e freedom w e a l -
l o w o n e a n o t h e r m a y be, i t w o u l d be t a n t a m o u n t t o sacrilege f o r a m a n
w h o l l y t o d e n y progress o r t o reject the h u m a n ideal t o w h i c h m o d e r n s o c i -
eties are attached. E v e n the peoples m o s t e n a m o r e d o f free t h i n k i n g t e n d t o
place o n e p r i n c i p l e above discussion a n d regard i t as u n t o u c h a b l e , i n o t h e r
w o r d s , sacred: t h e p r i n c i p l e o f free discussion itself.
N o w h e r e has society's a b i l i t y t o m a k e itself a g o d o r t o create gods b e e n
m o r e i n evidence t h a n d u r i n g the first years o f the R e v o l u t i o n . I n the g e n -
eral enthusiasm o f that t i m e , things that w e r e b y nature p u r e l y secular w e r e
14
[Robert Henry] Codrington, The Melanesians [Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1891], pp. 50, 103, 120.
Moreover, it is generally believed that in the Polynesian languages, the word mana originally meant "author-
ity." (See [Edward] Tregear, Maori Polynesian Comparative Dictionary, s.v. [Wellington, Lyon and Blair, 1891].)
216 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

t r a n s f o r m e d b y p u b l i c o p i n i o n i n t o sacred things: Fatherland, L i b e r t y , R e a -

15
son. A religion tended t o establish itself spontaneously, w i t h its o w n
1 6 17 18 19
dogma, symbols, altars, a n d feast days. I t was t o these spontaneous
hopes that the C u l t o f R e a s o n a n d the S u p r e m e B e i n g t r i e d t o give a k i n d o f
a u t h o r i t a t i v e f u l f i l l m e n t . G r a n t e d , this r e l i g i o u s n o v e l t y d i d n o t last. T h e p a -
20
t r i o t i c enthusiasm that o r i g i n a l l y s t i r r e d the masses d i e d away, a n d t h e cause
h a v i n g departed, the effect c o u l d n o t h o l d . B u t b r i e f t h o u g h i t was, this e x -
p e r i m e n t loses n o n e o f its s o c i o l o g i c a l interest. I n a specific case, w e saw so-
ciety a n d its f u n d a m e n t a l ideas b e c o m i n g the object o f a g e n u i n e cult
d i r e c t l y — a n d w i t h o u t t r a n s f i g u r a t i o n o f any k i n d .
A l l these facts enable us t o grasp h o w i t is possible f o r t h e clan t o awaken
i n its m e m b e r s the idea o f forces e x i s t i n g outside t h e m , b o t h d o m i n a t i n g a n d
s u p p o r t i n g t h e m — i n s u m , r e l i g i o u s forces. T h e r e is n o o t h e r social g r o u p t o
w h i c h the p r i m i t i v e is m o r e d i r e c d y o r t i g h d y b o u n d . T h e ties that b i n d h i m
t o the t r i b e are looser a n d less s t r o n g l y felt. A l t h o u g h t h e t r i b e is c e r t a i n l y
n o t f o r e i g n t o h i m , i t is w i t h the p e o p l e o f his clan that he has m o s t i n c o m -
m o n , a n d i t is the i n f l u e n c e o f this g r o u p that he feels m o s t i m m e d i a t e l y , a n d
so i t is also this i n f l u e n c e , m o r e t h a n any other, that was b o u n d t o f i n d e x -
pression i n religious symbols.
T h i s first e x p l a n a t i o n is t o o general, t h o u g h , since i t can be a p p l i e d i n -
d i s c r i m i n a t e l y t o any k i n d o f society a n d hence t o any k i n d o f r e l i g i o n . L e t
us t r y t o specify w h a t p a r t i c u l a r f o r m collective a c t i o n takes i n the clan a n d
h o w i n the clan i t b r i n g s a b o u t t h e sense o f t h e sacred, f o r collective a c t i o n
is n o w h e r e m o r e easily observable o r m o r e o b v i o u s t h a n i n its results.

Ill
21
L i f e i n A u s t r a l i a n societies alternates b e t w e e n t w o different phases. I n one
phase, the p o p u l a t i o n is scattered i n small groups that a t t e n d t o t h e i r o c c u p a -

15
See Albert Mathiez, Les Origines des cultes révolutionnaires 1789-1792 [Paris, G. Bellais, 1904].
16
Ibid., p. 24.
"Ibid., pp. 29, 32.
18
Ibid., p. 30.
,9
Ibid, p. 46.
20
See [Albert] Mathiez, La Théophilanthropie et le culte décadaire [Paris, F. Alcan, 1903], p. 36.
21
See [Sir Baldwin] Spencer and [Francis James] Gillen, Northern Tribes [of Central Australia, London,
Macmillan, 1904], p. 33.
Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 217

tions i n d e p e n d e n t l y . E a c h f a m i l y lives t o itself, h u n t i n g , f i s h i n g — i n short,

s t r i v i n g b y all possible means t o get the f o o d i t requires. I n the o t h e r phase,
b y contrast, the p o p u l a t i o n comes together, c o n c e n t r a t i n g itself at specified
places f o r a p e r i o d that varies f r o m several days t o several m o n t h s . T h i s c o n -
2 2
c e n t r a t i o n takes place w h e n a clan o r a p o r t i o n o f the t r i b e is s u m m o n e d t o
c o m e t o g e t h e r a n d o n that occasion e i t h e r conducts a religious c e r e m o n y o r
23
holds w h a t i n t h e usual e t h n o g r a p h i c t e r m i n o l o g y is called a corroboree.
These t w o phases stand i n the sharpest possible contrast. T h e first phase,
i n w h i c h e c o n o m i c a c t i v i t y p r e d o m i n a t e s , is generally o f rather l o w intensity.
G a t h e r i n g seeds o r plants necessary f o r f o o d , h u n t i n g , a n d f i s h i n g are n o t o c -
24
cupations that can stir t r u l y s t r o n g passions. T h e dispersed state i n w h i c h
2 5
the society finds itself makes life m o n o t o n o u s , slack, a n d h u m d r u m . Every-
t h i n g changes w h e n a c o r r o b o r e e takes place. Since t h e e m o t i o n a l a n d pas-
sionate faculties o f t h e p r i m i t i v e are n o t f u l l y s u b o r d i n a t e d to his reason a n d
w i l l , h e easily loses his s e l f - c o n t r o l . A n event o f any i m p o r t a n c e i m m e d i a t e l y
puts h i m outside himself. D o e s he receive happy news? T h e r e are transports
o f enthusiasm. I f t h e o p p o s i t e happens, h e is seen r u n n i n g h i t h e r a n d y o n l i k e
a m a d m a n , g i v i n g w a y t o all sorts o f c h a o t i c m o v e m e n t s : s h o u t i n g , scream-
i n g , g a t h e r i n g dust a n d t h r o w i n g i t i n all d i r e c t i o n s , b i t i n g himself, b r a n d i s h -
2 6
i n g his weapons furiously, a n d so o n . T h e v e r y act o f c o n g r e g a t i n g is an
e x c e p t i o n a l l y p o w e r f u l s t i m u l a n t . O n c e the i n d i v i d u a l s are gathered t o -
gether, a sort o f e l e c t r i c i t y is generated from t h e i r closeness a n d q u i c k l y
launches t h e m t o an e x t r a o r d i n a r y h e i g h t o f e x a l t a t i o n . E v e r y e m o t i o n e x -
pressed resonates w i t h o u t interference i n consciousnesses that are w i d e o p e n

22
Indeed there are ceremonies, notably those that take place for initiation, to which members of for-
eign tribes are summoned. A system of messages and messengers is organized for the purpose of giving
the notice that is indispensable for the grand ceremonies. (See [Alfred William] Howitt, "Notes on Aus-
tralian Message-Sticks and Messengers," JAI, vol. XVIII (1889) [pp. 314-334]; Howitt, Native Tribes [of
South-East Australia, New York, Macmillan, 1904], pp. 83, 678-691; Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes [of
Central Australia, London, Macmillan, 1899], p. 159; Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 551.
23
The corroboree is distinguished from a religious rite proper in that it is accessible to women and the
uninitiated. But although these two sorts of collective celebrations must be distinguished, they are closely
related. I will return to and explain this relationship.
24
Except in the case of the large bush-beating hunts.
25
"The peaceful monotony of this part of his life," say Spencer and Gillen (Northern Tribes, p. 33).
^Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 683. Here it is the demonstrations that take place when an embassy sent to
a foreign group returns to camp with news of a favorable result. [Durkheim will not be the one to report
that the embassy in question had been entrusted to women. Howitt does not say what the women's mis-
sion was about. Trans.] Cf. [Robert] Brough Smyth, [The Aborigines of Victoria], vol. 1 [Melbourne, J. Fer¬
res, 1878], p. 138; [Reverend Louis] Schulze, "Aborigines of the Upper and Middle Finke River," RSSA,
vol. XVI [1891], p. 222.
218 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

t o e x t e r n a l impressions, each o n e e c h o i n g t h e others. T h e i n i t i a l i m p u l s e is

thereby a m p l i f i e d each t i m e i t is e c h o e d , l i k e an avalanche that grows as i t
goes a l o n g . A n d since passions so heated a n d so free f r o m all c o n t r o l c a n n o t
help b u t spill over, f r o m every side there are n o t h i n g b u t w i l d m o v e m e n t s ,
shouts, d o w n r i g h t h o w l s , a n d deafening noises o f all k i n d s that f u r t h e r i n -
tensify the state t h e y are expressing. P r o b a b l y because a collective e m o t i o n
c a n n o t be expressed c o l l e c t i v e l y w i t h o u t some o r d e r that p e r m i t s h a r m o n y
and u n i s o n o f m o v e m e n t , these gestures a n d cries t e n d t o fall i n t o r h y t h m
and regularity, a n d from there i n t o songs a n d dances. B u t i n t a k i n g o n a m o r e
regular f o r m , t h e y lose n o n e o f t h e i r n a t u r a l fury. A regulated c o m m o t i o n is
still a c o m m o t i o n . T h e h u m a n v o i c e is inadequate t o t h e task a n d is g i v e n ar-
tificial r e i n f o r c e m e n t : B o o m e r a n g s are k n o c k e d against o n e another; b u l l
roarers are w h i r l e d . T h e o r i g i n a l f u n c t i o n o f these i n s t r u m e n t s , used w i d e l y
i n the r e l i g i o u s ceremonies o f Australia, p r o b a b l y was t o give m o r e satisfying
expression t o the e x c i t e m e n t felt. A n d b y expressing this e x c i t e m e n t , t h e y
also reinforce i t . T h e effervescence o f t e n becomes so intense that i t leads t o
o u d a n d i s h b e h a v i o r ; t h e passions unleashed are so t o r r e n t i a l that n o t h i n g can
h o l d t h e m . People are so far outside t h e o r d i n a r y c o n d i t i o n s o f life, a n d so
conscious o f the fact, that t h e y feel a c e r t a i n n e e d t o set themselves above a n d
b e y o n d o r d i n a r y m o r a l i t y . T h e sexes c o m e t o g e t h e r i n v i o l a t i o n o f the rules
g o v e r n i n g sexual relations. M e n exchange w i v e s . I n d e e d , sometimes inces-
tuous u n i o n s , i n n o r m a l times j u d g e d l o a t h s o m e a n d harshly c o n d e m n e d , are
2 7
c o n t r a c t e d i n the o p e n a n d w i t h i m p u n i t y . I f i t is added that the ceremonies
are generally h e l d at n i g h t , i n t h e m i d s t o f shadows p i e r c e d here and there b y
f i r e l i g h t , w e can easily i m a g i n e the effect that scenes l i k e these are b o u n d t o
have o n the m i n d s o f all those w h o take part. T h e y b r i n g a b o u t such an i n -
tense h y p e r e x c i t e m e n t o f physical a n d m e n t a l life as a w h o l e that t h e y c a n -
n o t be b o r n e f o r v e r y l o n g . T h e celebrant w h o takes the l e a d i n g role
2 8
eventually falls exhausted t o the g r o u n d .
T o illustrate a n d flesh o u t this u n a v o i d a b l y sketchy tableau, here is an ac-
c o u n t o f scenes taken f r o m Spencer a n d G i l l e n .
O n e o f the m o s t i m p o r t a n t r e l i g i o u s celebrations a m o n g the W a r r a -

27
See Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 96—97, Northern Tribes, p. 137; Brough Smyth, Aborigines of
Victoria, vol. II, p. 319. This ritual promiscuity is practiced especially during initiation ceremonies
(Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 267, 381; Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 657) and in totemic ceremonies
(Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 214, 237, 298). The ordinary rules of exogamy are violated dur-
ing totemic ceremonies. Nevertheless, among the Arunta, unions between father and daughter, son and
mother, brothers and sisters (all cases of blood kinship) remain forbidden (Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes
[pp. 96-97]).
2s
Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 535, 545. This is extremely common.
Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 219

m u n g a concerns t h e snake W o l l u n q u a . I t is a series o f rites that u n f o l d over

several days. W h a t I w i l l describe takes place o n t h e f o u r t h day.
A c c o r d i n g t o t h e p r o t o c o l i n use a m o n g t h e W a r r a m u n g a , representa-
tives o f t h e t w o phratries take part, some as celebrants a n d others as o r g a n i z -
ers a n d participants. A l t h o u g h o n l y the p e o p l e o f t h e U l u u r u p h r a t r y are
a u t h o r i z e d t o c o n d u c t the ceremony, t h e m e m b e r s o f t h e K i n g i l h p h r a t r y
must decorate the participants, prepare the site a n d the i n s t r u m e n t s , a n d
serve as t h e audience. I n this capacity, t h e y are responsible f o r m o u n d i n g
d a m p sand ahead o f time, o n w h i c h t h e y use r e d d o w n t o m a k e a d r a w i n g
that represents the snake W o l l u n q u a . T h e c e r e m o n y proper, w h i c h Spencer
a n d G i l l e n attended, d i d n o t b e g i n u n t i l n i g h t f a l l . A r o u n d t e n o r eleven o ' -
c l o c k , U l u u r u a n d K i n g i l l i a r r i v e d o n t h e scene, sat o n t h e m o u n d , and b e -
gan t o sing. A l l w e r e i n a state o f o b v i o u s e x c i t e m e n t ("every one was evidently
very excited"). A s h o r t t i m e later i n the e v e n i n g , t h e U l u u r u b r o u g h t t h e i r
2 9
wives a n d h a n d e d t h e m over t o the K i n g i l l i , w h o h a d sexual relations w i t h
t h e m . T h e r e c e n t l y i n i t i a t e d y o u n g m e n w e r e b r o u g h t i n , and t h e c e r e m o n y
was e x p l a i n e d t o t h e m , after w h i c h there was u n i n t e r r u p t e d s i n g i n g u n t i l
three i n t h e m o r n i n g . T h e n came a scene o f t r u l y w i l d frenzy ("a scene of the
wildest excitement"). W i t h fires flickering o n all sides, b r i n g i n g o u t starkly the
whiteness o f the g u m trees against t h e s u r r o u n d i n g n i g h t , the U l u u r u k n e l t
i n single file beside the m o u n d , t h e n m o v e d a r o u n d i t , r i s i n g i n u n i s o n w i t h
b o t h hands o n t h e i r thighs, k n e e l i n g again a l i t t l e farther a l o n g , a n d so o n . A t
the same t i m e , t h e y m o v e d t h e i r bodies left a n d t h e n right, at each m o v e -
m e n t l e t t i n g o u t an e c h o i n g scream—actually a h o w l — a t the t o p o f t h e i r
voices, Yrrsh! Yrrsh! Yrrsh! M e a n w h i l e the K i n g i l h , i n a h i g h state o f e x c i t e -
m e n t , s o u n d e d t h e i r b o o m e r a n g s , t h e i r c h i e f a p p e a r i n g t o be even m o r e e x -
c i t e d t h a n his c o m p a n i o n s . W h e n t h e procession o f the U l u u r u h a d c i r c l e d
the m o u n d t w i c e , t h e y rose from t h e i r k n e e l i n g p o s i t i o n , seated themselves,
a n d t o o k t o s i n g i n g again. F r o m t i m e t o t i m e , the s i n g i n g w o u l d flag and a l -
m o s t die, t h e n break o u t suddenly again. A t t h e first sign o f day, everyone
j u m p e d t o t h e i r feet; the fires that h a d g o n e o u t w e r e relit; u r g e d o n b y the
K i n g i l h , the U l u u r u f u r i o u s l y attacked the m o u n d w i t h b o o m e r a n g s , lances,
a n d sticks, a n d i n a f e w m i n u t e s i t was i n pieces. T h e fires d i e d a n d there was
30
profound silence.
T h e same observers w e r e present at a yet w i l d e r scene a m o n g t h e W a r -
r a m u n g a d u r i n g the fire rituals. A l l sorts o f processions, dances, a n d songs
h a d b e e n u n d e r w a y b y t o r c h l i g h t since n i g h t f a l l , a n d t h e general efferves-

29
Since the women were also Kingilli, these unions violated the rule of exogamy.
'"Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 237. [This account begins at p. 231. Trans.]
220 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

cence was increasingly intense. A t a c e r t a i n m o m e n t , t w e l v e o f those present

each t o o k i n h a n d a large l i g h t e d t o r c h ; and, h o l d i n g his o w n t o r c h l i k e a
bayonette, o n e o f t h e m charged a g r o u p o f natives. T h e b l o w s w e r e p a r r i e d
w i t h staves a n d lances. A general m ê l é e f o l l o w e d . M e n j u m p e d , k i c k e d ,
reared, a n d l e t o u t w i l d screams. T h e torches blazed a n d c r a c k l e d as t h e y h i t
heads a n d bodies, s h o w e r i n g sparks i n all d i r e c t i o n s . " T h e smoke, t h e flam-
i n g torches, the r a i n o f sparks, t h e mass o f m e n d a n c i n g a n d s c r e a m i n g — a l l
that, say Spencer a n d G i l l e n , created a scene w h o s e wildness c a n n o t be c o n -
31
veyed i n w o r d s . "
I t is n o t d i f f i c u l t t o i m a g i n e that a m a n i n such a state o f e x a l t a t i o n
s h o u l d n o l o n g e r k n o w h i m s e l f . F e e l i n g possessed a n d l e d o n b y some sort o f
e x t e r n a l p o w e r that makes h i m t h i n k a n d act d i f f e r e n d y t h a n h e n o r m a l l y
does, he n a t u r a l l y feels he is n o l o n g e r h i m s e l f . I t seems t o h i m that he has
b e c o m e a n e w b e i n g . T h e decorations w i t h w h i c h he is d e c k e d o u t , a n d t h e
masklike decorations that cover his face, represent this i n w a r d t r a n s f o r m a t i o n
even m o r e t h a n t h e y h e l p b r i n g i t a b o u t . A n d because his c o m p a n i o n s feel
t r a n s f o r m e d i n t h e same w a y at the same m o m e n t , a n d express this feeling b y
t h e i r shouts, m o v e m e n t s , a n d b e a r i n g , i t is as i f he was i n reality t r a n s p o r t e d
i n t o a special w o r l d e n t i r e l y different f r o m t h e o n e i n w h i c h he o r d i n a r i l y
lives, a special w o r l d i n h a b i t e d b y e x c e p t i o n a l l y intense forces t h a t invade a n d
t r a n s f o r m h i m . Especially w h e n repeated f o r weeks, day after day, h o w
w o u l d experiences l i k e these n o t leave h i m w i t h t h e c o n v i c t i o n that t w o h e t -
erogeneous a n d i n c o m m e n s u r a b l e w o r l d s exist i n fact? I n o n e w o r l d he l a n -
g u i d l y carries o n his d a i l y life; the o t h e r is o n e t h a t h e c a n n o t enter w i t h o u t
a b r u p d y e n t e r i n g i n t o relations w i t h e x t r a o r d i n a r y p o w e r s that excite h i m t o
the p o i n t o f frenzy. T h e first is the profane w o r l d a n d t h e second, the w o r l d
o f sacred t h i n g s .
I t is i n these effervescent social m i l i e u x , a n d i n d e e d from that v e r y effer-
vescence, that the r e l i g i o u s idea seems t o have b e e n b o r n . T h a t such is i n -
deed the o r i g i n tends t o be c o n f i r m e d b y the fact t h a t w h a t is p r o p e r l y called
religious a c t i v i t y i n A u s t r a l i a is almost e n t i r e l y c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n the p e r i o d s
w h e n these gatherings are h e l d . T o be sure, there is n o p e o p l e a m o n g w h o m
the great c u l t ceremonies are n o t m o r e o r less p e r i o d i c a l , b u t i n the m o r e a d -
vanced societies, there is v i r t u a l l y n o day o n w h i c h some prayer o r o f f e r i n g
is n o t offered t o the gods o r o n w h i c h some r i t u a l o b l i g a t i o n is n o t f u l f i l l e d .
I n Australia, b y contrast, t h e t i m e apart from the feasts o f t h e clan a n d t h e

31
Ibid., p. 391. Other examples of collective effervescence during religious ceremonies are found in
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 244-246, 356-366, 374, 509-510. (The last occurs during a funeral
rite.) Cf. Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 213, 351.
Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 221

t r i b e is taken u p almost e n t i r e l y w i t h secular a n d profane activities. G r a n t e d ,

even d u r i n g the p e r i o d s o f secular activity, there are p r o h i b i t i o n s that m u s t be
and are observed. Freely k i l l i n g o r e a t i n g the t o t e m i c a n i m a l is never p e r -
m i t t e d , at least w h e r e t h e p r o h i b i t i o n has k e p t its o r i g i n a l strictness, b u t
hardly any positive r i t e o r c e r e m o n y o f any i m p o r t a n c e is c o n d u c t e d . T h e
positive rites a n d ceremonies take place o n l y a m o n g assembled groups. T h u s ,
the pious life o f t h e A u s t r a l i a n moves b e t w e e n successive phases—one o f u t -
ter colorlessness, o n e o f h y p e r e x c i t e m e n t — a n d social life oscillates t o the
same r h y t h m . T h i s b r i n g s o u t t h e l i n k b e t w e e n t h e t w o phases. A m o n g the
peoples called c i v i l i z e d , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , the relative c o n t i n u i t y b e t w e e n
t h e m p a r t i a l l y masks t h e i r i n t e r r e l a t i o n s . I n d e e d , w e m a y w e l l ask w h e t h e r
this starkness o f contrast m a y have b e e n necessary t o release the experience
o f the sacred i n its first f o r m . B y compressing itself almost e n t i r e l y i n t o c i r -
c u m s c r i b e d p e r i o d s , c o l l e c t i v e life c o u l d attain its m a x i m u m i n t e n s i t y a n d
p o w e r , t h e r e b y g i v i n g m a n a m o r e v i v i d sense o f the t w o f o l d existence he
leads a n d t h e t w o f o l d nature i n w h i c h h e participates.
B u t this e x p l a n a t i o n is still i n c o m p l e t e . I have s h o w n h o w the clan a w a k -
ens i n its m e m b e r s the idea o f e x t e r n a l forces t h a t d o m i n a t e a n d exalt i t b y
the w a y i n w h i c h i t acts u p o n its m e m b e r s . B u t I still m u s t ask h o w i t h a p -
pens that those forces w e r e c o n c e i v e d o f i n the f o r m o f t h e t o t e m , that is, i n
the f o r m o f an a n i m a l o r p l a n t .
T h e reason is that some a n i m a l o r p l a n t has g i v e n its name t o the clan
and serves as the clan's e m b l e m . I t is, i n fact, a w e l l - k n o w n l a w that the f e e l -
ings a t h i n g arouses i n us are spontaneously t r a n s m i t t e d t o the s y m b o l that
represents i t . B l a c k is f o r us a sign o f m o u r n i n g ; therefore i t evokes sad
t h o u g h t s a n d impressions. T h i s transfer o f feelings takes place because the
idea o f the t h i n g a n d the idea o f its s y m b o l are closely c o n n e c t e d i n o u r
m i n d s . A s a result, the feelings e v o k e d b y o n e spread c o n t a g i o u s l y t o the
other. T h i s c o n t a g i o n , w h i c h occurs i n all cases t o some extent, is m u c h
m o r e c o m p l e t e a n d m o r e p r o n o u n c e d w h e n e v e r the s y m b o l is s o m e t h i n g
simple, w e l l d e f i n e d , a n d easily i m a g i n e d . B u t t h e t h i n g itself is d i f f i c u l t f o r
the m i n d t o c o m p r e h e n d — g i v e n its d i m e n s i o n s , the n u m b e r o f its parts, a n d
the c o m p l e x i t y o f t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n . W e c a n n o t detect the source o f the
strong feelings w e have i n an abstract e n t i t y that w e can i m a g i n e o n l y w i t h
d i f f i c u l t y a n d i n a j u m b l e d way. W e can c o m p r e h e n d those feelings o n l y i n
c o n n e c t i o n w i t h a concrete o b j e c t w h o s e reality w e feel intensely. T h u s i f
the t h i n g itself does n o t m e e t this r e q u i r e m e n t , i t c a n n o t serve as a m o o r i n g
for the impressions felt, even f o r those impressions i t has itself aroused. T h e
s y m b o l thus takes t h e place o f t h e t h i n g , a n d t h e e m o t i o n s aroused are trans-
ferred t o the s y m b o l . I t is the s y m b o l that is l o v e d , feared, and respected. I t
222 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

is t o the s y m b o l that o n e is grateful. A n d i t is t o t h e s y m b o l that o n e sacri-

fices oneself. T h e soldier w h o dies f o r his flag dies f o r his c o u n t r y , b u t the
idea o f t h e flag is actually i n the f o r e g r o u n d o f his consciousness. I n d e e d , the
flag sometimes causes a c t i o n directly. A l t h o u g h the c o u n t r y w i l l n o t be lost
i f a solitary flag remains i n the hands o f t h e e n e m y o r w o n i f i t is regained,
the soldier is k i l l e d r e t a k i n g i t . H e forgets that the flag is o n l y a s y m b o l that
has n o value i n itself b u t o n l y b r i n g s t o m i n d the reality i t represents. T h e flag
itself is treated as i f i t was that reality.
T h e t o t e m is the flag o f the clan, so i t is n a t u r a l that the impressions t h e
clan arouses i n i n d i v i d u a l consciousness—impressions o f dependence a n d o f
h e i g h t e n e d e n e r g y — s h o u l d b e c o m e m o r e closely attached t o the idea o f the
t o t e m t h a n t o that o f the clan. T h e clan is t o o c o m p l e x a reality f o r such u n -
f o r m e d m i n d s t o be able t o b r i n g its concrete u n i t y i n t o clear focus. Besides,
the p r i m i t i v e does n o t see that these impressions c o m e t o h i m f r o m the
g r o u p . H e does n o t even see that the c o m i n g t o g e t h e r o f a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f
men p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the same life releases n e w energies that t r a n s f o r m each
o n e o f t h e m . A l l he feels is that he is l i f t e d above h i m s e l f a n d that he is p a r -
t i c i p a t i n g i n a life different f r o m t h e o n e he lives o r d i n a r i l y . H e m u s t still
c o n n e c t those experiences t o some e x t e r n a l o b j e c t i n a causal r e l a t i o n . N o w
w h a t does he see a r o u n d h i m ? W h a t is avadable t o his senses, and w h a t at-
tracts his a t t e n t i o n , is the m u l t i t u d e o f t o t e m i c images s u r r o u n d i n g h i m . H e
sees t h e w a n i n g a a n d t h e n u r t u n j a , symbols o f the sacred b e i n g . H e sees t h e
b u l l roarers a n d the churingas, o n w h i c h c o m b i n a t i o n s o f lines that have t h e
same m e a n i n g are usually engraved. T h e decorations o n v a r i o u s parts o f his
b o d y are so m a n y t o t e m i c m a r k s . R e p e a t e d e v e r y w h e r e a n d i n every f o r m ,
how c o u l d t h a t i m a g e n o t fail t o stand o u t i n t h e m i n d w i t h e x c e p t i o n a l l y
sharp relief? T h u s p l a c e d at center stage, i t becomes representative. T o that
image the felt e m o t i o n s attach themselves, f o r i t is the o n l y concrete o b j e c t
to w h i c h t h e y can attach themselves.
T h e i m a g e goes o n c a l l i n g f o r t h a n d r e c a l l i n g those e m o t i o n s even after
the assembly is over. E n g r a v e d o n the c u l t i m p l e m e n t s , o n t h e sides o f rocks,
o n shields, a n d so f o r t h , i t lives b e y o n d the g a t h e r i n g . B y means o f i t , the
e m o t i o n s felt are k e p t p e r p e t u a l l y alive a n d fresh. I t is as t h o u g h the i m a g e
p r o v o k e d t h e m directly. I m p u t i n g t h e e m o t i o n s t o t h e i m a g e is all t h e m o r e
natural because, b e i n g c o m m o n t o the g r o u p , t h e y can o n l y be related t o a
t h i n g that is equally c o m m o n t o a l l . O n l y the t o t e m i c e m b l e m meets this
c o n d i t i o n . B y d e f i n i t i o n , i t is c o m m o n t o a l l . D u r i n g t h e ceremony, all eyes
are u p o n i t . A l t h o u g h t h e generations change, t h e i m a g e remains t h e same.
I t is t h e a b i d i n g e l e m e n t o f social life. So t h e m y s t e r i o u s forces w i t h w h i c h
men feel i n t o u c h seem t o emanate from i t , a n d thus w e u n d e r s t a n d h o w
Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 223

m e n w e r e l e d t o conceive t h e m i n t h e f o r m o f the animate or i n a n i m a t e b e -

i n g that gives the clan its n a m e .
H a v i n g l a i d this f o u n d a t i o n , w e are i n a p o s i t i o n t o grasp the essence o f
t o t e m i c beliefs. Because r e l i g i o u s force is n o n e o t h e r t h a n the collective a n d
a n o n y m o u s force o f the clan a n d because that force can o n l y be c o n c e i v e d o f
i n the f o r m o f t h e t o t e m , t h e t o t e m i c e m b l e m is, so t o speak, the visible b o d y
o f the g o d . F r o m t h e t o t e m , therefore, the b e n e f i c i a l o r fearsome actions that
the c u l t is i n t e n d e d t o p r o v o k e o r p r e v e n t w i l l seem t o emanate. So i t is t o
the t o t e m that the rites are specifically addressed. T h i s is w h y the t o t e m
stands foremost i n the ranks o f sacred things.
L i k e any o t h e r society, t h e clan can o n l y live i n a n d b y means o f the i n -
d i v i d u a l consciousnesses o f w h i c h i t is made. T h u s , insofar as religious force
is c o n c e i v e d o f as e m b o d i e d i n the t o t e m i c e m b l e m , i t seems t o be e x t e r n a l
t o i n d i v i d u a l s a n d e n d o w e d w i t h a k i n d o f transcendence; a n d yet, f r o m a n -
o t h e r standpoint, a n d l i k e t h e clan i t symbolizes, i t can be m a d e real o n l y
w i t h i n a n d b y t h e m . So i n this sense, i t is i m m a n e n t i n i n d i v i d u a l m e m b e r s
a n d t h e y o f necessity i m a g i n e i t t o be. T h e y feel w i t h i n themselves the active
presence o f the r e l i g i o u s force, because i t is this force that lifts t h e m u p to a
h i g h e r life. T h i s is h o w m a n came t o believe that he h a d w i t h i n h i m a p r i n -
c i p l e comparable t o the o n e r e s i d i n g i n the t o t e m , a n d thus h o w he came t o
i m p u t e sacredness t o himself-—albeit a sacredness less p r o n o u n c e d t h a n that
o f the e m b l e m . T h i s happens because the e m b l e m is the p r e e m i n e n t source
o f r e l i g i o u s life. M a n participates i n i t o n l y i n d i r e c d y , a n d he is aware o f that;
he realizes that t h e force c a r r y i n g h i m i n t o the r e a l m o f sacred things is n o t
i n h e r e n t i n h i m s e l f b u t comes t o h i m f r o m outside.
F o r a n o t h e r reason, the animals o r plants o f t h e t o t e m i c species h a d t o
have the same q u a l i t y t o an even greater degree. F o r i f t h e t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e
is n o n e o t h e r t h a n t h e clan, i t is the clan t h o u g h t o f i n t h e physical f o r m d e -
p i c t e d b y the e m b l e m . N o w , this is also the f o r m o f the real beings w h o s e
n a m e t h e clan bears. Because o f this resemblance, t h e y c o u l d n o t fail t o
arouse feelings similar t o those aroused b y the e m b l e m itself. Because this
e m b l e m is the o b j e c t o f r e l i g i o u s respect, t h e y t o o s h o u l d inspire respect o f
the same k i n d a n d appear as sacred. G i v e n f o r m s so perfecdy i d e n t i c a l , the
faithful w e r e b o u n d t o i m p u t e forces o f t h e same k i n d t o b o t h . T h i s is w h y
it is f o r b i d d e n t o k i l l o r eat the t o t e m i c a n i m a l a n d w h y t h e flesh is d e e m e d
to have positive v i r t u e s that the rites p u t t o use. T h e a n i m a l l o o k s l i k e the
e m b l e m o f t h e c l a n — l i k e its o w n image, i n o t h e r w o r d s . A n d since i t l o o k s
m o r e l i k e t h e e m b l e m t h a n t h e m a n does, its place i n the hierarchy o f sacred
things is s u p e r i o r t o man's. C l e a r l y there is a close k i n s h i p b e t w e e n these t w o
beings; b o t h share t h e same essence, a n d b o t h incarnate s o m e t h i n g o f the
224 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e . B u t because t h e p r i n c i p l e i t s e l f is c o n c e i v e d o f i n a n i m a l
f o r m , the a n i m a l seems t o incarnate i t m o r e c o n s p i c u o u s l y t h a n the m a n
does. T h i s is w h y , i f t h e m a n respects the a n i m a l a n d treats i t as a b r o t h e r , he
32
gives i t at least the respect d u e an o l d e r b r o t h e r .
B u t a l t h o u g h t h e t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e has its c h i e f residence i n a specific
a n i m a l o r p l a n t species, i t c a n n o t possibly r e m a i n l o c a l i z e d there. Sacredness
33
is h i g h l y c o n t a g i o u s , and i t spreads from t h e t o t e m i c b e i n g t o e v e r y t h i n g
that d i r e c d y o r r e m o t e l y has t o d o w i t h i t . T h e r e l i g i o u s feelings inspired b y
t h e a n i m a l passed i n t o the substances i t ate, t h e r e b y m a k i n g o r r e m a k i n g its
flesh a n d b l o o d ; those feelings passed i n t o the things that resemble i t a n d i n t o
the various creatures w i t h w h i c h i t is i n constant contact. T h u s , h t t l e b y l i t -
de, subtotems attached themselves t o t o t e m s , a n d t h e c o s m o l o g i c a l systems
expressed b y t h e p r i m i t i v e classifications came i n t o b e i n g . I n the e n d , t h e
w h o l e w o r l d was d i v i d e d u p a m o n g t h e t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e s o f t h e same t r i b e .
W e n o w understand the source o f the a m b i g u i t y that r e l i g i o u s forces dis-
play w h e n t h e y appear i n h i s t o r y — h o w t h e y c o m e t o b e n a t u r a l as w e l l as
h u m a n a n d m a t e r i a l as w e l l as m o r a l . T h e y are m o r a l p o w e r s , since t h e y are
m a d e e n t i r e l y from the impressions that m o r a l c o l l e c t i v i t y as a m o r a l b e i n g
makes o n o t h e r m o r a l beings, t h e i n d i v i d u a l s . S u c h m o r a l p o w e r s d o n o t e x -
press the m a n n e r i n w h i c h n a t u r a l things affect o u r senses b u t t h e m a n n e r i n
w h i c h the collective consciousness affects i n d i v i d u a l consciousnesses. T h e i r
a u t h o r i t y is b u t o n e aspect o f t h e m o r a l i n f l u e n c e that society exerts o n its
m e m b e r s . F r o m a n o t h e r standpoint, t h e y are b o u n d t o be regarded as closely
3 4
akin to material t h i n g s because t h e y are c o n c e i v e d o f i n t a n g i b l e f o r m s .
T h u s t h e y bestride the t w o w o r l d s . T h e y reside i n m e n b u t are at t h e same
time t h e l i f e - p r i n c i p l e s o f things. I t is t h e y that e n l i v e n a n d discipline c o n -
sciences; i t is also t h e y that m a k e t h e plants g r o w a n d t h e animals m u l t i p l y .
Because o f its d o u b l e nature, r e l i g i o n was able t o b e the w o m b i n w h i c h t h e

32
It can be seen that this brotherhood, far from being the premise of totemism, is its logical conse-
quence. Men did not come to believe they had duties toward the animals of the totemic species because
they believed them to be kin; instead, they imagined that kinship in order to explain the nature of the be-
liefs and rites of which the animals were the object. The animal was considered man's relative because it
was a sacred being like man; it was not treated like a sacred being because people saw him as a relative.
33
See below, Bk. Ill, chap. 1, §3.
34
Furthermore, at the basis of this idea is a well-founded and lasting awareness. Modern science also
tends more and more to allow that the duality of man and nature does not preclude their unity, and that,
while distinct, physical forces and moral ones are closely akin. We certainly have a different idea of this
unity and kinship than the primitive's, but beneath the different symbols, the fact affirmed is the same for
both.
Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 225

p r i n c i p a l seeds o f h u m a n c i v i l i z a t i o n have developed. Because r e l i g i o n has

b o r n e reality as a w h o l e w i t h i n itself, the m a t e r i a l w o r l d as w e l l as the m o r a l
w o r l d , t h e forces t h a t m o v e b o t h bodies a n d m i n d s have b e e n c o n c e i v e d o f
i n r e l i g i o u s f o r m . T h u s i t is that the m o s t disparate techniques a n d prac-
tices—those that ensure the c o n t i n u i t y o f m o r a l life (law, morals, fine arts)
a n d those that are useful t o m a t e r i a l life (natural sciences, i n d u s t r i a l t e c h -
35
niques)—sprang f r o m r e l i g i o n , d i r e c d y o r i n d i r e c d y .

IV
T h e first r e l i g i o u s ideas have o f t e n b e e n a t t r i b u t e d t o feelings o f weakness
a n d s u b j e c t i o n o r fear a n d m i s g i v i n g , w h i c h supposedly g r i p p e d m a n w h e n
he came i n t o c o n t a c t w i t h t h e w o r l d . T h e v i c t i m o f a sort o f n i g h t m a r e f a b -
r i c a t e d b y n o n e o t h e r t h a n himself, m a n imagines h i m s e l f s u r r o u n d e d b y
those same hostile a n d fearsome p o w e r s , a n d appeasing t h e m is t h e p o i n t o f
the rites. I have j u s t s h o w n that t h e first r e l i g i o n s have an altogether different
o r i g i n . T h e famous f o r m u l a Primus in orbe deos fecit timor* is i n n o w a y w a r -
r a n t e d b y the facts. T h e p r i m i t i v e d i d n o t see his gods as strangers, enemies,
o r beings w h o w e r e f u n d a m e n t a l l y o r necessarily e v i l - m i n d e d o r w h o s e fa-
v o r h e h a d t o w i n at all costs. Q u i t e t h e contrary, t o h i m t h e gods are friends,
relatives, a n d n a t u r a l p r o t e c t o r s . A r e these n o t the names he gives t o the b e -
ings o f t h e t o t e m i c species? A s he i m a g i n e s i t , the p o w e r t o w h i c h the c u l t is
addressed does n o t l o o m far above, c r u s h i n g h i m w i t h its s u p e r i o r i t y ; instead,
i t is v e r y near a n d bestows u p o n h i m useful abilities that he is n o t b o r n w i t h .
N e v e r , perhaps, has d i v i n i t y b e e n closer t o m a n t h a n at this m o m e n t i n h i s -
tory, w h e n i t is present i n the things that i n h a b i t his i m m e d i a t e s u r r o u n d i n g s
and, i n part, is i m m a n e n t i n m a n h i m s e l f . I n s u m , j o y f u l confidence, rather
t h a n t e r r o r o r constraint, is at t h e r o o t o f t o t e m i s m .
I f w e set aside funeral rites, t h e m e l a n c h o l y aspect o f any r e l i g i o n , the
t o t e m i c c u l t is celebrated w i t h songs, dances, a n d dramatic performances.
C r u e l expiations are relatively rare i n i t , as w e w i l l see; even the p a i n f u l a n d
o b l i g a t o r y m a n n i n g s t h a t a t t e n d i n i t i a t i o n are n o t o f this character. T h e j e a l -
ous a n d t e r r i b l e gods d o n o t m a k e t h e i r appearance u n t i l later i n religious

* First in the world, fear created the gods.

35
I say that this derivation is sometimes indirect, because of techniques that, in the great majority of
cases, seem to be derived from religion only via magic (see [Henri] Hubert and [Marcel] Mauss, [Esquisse
d'une] Théorie générale de la magie,AS, vol. VII [1904], pp. 144ff; magie forces are, I think, only a special
form of religious forces. I will have occasion to return more than once to this point.
226 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

e v o l u t i o n . T h i s is so because p r i m i t i v e societies are n o t Leviathans that o v e r -

w h e l m m a n w i t h the e n o r m i t y o f t h e i r p o w e r a n d subject h i m t o harsh d i s -
3 6
cipline; he surrenders t o t h e m spontaneously a n d w i t h o u t resistance. Since
the social s o u l is at that t i m e m a d e u p o f o n l y a small n u m b e r o f ideas a n d
feelings, the w h o l e o f i t is i n c a r n a t e d w i t h o u t d i f f i c u l t y i n each individual's
consciousness. E a c h i n d i v i d u a l carries t h e w h o l e i n himself. I t is part o f h i m ,
so w h e n he yields t o its p r o m p t i n g s , he does n o t t h i n k he is y i e l d i n g t o c o -
3 7
e r c i o n b u t instead d o i n g w h a t his o w n nature tells h i m t o d o .
T h i s w a y o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g the o r i g i n o f r e l i g i o u s t h o u g h t escapes t h e
objections that the m o s t respected classical theories are o p e n t o .
W e have seen that t h e naturists a n d the animists p u r p o r t e d t o c o n s t r u c t
t h e n o t i o n o f sacred beings f r o m t h e sensations that v a r i o u s physical o r b i o -
l o g i c a l p h e n o m e n a evoke i n us. I have s h o w n w h a t was impossible a n d even
c o n t r a d i c t o r y a b o u t this enterprise. N o t h i n g comes o u t o f n o t h i n g . T h e sen-
sations that t h e physical w o r l d evokes i n us c a n n o t , b y d e f i n i t i o n , c o n t a i n
a n y t h i n g that goes b e y o n d that w o r l d . F r o m s o m e t h i n g tangible o n e can
o n l y m a k e s o m e t h i n g tangible; f r o m e x t e n d e d substance o n e c a n n o t m a k e
u n e x t e n d e d substance. * So t o be i n a p o s i t i o n t o e x p l a i n h o w , u n d e r those
c o n d i t i o n s , the n o t i o n o f the sacred c o u l d have b e e n f o r m e d , m o s t theorists
w e r e f o r c e d t o assume that m a n has s u p e r i m p o s e d an u n r e a l w o r l d u p o n r e -
ality as reality is available t o o b s e r v a t i o n . A n d this unreal w o r l d is c o n s t r u c t e d
e n t i r e l y w i t h the phantasms that agitate his spirit d u r i n g dreams, o r w i t h the
o f t e n m o n s t r o u s derangements that, supposedly, t h e m y t h o l o g i c a l i m a g i n a -
t i o n spawned u n d e r the deceptive, i f seductive, i n f l u e n c e o f language. B u t i t
t h e n became impossible t o u n d e r s t a n d w h y h u m a n i t y s h o u l d have persisted
for centuries i n errors that e x p e r i e n c e w o u l d v e r y q u i c k l y have exposed as
such.
F r o m m y standpoint, these difficulties disappear. R e l i g i o n ceases t o be
an i n e x p l i c a b l e h a l l u c i n a t i o n o f some sort a n d gains a f o o t h o l d i n reality. I n -
deed, w e can say that the faithful are n o t m i s t a k e n w h e n t h e y believe i n the
existence o f a m o r a l p o w e r t o w h i c h t h e y are subject a n d from w h i c h t h e y

* L'étendu and l'inétendu. Literally, "something extended" and "something unextended," which corre-
spond to Descartes' opposition between res externa and res inextensa, classically the opposition between
mind (or soul) and body.
^In any case, once he is adult and fully initiated. The rites of initiation, which introduce the young
man into social life, in themselves constitute a harsh discipline.
"Concerning the specific nature of primitive societies, see [Dürkheim,] Division du travail social,
pp. 123, 149, 173ff.
Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 227

receive w h a t is best i n themselves. T h a t p o w e r exists, a n d i t is society. W h e n

the A u s t r a l i a n is c a r r i e d above himself, f e e l i n g inside a life o v e r f l o w i n g w i t h
an i n t e n s i t y that surprises h i m , he is n o t t h e d u p e o f an i l l u s i o n . T h a t exalta-
tion is real a n d really is the p r o d u c t o f forces outside o f a n d s u p e r i o r t o the
i n d i v i d u a l . O f course, he is m i s t a k e n t o believe that a p o w e r i n the f o r m o f
an a n i m a l o r p l a n t has b r o u g h t a b o u t this increase i n v i t a l energy. B u t his
mistake lies i n t a k i n g l i t e r a l l y the s y m b o l that represents this b e i n g i n the
m i n d , o r t h e o u t w a r d appearance i n w h i c h the i m a g i n a t i o n has dressed i t u p ,
n o t i n the fact o f its v e r y existence. B e h i n d these f o r m s , be t h e y c r u d e r o r
m o r e r e f i n e d , there is a concrete a n d l i v i n g reality.
I n this way, r e l i g i o n acquires a sense a n d a reasonableness that the m o s t
m i l i t a n t rationalist c a n n o t fail t o recognize. T h e m a i n object o f r e l i g i o n is n o t
t o give m a n a representation o f the natural universe, f o r i f that had b e e n its es-
sential task, h o w i t c o u l d have h e l d o n w o u l d be i n c o m p r e h e n s i b l e . I n this r e -
spect, i t is barely m o r e t h a n a fabric o f errors. B u t r e l i g i o n is first a n d foremost
a system o f ideas b y means o f w h i c h i n d i v i d u a l s i m a g i n e the society o f w h i c h
t h e y are m e m b e r s a n d the obscure yet i n t i m a t e relations they have w i t h i t .
Such is its p a r a m o u n t role. A n d a l t h o u g h this representation is s y m b o l i c a n d
m e t a p h o r i c a l , i t is n o t u n f a i t h f u l . I t f u l l y translates the essence o f the relations
t o be a c c o u n t e d for. I t is t r u e w i t h a t r u t h that is eternal that there exists o u t -
side us s o m e t h i n g greater t h a n w e a n d w i t h w h i c h w e c o m m u n e .
T h a t is w h y w e can be c e r t a i n that acts o f w o r s h i p , w h a t e v e r t h e y m a y
be, are s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n paralyzed force, gesture w i t h o u t m o t i o n . B y
the v e r y act o f s e r v i n g the manifest p u r p o s e o f s t r e n g t h e n i n g the ties b e -
t w e e n t h e faithful a n d t h e i r g o d — t h e g o d b e i n g o n l y a figurative represen-
t a t i o n o f the s o c i e t y — t h e y at t h e same t i m e strengthen the ties b e t w e e n the
i n d i v i d u a l a n d the society o f w h i c h he is a m e m b e r . W e can even u n d e r s t a n d
h o w t h e f u n d a m e n t a l t r u t h that r e l i g i o n thus c o n t a i n e d m i g h t have b e e n
e n o u g h t o offset t h e secondary errors that i t almost necessarily e n t a i l e d a n d
therefore h o w , despite t h e unpleasant surprises those errors caused, t h e f a i t h -
f u l w e r e p r e v e n t e d f r o m setting r e l i g i o n aside. M o r e o f t e n t h a n n o t , t h e p r e -
scriptions i t counseled f o r man's use u p o n t h i n g s m u s t surely have p r o v e d
ineffective. B u t these setbacks c o u l d n o t have p r o f o u n d influence, because
3 8
t h e y d i d n o t strike at w h a t is f u n d a m e n t a l t o r e l i g i o n .
Nonetheless, i t w i l l b e o b j e c t e d t h a t even i n t e r m s o f this hypothesis, r e -
l i g i o n is still t h e p r o d u c t o f a c e r t a i n d e l u s i o n . B y w h a t o t h e r n a m e can o n e

38
Since I will return to this idea and will argue the case more explicidy in treating the rites (Bk. Ill),
for now I confine myself to this general indication.
228 THE ELEMENTARY BELLEFS

call the state i n w h i c h m e n f i n d themselves w h e n , as a result o f collective ef-

fervescence, t h e y believe t h e y have b e e n swept u p i n t o a w o r l d e n t i r e l y d i f -
ferent f r o m t h e o n e t h e y have before t h e i r eyes?
I t is q u i t e t r u e that r e l i g i o u s life c a n n o t attain any degree o f i n t e n s i t y a n d
n o t c a r r y w i t h i t a psychic e x a l t a t i o n that is c o n n e c t e d t o d e l i r i u m . I t is f o r
this reason that m e n o f e x t r a o r d i n a r i l y sensitive r e l i g i o u s consciousness—
prophets, founders o f religions, great saints—often s h o w s y m p t o m s o f an e x -
c i t a b i l i t y that is e x t r e m e a n d even p a t h o l o g i c a l : These p h y s i o l o g i c a l defects
predisposed t h e m t o great r e l i g i o u s roles. T h e r i t u a l use o f i n t o x i c a t i n g
39
l i q u o r s is t o be u n d e r s t o o d i n the same w a y . T h e reason is c e r t a i n l y n o t that
ardent f a i t h is necessarily t h e fruit o f drunkenness a n d m e n t a l disorders.
H o w e v e r , since e x p e r i e n c e q u i c k l y t a u g h t p e o p l e t h e resemblances b e t w e e n
t h e mentalities o f t h e delusive a n d o f the seer, t h e y sought t o o p e n a p a t h t o
the second b y p r o d u c i n g t h e first artificially. I f , f o r this reason, i t can b e said
that r e l i g i o n does n o t d o w i t h o u t a c e r t a i n d e l i r i u m , i t m u s t b e added t h a t a
d e l i r i u m w i t h t h e causes I have a t t r i b u t e d t o i t is well founded. T h e images o f
w h i c h i t is m a d e are n o t p u r e illusions, a n d u n l i k e those t h e naturists a n d the
animists p u t at the basis o f r e l i g i o n , t h e y c o r r e s p o n d t o s o m e t h i n g real.
Doubdess, i t is the nature o f m o r a l forces expressed m e r e l y b y images that
t h e y c a n n o t affect t h e h u m a n m i n d w i t h any forcefulness w i t h o u t p u t t i n g i t
outside itself, a n d p l u n g i n g i t i n t o a state describable as "ecstatic" (so l o n g as
t h e w o r d is taken i n its e t y m o l o g i c a l sense [eKo-Totais, " s t a n d " plus " o u t
o f " ] ) . B u t i t b y n o means f o l l o w s that these forces are i m a g i n a r y . Q u i t e the
contrary, the m e n t a l e x c i t e m e n t t h e y b r i n g a b o u t attests t o t h e i r reality. I t
provides f u r t h e r evidence that a v e r y intense social life always does a sort o f
v i o l e n c e t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l ' s b o d y a n d m i n d a n d disrupts t h e i r n o r m a l f u n c -
4 0
tioning. T h i s is w h y i t can last f o r o n l y a l i m i t e d t i m e .
W h a t is m o r e , i f t h e n a m e " d e l i r i u m " is g i v e n t o any state i n w h i c h t h e
m i n d adds t o w h a t e v e r is i m m e d i a t e l y g i v e n t h r o u g h t h e senses, p r o j e c t i n g its
o w n impressions o n t o i t , there is perhaps n o collective representation that is
n o t i n a sense delusive; r e l i g i o u s beliefs are o n l y a special case o f a v e r y g e n -
eral law. T h e w h o l e social w o r l d seems p o p u l a t e d w i t h forces t h a t i n reality
exist o n l y i n o u r m i n d s . W e k n o w w h a t t h e flag is f o r t h e soldier, b u t i n i t -
self i t is o n l y a b i t o f c l o t h . H u m a n b l o o d is o n l y an organic l i q u i d , yet even

39
On this point see [Thomas] Achelis, Die Ekstase [in ihrer kulturellen Bedeutung, Berlin, J. Rade, 1902],
esp. chap. 1.
""Cf. [Marcel] Mauss, "Essai sur les variations saisonnières des sociétés eskimos," in AS, vol. IX,
[1906], p. 127.
Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 229

today w e c a n n o t see i t flow w i t h o u t e x p e r i e n c i n g an acute e m o t i o n that its

p h y s i c o c h e m i c a l properties c a n n o t e x p l a i n . F r o m a physical p o i n t o f v i e w ,
m a n is n o t h i n g b u t a system o f cells, a n d from t h e m e n t a l p o i n t o f v i e w , a sys-
t e m o f representations. F r o m b o t h p o i n t s o f v i e w , h e differs from the a n i m a l
o n l y i n degree. A n d yet society conceives h i m a n d requires that w e conceive
h i m as b e i n g e n d o w e d w i t h a sui generis character that insulates a n d shields
him f r o m all reckless i n f r i n g e m e n t — i n o t h e r w o r d s , t h a t imposes respect.
T h i s status, w h i c h puts h i m i n a class b y himself, seems t o us t o be o n e o f his
distinctive attributes, even t h o u g h n o basis f o r i t can be f o u n d i n the e m p i r -
ical nature o f m a n . A cancelled postage stamp m a y be w o r t h a f o r t u n e , b u t
o b v i o u s l y t h a t value is i n n o w a y e n t a i l e d b y its n a t u r a l properties. T h e r e is a
sense, o f course, i n w h i c h o u r representation o f t h e e x t e r n a l w o r l d is itself
n o t h i n g b u t a fabric o f h a l l u c i n a t i o n s . T h e o d o r s , tastes, and colors that w e
place i n bodies are n o t there, o r at least are n o t there i n the w a y w e perceive
t h e m . Nevertheless, o u r sensations o f smell, taste, a n d sight d o c o r r e s p o n d t o
c e r t a i n o b j e c t i v e states o f t h e t h i n g s represented. A f t e r a fashion, t h e y d o e x -
press t h e properties o f p a r t i c u l a r materials o r m o v e m e n t s o f the ether that r e -
ally d o have t h e i r o r i g i n i n t h e bodies w e perceive as b e i n g fragrant, tasty, o r
c o l o r f u l . B u t collective representations o f t e n i m p u t e t o t h e things t o w h i c h
t h e y refer properties that d o n o t exist i n t h e m i n any f o r m o r t o any degree
whatsoever. F r o m t h e m o s t c o m m o n p l a c e o b j e c t , t h e y can m a k e a sacred a n d
very powerful being.
H o w e v e r , even t h o u g h p u r e l y ideal, the p o w e r s thereby c o n f e r r e d o n
that object behave as i f t h e y w e r e real. T h e y d e t e r m i n e man's c o n d u c t w i t h
the same necessity as physical forces. T h e A r u n t a w h o has p r o p e r l y r u b b e d
h i m s e l f w i t h his c h u r i n g a feels stronger; h e is stronger. I f he has eaten t h e
flesh o f an a n i m a l that is p r o h i b i t e d , even t h r o u g h i t is perfecdy w h o l e s o m e ,
he w i l l feel i l l from i t a n d m a y die. T h e soldier w h o falls d e f e n d i n g his flag
c e r t a i n l y does n o t believe he has sacrificed h i m s e l f t o a piece o f c l o t h . S u c h
things h a p p e n because social t h o u g h t , w i t h its i m p e r a t i v e a u t h o r i t y , has a
p o w e r that i n d i v i d u a l t h o u g h t c a n n o t possibly have. B y a c t i n g o n o u r m i n d s ,
i t can m a k e us see things i n the l i g h t that suits i t ; a c c o r d i n g t o circumstances,
i t adds t o o r takes away f r o m the real. H e n c e , there is a r e a l m o f nature i n
w h i c h the f o r m u l a o f i d e a l i s m is almost l i t e r a l l y applicable; that is t h e social
r e a l m . T h e r e , far m o r e t h a n a n y w h e r e else, t h e idea creates the reality. E v e n
i n this case, i d e a l i s m is p r o b a b l y n o t t r u e w i t h o u t q u a l i f i c a t i o n . W e can never
escape t h e d u a l i t y o f o u r nature a n d w h o l l y emancipate ourselves from p h y s -
ical necessities. As I w i l l show, t o express o u r o w n ideas even t o ourselves, w e
n e e d t o attach those ideas t o m a t e r i a l t h i n g s that s y m b o l i z e t h e m . B u t , here,
t h e role o f m a t t e r is at a m i n i m u m . T h e o b j e c t that serves as a p r o p f o r the
230 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

idea does n o t a m o u n t t o m u c h as c o m p a r e d t o the ideal superstructure u n -

der w h i c h i t disappears, and, f u r t h e r m o r e , i t has n o t h i n g t o d o w i t h that su-
perstructure. F r o m all that has b e e n said, w e see w h a t t h e p s e u d o - d e l i r i u m
m e t w i t h at the basis o f so m a n y collective representations consists of: I t is
41
o n l y a f o r m o f this f u n d a m e n t a l i d e a l i s m . So i t is n o t p r o p e r l y called a d e l u -
sion. T h e ideas thus o b j e c t i f i e d are w e l l f o u n d e d — n o t , t o be sure, i n the n a -
ture o f the t a n g i b l e things o n t o w h i c h t h e y are grafted b u t i n the nature o f
society.
W e can u n d e r s t a n d n o w h o w i t happens that t h e t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e and,
m o r e generally, h o w any r e l i g i o u s force comes t o be e x t e r n a l t o the things i n
42
w h i c h i t resides: because t h e idea o f i t is n o t at all c o n s t r u c t e d from t h e i m -
pressions the t h i n g makes d i r e c t l y o n o u r senses and m i n d s . R e l i g i o u s force
is n o n e o t h e r t h a n t h e f e e l i n g that the c o l l e c t i v i t y inspires i n its m e m b e r s , b u t
p r o j e c t e d outside t h e m i n d s that e x p e r i e n c e t h e m , a n d o b j e c t i f i e d . T o b e -
c o m e o b j e c t i f i e d , i t fixes o n a t h i n g that t h e r e b y becomes sacred; any object
can play this role. I n p r i n c i p l e , n o n e is b y nature predestined t o i t , t o the e x -
4 3
c l u s i o n o f others, any m o r e t h a n others are necessarily p r e c l u d e d f r o m i t .
W h e r e religious force becomes o b j e c t i f i e d depends e n t i r e l y u p o n w h a t c i r -
cumstances cause the f e e l i n g that generates r e l i g i o u s ideas t o settle here o r
there, i n o n e place rather t h a n another. T h e sacredness e x h i b i t e d b y the t h i n g
is n o t i m p l i c a t e d i n t h e i n t r i n s i c properties o f the t h i n g : It is added to them.
T h e w o r l d o f the r e l i g i o u s is n o t a special aspect o f e m p i r i c a l nature: It is su-
perimposed upon nature.
Finally, this idea o f the r e l i g i o u s enables us t o e x p l a i n an i m p o r t a n t p r i n -
c i p l e f o u n d at the r o o t o f m a n y m y t h s : W h e n a sacred b e i n g is s u b d i v i d e d , i t
remains w h o l l y equal t o itself i n each o f its parts. I n o t h e r w o r d s , f r o m the
s t a n d p o i n t o f religious t h o u g h t , the part equals the w h o l e ; the part has the
same p o w e r s a n d the same efficacy. A fragment o f a relic has the same virtues

4,
One can see all that is wrong in theories like the geographic materialism of [Friedrich] Ratzel (see
especially his "Der Raum im Geist der Völker" in Politische Geographie, [Leipzig, R. Oldenbourg, 1897]),
which aim to derive all of social lifefromits material substrate (either economic or territorial). Their mis-
take is comparable to Maudsley's in individual psychology. Just as Maudsley reduced the psychic life of the
individual to a mere epiphenomenon of its physiological base, they want to reduce all of the psychic life
of the collectivity to its physical base. This is to forget that ideas are realities—forces—and that collective
representations are forces even more dynamic and powerful than individual representations. On this point,
see [Dürkheim], "Représentations," RMM, 1898.
42
See pp. 191, 196-197.
43
Even excrement has a religious quality. See [Konrad Theodor] Preuss, "Der Ursprung der Religion
und Kunst," esp. chap. 2, "Der Zauber der Defakation, Globus, vol. LXXXVI [1904], pp. 325ff.
Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 231

as the w h o l e relic. T h e smallest d r o p o f b l o o d contains the same active p r i n -

ciple as all the b l o o d . A s w e w i l l see, the soul can b e b r o k e n u p i n t o almost
as m a n y parts as there are organs o r tissues i n t h e b o d y ; each o f these p a r t i a l
souls is equivalent t o t h e entire soul. T h i s c o n c e p t i o n w o u l d be i n e x p l i c a b l e
i f sacredness d e p e n d e d o n t h e c o n s t i t u t i v e properties o f the t h i n g s e r v i n g as
its substrate, f o r sacredness w o u l d have t o change w i t h that t h i n g , increasing
a n d decreasing w i t h i t . B u t i f t h e v i r t u e s the t h i n g is d e e m e d t o have are n o t
i n t r i n s i c t o i t , i f t h e y c o m e t o i t f r o m c e r t a i n feelings that i t calls t o m i n d a n d
symbolizes (even t h o u g h such feelings o r i g i n a t e outside i t ) , i t can play an
evocative role w h e t h e r i t is w h o l e o r n o t , since i n that r o l e i t does n o t n e e d
specific d i m e n s i o n s . Since t h e part evokes the w h o l e , i t also evokes the same
feelings as t h e w h o l e . A m e r e scrap o f t h e flag represents the c o u n t r y as m u c h
as the flag itself; m o r e o v e r , i t is sacred i n the same r i g h t a n d t o the same d e -
44
gree.

V
T h i s t h e o r y o f t o t e m i s m has enabled us t o e x p l a i n the m o s t characteristic b e -
liefs o f t h e r e l i g i o n , b u t i t rests o n a fact that is n o t yet e x p l a i n e d . G i v e n the
idea o f t h e t o t e m , t h e e m b l e m o f t h e clan, all the rest follows, b u t w e must
still f i n d o u t h o w that idea was f o r m e d . T h e q u e s t i o n is t w o f o l d a n d can be
b r o k e n d o w n i n this w a y : (1) W h a t caused t h e clan t o choose an emblem? (2)
W h y w e r e those e m b l e m s t a k e n f r o m the w o r l d o f animals a n d plants, b u t es-
pecially f r o m the w o r l d o f animals?
T h a t an e m b l e m can be useful as a r a l l y i n g p o i n t f o r any sort o f g r o u p r e -
quires n o a r g u m e n t . B y expressing t h e social u n i t tangibly, i t makes t h e u n i t
itself m o r e t a n g i b l e t o all. A n d f o r that reason, t h e use o f e m b l e m a t i c s y m -
bols m u s t have spread q u i c k l y , as s o o n as the idea was b o r n . F u r t h e r m o r e ,
this idea m u s t have arisen spontaneously f r o m the c o n d i t i o n s o f life i n c o m -
m o n , f o r t h e e m b l e m is n o t o n l y a c o n v e n i e n t m e t h o d o f c l a r i f y i n g the
awareness t h e society has o f itself: I t serves t o create—and is a c o n s t i t u t i v e e l -
e m e n t of-—that awareness.
B y themselves, i n d i v i d u a l consciousnesses are actually closed t o one
another, a n d t h e y can c o m m u n i c a t e o n l y b y means o f signs i n w h i c h t h e i r
i n n e r states c o m e t o express themselves. F o r t h e c o m m u n i c a t i o n that is
o p e n i n g u p b e t w e e n t h e m t o e n d i n a c o m m u n i o n — t h a t is, i n a fusion o f all

""This principle has passed from religion into magic. It is the alchemists' Totum ex parte [the whole
from the part. Trans.].
232 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

the i n d i v i d u a l feelings i n t o a c o m m o n o n e — t h e signs that express those feel-

ings m u s t c o m e t o g e t h e r i n o n e single resultant.* T h e appearance o f this r e -
sultant notifies i n d i v i d u a l s that t h e y are i n u n i s o n a n d b r i n g s h o m e t o t h e m
t h e i r m o r a l u n i t y . I t is b y s h o u t i n g the same cry, saying t h e same w o r d s , a n d
p e r f o r m i n g t h e same a c t i o n i n regard t o the same object that they a r r i v e at
and experience agreement. G r a n t e d , i n d i v i d u a l representations also b r i n g
a b o u t repercussions i n t h e b o d y that are n o t u n i m p o r t a n t ; still, these effects
can be treated as analytically d i s t i n c t from physical repercussions that c o m e
w i t h o r after t h e m b u t that are n o t t h e i r basis.
C o l l e c t i v e representations are q u i t e a n o t h e r matter. T h e y presuppose
that consciousnesses are a c t i n g a n d reacting o n each o t h e r ; t h e y result from
actions a n d reactions that are possible o n l y w i t h t h e h e l p o f tangible i n t e r -
mediaries. T h u s t h e f u n c t i o n o f t h e i n t e r m e d i a r i e s is n o t m e r e l y t o reveal
the m e n t a l state associated w i t h t h e m ; they also c o n t r i b u t e t o its m a k i n g .
T h e i n d i v i d u a l m i n d s can m e e t a n d c o m m u n e o n l y i f t h e y c o m e outside
themselves, b u t t h e y d o this o n l y b y means o f m o v e m e n t . I t is the h o m o -
g e n e i t y o f these m o v e m e n t s that makes t h e g r o u p aware o f itself and that, i n
consequence, makes i t be. O n c e this h o m o g e n e i t y has b e e n established
a n d these m o v e m e n t s have taken a d e f i n i t e f o r m a n d b e e n stereotyped, they
serve t o s y m b o l i z e t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g representations. B u t these m o v e m e n t s
s y m b o l i z e those representations o n l y because t h e y have h e l p e d t o form
them.
W i t h o u t symbols, m o r e o v e r , social feelings c o u l d have o n l y an unstable
existence. T h o s e feelings are v e r y s t r o n g so l o n g as m e n are assembled, m u -
t u a l l y i n f l u e n c i n g o n e another, b u t w h e n the g a t h e r i n g is over, they survive
o n l y i n t h e f o r m o f m e m o r i e s that g r a d u a l l y d i m a n d fade away i f left t o
themselves. Since the g r o u p is n o l o n g e r present a n d active, the i n d i v i d u a l
temperaments q u i c k l y take over again. W i l d passions that c o u l d unleash
themselves i n the m i d s t o f a c r o w d c o o l a n d die d o w n o n c e the c r o w d has
dispersed, and i n d i v i d u a l s w o n d e r w i t h amazement h o w t h e y c o u l d let
themselves be c a r r i e d so far o u t o f character. B u t i f the m o v e m e n t s b y w h i c h
these feelings have b e e n expressed eventually b e c o m e i n s c r i b e d o n things
that are durable, t h e n t h e y t o o b e c o m e durable. T h e s e things keep b r i n g i n g
the feelings t o i n d i v i d u a l m i n d s a n d keep t h e m p e r p e t u a l l y aroused, j u s t as

* Since Dürkheim said "resultant" (résultante) and not "result" (résultat), he may have had in mind the
mathematical notion of a vector sum of forces. A resultant may be defined as the single force, measured as
velocity or acceleration, to which several forces taken together are equivalent. The term also has an anal-
ogous literary sense.
Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 233

w o u l d h a p p e n i f the cause that first called t h e m f o r t h was still acting. T h u s ,

w h i l e e m b l e m a t i z i n g is necessary i f society is t o b e c o m e conscious o f itself,
so is i t n o less indispensable i n p e r p e t u a t i n g that consciousness.
H e n c e , w e m u s t g u a r d against seeing those symbols as m e r e artifices—a
v a r i e t y o f labels placed o n ready-made representations t o make t h e m easier
t o handle. T h e y are i n t e g r a l t o those representations. T h e fact that collective
feelings f i n d themselves j o i n e d i n this w a y t o things that are alien t o t h e m is
n o t p u r e l y c o n v e n t i o n a l . I t t a n g i b l y portrays a real feature o f social p h e n o m -
ena: t h e i r transcendence o f i n d i v i d u a l consciousnesses. W e k n o w , i n fact, that
social p h e n o m e n a are b o r n n o t i n t h e i n d i v i d u a l b u t i n the g r o u p . N o m a t -
ter w h a t p a r t w e m a y play i n t h e i r genesis, each o f us receives t h e m from
4 5
without. T h u s , w h e n w e i m a g i n e t h e m as e m a n a t i n g f r o m a m a t e r i a l o b -
j e c t , w e are n o t e n t i r e l y w r o n g a b o u t t h e i r nature. A l t h o u g h t h e y c e r t a i n l y
d o n o t c o m e from t h e specific t h i n g t o w h i c h w e a t t r i b u t e t h e m , still i t is
t r u e that t h e y o r i g i n a t e outside us. A n d a l t h o u g h the m o r a l force that sus-
tains the w o r s h i p p e r does n o t c o m e from t h e i d o l he w o r s h i p s o r the e m b l e m
he venerates, still i t is e x t e r n a l t o h i m ; a n d he feels this. T h e o b j e c t i v i t y o f
the s y m b o l is b u t an expression o f that externality.
T h u s , i n all its aspects and at every m o m e n t o f its history, social life is
o n l y possible thanks t o a vast s y m b o l i s m . T h e physical emblems a n d f i g u r a -
tive representations w i t h w h i c h I have b e e n especially c o n c e r n e d i n the p r e -
sent study are o n e f o r m o f i t , b u t there are a g o o d m a n y others. C o l l e c t i v e
feelings can j u s t as w e l l be i n c a r n a t e d i n persons as i n formulas. S o m e f o r -
mulas are flags; some real o r m y t h i c personages are symbols. B u t there is o n e
sort o f e m b l e m that m u s t have appeared v e r y q u i c k l y , q u i t e apart f r o m any
r e f l e c t i o n o r c a l c u l a t i o n , a n d i t is this o n e that w e have seen p l a y i n g a c o n -
siderable role i n t o t e m i s m : t a t t o o i n g . W e l l - k n o w n facts demonstrate, i n fact,
that u n d e r c e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s , i t is p r o d u c e d b y a sort o f a u t o m a t i c a c t i o n .
W h e n m e n o f an i n f e r i o r c u l t u r e share i n a c o m m o n life, they are o f t e n l e d ,
almost instinctively, t o p a i n t themselves o r t o i m p r i n t images o n t h e i r bodies
that r e m i n d t h e m o f t h e i r c o m m o n life. A c c o r d i n g t o a t e x t b y P r o c o p e , the
first Christians h a d t h e n a m e o f C h r i s t o r the sign o f the cross i m p r i n t e d o n
4 6
their s k i n . F o r a l o n g t i m e , groups o f p i l g r i m s w h o w e n t t o Palestine also
h a d themselves t a t t o o e d o n t h e i r arms o r w r i s t s w i t h designs representing the

45
On this point, see [Durkheim], Règles de la méthode sociologique, pp. 5ff.
^Procopius of Gaza, Commentarii in Isaiam, p. 496. [It may be that Durkheim drew this fifth-century
reference from Procopii Gazaei. . . Opera omnia in unum corpus adunata, Petit Montrouge, J. P. Migne, 1861.
Trans.]
234 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

4 7
cross o r the m o n o g r a m o f C h r i s t . T h e same c u s t o m is r e p o r t e d f o r p d -
48
grimages t o c e r t a i n h o l y places i n I t a l y . Lombroso reported a curious ex-
ample o f spontaneous t a t t o o i n g . W h e n t w e n t y y o u n g m e n f r o m an Italian
h i g h s c h o o l w e r e a b o u t t o separate, t h e y h a d themselves decorated w i t h t a t -
49
toos that i n various ways r e c o r d e d t h e years t h e y h a d j u s t spent t o g e t h e r .
T h e same practice has o f t e n b e e n observed a m o n g soldiers o f the same camp,
5 0
sailors o n t h e same ship, a n d prisoners i n the same house o f d e t e n t i o n . In
fact, i t is understandable, especially w h e r e t e c h n o l o g y is still u n d e v e l o p e d ,
that t a t t o o i n g is the m o s t d i r e c t a n d expressive means b y w h i c h the c o m m u -
n i o n o f m i n d s can be a f f i r m e d . T h e best w a y o f testifying t o oneself a n d o t h -
ers that o n e is p a r t o f t h e same g r o u p is t o place the same distinctive m a r k o n
t h e b o d y . P r o o f that such is i n d e e d the raison d'être o f the t o t e m i c i m a g e is
that, as I have s h o w n , i t does n o t t r y t o c o p y the appearance o f the t h i n g i t is
considered t o represent. I t is made o f lines a n d p o i n t s t h a t are g i v e n an e n -
5 1
tirely conventional m e a n i n g . T h e p u r p o s e o f t h e image is n o t t o represent
o r evoke a p a r t i c u l a r o b j e c t b u t t o testify that a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f i n d i v i d u -
als share the same m o r a l life.
T h e c l a n is a society t h a t is less able t h a n any o t h e r t o d o w i t h o u t an e m -
b l e m a n d a s y m b o l , f o r there are f e w societies so l a c k i n g i n cohesion. T h e
clan c a n n o t be d e f i n e d b y its leader, f o r a l t h o u g h n o t absent altogether, c e n -
52
tral a u t h o r i t y i n i t is at best s h i f t i n g a n d u n s t a b l e . N o r can i t be any better
5 3
d e f i n e d b y the t e r r i t o r y i t occupies for, b e i n g n o m a d i c , the clan's p o p u l a -
tion is n o t closely t i e d t o any d e f i n i t e locality. F u r t h e r m o r e , g i v e n the r u l e o f
exogamy, t h e husband a n d w i f e m u s t be o f different t o t e m s . T h u s , w h e r e the
t o t e m is t r a n s m i t t e d i n the m a t e r n a l l i n e — a n d t o d a y this descent system is

47
See Thevenot, [Suite de] voyage [de M. de Thévenot] au Levant, Paris, 1689, p. 638. This phenomenon
was observed again in 1862: cf. Berchon, "Histoire médicale du tatouage," Archives de Médiane Navale, vol.
XI (1869), p. 377 n.
•^[Alexandre] Lacassagne, Les Tatouages: [Étude anthropologique et médico légale, Paris, Baillière, 1881],
p. 10.
49
[Césare] Lombroso, L'Homme criminel, vol. I [Paris, Alcan, 1885], p. 292.
50
Ibid., vol. I, pp. 268, 285, 291-292; Lacassagne, Tatouages, p. 97.
51
See above, p. 126.
52
On the authority of the chiefs, see Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 10; Spencer and Gillen,
Northern Tribes, p. 25; Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 295ff.
53
At least in Australia. In America, the population is most often sedentary, but the clan in America is
a relatively advanced form of organization.
Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 235

54
still the m o s t w i d e s p r e a d — t h e c h i l d r e n are o f a different clan f r o m t h e i r fa-
ther, even w h e n l i v i n g w i t h h i m . F o r all these reasons, w e f i n d all sorts o f d i f -
ferent clans represented w i t h i n the same f a m i l y a n d even w i t h i n the same
locality. T h e u n i t y o f t h e g r o u p can be felt o n l y because o f t h e collective
name b o r n e b y all t h e m e m b e r s a n d because o f the equally c o l l e c t i v e e m -
b l e m representing t h e t h i n g designated b y that name. A clan is essentially a
c o m p a n y o f i n d i v i d u a l s w h o have t h e same n a m e a n d rally a r o u n d t h e same
s y m b o l . Take away the n a m e a n d t h e s y m b o l that gives i t tangible f o r m , a n d
the clan can n o l o n g e r even be i m a g i n e d . Since the clan was possible o n l y o n
c o n d i t i o n o f b e i n g i m a g i n a b l e , b o t h the i n s t i t u t i o n o f t h e e m b l e m a n d its
place i n the group's life are thus e x p l a i n e d .
Still, w e m u s t find o u t w h y these names a n d emblems were taken almost
exclusively f r o m the a n i m a l a n d p l a n t k i n g d o m s , t h o u g h m a i n l y f r o m the first.
I t seems plausible that t h e e m b l e m has played a m o r e i m p o r t a n t role t h a n
the name. I n any event, today t h e w r i t t e n sign still holds a m o r e central place
i n the life o f the clan t h a n the spoken one. N o w , the e m b l e m a t i c i m a g e called
f o r a subject representable b y a design. A n d besides, the things h a d t o be f r o m
a m o n g those w i t h w h i c h the m e n o f the clan w e r e m o s t closely and h a b i t u -
ally i n contact. A n i m a l s m e t this c o n d i t i o n best. F o r these h u n t i n g a n d fish-
i n g p o p u l a t i o n s , animals w e r e i n fact the essential e l e m e n t o f the e c o n o m i c
e n v i r o n m e n t . I n this respect, plants t o o k second place, f o r they are o f o n l y
secondary i m p o r t a n c e as f o o d so l o n g as t h e y are n o t c u l t i v a t e d . Besides,
animals have a closer relationship t o man's life t h a n d o plants, i f o n l y because
o f the k i n d r e d nature that j o i n s these t w o creatures t o o n e another. B y c o n -
trast, t h e sun, m o o n , a n d stars w e r e t o o far away a n d seemed t o b e l o n g t o
5 5
a different w o r l d . F u r t h e r , since t h e constellations w e r e n o t differentiated
a n d classified, the starry sky d i d n o t present objects different e n o u g h from
o n e a n o t h e r t o be serviceable i n designating all t h e clans and subclans o f a
t r i b e . O n the o t h e r h a n d , t h e v a r i e t y o f the flora, a n d especially the fauna,

54
To be convinced of this, it is enough to look at the map prepared by [Northcote Whitridge] Thomas
in Kinship [Organization and Group] Marriage in Australia [Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1906],
p. 40. To evaluate this map properly, we must take into account the fact that, for reasons unknown, the
author has extended the system of totemic descent through the paternal Une as far as the west coast of
Australia, even though we have virtually no information about the tribes of this region (and which, be-
sides, is mainly desert).
55
As I will show in the next chapter, the stars are often considered, even by the Australians, as coun-
tries of souls or mythic personages—that is, they seem to constitute a world very different from that of the
living.
236 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

was almost inexhaustible. F o r these reasons, t h e heavenly bodies w e r e u n -

suited t o the role o f totems, n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g t h e i r b r i l l i a n c e a n d the p o w e r -
ful impression t h e y m a k e u p o n t h e senses. A n i m a l s and plants were perfect
for i t .
A n o b s e r v a t i o n b y S t r e h l o w p e r m i t s us t o specify the m a n n e r i n w h i c h
these e m b l e m s w e r e p r o b a b l y chosen. H e reports h a v i n g n o t i c e d that the
t o t e m i c centers are m o s t o f t e n situated near a m o u n t a i n , s p r i n g , o r gorge
w h e r e the animals that serve as t h e g r o u p s t o t e m are f o u n d i n abundance,
56
and he cites various e x a m p l e s . These t o t e m i c centers are c e r t a i n l y t h e c o n -
secrated places w h e r e t h e c l a n h e l d its meetings. I t therefore seems l i k e l y that
each g r o u p t o o k as its e m b l e m t h e a n i m a l o r p l a n t that was the m o s t p l e n t i -
57
f u l i n the n e i g h b o r h o o d o f the place w h e r e i t usually assembled.

VI
T h i s t h e o r y o f t o t e m i s m w i l l p r o v i d e us t h e k e y t o a c u r i o u s trait o f t h e h u -
m a n m i n d that, a l t h o u g h m o r e p r o n o u n c e d l o n g ago t h a n n o w , has n o t dis-
appeared a n d i n any case has played a significant role i n t h e h i s t o r y o f
t h o u g h t . T h i s w i l l be yet a n o t h e r o p p o r t u n i t y t o observe that l o g i c a l e v o l u -
tion is closely i n t e r c o n n e c t e d w i t h r e l i g i o u s e v o l u t i o n and, l i k e r e l i g i o u s
5 8
e v o l u t i o n , depends u p o n social c o n d i t i o n s .
I f there is a t r u t h that today seems t o us c o m p l e t e l y self-evident, i t is this:
Beings that differ n o t o n l y i n o u t w a r d appearance b u t also i n t h e i r m o s t f u n -
d a m e n t a l p r o p e r t i e s — s u c h as minerals, plants, animals, a n d m e n — c a n n o t be
regarded as equivalent a n d interchangeable. L o n g - e s t a b l i s h e d practice, w h i c h
scientific c u l t u r e has r o o t e d even m o r e deeply i n o u r m i n d s , taught us t o set
u p barriers b e t w e e n realms o f nature, barriers w h o s e existence even trans-

56
[Carl Strehlow, DieAranda- und Loritja-Stamme in Zentral Australien], vol. 1 [Frankfurt, J. Baer, 1907],
p. 4. Cf. along the same lines Schulze, "Aborigines of the . .. Finke River," p. 243.
57
Of course, as I have already had occasion to show (see p. 156, above), this choice is not made with-
out a more or less well-thought-out agreement among the different groups, since each of them had to
adopt a different emblem from that of its neighbors.
58
The turn of mind treated in this paragraph is identical to the one that [Lucien] Lévy-Bruhl calls the
law of participation (Les Fonctions mentales dans les sociétés inférieures [Paris, Alcan, 1910], pp. 76ff.). These
pages were already written when that work appeared; I publish them in their original form without any
change but confine myself to adding certain explanations that indicate where I differ with Lévy-Bruhl in
the evaluation of the evidence.
Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 237

f o r m i s m * does n o t deny. F o r a l t h o u g h t r a n s f o r m i s m grants that life c o u l d

have b e e n b o r n f r o m n o n l i v i n g matter, a n d m e n f r o m animals, i t recognizes
nonetheless that, o n c e f o r m e d , l i v i n g beings are different from minerals, and
m e n from animals. W i t h i n each r e a l m , the same barriers separate different
classes. W e c a n n o t i m a g i n e h o w o n e m i n e r a l c o u l d have t h e distinctive char-
acteristics o f a n o t h e r m i n e r a l — o r o n e a n i m a l species, those o f a n o t h e r
species. B u t these d i s t i n c t i o n s , w h i c h seem t o us so natural, are n o t at all
p r i m i t i v e . O r i g i n a l l y , a l l t h e realms are m e r g e d . T h e rocks have a sex; t h e y
have the a b i l i t y t o procreate; the sun, m o o n , a n d stars are m e n and w o m e n ,
w h o feel a n d express h u m a n feelings, w h i l e h u m a n s are p i c t u r e d as animals
o r plants. T h i s m e r g i n g is f o u n d again a n d again at t h e basis o f all m y t h o l o -
gies. F r o m i t arises the a m b i g u o u s nature o f the beings that figure i n m y t h s .
T h o s e beings c a n n o t be placed i n any d e f i n i t e genus because t h e y s i m u l t a n e -
ously participate i n the m o s t dissimilar ones. M o r e o v e r , i t is c o n c e d e d w i t h -
o u t d i f f i c u l t y that t h e y can m o v e f r o m o n e i n t o another, and i t is t h r o u g h
transmutations o f this k i n d that m e n l o n g b e l i e v e d t h e y c o u l d e x p l a i n the
origins o f things.
T h a t the a n t h r o p o m o r p h i c i n s t i n c t , w i t h w h i c h the animists have e n -
d o w e d the p r i m i t i v e , c a n n o t account f o r this t u r n o f m i n d is s h o w n b y the n a -
ture o f the errors that are t y p i c a l o f i t . These errors arise n o t from man's
h a v i n g w i l d l y e x p a n d e d the h u m a n r e a l m t o the p o i n t o f encompassing all the
others b u t from his h a v i n g m e r g e d the m o s t disparate realms w i t h one a n -
other. H e has n o m o r e i m a g i n e d the w o r l d i n his o w n image t h a n he has
i m a g i n e d h i m s e l f i n the image o f the w o r l d . H e has d o n e b o t h at once. I n the
w a y he t h o u g h t a b o u t things, he o f course i n c l u d e d h u m a n elements, b u t i n
the w a y he t h o u g h t a b o u t himself, he i n c l u d e d elements that came t o h i m
from things.
H o w e v e r there was n o t h i n g i n e x p e r i e n c e t h a t c o u l d have suggested
these mergers a n d m i x t u r e s t o h i m . F r o m the s t a n d p o i n t o f o b s e r v a t i o n

*The 1992 Petit Robert dictionary indicates a "scientific" term, transformisme, and a "philosophical"
term, evolutionnisme, dating them, respectively, from 1867 and 1878. Both terms come after Charles Dar-
win's The Origin of Species (1859). According to André Lalande (Vocabulaire technique et critique de la philoso-
phie, Paris, Alcan, 1902, p. 909), the difference between the two terms is as follows. In one sense,
transformisme is a more general term in biology than evolutionnisme, because it also includes such notions as
Lamarck's inheritance of acquired characteristics. In another sense, it is more specific than evolutionism
because it is limited to biology, whereas evolutionism became a far more general philosophical notion
considered to be applicable to all phenomena. It is clear from the context of the book as a whole that, in
these terms, Durkheim had evolutionnisme in mind. But I have preserved his "transformism" so as not to
obliterate the memory of two overlapping terms that had somewhat different, and no doubt contested,
meaning in his day.
238 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

t h r o u g h t h e senses, e v e r y t h i n g is disparate a n d d i s c o n t i n u o u s . N o w h e r e i n
reality d o w e observe beings t h a t m e r g e t h e i r natures a n d change i n t o o n e
another. A n e x c e p t i o n a l l y p o w e r f u l cause w o u l d have h a d t o i n t e r v e n e a n d
so transfigure the real as t o m a k e i t appear i n a f o r m n o t its o w n .
I t is r e l i g i o n that c a r r i e d o u t this t r a n s f o r m a t i o n ; i t is r e l i g i o u s beliefs that
replaced the w o r l d as t h e senses perceive i t w i t h a different one. T h i s , the case
o f t o t e m i s m shows v e r y w e l l . W h a t is f u n d a m e n t a l t o t o t e m i s m is that t h e
p e o p l e o f the clan, a n d the various beings w h o s e f o r m t h e t o t e m i c e m b l e m
represents, are h e l d t o be made o f t h e same essence. O n c e that b e l i e f was ac-
cepted, the disparate realms w e r e b r i d g e d . M a n was c o n c e i v e d o f as a k i n d o f
a n i m a l o r p l a n t , a n d the plants a n d animals as man's k i n — o r , rather, all these
beings, so different a c c o r d i n g t o t h e senses, w e r e c o n c e i v e d o f as p a r t i c i p a t -
i n g i n t h e same nature. H e n c e , the o r i g i n o f that remarkable capacity t o c o n -
f o u n d w h a t seems t o us so o b v i o u s l y d i s t i n c t : T h e first forces w i t h w h i c h the
h u m a n i n t e l l e c t p o p u l a t e d t h e universe w e r e elaborated t h r o u g h r e l i g i o n .
Since these forces w e r e made o f elements taken f r o m different k i n g d o m s ,
they became t h e p r i n c i p l e c o m m o n t o t h e m o s t disparate things, w h i c h w e r e
t h e r e b y e n d o w e d w i t h o n e a n d t h e same essence.
W e k n o w f u r t h e r m o r e that these r e l i g i o u s ideas are the o u t c o m e o f def-
i n i t e social causes. Because t h e clan c a n n o t exist w i t h o u t a name and an e m -
b l e m , a n d because that e m b l e m is e v e r y w h e r e before the eyes o f i n d i v i d u a l s ,
the feelings that society arouses i n its m e m b e r s are d i r e c t e d t o w a r d t h e e m -
b l e m a n d t o w a r d the objects w h o s e i m a g e i t is. I n this way, m e n h a d n o
c h o i c e b u t t o conceive t h e c o l l e c t i v e force, w h o s e w o r k i n g s t h e y felt, i n the
f o r m o f the t h i n g that served as t h e flag o f the g r o u p . T h e r e f o r e , t h e m o s t
disparate realms f o u n d themselves m e r g e d i n t h e idea o f this force. I n o n e
sense, t h e force was f u n d a m e n t a l l y h u m a n , since i t was made o f h u m a n ideas
a n d feelings; at the same time, i t c o u l d n o t b u t appear as closely a k i n t o the
animate o r i n a n i m a t e b e i n g that gave i t o u t w a r d f o r m . T h e cause w e are cap-
t u r i n g at w o r k is n o t exclusive t o t o t e m i s m ; there is n o society i n w h i c h i t is
n o t at w o r k . N o w h e r e can a c o l l e c t i v e f e e l i n g b e c o m e consciousness o f itself
59
w i t h o u t f i x i n g u p o n a tangible object; b u t b y that v e r y fact, i t participates
i n the nature o f that object, a n d v i c e versa. T h u s , i t is social r e q u i r e m e n t s that
have fused t o g e t h e r ideas that at first glance seem d i s t i n c t , a n d t h r o u g h the
great m e n t a l effervescence that i t b r i n g s about, social life has p r o m o t e d that
60
fusion. T h i s is f u r t h e r evidence that l o g i c a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g is a f u n c t i o n o f

59
See above, p. 231.
60
Another cause accounts for a large part of this fusion: the extreme contagiousness of religious forces.
They invade every object in their reach, whatever it may be. Hence the same religious force can animate
Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 239

society, since l o g i c a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g adopts the c o n v e n t i o n s and v i e w p o i n t s

that society i m p r i n t s u p o n i t .
T h i s l o g i c is u n s e t t l i n g , t o be sure. S t i l l , w e m u s t be careful n o t t o d e -
preciate i t : H o w e v e r c r u d e i t m a y seem t o us, i t was a m o m e n t o u s c o n t r i b u -
t i o n t o the i n t e l l e c t u a l d e v e l o p m e n t o f h u m a n i t y . F o r t h r o u g h that logic, a
first e x p l a n a t i o n o f the w o r l d became possible. O f course, the m e n t a l habits
i t i m p l i e s p r e v e n t e d m a n from seeing reality as his senses show i t t o h i m ; b u t
as t h e senses s h o w i t t o h i m , r e a l i t y has t h e grave disadvantage o f b e i n g resis-
tant t o all e x p l a n a t i o n . F o r t o e x p l a i n is t o c o n n e c t things t o o t h e r things; i t
is t o establish relationships b e t w e e n things that m a k e t h e m appear t o us as
f u n c t i o n s o f o n e a n o t h e r a n d as v i b r a t i n g sympathetically i n accordance w i t h
an i n t e r n a l l a w that is r o o t e d i n t h e i r nature. Sense p e r c e p t i o n , w h i c h sees
o n l y from t h e outside, c o u l d n o t possibly cause us t o discover such r e l a t i o n -
ships a n d i n t e r n a l ties; o n l y t h e i n t e l l e c t can create the n o t i o n o f t h e m .
W h e n I l e a r n that A r e g u l a r l y precedes B , m y k n o w l e d g e is e n r i c h e d w i t h a
n e w piece o f k n o w l e d g e , b u t m y i n t e l l i g e n c e is i n n o w a y satisfied b y an o b -
servation that does n o t c a r r y a reason w i t h i t . I b e g i n t o understand o n l y i f i t
is possible f o r m e t o conceive o f B i n some w a y that makes i t appear t o m e
as n o t f o r e i g n t o A b u t as u n i t e d w i t h A i n some r e l a t i o n o f k i n s h i p . T h e
great service that r e l i g i o n s have r e n d e r e d t o t h o u g h t is t o have c o n s t r u c t e d a
first representation o f w h a t the relations o f k i n s h i p b e t w e e n things m i g h t be.
G i v e n the c o n d i t i o n s i n w h i c h i t was t r i e d , that enterprise c o u l d o b v i o u s l y
lead o n l y t o makeshift results. B u t , t h e n , are the results o f any such enterprise
ever d e f i n i t i v e , a n d m u s t i t n o t be taken u p again a n d again? F u r t h e r m o r e , i t
was less i m p o r t a n t t o succeed t h a n t o dare. W h a t was essential was n o t t o l e t
the m i n d be d o m i n a t e d b y w h a t appears t o the senses, b u t instead t o teach
the m i n d t o d o m i n a t e i t a n d t o j o i n t o g e t h e r w h a t t h e senses p u t asunder. As
s o o n as m a n became aware t h a t i n t e r n a l c o n n e c t i o n s exist b e t w e e n things,
science a n d p h i l o s o p h y became possible. R e l i g i o n m a d e a w a y f o r t h e m . I t is
because r e l i g i o n is a social t h i n g that i t c o u l d play this role. T o m a k e m e n
take c o n t r o l o f sense impressions a n d replace t h e m w i t h a n e w w a y o f i m a g -
i n i n g t h e real, a n e w k i n d o f t h o u g h t h a d t o be created: collective t h o u g h t .
I f collective t h o u g h t alone h a d the p o w e r t o achieve this, here is the reason:
C r e a t i n g a w h o l e w o r l d o f ideals, t h r o u g h w h i c h t h e w o r l d o f sensed r e a l i -
ties seemed transfigured, w o u l d r e q u i r e a h y p e r e x c i t a t i o n o f i n t e l l e c t u a l
forces that is possible o n l y i n and t h r o u g h society.

the most dissimilar things, which by that very fact find themselves closely connected and classified in the
same genus. I will return to this contagion below, while showing that it is related to the social origins of
the idea of the sacred (Bk. Ill, chap. 1, end).
240 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

H e n c e , that m e n t a l i t y is far f r o m b e i n g u n r e l a t e d t o o u r o w n . O u r o w n
l o g i c was b o r n i n that l o g i c . T h e explanations o f c o n t e m p o r a r y science are
m o r e c e r t a i n o f b e i n g objective, because t h e y are m o r e systematic and based
o n m o r e r i g o r o u s l y c o n t r o l l e d observations, b u t t h e y are n o t different i n n a -
ture f r o m those that satisfy p r i m i t i v e t h o u g h t . T o d a y as i n t h e past, t o e x p l a i n
is t o s h o w h o w a t h i n g participates i n o n e o r several o t h e r t h i n g s . I t has b e e n
said that t h e p a r t i c i p a t i o n s w h o s e existence m y t h o l o g i e s presuppose v i o l a t e
the p r i n c i p l e o f c o n t r a d i c t i o n and, o n those g r o u n d s , are a n t i t h e t i c a l t o t h e
61
participations that scientific explanations i n v o l v e . Is n o t p o s t u l a t i n g that a
m a n is a k a n g a r o o a n d t h e sun a b i r d i d e n t i f y i n g o n e t h i n g w i t h another? W e
d o n o t t h i n k any d i f f e r e n d y w h e n w e say o f heat that i t is a m o v e m e n t , a n d
o f l i g h t that i t is a v i b r a t i o n o f the ether, a n d so o n . E v e r y t i m e w e j o i n h e t -
erogeneous terms b y an i n t e r n a l tie, w e o f necessity i d e n t i f y contraries. T h e
terms w e j o i n i n this w a y are n o t , o f course, the ones the A u s t r a l i a n j o i n s . W e
choose t h e m a c c o r d i n g t o different c r i t e r i a a n d f o r different reasons, b u t t h e
p r o c e d u r e b y w h i c h the m i n d places t h e m i n t o r e l a t i o n s h i p is n o t essentially
different.
G r a n t e d , i f p r i m i t i v e t h o u g h t h a d the sort o f universal a n d a b i d i n g i n d i f -
6 2
ference t o c o n t r a d i c t i o n that has b e e n ascribed t o i t , o n this p o i n t i t w o u l d
c o n t r a s t — a n d contrast v e r y m a r k e d l y — w i t h m o d e r n t h o u g h t , w h i c h is a l -
ways careful t o r e m a i n i n t e r n a l l y consistent. B u t I d o n o t believe i t possible
t o characterize the m e n t a l i t y o f t h e l o w e r societies b y a sort o f o n e - s i d e d a n d
exclusive i n c l i n a t i o n n o t t o m a k e d i s t i n c t i o n s . I f the p r i m i t i v e puts t o g e t h e r
things that w e keep separate, inversely, h e separates o t h e r things that w e p u t
together, a n d h e actually conceives o f those d i s t i n c t i o n s as a b r u p t a n d p r o -
n o u n c e d o p p o s i t i o n s . B e t w e e n t w o beings t h a t are classified i n t w o different
63
phratries, there is n o t o n l y separation b u t also a n t a g o n i s m . F o r this reason,
the same A u s t r a l i a n w h o puts t h e sun a n d the w h i t e c o c k a t o o t o g e t h e r o p -
poses t h e b l a c k c o c k a t o o t o t h e w h i t e as t o its opposite. T h e t w o seem t o
h i m t o b e l o n g t o t w o separate genera w i t h n o t h i n g i n c o m m o n . T h e r e is an
even m o r e p r o n o u n c e d o p p o s i t i o n b e t w e e n sacred a n d profane things. T h e y
repel a n d c o n t r a d i c t o n e a n o t h e r so forcefully that t h e m i n d refuses t o t h i n k
o f t h e m at the same t i m e . T h e y e x p e l o n e a n o t h e r f r o m consciousness.
H e n c e , there is n o g u l f b e t w e e n the l o g i c o f r e l i g i o u s t h o u g h t a n d the
l o g i c o f scientific t h o u g h t . B o t h are made u p o f the same essential elements,

61
Levy-Bruhl, Les Fonctions mentales, pp. 77fF.
62
Ibid., p. 79.
63
See above, p. 146.
Origins of These Beliefs (Conclusion) 241

although these elements are u n e q u a l l y a n d differendy developed. W h a t ap-

pears above all t o t y p i f y t h e l o g i c o f religious t h o u g h t is a natural taste as m u c h
for unrestrained assimilations as f o r clashing contrasts. I t is g i v e n t o excess i n
b o t h directions. W h e n i t b r i n g s things together, i t mixes t h e m together; w h e n
it distinguishes b e t w e e n things, i t makes t h e m opposites. I t k n o w s n e i t h e r
m o d e r a t i o n n o r nuance b u t seeks the extremes. As a result, i t employs logical
mechanisms w i t h a c e r t a i n gaucheness, b u t n o n e o f t h e m are u n k n o w n t o i t .
 CHAPTER EIGHT

THE NOTION OF
SOUL*

I n the p r e c e d i n g chapters, w e have s t u d i e d the f u n d a m e n t a l principles o f

t o t e m i c r e l i g i o n . W e have f o u n d that t h e n o t i o n s o f soul, spirit, and
m y t h i c personage are absent f r o m i t . Yet a l t h o u g h t h e n o t i o n o f spiritual be-
ings is n o t f u n d a m e n t a l t o t o t e m i s m or, consequently, t o r e l i g i o n i n general,
there is n o r e l i g i o n f r o m w h i c h i t is absent—hence t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t r y i n g
t o discover h o w i t came t o be f o r m e d . T o be sure that n o t i o n is i n fact the
result o f a secondary f o r m a t i o n , I m u s t s h o w h o w i t is d e r i v e d from t h e m o r e
f u n d a m e n t a l ideas I have p r e v i o u s l y set f o r t h a n d e x p l a i n e d .
O f all the s p i r i t beings, there is o n e that m u s t c l a i m o u r a t t e n t i o n first
a n d foremost, since i t is the p r o t o t y p e from w h i c h t h e others have b e e n b u i l t ,
a n d that is t h e soul.

I
Just as there is n o k n o w n society w i t h o u t r e l i g i o n , there is n o r e l i g i o n , h o w -
ever c r u d e l y o r g a n i z e d , i n w h i c h w e d o n o t f i n d a system o f collective rep-
resentations d e a l i n g w i t h s o u l — i t s o r i g i n a n d its destiny. So far as can be
j u d g e d from the e t h n o g r a p h i c data, t h e idea o f soul seems t o b e c o n t e m p o -
raneous w i t h h u m a n i t y . I n d e e d , i t seems t o have h a d all its basic features from
the b e g i n n i n g , a n d t o such an e x t e n t that the w o r k o f the m o r e advanced r e -
l i g i o n s a n d p h i l o s o p h y has o n l y b e e n t o refine i t rather t h a n t o add a n y t h i n g
t r u l y f u n d a m e n t a l . A l l t h e A u s t r a l i a n societies a l l o w that every h u m a n b o d y
harbors an i n t e r i o r b e i n g , a l i f e - p r i n c i p l e that animates i t ; a n d that p r i n c i p l e
is the soul. T r u e , w o m e n are sometimes the e x c e p t i o n t o that general r u l e :

*The French reads la notion d'âme but could have read "la notion de l'âme'' Dürkheim treats "soul" as
both a thing and a generic substance that becomes thinglike when it becomes part of an individual. Cf.
in this chapter, "the idea of mana" and "the idea of personality."

242
 The Notion of Soul 243

T h e r e are tribes i n w h i c h t h e y are considered t o have n o such t h i n g as a

1
s o u l . I f D a w s o n is t o be b e l i e v e d o n this subject, the same is t r u e o f y o u n g
2
c h i l d r e n i n the tribes h e o b s e r v e d . B u t such cases are unusual, a n d p r o b a b l y
3
late d e v e l o p m e n t s . I n fact, the latter case seems suspect a n d c o u l d w e l l be
4
the result o f a m i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f the facts.
T o d e t e r m i n e w h a t idea t h e A u s t r a l i a n has o f t h e s o u l is n o t easy, since
his idea is vague a n d variable. B u t this s h o u l d b y n o means surprise us. I f w e
asked o u r o w n c o n t e m p o r a r i e s h o w t h e y i m a g i n e the soul, even those w h o
believe t h e m o s t f i r m l y i n its existence, t h e responses w e w o u l d get w o u l d
n o t have m u c h greater coherence a n d p r e c i s i o n . T h i s is because the idea i n
q u e s t i o n is v e r y c o m p l e x , c o n t a i n i n g a m u l t i t u d e o f p o o r l y analyzed i m p r e s -
sions elaborated over centuries w i t h o u t men's h a v i n g b e e n fully conscious o f
that e l a b o r a t i o n . H e r e , nonetheless, are t h e m o s t basic, i f often c o n t r a d i c t o r y ,
features b y w h i c h i t is d e f i n e d .
I n some cases, w e are t o l d t h a t the s o u l has the e x t e r n a l appearance o f t h e
5
b o d y . I n others, i t is i m a g i n e d as b e i n g t h e size o f a g r a i n o f sand, so small
6
that i t can pass t h r o u g h t h e narrowest crevices a n d the tiniest cracks. W e w i l l
see that i t is also t h o u g h t o f i n the f o r m o f animals. I n o t h e r w o r d s , its f o r m

'This is the case of the Gnanji; see [Sir Baldwin] Spencer and [Francis James] Gillen, Northern Tribes [of
Central Australia, London, Macmillan, 1904], pp. 170, 546; cf. a similar case, in [Robert] Brough Smyth
[The Aborigines of Victoria, Melbourne, J. Ferres, 1878], vol. II, p. 269.
2
[James] Dawson, Australian Aborigines [Melbourne, G. Robertson, 1881], p. 51.
3
Among the Gnanji, there surely was a time when women had souls, for today a large number of
women's souls still exist, but they never reincarnate themselves; and since, among this people, the soul that
animates a newborn is an old one incarnated, it follows from the fact that the souls of women are not rein-
carnated that women cannot have souls. Incidentally, we can explain that absence of reincarnation. De-
scent among the Gnanji, which was once matrilineal, now follows the paternal line. The mother does not
transmit her totem to her child. Thus the woman never has descendants who perpetuate her; she is finis
familiae suae [the end of her family. Trans], To explain that situation, there are only two possible hypothe-
ses: either women do not have souls, or the souls of women are destroyed after death. The Gnanji have
adopted thefirstof those two explanations. Certain peoples of Queensland have preferred the second (see
[Walter Edmund] Roth, [Superstition] Magic and Medicine in North Queensland Ethnography, Bulletin no. 5,
§68 [Brisbane, G. A. Vaughn, 1903]).

••"Children below four orfiveyears of age have neither soul nor future life," says Dawson. But what
Dawson translates in this way is simply the absence of funeral rites for very young children. We will see
the true meaning of this later on.
5
[James] Dawson, "Australian Aborigines," p. 51; [Langloh] Parker, [Catherine Sommerville Field
Parker], 77ie Euahlayi [Tribe] [London, A. Constable, 1905], p. 35; [Richard] Eylmann, [Die] Eingeborenen
[derKolonie SudAustralien, Berlin, D. Reumer, 1908], p. 188.
6
[Spencer and Gillen], Northern Tribes, p. 542; Schiirmann, "The Aboriginal Tribes of Port Lincoln,"
in [James Dominick] Woods [The NativeTribes of South Australia Adelaide, E. S. Wigg, 1879], p. 235.
244 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

7
is essentially unstable a n d i n d e f i n i t e ; i t changes f r o m m o m e n t t o m o m e n t to
suit circumstances a n d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e demands o f m y t h a n d r i t e . T h e sub-
stance o f w h i c h i t is m a d e is n o less undefinable. Since i t has f o r m , h o w e v e r
vague, i t is n o t i m m a t e r i a l . A n d i n fact, d u r i n g this life, i t even has physical
needs: I t eats and, inversely, can be eaten. S o m e t i m e s i t leaves the b o d y and
8
feeds o n f o r e i g n souls d u r i n g its travels. O n c e i t has b e c o m e c o m p l e t e l y
emancipated from the body, i t is p r e s u m e d t o lead a life w h o l l y similar t o the
9
o n e i t l e d o n this earth: I t d r i n k s , eats, hunts, a n d so f o r t h . W h e n i t flits
a b o u t i n tree branches, i t makes rusdings a n d cracklings that even profane
10
ears can h e a r . A t the same t i m e , i t is h e l d t o be invisible t o the o r d i n a r y p e r -
11
son. T o be sure, magicians o r o l d m e n possess t h e f a c u l t y o f seeing souls,
b u t this is because t h e y see things that escape o u r senses, b y v i r t u e o f special
powers t h e y o w e t o e i t h e r age o r special k n o w l e d g e . W h e n i t comes t o o r -
d i n a r y i n d i v i d u a l s , however, that p r i v i l e g e is enjoyed at o n l y o n e time i n
t h e i r lives: w h e n t h e y are o n t h e eve o f p r e m a t u r e death. T h a t near-
m i r a c u l o u s v i s i o n is therefore regarded as a sinister p o r t e n t . N o w , i n v i s i b i l i t y
is w i d e l y regarded as o n e a m o n g t h e signs o f spiritualness. * T h u s , the soul is
c o n c e i v e d o f as b e i n g i m m a t e r i a l , t o a c e r t a i n e x t e n t , since i t does n o t affect
t h e senses i n the w a y bodies d o ; i t has n o bones, say the tribes o f the T u l l y
1 2
River. T o r e c o n c i l e all these c o n t r a d i c t o r y traits, i t is i m a g i n e d as b e i n g
m a d e o f an i n f i n i t e l y m o r e r a r i f i e d a n d subde m a t e r i a l , as s o m e t h i n g ethe-
13 1 4
real, comparable t o shadow o r w i n d .

*Durkheim says de la spiritualité, but the English "spirituality" would mislead.

7
This is the phrase Dawson uses.
8
Strehlow [DieAranda- und Loritja-Stamme in Zentral-Australien], vol. I [Frankfurt, J. Baer, 1907], p. 15
n. 1; [Reverend Louis] Schulze, "Aborigines of the Upper Middle Finke River," RSSA, vol. XVI [1891],
p. 246. This is the theme of the vampire myth.
9
[Strehlow], Aranda, vol. I, p. 15; Schulze, "Aborigines," p. 244; Dawson, "Australian Aborigines,"
p. 51. True, souls are sometimes said to have nothing corporeal about them. According to certain accounts
collected by Eylmann (p. 188), they are said to be ohne Fleisch und Blut [without flesh and blood. Trans.].
But these radical negatives leave me skeptical. The fact that offerings are not made to the souls of the dead
in no way implies, as Roth thinks (Superstition, Magic, etc., §65), that they do not eat.
10
Roth, Superstition, Magic, §65; Northern Tribes, p. 500. Hence the soul sometimes emits odors (Roth,
§68).
"Roth, Superstition, Magic, §67; Dawson, p. 51.
12
Roth, Superstition, Magic, §65.
13
Schurmann, "Aborigines," p. 235.
"Parker, The Euahlayi, pp. 29, 35; Roth, Superstition, Magic, §65, 67, 68.
The Notion of Soul 245

T h e soul is d i s t i n c t f r o m a n d i n d e p e n d e n t o f t h e b o d y because f r o m the

b e g i n n i n g o f life, i t can leave t h e b o d y f o r s h o r t p e r i o d s . I t leaves the b o d y
1 5
d u r i n g sleep, d u r i n g a f a i n t , a n d so f o r t h . I n d e e d , i t can r e m a i n absent f o r
a t i m e w i t h o u t death's r e s u l t i n g . E v e n so, life is lessened d u r i n g those ab-
1 6
sences, a n d i n fact ends i f the soul does n o t r e t u r n h o m e . B u t i t is above all
at death that this distinctness a n d i n d e p e n d e n c e are m o s t manifest. W h e r e a s
the b o d y is n o m o r e , w i t h n o visible traces r e m a i n i n g , the soul continues t o
live, h a v i n g an a u t o n o m o u s existence i n a w o r l d apart.
B u t as real as this d u a l i t y m a y be, i t is i n n o w a y absolute. I t w o u l d be a
m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g t o conceive the b o d y as a k i n d o f l o d g i n g i n w h i c h the
soul resides b u t w i t h w h i c h i t has o n l y e x t e r n a l relations. Q u i t e the contrary,
i t is b o u n d t o the b o d y w i t h the closest o f ties; i n d e e d , i t can be separated
from t h e b o d y o n l y w i t h difficulty, a n d i n c o m p l e t e l y . W e have already seen
that i t can take at least its e x t e r n a l appearance from t h e body. T h e r e f o r e ,
w h a t e v e r h a r m s t h e o n e h a r m s the o t h e r ; every w o u n d o f the b o d y is p r o p -
1 7
agated all t h e w a y t o the s o u l . T h e soul is so i n t i m a t e l y c o n n e c t e d w i t h the
life o f t h e b o d y t h a t i t matures a n d perishes w i t h i t . T h i s is w h y t h e m a n
w h o has reached a c e r t a i n age enjoys privileges d e n i e d t o y o u n g m e n . As
he has advanced i n years, the r e l i g i o u s p r i n c i p l e t h a t is i n h i m has gained
capacity a n d p o w e r . B u t w h e n there is actual senility, w h e n the o l d m a n has
b e c o m e unable t o play a useful role i n the great r e l i g i o u s ceremonies o r i n
t h e v i t a l interests o f t h e t r i b e t h a t are at stake, he is n o l o n g e r s h o w n respect.
T h e feebleness o f his b o d y is considered t o have spread t o the s o u l . N o
l o n g e r h a v i n g the same powers, the subject is n o l o n g e r e n t i d e d t o t h e same
18
status.
T h e r e is n o t o n l y close i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e b e t w e e n t h e soul a n d the b o d y
b u t also p a r t i a l assimilation. Just as there is s o m e t h i n g o f the b o d y i n the soul,
since i t sometimes reproduces the body's f o r m , so there is s o m e t h i n g o f the
soul i n t h e body. C e r t a i n regions a n d products o f the b o d y are t h o u g h t t o
19
have a special affinity w i t h t h e soul: t h e heart, t h e breath, t h e p l a c e n t a , the

15
Roth, Superstition, Magic, §65; Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, p. 15.
16
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, p. 14 n. 1.
17
[James George] Frazer, "On Certain Burial Customs, as Illustrative of the Primitive Theory of the
Soul," in JAI, vol. XV [1886], p. 66.
18
This is the case among the Kaitish and the Unmatjera. See Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes,
p. 506, and Native Tribes, p. 512.

"Roth, Superstition, Magic, §65-68.

246 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

2 0 21 22
blood, the shadow, t h e liver, the fat o f the liver, a n d t h e k i d n e y s , and so
f o r t h . These various physical substrates are n o t m e r e l o d g i n g s for the soul;
they are the soul itself v i e w e d f r o m outside. W h e n the b l o o d flows, the soul
escapes w i t h i t . T h e s o u l is n o t i n the breath; i t is t h e breath. I t is inseparable
f r o m the b o d y p a r t i n w h i c h i t resides—hence the idea t h a t m a n has m u l t i -
ple souls. D i f f u s e d t h r o u g h o u t t h e b o d y , the s o u l became differentiated and
fragmented. I n a sense, each o r g a n has i n d i v i d u a l i z e d the b i t o f soul i t c o n -
tains, a n d each b i t o f s o u l has t h e r e b y b e c o m e a d i s t i n c t entity. T h a t o f the
heart c o u l d n o t be i d e n t i c a l w i t h that o f the breath, the shadow, o r the p l a -
centa. A l l are related, yet t h e y m u s t b e d i s t i n g u i s h e d — a n d t h e y have differ-
23
ent n a m e s .
M o r e o v e r , w h i l e t h e s o u l is m o s t l i k e l y t o be l o c a l i z e d i n c e r t a i n parts o f
t h e body, i t is n o t absent f r o m the others. T o v a r y i n g degrees, i t is diffused
t h r o u g h o u t t h e w h o l e body. F u n e r a l rites s h o w this q u i t e w e l l . O n c e t h e last
breath has b e e n exhaled a n d the s o u l p r e s u m e d t o have departed, i t w o u l d
seem that the s o u l s h o u l d m a k e i m m e d i a t e use o f t h e f r e e d o m i t has j u s t r e -
gained t o m o v e at w i l l a n d r e t u r n as q u i c k l y as possible t o its t r u e h o m e l a n d ,
w h i c h is elsewhere. A n d yet i t stays near t h e corpse, its b o n d w i t h the corpse
h a v i n g stretched b u t n o t b r o k e n . A w h o l e set o f rites is necessary t o m a k e i t
g o away o n c e a n d f o r all. B y gestures a n d expressive m o v e m e n t s , i t is i n v i t e d
24
to depart. A w a y is o p e n e d f o r i t , a n d exits are prepared so that i t can fly
25
away the m o r e easily. T h i s is d o n e because i t has n o t c o m e o u t o f t h e b o d y
i n o n e piece; i t p e r v a d e d t h e b o d y t o o c o m p l e t e l y t o be able t o leave i t all at
once. H e r e originates the c o m m o n r i t e o f funeral a n t h r o p o p h a g y : T h e flesh
o f the deceased is eaten because a sacred p r i n c i p l e is h e l d t o reside i n i t , that

20
Ibid., §68. This passage says that when there is faintingfromloss of blood, it is because the soul has
left. Cf. Parker, The Euahlayi Tribe, p. 38.
21
Parker, The Euahlayi Tribe, pp. 29, 35; Roth, Superstition, Magic, §65.
22
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, pp. 12, 14. These several passages speak of evil spirits that kill small children
and eat their souls, livers, and liver fat, or eke their souls, livers, and kidneys. The fact that the soul is
thereby placed on the same footing as varioustissuesand viscera, constituting a food of the same sort,
clearly shows its close relationship with them. Cf. Schulze, p. 246.
23
For example, among the people of the Pennefather River (Roth, Superstition, Magic, §68), there is
one name for the soul that resides in the heart (ngai), another for the one that resides in the placenta (choi),
a third for the one that mingles with the breath hvanji). Among the Euahlayi, there are three or even four
souls (Parker, The Euahlayi Tribe, p. 35).
2+
See the description of the Urpmilchima rite, among the Arunta (Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes,
pp. 503ff.).
25
Ibid., pp. 497, 508.
The Notion of Soul 247

2 6
sacred p r i n c i p l e b e i n g n o n e o t h e r t h a n the s o u l . T h e flesh is m e l t e d i n o r -
2 7
der t o u p r o o t the s o u l f o r g o o d , b y s u b j e c t i n g i t t o heat, either o f the s u n
2 8
or o f man-made f i r e . T h e s o u l flows o u t w i t h t h e l i q u i d s that result. B u t
since t h e d r i e d bones r e t a i n some p a r t o f i t still, t h e y are used as sacred o b -
2 9
jects o r as i n s t r u m e n t s o f m a g i c . I f t h e p r i n c i p l e t h e y enclose is t o be freed
3 0
completely, the bones are b r o k e n .
A m o m e n t comes w h e n the irrevocable separation has b e e n made, a n d
the freed soul takes flight. T h e s o u l is b y nature so i n t i m a t e l y c o n n e c t e d w i t h
the b o d y that this t e a r i n g away does n o t h a p p e n w i t h o u t a p r o f o u n d trans-
31
f o r m a t i o n o f its c o n d i t i o n . C o n s e q u e n d y , i t t h e n takes another n a m e . Al-
t h o u g h i t retains all the d i s t i n c t i v e traits o f the i n d i v i d u a l i t a n i m a t e d — h i s
32
h u m o r , his g o o d a n d b a d q u a l i t i e s — s t i l l i t has b e c o m e a n e w b e i n g . F r o m
that m o m e n t , its n e w existence begins.
T h e soul goes t o the l a n d o f souls. T h i s l a n d is c o n c e i v e d differendy from
t r i b e t o t r i b e , a n d sometimes different ideas are f o u n d c o e x i s t i n g i n the same
society. F o r some, that l a n d is u n d e r g r o u n d , each t o t e m h a v i n g its o w n . I t is
the place w h e r e the first ancestors, the founders o f the clan, at a c e r t a i n m o -
m e n t vanished deep i n t o the e a r t h a n d w h e r e they w e n t t o live after death.
T h u s , i n the subterranean w o r l d , there is a geographic d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the
dead c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o that o f t h e l i v i n g . T h e r e shines a p e r p e t u a l sun; there
flow rivers that never r u n dry. S u c h is the c o n c e p t i o n that Spencer a n d
3 3 34
G ü l e n a t t r i b u t e t o t h e tribes o f the center, A r u n t a , W a r r a m u n g a , and o t h -
3 5
ers. I t is shared b y t h e W o t j o b a l u k . Elsewhere, all t h e dead, w h a t e v e r t h e i r
t o t e m s , are t h o u g h t t o live t o g e t h e r i n t h e same place, w h i c h is rather

26
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 547, 548.
27
Ibid., pp. 506, 527ff.
28
Meyer, "The Encounter Bay Tribe," in Woods, p. 198.
^Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 551, 463; Native Tribes, p. 553.

•""Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 540.

3,
For example, among the Arunta and the Loritja (Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, p. 15 n. 2; vol. II, p. 77).
During life, the soul is called guruna and after death liana. The itana of Strehlow is identical to the ulthana
of Spencer and Gillen (Native Tribes, pp. 514ff.). The same is true among the Bloomfield River people
(Roth, Superstition, Magic, §66).
32
Eylmann, "Die Eingeborenen," p. 188.
"Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 524, 491, 496.
M
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 542, 508.
35
[Robert Hamilton] Mathews, "Ethnological Notes on the Aboriginal Tribes of N.S. Wales and Vic-
toria," in RSNSW, vol. XXXVIII, 1904, p. 287.
248 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

36 37
vaguely localized: b e y o n d t h e sea, o n a n i s l a n d , o r o n t h e shores o f a l a k e .
Finally, t h e dead are sometimes t h o u g h t t o g o i n t o t h e sky, b e y o n d the
clouds. " T h e r e , " says D a w s o n , "is f o u n d a m a g n i f i c e n t c o u n t r y , a b o u n d i n g
i n kangaroos a n d i n game o f every k i n d , a n d w h e r e a j o y f u l life is l e d . T h e
38
souls m e e t there a n d recognize o n e a n o t h e r . " C e r t a i n features i n c l u d e d i n
this tableau w e r e p r o b a b l y taken f r o m t h e paradise o f C h r i s t i a n missionar-
39
ies. H o w e v e r t h e idea that t h e s o u k , o r at least c e r t a i n souls, g o t o the sky
after death w o u l d seem t o be i n d i g e n o u s , f o r i t recurs i n o t h e r parts o f the
4 0
continent.
I n general, a l l t h e souls have t h e same fate a n d lead t h e same life. H o w -
ever, sometimes a different t r e a t m e n t is a p p l i e d t o t h e m a c c o r d i n g t o t h e i r
c o n d u c t o n earth, a n d o n e can see m a k i n g its appearance s o m e t h i n g that ap-
proximates a first sketch o f those d i s t i n c t a n d even opposite compartments
b e t w e e n w h i c h t h e w o r l d o f t h e b e y o n d w i l l later be d i v i d e d . T h e souls o f
those w h o excelled i n life as h u n t e r s , fighters, dancers, a n d so f o r t h d o n o t
4 1
m e l t i n t o t h e c r o w d o f t h e others. A special place is assigned t o t h e m ,
42
sometimes t h e s k y . I n d e e d , S t r e h l o w reports that, a c c o r d i n g t o o n e m y t h ,
43
t h e souls o f t h e m e a n are d e v o u r e d b y dreadful spirits a n d a n n i h i l a t e d .
44
Nonetheless, these c o n c e p t i o n s are still q u i t e vague i n A u s t r a l i a ; t h e y b e g i n
t o acquire a m o d i c u m o f d e f i n i t i o n a n d c l a r i t y o n l y i n m o r e advanced s o c i -
4 5
eties, such as those o f A m e r i c a .

36
Strehlow, vol. I, pp. 15ff. Thus, according to Strehlow, among the Arunta the dead live on an is-
land—but, according to Spencer and Gillen, in an underground place. It is probable that the two myths
coexist and are not the only ones. We will see that there is even a third. On that conception of the island
of the dead, cf. Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 498; C. W. Schiirmann, "Aboriginal Tribes of Port Lincoln," in
Woods, p. 235; Eylmann, p. 189.
37
Schultze, "Aborigines of. . . Finke River," p. 244.
38
Dawson [The Australian Aborigines], p. 51.
39
Among these same tribes, there are obvious traces of a more ancient myth, according to which the
souls lived in an underground place (ibid.).
*Taplin, "The Narrinyeri" [in James Dominick Woods, The Native Tribes of South Australia, Adelaide,
E. S. Wigg, 1879], pp. 18-19; Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 473; Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, p. 16.
41
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 498.
42
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, p. 16; Eylmann, "Die Eingeborenen," p. 189; Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 473.
43
These are the spirits of the ancestors of a special clan, the Venom Pouch clan (Gifidrusenmanner).
"Sometimes the missionaries' influence is obvious. Dawson tells us of an authentic hell opposed to
the paradise. He himself tends to regard this idea as a European import.
45
See Dorsey, "Siouan Cults," in Xlth Rep., pp. 419—420, 422, 485; cf. Marillier, La Survivance de l'âme
et l'idée de justice chez les peuples non civilisés, Rapport de l'Ecole des Hautes Etudes, 1893.
The Notion of Soul 249

II
Such, i n t h e i r m o s t e l e m e n t a r y f o r m and s t r i p p e d d o w n t o t h e i r m o s t basic
traits, are the beliefs relative t o t h e nature o f the soul a n d its destiny. W e must
n o w t r y t o a c c o u n t f o r t h e m . W h a t is i t that c o u l d have l e d m a n t o t h i n k that
there w e r e t w o beings i n h i m , o n e h a v i n g characteristics as special as those
j u s t enumerated? T o answer this q u e s t i o n , let us b e g i n b y t r y i n g t o find o u t
w h a t o r i g i n the p r i m i t i v e ascribes t o the spirit p r i n c i p l e that he t h i n k s he
feels w i t h i n h i m s e l f . I f p r o p e r l y analyzed, his o w n idea w i l l set us o n t h e road
to the answer.
F o l l o w i n g t h e m e t h o d I set o u t t o use, I w i l l study the ideas i n q u e s t i o n
i n a g r o u p o f societies w h e r e t h e y have b e e n observed w i t h e x c e p t i o n a l p r e -
cision: t h e tribes o f central Australia. T h e r e f o r e , a l t h o u g h i t is b r o a d , the area
o f o u r o b s e r v a t i o n w i l l be l i m i t e d . S t i l l , there is reason t o believe that the
same ideas i n various f o r m s are o r have b e e n widespread, even outside A u s -
tralia. F u r t h e r m o r e , a n d above a l l , t h e idea o f soul is n o t d i s t i n c d y different
i n these central tribes t h a n i n t h e o t h e r A u s t r a l i a n societies, b u t has the same
basic features e v e r y w h e r e . Since the same effect always has the same cause,
there are g r o u n d s f o r t h i n k i n g that this idea, w h i c h is the same e v e r y w h e r e ,
does n o t have different causes i n different places. So the o r i g i n that the study
o f the tribes specifically i n q u e s t i o n w i l l lead us t o a t t r i b u t e t o i t s h o u l d be
regarded as t r u e o f t h e others as w e l l . T h e s e tribes w i l l p r o v i d e the occasion
to m a k e a sort o f e x p e r i m e n t , the results o f w h i c h , l i k e those o f any w e l l -
made e x p e r i m e n t , w i l l be generalizable. T h e h o m o g e n e i t y o f A u s t r a l i a n c i v -
d i z a t i o n w o u l d suffice i n itself t o w a r r a n t this g e n e r a l i z a t i o n , b u t I w i l l take
the p r e c a u t i o n o f testing i t against facts taken f r o m a m o n g o t h e r peoples, i n
b o t h Australia and A m e r i c a .
Since the ideas that are t o p r o v i d e the basis o f o u r d e m o n s t r a t i o n have
b e e n r e p o r t e d d i f f e r e n d y b y Spencer a n d G i l l e n t h a n b y Strehlow, I w i l l set
f o r t h these t w o versions, o n e after t h e other. P r o p e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n w i l l s h o w
that t h e y differ m o r e i n f o r m t h a n i n substance a n d i n t h e e n d have t h e same
sociological i m p o r t .
A c c o r d i n g t o Spencer a n d G i l l e n , the souls that c o m e i n each g e n e r a t i o n
to animate t h e bodies o f t h e n e w b o r n d o n o t result from special a n d o r i g i n a l
creations. A l l these tribes w o u l d agree that there is a finite stock o f souls that
are r e i n c a r n a t e d p e r i o d i c a l l y , the n u m b e r o f w h i c h c a n n o t be increased b y
4 6
even a single o n e . W h e n an i n d i v i d u a l dies, his s o u l leaves the b o d y i n

"They can temporarily duplicate themselves, as we will see in the next chapter, but these doubles do
not add even one to the number of souls capable of being reincarnated.
250 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

w h i c h i t resided and, o n c e the m o u r n i n g is over, goes t o the l a n d o f souls.

A f t e r a c e r t a i n p e r i o d , t h e s o u l comes b a c k t o reincarnate itself, and i t is these
reincarnations that b r i n g a b o u t c o n c e p t i o n s a n d b i r t h s . T h e s e fundamental
souls are the ones that a n i m a t e d the f o u n d i n g ancestors o f t h e clan at the v e r y
b e g i n n i n g o f t h i n g s . I n a c e r t a i n e p o c h b e y o n d w h i c h the i m a g i n a t i o n does
n o t go, a n d w h i c h is considered t h e v e r y b e g i n n i n g o f t i m e , beings existed
that w e r e descended f r o m n o n e . F o r this reason, t h e A r u n t a calls these the Al-
47
tjirangamitjina, t h e uncreated o n e s — t h e ones that, f r o m all eternity, are. A c -
49
c o r d i n g t o Spencer a n d G i l l e n , the A r u n t a gives the n a m e Alcheringa t o the
p e r i o d i n w h i c h these m y t h i c beings are t h o u g h t t o have l i v e d . O r g a n i z e d i n
t o t e m i c clans l i k e the m e n o f today, t h e y spent t h e i r time traveling, i n the
course o f w h i c h t h e y p e r f o r m e d all k i n d s o f p r o d i g i o u s deeds, w h i c h are rec-
o l l e c t e d i n m y t h s . B u t a t i m e came w h e n that terrestrial life ended. Sepa-
rately o r i n groups, t h e y vanished i n t o t h e g r o u n d . T h e i r bodies changed
i n t o trees o r rocks, still seen i n the places w h e r e t h e y are t h o u g h t t o have dis-
appeared. * B u t t h e i r souls endure; t h e y are i m m o r t a l . T h e y even c o n t i n u e to
frequent t h e same places w h e r e the existence o f t h e i r first hosts came t o an
e n d . Because o f the m e m o r i e s attached t o t h e m , these places t o o have a q u a l -
i t y o f sacredness; t o be f o u n d there are t h e oknanikilla, those sanctuaries i n
w h i c h the churingas o f t h e c l a n are k e p t a n d w h i c h are l i k e centers f o r the
various t o t e m i c cults. W h e n o n e o f t h e souls that w a n d e r a b o u t one o f these
sanctuaries enters t h e b o d y o f a w o m a n , c o n c e p t i o n results and later a
4 9
birth. T h u s each i n d i v i d u a l is considered a n e w avatar o f a d e f i n i t e ances-
tor. T h e i n d i v i d u a l is this v e r y ancestor, r e b o r n i n a n e w b o d y a n d w i t h n e w
features. B u t w h o w e r e those ancestors?
First, t h e y w e r e e n d o w e d w i t h i n f i n i t e l y greater capacities t h a n those
possessed b y the m e n o f today, i n c l u d i n g the m o s t respected o l d m e n a n d the
m o s t r e n o w n e d magicians. V i r t u e s that m a y be called m i r a c u l o u s are a t t r i b -
u t e d t o t h e m : " T h e y c o u l d travel o n t h e g r o u n d , u n d e r the g r o u n d , a n d i n
the air; b y o p e n i n g a v e i n , each o f t h e m c o u l d f l o o d w h o l e regions or, i n -

*This sentence is absent from Swain's translation.

47
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, p. 2.
^Native Tribes, p. 73 n. 1.

"On that body of ideas, see Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes, pp. 119, 123-127, 387tT.; Northern Tribes,
pp. 145-174. Among the Gnanji, conception does not necessarily occur near the oknanikilla. But they be-
lieve that each couple is accompanied on its peregrinations about the continent by a swarm of souls from
the husbands totem. When the occasion comes, one of these souls goes into the body of the woman and
impregnates her, wherever she may be (Northern Tribes, p. 169).
The Notion of Soul 251

versely, cause n e w lands t o emerge; i n a w a l l o f rocks, t h e y w o u l d cause a lake

t o appear, o r o p e n a gorge as a passage-way; w h e r e t h e y p l a n t e d t h e i r n u r -
5 0
tunja, rocks o r trees came o u t o f the g r o u n d . " I t is t h e y w h o gave the l a n d
its present f o r m a n d w h o created all sorts o f beings, m e n and animals. T h e y
are almost gods. H e n c e t h e i r souls also have a g o d l i k e quality. A n d since the
souls o f m e n are these ancestral souls reincarnated i n h u m a n bodies, the souls
themselves are sacred beings.
Second, these ancestors w e r e n o t m e n i n t h e t r u e sense o f t h e w o r d , b u t
animals o r plants, o r else m i x e d beings i n w h i c h t h e a n i m a l o r p l a n t e l e m e n t
p r e d o m i n a t e d . " T h e ancestors w h o l i v e d i n those legendary times," say
Spencer a n d G i l l e n , " w e r e , i n t h e o p i n i o n o f t h e natives, so closely allied
w i t h the animals a n d plants w h o s e names t h e y b o r e that an A l c h e r i n g a p e r -
sonage w h o belongs t o the K a n g a r o o t o t e m , f o r e x a m p l e , is o f t e n p o r t r a y e d
i n the m y t h s as a m a n - k a n g a r o o o r a k a n g a r o o - m a n . Its h u m a n personality is
often absorbed b y that o f the p l a n t o r a n i m a l from w h i c h i t is t h o u g h t t o be
51
descended." T h e i r souls, w h i c h still endure, are necessarily o f t h e same n a -
ture. T h e h u m a n a n d a n i m a l elements are j o i n e d inside t h e m , w i t h t h e a n i -
m a l h a v i n g a c e r t a i n t e n d e n c y t o p r e d o m i n a t e . So t h e y are made o f t h e same
substance as t h e t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e , f o r w e k n o w that the d e f i n i n g character-
istic o f t h e t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e is that i t possesses this d u a l aspect, synthesizing
and a m a l g a m a t i n g these t w o k i n g d o m s w i t h i n itself.
Since n o o t h e r souls b u t these exist, w e a r r i v e at the c o n c l u s i o n that, i n
general t e r m s , the s o u l is n o n e o t h e r t h a n t h e t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e i n c a r n a t e d
i n each i n d i v i d u a l . N o t h i n g a b o u t this d e r i v a t i o n s h o u l d surprise us. W e a l -
ready k n o w that this p r i n c i p l e is i m m a n e n t i n each m e m b e r o f the clan, a n d
that b y p e r m e a t i n g i n d i v i d u a l s , i t i n e v i t a b l y becomes i n d i v i d u a l i z e d . Since
consciousnesses ( o f w h i c h i t t h e r e b y becomes an i n t e g r a l e l e m e n t ) differ
f r o m o n e another, t h e p r i n c i p l e becomes differentiated i n t h e i r image. Since
each consciousness has its o w n f o r m , the s o u l i n each takes a d i s t i n c t f o r m .
I n itself, i t u n d o u b t e d l y remains a force e x t e r n a l t o a n d f o r e i g n t o the m a n ,
b u t t h e p o r t i o n o f i t t h a t each is t h o u g h t t o possess c a n n o t help b u t develop
close affinities w i t h t h e i n d i v i d u a l subject i n w h i c h i t resides. T h e s o u l par-
ticipates i n the nature o f that subject, b e c o m i n g i n some measure the sub-
ject's o w n p r o p e r t y . I n this way, i t comes t o have t w o c o n t r a d i c t o r y features,
b u t t h e i r coexistence is a m o n g the d i s t i n g u i s h i n g traits o f the idea o f soul.
Today, as at o t h e r times, t h e s o u l is that w h i c h is best a n d m o s t p r o f o u n d i n

50
[Spencer and Gillen], NativeTribes, pp. 512-513; cf. chaps. X andXI.
51
Ibid.,p. 119.
252 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

us, o n the o n e h a n d , a n d the e m i n e n t p a r t o f o u r b e i n g ; o n the other, i t is a

t e m p o r a r y guest that has c o m e t o us f r o m outside, t h a t lives a life inside us
that is d i s t i n c t from the body's, a n d that m u s t o n e day regain its c o m p l e t e i n -
dependence. I n short, j u s t as society exists o n l y t h r o u g h i n d i v i d u a l s , the
t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e lives o n l y i n a n d t h r o u g h t h e i n d i v i d u a l consciousnesses
w h o s e c o m i n g t o g e t h e r f o r m s t h e clan. I f t h e y d i d n o t feel the t o t e m i c p r i n -
ciple w i t h i n t h e m , i t w o u l d n o t be; i t is t h e y w h o p u t i t i n t o things. A n d so
i t must s u b d i v i d e a n d fragment a m o n g i n d i v i d u a l s . E a c h o f these fragments
is a soul.
A m y t h that is f o u n d i n a rather large n u m b e r o f societies o f t h e center
(and that, b y t h e way, is b u t a special f o r m o f the p r e c e d i n g ) shows even b e t -
ter that the r a w m a t e r i a l from w h i c h the idea o f s o u l is m a d e is o f this k i n d .
I n these tribes, t r a d i t i o n places at t h e o r i g i n o f each clan n o t several ances-
5 2 5 3
tors b u t o n l y t w o , o r even o n l y o n e . So l o n g as i t r e m a i n e d alone, this s i n -
gle b e i n g c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n i t s e l f t h e w h o l e t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e , f o r at that
m o m e n t there was as yet n o t h i n g t o w h i c h that p r i n c i p l e c o u l d have been
passed o n . A c c o r d i n g t o t h e same t r a d i t i o n , all the h u m a n souls that exist,
b o t h those n o w a n i m a t i n g the bodies o f m e n a n d those n o w unused b u t i n
reserve f o r the future, issued f r o m that o n e personage and are made f r o m the
same substance. I n m o v i n g o n t h e surface o f the earth, i n s t i r r i n g a n d shak-
i n g itself, i t b r o u g h t t h e m o u t o f its b o d y a n d s o w e d t h e m i n the various
places i t is said t o have traversed. Is this n o t t o say, symbolically, that these are
p o r t i o n s o f the t o t e m i c deity?
S u c h a c o n c l u s i o n , however, presupposes that t h e tribes discussed accept
the d o c t r i n e o f r e i n c a r n a t i o n . Yet, a c c o r d i n g t o Strehlow, that d o c t r i n e is u n -
k n o w n a m o n g the A r u n t a — t h a t is, t h e society that Spencer a n d G i l l e n s t u d -
i e d longest a n d best. I f i n this case these t w o observers w e r e so mistaken, the
w h o l e o f t h e i r study w o u l d have t o b e considered suspect, so i t is i m p o r t a n t
t o d e t e r m i n e t h e real scope o f this divergence.
O n c e the rites o f m o u r n i n g free i t from t h e b o d y f o r g o o d , the s o u l is
n o t reincarnated, a c c o r d i n g t o Strehlow. I t goes t o the island o f t h e dead,
w h e r e i t spends its days sleeping a n d its nights d a n c i n g , u n t i l i t rains o n earth.
I t returns at that m o m e n t t o the m i l i e u o f t h e l i v i n g a n d plays t h e role o f p r o -
tective genie f o r y o u n g sons or, i n t h e absence o f t h e sons, a m o n g the g r a n d -
sons left b e h i n d ; i t enters t h e i r bodies a n d assists t h e i r g r o w t h . So i t remains

52
Among the Kalish (Northern Tribes, pp. 154), and among the Urabunna (Northern Tribes, p. 146).
"This is the case among the Warramunga and related tribes, Walpari, Wulmala, Worgaia, Tjingilli
(Northern Tribes, p. 161), and also among the Umbaia and the Gnanji (Northern Tribes, p. 170).
The Notion of Soul 253

i n the m i d s t o f its f o r m e r f a m i l y f o r a year o r t w o , t h e n returns t o the l a n d o f

souls. A f t e r a c e r t a i n p e r i o d , i t leaves yet again t o m a k e a n e w s o j o u r n o n
e a r t h — m o r e o v e r , its last. T h e t i m e comes w h e n i t m u s t again travel the road
t o the island o f t h e dead, this t i m e i r r e v o c a b l y ; a n d there, after various i n c i -
dents that n e e d n o t b e r e p o r t e d i n detail, a s t o r m occurs d u r i n g w h i c h i t is
54
struck b y l i g h t n i n g . Its career is finally o v e r .
T h u s , i t c a n n o t reincarnate itself, a n d thus, c o n c e p t i o n s a n d b i r t h s are
n o t d u e t o t h e r e i n c a r n a t i o n o f souls that p e r i o d i c a l l y b e g i n n e w existences
i n n e w bodies. T o be sure, Strehlow, l i k e Spencer a n d G i l l e n , declares that,
for the A r u n t a , sexual intercourse is b y n o means t h e sufficient c o n d i t i o n o f
55
procreation, w h i c h instead is t h e o u t c o m e o f m y s t i c o p e r a t i o n s — d i f f e r e n t
operations, however, f r o m those Spencer a n d G i l l e n made k n o w n t o us. I t
comes a b o u t i n o n e o f t h e t w o f o l l o w i n g ways.
56
E v e r y w h e r e the A l c h e r i n g a a n c e s t o r is t h o u g h t t o have s u n k i n t o the
g r o u n d , there is a r o c k o r a tree representing t h e body. A c c o r d i n g t o Spencer
5 7
and G i l l e n , the tree o r r o c k that has this m y s t i c r e l a t i o n w i t h the departed
5S
heroes is called nanja and, a c c o r d i n g t o Strehlow, ngarra. Sometimes i t is a
w a t e r h o l e that is said t o have b e e n f o r m e d i n this way. O n each o f these trees
a n d rocks, a n d i n each o f these w a t e r holes, live t h e e m b r y o s o f babies, called
59
ratapa, w h i c h b e l o n g t o the v e r y same t o t e m as the c o r r e s p o n d i n g ancestor.
F o r e x a m p l e , o n a g u m tree that represents an ancestor o f t h e K a n g a r o o clan,
there are ratapas that are all o f the K a n g a r o o t o t e m . I f a w o m a n b e l o n g i n g t o
the m a r r i a g e class t o w h i c h m o t h e r s o f these ratapas m u s t o r d i n a r i l y b e l o n g

54
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, pp. 15-16. For the Lorirja, see Strehlow, [Aranda], vol. II, p. 7.
55
Strehlow goes so far as to say that sexual relations are not even considered a necessary condition, a
sort of preparation for conception (vol. II, p. 52 n. 7). It is true that he adds, a few lines further on, that
the old men know perfecdy well the relationship between physical intercourse and procreation—and that,
so far as animals are concerned, even children know. This is bound to dilute somewhat the import of the
first statement.
56
I generally use the terminology of Spencer and Gillen, rather than that of Strehlow, because it has
been sanctioned by long usage.
^Native Tribes, pp. 124, 513.
58
[Strehlow, Aranda], vol. I, p. 5. According to Strehlow, ngarra means "eternal." Among the Loritja,
only rocks have this function.
^Strehlow translates it as Kinderkeime ("seeds of children"). However, Spencer and Gillen are far from
having ignored the myth of the ratapa and the customs connected to them. They speak of it explicidy in
Native Tribes, pp. 366ff. and 552. They note the existence of rocks called Erathipa in various parts of the
Arunta territory, from which emanate "spirit children," souls of children, that enter into the bodies of
women and impregnate them. According to Spencer and Gillen, Erathipa means "child," although they
go on to say that this word is rarely used in this sense in everyday conversation (ibid., p. 338).
254 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

6 0
s h o u l d h a p p e n t o pass b y , o n e o f t h e m w i l l be able t o enter her t h r o u g h the
hip. T h e w o m a n learns o f this possession t h r o u g h the characteristic pains that
are the first signs o f pregnancy. T h e c h i l d c o n c e i v e d i n this w a y w i l l n a t u r a l l y
be f r o m the same ancestor o n w h o s e mystical b o d y i t resided before i n c a r -
61
nating itself.
I n o t h e r cases, the p r o c e d u r e used is s l i g h d y different, w i t h the ancestor
a c t i n g i n person. A t a g i v e n m o m e n t , the ancestor leaves its u n d e r g r o u n d r e -
treat a n d t h r o w s at t h e w o m a n a small c h u r i n g a o f a special shape, called a na-
62
matuna. T h e c h u r i n g a enters the b o d y o f the w o m a n a n d there takes
63
h u m a n f o r m , w h i l e the ancestor disappears again i n t o the e a r t h .
These t w o m o d e s o f c o n c e p t i o n are h e l d t o be e q u a l l y c o m m o n . T h e
shape o f the child's face reveals t h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h i t was c o n c e i v e d . A c -
c o r d i n g t o the w i d t h o r narrowness o f the face, c o n c e p t i o n is said t o be due
to the i n c a r n a t i o n o f a ratapa o r a namatuna. S t r e h l o w also notes a t h i r d
m e t h o d o f i m p r e g n a t i o n , i n a d d i t i o n t o these t w o , b u t o n e that is said t o be
m u c h rarer. A f t e r its n a m a t u n a has entered t h e b o d y o f t h e w o m a n , the a n -
cestor itself enters a n d v o l u n t a r i l y submits t o a n e w b i r t h . I n this case, c o n -
c e p t i o n w o u l d result f r o m a t r u e r e i n c a r n a t i o n o f the ancestor. B u t this case
is h i g h l y unusual, and f u r t h e r m o r e , w h e n the m a n so c o n c e i v e d dies, t h e a n -
cestral soul that a n i m a t e d h i m departs, as d o o r d i n a r y souls, f o r the island o f
t h e dead, w h e r e i t i s finally destroyed after the usual p e r i o d . I t does n o t u n -
64
dergo n e w r e i n c a r n a t i o n s .
65
S u c h is Strehlow's v e r s i o n . I n his v i e w , i t is radically o p p o s e d t o that o f
Spencer a n d G i l l e n . I n reality, however, i t differs o n l y i n t h e literal detail o f
the formulas a n d symbols, and, variations o f f o r m aside, t h e m y t h i c a l t h e m e
is the same i n b o t h cases.
I n the first place, all these observers agree i n v i e w i n g every c o n c e p t i o n as
the result o f an i n c a r n a t i o n . A c c o r d i n g t o Strehlow, w h a t is incarnated is n o t a

"The Arunta are divided sometimes into four, sometimes into eight marriage classes. The class of a
child is determined by that of its father; inversely, the father's can be deduced from the child's. (See
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 70ff.; Strehlow [Aranda], vol. I, pp. 6ff.) We must stillfindout how
the ratapa acquires a definite class; I will return to this point.
61
Strehlow [Aranda], vol. II, p. 52. Sometimes, albeit seldom, conflicts do arise over which is the
child's totem. Strehlow cites a case (p. 53).
62
This is the same word as namatwinna, which is found in Spencer and Gillen (Native Tribes, p. 541).
"Strehlow [Aranda], vol. II, p. 53.
64
Ibid., vol. II, p. 56.
65
Mathews ascribes a similar theory of conception to the Tjingilli (also known as Chingalee). [Possi-
bly, Proceedings and Transactions of the Queensland Branch of the Royal Geographic Society of Australasia, Bris-
bane], vol. XXII (1907), pp. 75—76. [This source remains obscure to me. Trans.]
The Notion of Soul 255

soul b u t a ratapa o r a namatuna. W h a t , t h e n , is a ratapa? I t is, says Strehlow, a

complete e m b r y o , made o f b o t h a soul a n d a body, b u t the soul is always c o n -
ceived o f i n physical forms. Since i t sleeps, dances, hunts, eats, and so f o r t h , i t
has a corporeal element as w e l l . Inversely, the ratapa is invisible t o o r d i n a r y
6 6
m e n ; n o o n e sees i t e n t e r i n g the woman's b o d y ; i t is made o f material quite
comparable t o that o f the soul. I n this respect, therefore, i t does n o t seem pos-
sible t o differentiate clearly b e t w e e n the t w o . These are, i n sum, m y t h i c a l b e -
ings that are conceived m o r e o r less o n the same m o d e l . Schulze calls t h e m
67
child-souls. M o r e o v e r , l i k e the soul, the ratapa has the closest relations w i t h
the ancestor o f w h i c h the sacred tree o r r o c k is a materialized f o r m . I t is o f the
68
same t o t e m , the same phratry, and the same marriage class as that ancestor. Its
place i n the social organization o f the t r i b e is exacdy the one the ancestor is
69
said t o have h e l d o n c e u p o n a t i m e . I t has the same n a m e . T h i s is p r o o f that
these t w o personalities are v e r y closely related t o o n e another.
T h e r e is m o r e : T h i s k i n s h i p goes as far as c o m p l e t e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . I t is
actually o n the m y s t i c a l b o d y o f t h e ancestor that the ratapa t o o k f o r m ; i t
comes from this b o d y a n d is l i k e a b i t t h a t detached itself. I n s u m , therefore,
w h a t enters t h e w o m b o f the m o t h e r a n d becomes the c h i l d is p a r t o f the a n -
cestor. A n d b y this r o u t e , w e c o m e back t o the idea o f Spencer a n d G i l l e n :
B i r t h is due t o the i n c a r n a t i o n o f an ancestral personage. O f course, w h a t is
i n c a r n a t e d is n o t t h e w h o l e personage b u t o n l y an e m a n a t i o n o f i t . H o w e v e r ,
this difference is o f e n t i r e l y secondary interest, f o r this reason: W h e n a sacred
b e i n g divides a n d replicates itself, i t is f o u n d again, a n d w i t h all its f u n d a -
m e n t a l traits, i n each o f the fragments i n t o w h i c h i t has b e e n d i v i d e d . B a s i -
cally, t h e n , t h e A l c h e r i n g a ancestor is w h o l l y w i t h i n t h e element o f itself that
70
becomes a r a t a p a .

66
Sometimes the ancestor who is thought to have thrown the namatuna shows itself to the woman in
the form of an animal or a man. This is further proof of the affinity the ancestral soul has for physical form.
67
Schulze, "Aborigines of. . . Finke River," p. 237.
68
This arisesfromthe fact that the ratapa can only incarnate itself in the body of a woman who be-
longs to the same marriage class as the mother of the mythical ancestor. Thus I do not understand how
Strehlow could say (Aranda, vol. I, p. 42, Anmerkung) that, except in this case, the myths do not assign the
Alcheringa ancestors to definite marriage classes. His own theory of conception presupposes just the op-
posite (cf. II, pp. 53ff.).
69
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, p. 58.
70
The difference between the two versions narrows even more and diminishes almost to nothing if we
notice that when Spencer and Gillen tell us that the ancestral soul is incarnated in the body of the woman,
their mode of expression must not be taken literally. It is not the whole soul that comes to impregnate the
mother but only an emanation of that soul. Indeed, on their own avowal, a soul equal and even superior
in power to the one that is incarnated continues to reside in the nanja tree or rock (see Native Tribes,
p. 514). I will have occasion to return to this point (cf. below, p. 277).
256 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

T h e second m o d e o f c o n c e p t i o n that S t r e h l o w distinguishes has the

same m e a n i n g . I n fact, the c h u r i n g a , a n d especially the p a r t i c u l a r c h u r i n g a
that is called the namatuna, is considered a n avatar o f t h e ancestor: I t is t h e
71
ancestor's b o d y , a c c o r d i n g t o S t r e h l o w , j u s t as t h e nanja tree is. I n o t h e r
w o r d s , t h e p e r s o n a l i t y o f the ancestor, its c h u r i n g a , a n d its nanja tree are sa-
c r e d things, w h i c h e l i c i t the same feelings, a n d t o w h i c h t h e same religious
value is ascribed. T h e r e f o r e , t h e y change i n t o o n e a n o t h e r : A sacred tree o r
r o c k came o u t o f the g r o u n d i n t h e place w h e r e the ancestor lost a c h u r i n g a ,
7 2
j u s t as i n t h e places w h e r e he h i m s e l f sank i n t o t h e g r o u n d . T h e r e is a
m y t h i c a l equivalence b e t w e e n an A l c h e r i n g a personage a n d his c h u r i n g a ,
t h e n ; so w h e n the personage t h r o w s a n a m a t u n a i n t o a w o m a n ' s body, i t is as
i f that v e r y personage entered her. I n fact, w e have seen t h a t i t sometimes e n -
ters i n person, f o l l o w i n g the namatuna; and, a c c o r d i n g t o o t h e r accounts, t h e
7 3
personage enters before the n a m a t u n a , as i f o p e n i n g a w a y f o r i t . T h e fact
that these themes coexist i n the same m y t h shows d e f i n i t i v e l y that the o n e is
o n l y a d u p l i c a t e o f t h e other.
F u r t h e r m o r e , n o m a t t e r h o w c o n c e p t i o n occurs, there is n o d o u b t that
each i n d i v i d u a l is b o u n d t o a d e f i n i t e A l c h e r i n g a ancestor b y e x t r e m e l y close
ties. First, each m a n has his r e c o g n i z e d ancestor; t w o persons c a n n o t s i m u l -
taneously have t h e same one. I n o t h e r w o r d s , an A l c h e r i n g a b e i n g never has
7 4
m o r e t h a n o n e representative a m o n g the l i v i n g . W h a t is m o r e , the o n e is
o n l y an aspect o f t h e other. I n fact, as w e already k n o w , t h e c h u r i n g a left b y
t h e ancestor expresses his personality. I f w e a d o p t t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n that
S t r e h l o w reports, w h i c h is perhaps t h e m o r e satisfactory, w e w i l l say that i t is
the ancestor's body. B u t this same c h u r i n g a is related i n the same w a y t o the
i n d i v i d u a l w h o is t h o u g h t t o have b e e n c o n c e i v e d u n d e r t h e i n f l u e n c e o f
the ancestor, that is, the o n e w h o is the f r u i t o f his mystical labors. W h e n
the y o u n g n e o p h y t e is b r o u g h t i n t o t h e sanctuary o f t h e clan, he is s h o w n the
c h u r i n g a o f his ancestor w i t h t h e w o r d s : " Y o u are this b o d y ; y o u are the

''Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, pp. 76, 81. According to Spencer and Gillen, the churinga is not the body
of the ancestor but the object in which the ancestors soul resides. These two mythical interpretations are
basically identical, and it is easy to see how one was able to pass over into the other: The body is the place
where the soul resides.
72
Ibid., vol. I, p. 4.
73
Ibid., vol. I, pp. 53—54. In these accounts, the ancestor begins by entering the womb of the woman,
bringing on the characteristic discomforts of pregnancy. Then he exits and only afterward leaves the na-
matuna.
74
Ibid., vol. II, p. 76.
The Notion of Soul 257

75
same t h i n g as t h i s . " T h u s , i n Strehlow's phrase, the c h u r i n g a is " t h e c o m -
76
m o n b o d y o f the i n d i v i d u a l a n d his ancestor." F r o m o n e p o i n t o f v i e w , at
least, t h e i r t w o personalities have t o be m e r g e d i n o r d e r f o r t h e m t o have the
same body. S t r e h l o w e x p l i c i t l y recognizes this. H e says: " B y the T j u r u n g a
77
( c h u r i n g a ) , the i n d i v i d u a l is j o i n e d w i t h his personal ancestor."
T o s u m m a r i z e , f o r S t r e h l o w as w e l l as f o r Spencer a n d G i l l e n , there is a
religious a n d mystical p r i n c i p l e i n each n e w b o r n that emanates f r o m an
A l c h e r i n g a ancestor. I t is this p r i n c i p l e that f o r m s t h e essence o f each i n d i -
v i d u a l . So this p r i n c i p l e is the i n d i v i d u a l ' s soul; or, i n any case, t h e soul is
made o f the same m a t t e r and substance. I have r e l i e d o n this f u n d a m e n t a l fact
o n l y t o d e t e r m i n e t h e nature a n d o r i g i n o f the idea o f soul. T h e different
m e t a p h o r s b y means o f w h i c h this c o u l d have b e e n expressed are o f e n t i r e l y
7 8
secondary interest t o m e .
Far from c o n t r a d i c t i n g t h e data o n w h i c h m y thesis rests, the recent o b -
servations o f S t r e h l o w b r i n g us n e w evidence that c o n f i r m s i t . M y reasoning
consisted o f i n f e r r i n g the t o t e m i c nature o f the h u m a n soul from the t o t e m i c
nature o f the ancestral soul, o f w h i c h t h e h u m a n o n e is an e m a n a t i o n and a
k i n d o f replica. C e r t a i n o f the n e w facts that w e o w e t o S t r e h l o w d e m o n -
strate this characteristic o f b o t h , even m o r e u n e q u i v o c a l l y than those r e l i e d
u p o n u n t i l n o w . First, l i k e Spencer a n d G i l l e n , S t r e h l o w insists o n " t h e i n t i -
m a t e relations that j o i n each ancestor t o an a n i m a l , a p l a n t o r a n o t h e r natural
object." C e r t a i n o f these A l t j i r a n g a m i t j i n a (these are the A l c h e r i n g a o f
Spencer a n d G i l l e n ) , he says, " m u s t be d i r e c d y manifested i n the f o r m o f a n -
79
imals; others take a n i m a l f o r m t e m p o r a r i l y . " E v e n n o w , they are c o n t i n u -
80
ally t r a n s f o r m i n g themselves i n t o a n i m a l s . I n any case, and w h a t e v e r t h e i r

75
Ibid., p. 81. Here is the word-for-word translation of the terms used, as Strehlow gives them to us:
Dies du Körper bist; dies du der ähnliche. In one myth, a civilizing hero, Mangarkunjerkunja, presents to each
man the churinga of his ancestor, telling him, "You were born from this churinga" (ibid., p. 76).
76
Ibid.
77
Ibid.
78
Basically, the only real divergence between Strehlow, on the one hand, and Spencer and Gillen, on
the other, is the following. For Spencer and Gillen, after death the soul of the individual returns to the
nanja tree where it is again assimilated into the soul of the ancestor (Native Tribes, p. 513); for Strehlow, it
leaves for the island of the dead, where it is eventually destroyed. In neither myth does it survive individ-
ually. I make no attempt to determine the cause of this divergence. Possibly Spencer and Gillen, who do
not speak of the island of the dead, made an error of observation. Possibly also, the myth is not the same
among the eastern Arunta, which Spencer and Gillen mainly observed, and in the other parts of the tribe.
79
Strehlow [Aranda], vol. II, p. 51.
'»Ibid., vol. II, p. 56.
258 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

o u t w a r d appearance, " i n each o f t h e m , the special a n d d i s t i n c t i v e qualities o f

t h e a n i m a l are q u i t e evident." F o r example, the ancestors o f the K a n g a r o o
clan eat grass a n d flee the h u n t e r , l i k e real kangaroos; those o f the E m u clan
81
feed a n d flee l i k e e m u s , a n d so o n . A n d consider this: T h o s e o f the ances-
82
tors w h o h a d a p l a n t t o t e m became t h e same p l a n t at d e a t h . Furthermore,
this close k i n s h i p o f the ancestor a n d t h e t o t e m i c b e i n g is so strongly felt b y
t h e native that i t affects t e r m i n o l o g y . A m o n g t h e A r u n t a , the c h i l d calls altjira
8 3
the t o t e m o f its m o t h e r , w h i c h serves as its secondary t o t e m . Since descent
was at first r e c k o n e d i n the m a t e r n a l l i n e , there was a t i m e w h e n each i n d i -
v i d u a l h a d n o t o t e m o t h e r t h a n its mother's; thus, q u i t e probably, the t e r m
" a l t j i r a " designated the t o t e m , p e r i o d . N o w i t o b v i o u s l y enters i n t o the
84
c o m p o s i t i o n o f the w o r d that means "great ancestor," a l t j i r a n g a m i t j i n a .
T h e ideas o f t o t e m a n d ancestor are so close, i n d e e d , that t h e y apparently
are sometimes interchangeable. I n this way, after h a v i n g t o l d us a b o u t the
mother's t o t e m o r altjira, S t r e h l o w adds: " T h i s altjira appears t o the blacks i n
dreams a n d utters w a r n i n g s , j u s t as i t takes news o f t h e m t o t h e i r sleeping
85
friends." T h i s altjira that speaks, that is personally attached t o each i n d i v i d -
ual, is o b v i o u s l y an ancestor, a n d yet i t is also a n i n c a r n a t i o n o f the t o t e m . A
t e x t b y R o t h that discusses invocations addressed t o the t o t e m m u s t n o d o u b t
86
be i n t e r p r e t e d i n this w a y . I t seems, t h e n , that the t o t e m is sometimes i m a g -
i n e d as a c o l l e c t i o n o f ideal beings, m y t h i c personages that are m o r e o r less
d i s t i n c t f r o m the ancestors. I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e ancestors are the t o t e m d i -
87
vided i n t o parts.
But i f the ancestor is m e r g e d w i t h the t o t e m i c b e i n g t o this e x t e n t , i t
c a n n o t be o t h e r w i s e f o r the i n d i v i d u a l soul that is so closely related t o the a n -
cestral soul. M o r e o v e r , this also emerges f r o m t h e close b o n d s that j o i n each
m a n t o his c h u r i n g a . W e k n o w that t h e c h u r i n g a expresses t h e personality o f
8 8
the i n d i v i d u a l w h o is t h o u g h t t o have b e e n b o r n o f i t ; b u t i t also expresses

81
Ibid., vol. I, pp. 3-4.
82
Ibid., vol. II, p. 61.
83
See above, p. 185.
84
Strehlow [Aranda], vol. II, p. 57, and vol. I, p. 2.
85
Ibid„ vol. II, p. 57.
^Roth, Superstition, Magic, §74.
87
In other words, the totemic species is constituted more by the group of ancestors and by the mythic
species than by the animal or plant species themselves.
'"'See above, p. 256.
The Notion of Soul 259

the t o t e m i c a n i m a l . W h e n the c i v i l i z i n g h e r o M a n g a k u n j e r k u n j a gave a p e r -

sonal c h u r i n g a t o each m e m b e r o f the K a n g a r o o clan, he spoke these w o r d s :
89
" H e r e is the b o d y o f a k a n g a r o o . " I n this way, the c h u r i n g a is the b o d y o f
the ancestor, the actual i n d i v i d u a l , and the t o t e m i c a n i m a l , all at once: T h e
three beings f o r m , i n the s t r o n g a n d apt phrase o f Strehlow, " a n indissoluble
90
unity." These t e r m s are partially equivalent a n d interchangeable. T h a t is,
they are c o n c e i v e d o f as different aspects o f o n e a n d the same reality, w h i c h
is also d e f i n e d b y the d i s t i n c t i v e attributes o f the t o t e m . T h e i r shared essence
is t h e t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e . Language itself expresses this i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . The
w o r d s ratapa and, i n the language o f the L o r i t j a , aratapi designate the m y t h i -
cal e m b r y o that detaches itself from t h e ancestor a n d becomes the c h i l d . B u t
the same w o r d s also designate t h e t o t e m o f this same c h i l d , as d e t e r m i n e d b y
91
the place w h e r e t h e m o t h e r t h i n k s she c o n c e i v e d .

Ill
I n t h e p r e c e d i n g , the d o c t r i n e o f r e i n c a r n a t i o n was s t u d i e d o n l y i n the tribes
o f central Australia; the bases o n w h i c h m y inference rests m i g h t therefore be
j u d g e d t o o n a r r o w . B u t i n the first place, f o r t h e reasons already g i v e n , the
scope o f the e x p e r i m e n t extends b e y o n d the societies w e have studied d i -
rectly. F u r t h e r m o r e , a b u n d a n t facts establish that the same o r similar ideas are
t o be f o u n d i n the m o s t disparate parts o f Australia or, at least, have left v i s i -
ble traces there. T h e y are also t o be f o u n d i n A m e r i c a .
9 2
I n s o u t h e r n A u s t r a l i a , H o w i t t reports t h e m a m o n g the D i e r i . The
w o r d Mura-mura, w h i c h Gason translated as G o o d - S p i r i t (and i n w h i c h he
93
t h o u g h t he saw b e l i e f i n a creator g o d expressed ), is i n reality a collective
n a m e t h a t denotes the m u l t i t u d e o f ancestors placed at the o r i g i n o f the t r i b e .
T h e y c o n t i n u e t o exist today, as i n the past. " I t is b e l i e v e d that t h e y i n h a b i t
trees, w h i c h are sacred f o r this reason." C e r t a i n features o f the g r o u n d , rocks,

89
Strehlow [Aranda], vol. II, p. 76.
'"Ibid.
91
Ibid., pp. 57, 60, 61. Strehlow calls the list of the totems the list of the ratapas.
92
Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 475ff.
93
[Gason], "The Manners and Customs of the Dieyerie Tribe of Australian Aborigines," in [Edward
M.] Curr [The Australian Race, Its Origin, Languages, Customs, Place of Landing in Australia, and the Routes by
Which It Spread Itself over That Continent, Melbourne, J. Ferres, 1886-1887], vol. II, p. 47.
260 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

9 4
a n d springs are i d e n t i f i e d w i t h these M u r a - m u r a , w h i c h , consequendy, are
-remarkably l i k e the A l t j i r a n g a m i t j i n a o f t h e A r u n t a . E v e n t h o u g h o n l y ves-
tiges o f t o t e m i s m still exist a m o n g t h e m , the K u r n a i o f G i p p s l a n d also believe
i n the existence o f ancestors called Muk-Kurnai, c o n c e i v e d o f as beings m i d -
95
way b e t w e e n m e n a n d a n i m a l s . A m o n g t h e N i m b a l d i , T a p l i n has f o u n d a
9 6
t h e o r y o f c o n c e p t i o n l i k e the o n e S t r e h l o w ascribes t o the A r u n t a . I n the
state o f V i c t o r i a , a m o n g t h e W o t j o b a l u k , w e find i n f u l l the b e l i e f i n r e i n -
c a r n a t i o n . A c c o r d i n g t o M a t h e w s : " T h e spirits o f the dead gather i n the
97
miyur o f t h e i r respective clans; t h e y c o m e o u t i n o r d e r t o be b o r n again i n
98
h u m a n f o r m , w h e n a favorable o p p o r t u n i t y presents i t s e l f . " M a t h e w s even
states that " t h e b e l i e f i n r e i n c a r n a t i o n o r i n the t r a n s m i g r a t i o n o f souls is
99
deeply r o o t e d i n all the A u s t r a l i a n t r i b e s . "
I f w e m o v e o n t o the n o r t h e r n regions, w e find i n t h e n o r t h w e s t , a m o n g
the N i o l - N i o l , the p u r e d o c t r i n e o f the A r u n t a : E v e r y b i r t h is a t t r i b u t e d t o
the i n c a r n a t i o n o f a p r e e x i s t i n g soul t h a t is i n t r o d u c e d i n t o the b o d y o f the
1 0 0
woman. I n N o r t h Q u e e n s l a n d , m y t h s that differ f r o m the p r e c e d i n g o n l y
i n f o r m translate exactiy t h e same ideas. I n the tribes o f the Pennefather
R i v e r , each m a n is b e l i e v e d t o have t w o souls: one, called ngai, resides i n t h e
heart; the other, choi, remains i n the placenta. R i g h t after b i r t h , the placenta
is b u r i e d i n a consecrated place. A personal genie n a m e d A n j e - a , w h i c h is i n
charge o f the p h e n o m e n o n o f p r o c r e a t i o n , comes t o c o l l e c t this c h o i , a n d t o
keep i t u n t i l , h a v i n g reached a d u l t h o o d , the c h i l d m a r r i e s . W h e n t h e t i m e
has c o m e t o give h i m a son, A n j e - a gathers a b i t o f that man's c h o i a n d i n -
serts i t i n t o the e m b r y o , w h i c h A n j e - a makes a n d puts i n t h e w o m b o f t h e
m o t h e r . T h u s the c h i l d is m a d e w i t h the soul o f its father. I t is t r u e that the
c h i l d does n o t receive its f u l l paternal s o u l r i g h t away, f o r the ngai remains i n
the father's heart f o r as l o n g as he lives. B u t w h e n he dies, the freed n g a i also

94
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 482.
95
Ibid., p. 487.
%
[George] Taplin, Folklore, Customs, Manners, etc. [Customs and Languages] of South Australian Aborigines,
Adelaide, E. Spiller, 1879], p. 88.
97
Each clan of ancestors has its special camp under the ground; the miyur is this camp.
98
Mathews, "Aboriginal Tribes" in RSNSVV vol. XXXVIII, p. 293. Mathews reports the same belief
in other tribes of Victoria (ibid., p. 197).
"Ibid., p. 349.
100
[P. Jos.] Bischofs, "Die Niol-Niol, [ein Eingeborenenstamm in Nordwest Australien"] in Anthropos,
vol. Ill [1908], p. 35.
The Notion of Soul 261

goes t o incarnate itself i n t h e bodies o f c h i l d r e n ; i f there are several, i t divides

itself equally a m o n g t h e m . So there is perfect s p i r i t u a l c o n t i n u i t y b e t w e e n
the generations: T h e same s o u l is t r a n s m i t t e d f r o m father t o c f u l d r e n a n d
from t h e m t o t h e i r c h i l d r e n ; a n d this single soul, always i d e n t i c a l t o itself d e -
spite its successive divisions a n d subdivisions, is t h e o n e that a n i m a t e d the
1 0 1
first ancestor, at the b e g i n n i n g o f t h i n g s . T h e r e is o n l y one difference o f
any i m p o r t a n c e b e t w e e n this t h e o r y a n d that o f the central tribes: that r e i n -
c a r n a t i o n is n o t the w o r k o f t h e ancestors themselves b u t o f a special genie,
professionally assigned t o that f u n c t i o n . B u t i t seems, actually, that this genie
is the p r o d u c t o f a syncretism that caused the m u l t i p l e figures o f the first a n -
cestors t o m e r g e i n t o o n e a n d t h e same figure. T h e fact that t h e w o r d s
" A n j e - a " a n d " A n j i r " are apparendy related q u i t e closely makes this h y p o t h -
esis at least plausible; n o w , " A n j i r " designates t h e first m a n , the o r i g i n a l a n -
102
cestor from w h o m all m e n are d e s c e n d e d .
T h e same ideas r e c u r a m o n g t h e I n d i a n tribes o f A m e r i c a . A c c o r d i n g t o
Krause, i t is b e l i e v e d a m o n g t h e T l i n g i t that the souls o f the departed r e t u r n
t o e a r t h t o enter t h e bodies o f the pregnant w o m e n w h o b e l o n g t o t h e i r
families. "So, w h e n a w o m a n dreams o f such a n d such a deceased relative,
d u r i n g pregnancy, she believes t h a t relative's s o u l has entered her." I f the
n e w b o r n displays some characteristic m a r k that t h e deceased had, i t is
t h o u g h t t o be the deceased himself, r e t u r n e d t o earth, a n d is g i v e n t h e d e -
1 0 3
ceased's n a m e . T h i s b e l i e f is also c o m m o n a m o n g t h e H a i d a . I t is t h e
shaman w h o reveals w h i c h relative has r e i n c a r n a t e d h i m s e l f i n t h e c h i l d and,
104
consequendy, w h a t n a m e t h e c h i l d s h o u l d h a v e . I t is b e l i e v e d a m o n g the
K w a k i u d that t h e last t o die r e t u r n s t o life i n t h e p e r s o n o f the first c h i l d
1 0 5
b o r n i n the f a m i l y . T h e same is t r u e a m o n g t h e H u r o n , the I r o q u o i s , the
106
T i n n e h , a n d m a n y o t h e r tribes o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s .

101
Roth, Superstition, Magic, §68; cf. §69a, the similar case of the natives of the Proserpine River. To
simplify the exposition, I have left aside the complication that arises from sex difference. Girls' souls are
made with the choi of their mothers, whereas they share with their brothers the ngai of their father. How-
ever this peculiarity, which perhaps arises from the fact that the two systems of descent have been in use
one after the other, does not affect the principle of the soul's perpetuity.
,02
Ibid., p. 16.
103
[Aurel Krause], DieTlinkit-Indianer [Jena, H. Constable, 1885], p. 282.
,04
[John] Swanton, Contributions to the Ethnology of the Haida [Leiden, E. J. Brill, 1905], pp. 117ff.
105
Boas, Sixth Report of the Committee on the North-Western Tribes of Canada, p. 59.
106
[Joseph François] Lafitau, Moeurs des sauvages américains [comparées aux moeurs des premiers temps], vol.
II [Paris, Saugrain l'ainé; Charles Estienne Hochereau, 1724], p. 434; [Emile Fortune Stanislas Joseph] Pe-
titot, Monographie des Dénè-Dindjié [Paris, E. Leroux, 1876], p. 59.
262 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

T h e scope o f these ideas extends n a t u r a l l y t o the c o n c l u s i o n I have d e -

d u c e d f r o m i t : m y p r o p o s e d e x p l a n a t i o n f o r t h e idea o f soul. Its general ap-
p l i c a b i l i t y is a d d i t i o n a l l y c o n f i r m e d b y t h e f o l l o w i n g facts.
1 0 7
We k n o w that each i n d i v i d u a l harbors w i t h i n h i m s e l f s o m e t h i n g o f
the a n o n y m o u s force that pervades the entire sacred species, f o r he h i m s e l f is
a m e m b e r o f that species—not, however, insofar as he is an e m p i r i c a l a n d v i s -
ible b e i n g . I n spite o f t h e designs a n d s y m b o l i c signs w i t h w h i c h he decorates
his body, n o t h i n g a b o u t h i m b r i n g s t o m i n d the f o r m o f an a n i m a l o r plant.
H e n c e , there is a n o t h e r b e i n g i n h i m ; a n d w h i l e n o t ceasing t o recognize
h i m s e l f i n that b e i n g , he imagines i t i n the f o r m o f an a n i m a l o r plant. Is i t
n o t o b v i o u s that this d o u b l e can o n l y be the soul, since the soul, o n its o w n ,
is already a d o u b l e o f the subject i t animates? As final p r o o f o f this i d e n t i f i c a -
t i o n , t h e organs that m o s t p r e e m i n e n t l y incarnate t h e t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e i n
each i n d i v i d u a l are t h e same as those i n w h i c h the soul resides. T h i s is t r u e
o f the b l o o d . T h e b l o o d contains some p a r t o f the t o t e m i c essence, as is
108
demonstrated b y t h e role b l o o d plays i n t o t e m i c c e r e m o n i e s . B u t at the
same t i m e , t h e b l o o d is one o f the soul's residences; or, rather, i t is the soul
itself seen f r o m outside. W h e n i t flows, life slips away, a n d the soul escapes
t h e n a n d there. H e n c e , i t is i d e n t i f i e d w i t h the sacred p r i n c i p l e that is i m -
m a n e n t i n the b l o o d .
T o t u r n the m a t t e r a r o u n d : I f i n fact m y e x p l a n a t i o n is w e l l f o u n d e d , t h e
t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e that enters (as I assume) i n t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l must retain a
certain a u t o n o m y there, f o r i t is specifically d i s t i n c t from t h e subject i n
w h i c h i t is i n c a r n a t e d . N o w , this is precisely w h a t H o w i t t says he observed
a m o n g t h e Y u i n . H e says, " T h e fact that t h e t o t e m is c o n c e i v e d a m o n g these
tribes as b e i n g i n some w a y p a r t o f the m a n is clearly p r o v e d b y the case o f
o n e U m b a r a , already m e n t i o n e d . U m b a r a t o l d t h e s t o r y o f h o w , a f e w years
ago, an i n d i v i d u a l o f the L a c e - L i z a r d clan sent h i m his t o t e m as U m b a r a h i m -
self slept. I t w e n t d o w n the t h r o a t o f the sleeper a n d nearly ate his t o t e m ,
109
w h i c h resided i n his chest, a n d this nearly caused d e a t h . " So i t is q u i t e t r u e
that the t o t e m divides as i t becomes i n d i v i d u a l i z e d a n d that each o f the pieces
that is thereby detached plays t h e role o f a s p i r i t , o f a soul that resides i n t h e
1 1 0
body.

107
See above, pp. 133ff.
l08
See above, p. 136.
109
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 147. Cf. ibid., p. 769.
n0
Strehlow [Aranda] (vol. I, p. 15 n. 2), Schulze ("Aborigines of. . . Finke River," p. 246) portray the
soul to us, as Howitt here portrays the totem, as coming out of the body to go and eat another being. Sim-
ilarly, we earlier saw the altjira or maternal totem manifest itself in a dream, just as a soul or a spirit does.
The Notion of Soul 263

H e r e are m o r e d i r e c t l y t e l l i n g facts. I f the soul is b u t the t o t e m i c p r i n c i -

ple i n d i v i d u a l i z e d , t h e n i n c e r t a i n cases, at least, i t m u s t m a i n t a i n m o r e o r less
close relations w i t h the a n i m a l o r p l a n t species w h o s e f o r m the t o t e m r e p r o -
duces. A n d , i n fact, " T h e G e w w e - G a l (a t r i b e o f N e w S o u t h Wales) believe
that each p e r s o n has w i t h i n h i m s e l f an affinity f o r t h e spirit o f some b i r d ,
beast, o r reptile. I t is n o t that t h e i n d i v i d u a l is t h o u g h t t o be descended f r o m
that a n i m a l , b u t that a k i n s h i p is t h o u g h t t o exist b e t w e e n the spirit that a n -
1 1 1
imates the m a n a n d t h e spirit o f the a n i m a l . "
I n d e e d , there are cases i n w h i c h the soul is t h o u g h t t o emanate d i r e c t l y
from t h e t o t e m i c p l a n t o r a n i m a l . A m o n g t h e A r u n t a , a c c o r d i n g t o Strehlow,
i t is believed t h a t w h e n a w o m a n has eaten a b u n d a n d y o f a fruit, she w i l l bear
a c h i l d w h o s e t o t e m is that fruit. I f she was l o o k i n g at a kangaroo w h e n she
felt the first m o v e m e n t s o f the c h d d , a kangaroo ratapa is believed t o have e n -
1 1 2
tered her b o d y a n d i m p r e g n a t e d h e r . H . B a s e d o w has r e p o r t e d t h e same
1 1 3
b e l i e f a m o n g the W o g a i t . W e k n o w , o n the o t h e r h a n d , that the ratapa a n d
the soul are nearly indistinguishable. N o w , i t w o u l d n o t have b e e n possible t o
ascribe such an o r i g i n t o the soul i f i t was n o t t h o u g h t t o be m a d e o f the
same substance as t h e animals a n d plants o f the t o t e m i c species.
T h u s the soul is o f t e n d e p i c t e d as an a n i m a l . I n t h e l o w e r societies, as is
w e l l k n o w n , death is never considered a n a t u r a l event, w i t h p u r e l y physical
causes, b u t is w i d e l y i m p u t e d t o the m a c h i n a t i o n s o f some sorcerer. I n m a n y
A u s t r a l i a n tribes, t o d e t e r m i n e w h o is responsible f o r a m u r d e r , p e o p l e start
f r o m the p r i n c i p l e that, g i v i n g i n t o a sort o f c o m p u l s i o n , the soul o f the
m u r d e r e r i n e v i t a b l y comes t o v i s i t his v i c t i m . F o r this reason, t h e b o d y is
placed o n a scaffold, a n d the g r o u n d u n d e r a n d all a r o u n d the corpse is care-
f u l l y s m o o t h e d , so that the slightest m a r k o n i t is easily seen. T h e people r e -
t u r n the n e x t day. I f an a n i m a l has passed that w a y i n the m e a n t i m e , its tracks
are easily r e c o g n i z e d . T h e i r shape reveals t h e species t o w h i c h he belongs,

'"[Lorimer] Fison and [Alfred William] Howitt, Kamilaroi and Kurnai: [Group Marriage and Relation-
ship by Elopement, Drawn Chieflyfromthe Usage of the Australian Aborigines. Also the Kurnai Tribe, Their Cus-
toms in Peace and War, Melbourne, G. Robertson, 1880], p. 280.
n 2
Globus, vol. CXI, p. 289. Despite the objections of Leonhardi, Strehlow has stood behind his state-
ments on this point. Leonhardi deems that there is a certain contradiction between this assertion and the
theory that the ratapas emanate from trees, rocks, and churingas. But since the totemic animal incarnates
the totem, just as does the nanja tree or rock, it can play the same role. These different things are mytho-
logically equivalent.
113
[H. Basedow], "Notes on the West Coastal Tribes of the Northern Territory of S. Australia," in
RSSA, vol. XXXI (1907), p. 4. Cf. regarding the tribes of the Cairns district (North Queensland), Man
[vol. IX] (1909), p. 86.
264 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

a n d i n that way, the social g r o u p t o w h i c h t h e m u r d e r belongs is i n f e r r e d . H e

1 1 4
is said t o be a m a n o f such a n d such class o r c l a n , i f the a n i m a l is a t o t e m
o f this o r that class o r clan. T h i s is because t h e soul is t h o u g h t t o have c o m e
i n the f o r m o f the t o t e m i c a n i m a l .
I n o t h e r societies, w h e r e t o t e m i s m has w e a k e n e d o r disappeared, the
soul still continues t o be t h o u g h t o f i n a n i m a l f o r m . T h e natives o f C a p e
B e d f o r d ( N o r t h Queensland) believe that at the m o m e n t t h e c h i l d enters the
b o d y o f its m o t h e r , i t is a c u r l e w i f a g i r l a n d a snake i f a boy. O n l y later does
1 1 5
i t take a h u m a n f o r m . A c c o r d i n g t o the P r i n c e o f W i e d , m a n y Indians o f
1 1 6
N o r t h A m e r i c a say t h e y have an a n i m a l i n t h e i r b o d y . The Bororo o f
B r a z i l d r a w t h e i r souls i n t h e f o r m o f a b i r d a n d f o r that reason believe t h e y
1 1 7
are birds o f the same k i n d . Elsewhere the soul is c o n c e i v e d o f as a snake, a
1 1 8
lizard, a fly, a bee, a n d so o n .
B u t i t is above all after death that t h e a n i m a l nature o f t h e soul manifests
itself. D u r i n g life, this feature is p a r t i a l l y v e i l e d , so t o speak, b y the v e r y f o r m
o f t h e h u m a n b o d y . O n c e death has set t h e soul free, i t becomes itself again.
A m o n g t h e O m a h a , i n at least t w o o f the buffalo clans, the souls o f t h e dead
119
are b e l i e v e d t o r e j o i n t h e buffalo, t h e i r a n c e s t o r s . T h e H o p i are d i v i d e d
i n t o a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f clans, w h o s e ancestors w e r e animals o r beings i n a n -
i m a l f o r m . As Schoolcraft reports, t h e y say that at death t h e y regain t h e i r
o r i g i n a l f o r m . E a c h o f t h e m becomes a bear again, o r a hart, a c c o r d i n g t o the
120
clan t o w h i c h he b e l o n g s . O f t e n the soul is t h o u g h t t o reincarnate itself i n

114
Among the Wakelbura where, according to Curr and Howitt, each marriage class has its own
totems, the animal determines the class (see Curr, vol. Ill, p. 28); among the Buandik, it determines the
clan (Mrs. James S. Smith, The Booandik Tribes of S.Australian Aborigines [Adelaide, E. Spiller,1880], p. 128).
Cf. [Alfred William] Howitt, "On Some Australian Beliefs," in JAI, vol. XIII [1884], p. 191; XIV (1884),
p. 362; [Northcote Whitridge] Thomas, "An American View of Totemism," in Man [vol. II] (1902), 85;
[R. H.] Mathews, RSNSW. vol. XXXVIII, pp. 347-348; [Robert] Brough Smyth [The Aborigines of Vic-
toria, Melbourne, J. Ferres, 1878], vol. I, p. 110; Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 513.
115
Roth, Superstition, Magic, §83. This is probably a form of sexual totemism.
116
Prinz [von Maximillian] Wied, Reise in das innere Nord-Amerika in der Jahren 1832 bis 1834, II
[Koblenz, 1839], p. 190.
n 7
K . von den Steinen, Unter den Naturvölkern Zentral-Bräsiliens [Berlin, D. Reimer, 1894], pp. 511,
512.
"'See Frazer, Golden Bough, 2d. ed., vol. 1, London, Macmillan, 1894, pp. 250, 253, 256, 257,
258.
119
[James Owen Dorsey, "Omaha Sociology,"] Third L4nnwiiJ Report, [BAE, Washington, Govern-
ment Printing Office, 1884], pp. 229, 233.
120
[Schoolcraft], Indian Tribes, vol. IV, p. 86.
 The Notion of Soul 265

1 2 1
the b o d y o f an a n i m a l . T h i s , q u i t e probably, is the source o f the d o c t r i n e
o f metempsychosis, w h i c h is so w i d e l y h e l d . W e have seen h o w m u c h t r o u -
1 2 2
ble T y l o r has a c c o u n t i n g f o r i t . I f t h e soul is f u n d a m e n t a l l y a h u m a n p r i n -
ciple, w h a t c o u l d be stranger t h a n the m a r k e d p r e d i l e c t i o n f o r a n i m a l f o r m
that i t manifests i n so m a n y societies? O n the o t h e r h a n d , all is e x p l a i n e d i f ,
i n its v e r y c o n s t i t u t i o n , t h e soul is closely a k i n t o the a n i m a l , f o r t h e n , b y r e -
t u r n i n g after life t o the a n i m a l w o r l d , i t is o n l y r e t u r n i n g t o its t r u e nature.
T h u s , the quasi-uruversality o f b e l i e f i n metempsychosis is a d d i t i o n a l p r o o f
that t h e c o n s t i t u t i v e elements i n the idea o f the soul have b e e n taken chiefly
f r o m t h e a n i m a l r e a l m , as is presupposed b y t h e t h e o r y j u s t set f o r t h .

IV
T h e idea o f the soul is a p a r t i c u l a r a p p l i c a t i o n o f the beliefs relative t o sacred
things. I n this w a y m a y be e x p l a i n e d t h e r e l i g i o u s character this idea has d i s -
played ever since i t appeared i n h i s t o r y a n d that i t still has today. T h e soul has
always b e e n considered a sacred t h i n g ; i n this respect i t is opposed t o the
body, w h i c h i n itself is profane. T h e soul is n o t m e r e l y distinct f r o m its p h y s -
ical envelope, as the inside is from the outside, a n d i t is n o t m e r e l y i m a g i n e d
as b e i n g m a d e o f a m o r e subtle a n d f l u i d m a t e r i a l t h a n the b o d y ; m o r e t h a n
that, i t elicits i n some degree those feelings that are e v e r y w h e r e reserved f o r
that w h i c h is d i v i n e . I f i t is n o t m a d e i n t o a g o d , i t is seen at least as a spark
o f the d i v i n i t y . T h i s f u n d a m e n t a l characteristic w o u l d be i n e x p l i c a b l e i f the
idea o f the soul was n o m o r e t h a n a prescientific s o l u t i o n t o the p r o b l e m o f
dreams. Since there is n o t h i n g i n d r e a m i n g that can awaken religious e m o -
t i o n , t h e same m u s t be t r u e o f the cause that accounts f o r d r e a m i n g . H o w -
ever, i f t h e soul is a b i t o f d i v i n e substance, i t represents s o m e t h i n g w i t h i n

I21
For example, among the Batta of Sumatra (See Golden Bough, 2d. ed., vol. Ill, p. 420), in Melane-
sia (Codrington, The Melanesians, p. 178), in the Malay Archipelago (Tylor, "Remarks on Totemism," in
JAI, new series, vol. I [1907], p. 147). It will be noticed that the cases in which the soul clearly presents
itself after death as an animal are taken from societies in which totemism has been more or less breached.
This is so because, where totemic beliefs are relatively pure, the idea of soul is necessarily ambiguous, for
totemism implies that the soul participates in both realms at once. It cannot direct itself in either direction
exclusively but sometimes takes one aspect and sometimes the other, depending on the circumstances.
The more totemism recedes, the less necessary this ambiguity becomes, while, at the same time, the spir-
its feel a stronger need for differentiation. Then the quite marked affinities of the soul for the animal realm
make themselves felt, especially so after it is liberatedfromthe human body.
!22
See above, p. 172. On the universality of belief in metempsychosis, see Tylor, vol. II, pp. 8ff.
266 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

us that is o t h e r t h a n ourselves, a n d i f i t is made o f the same m e n t a l m a t e r -

ial as the sacred beings, i t w o u l d n a t u r a l l y be the object o f the same feel-
ings.
N o r is the character m a n thus ascribes t o h i m s e l f the result o f m e r e i l l u -
sion. L i k e t h e ideas o f r e l i g i o u s force a n d d i v i n i t y , t h e idea o f the soul is n o t
w i t h o u t reality. I t is q u i t e t r u e that w e are m a d e o f t w o d i s t i n c t parts that are
opposed t o o n e a n o t h e r as the sacred is t o the profane, a n d w e can say that i n
a sense there is d i v i n i t y i n us. F o r society, that u n i q u e source o f all that is sa-
cred, is n o t satisfied t o m o v e us from outside a n d t o affect us t r a n s i t o r i l y ; i t
organizes itself lastingly w i t h i n us. I t arouses i n us a w h o l e w o r l d o f ideas a n d
feelings that express i t b u t at t h e same t i m e are an i n t e g r a l a n d p e r m a n e n t
part o f ourselves. W h e n the A u s t r a l i a n comes away from a religious cere-
m o n y , the representations that c o m m o n life has awakened o r reawakened i n
h i m d o n o t i n s t a n d y dissolve. T h e g r a n d ancestral figures, the heroic e x p l o i t s
that t h e rites c o m m e m o r a t e , the great things o f all k i n d s that w o r s h i p has
made h i m participate i n — i n s u m , the various ideals that he has elaborated
w i t h o t h e r s — a l l these g o o n l i v i n g i n his consciousness. A n d b y t h e e m o -
t i o n s that are attached t o t h e m i n his consciousness, b y t h e v e r y special i n -
fluence t h e y have, t h e y clearly d i s t i n g u i s h themselves from the o r d i n a r y
impressions that his daily dealings w i t h e x t e r n a l things m a k e u p o n h i m .
M o r a l ideas are o f the same nature. I t is society that has engraved t h e m
u p o n us, a n d since the respect society inspires is n a t u r a l l y passed o n t o a l l that
comes f r o m i t , the i m p e r a t i v e n o r m s o f c o n d u c t , because o f t h e i r o r i g i n , b e -
c o m e invested w i t h an a u t h o r i t y a n d a stature that o u r o t h e r i n w a r d states d o
n o t have. T h e r e f o r e , w e assign t h e m a special place w i t h i n the t o t a l i t y o f o u r
psychic life. A l t h o u g h o u r m o r a l conscience is part o f o u r consciousness, w e
d o n o t feel o n an equal f o o t i n g w i t h i t . W e c a n n o t recognize o u r o w n v o i c e
i n that v o i c e that makes itself heard o n l y t o o r d e r us t o d o some things a n d
n o t t o d o others. T h e v e r y t o n e i n w h i c h i t speaks announces that i t is e x -
pressing s o m e t h i n g i n us that is o t h e r t h a n us. T h i s is w h a t is objective a b o u t
the idea o f t h e soul. T h e representations that are the w a r p a n d w o o f o f o u r
i n n e r life are o f t w o different species, i r r e d u c i b l e t o o n e another. Some relate
t o the o u t w a r d a n d physical w o r l d , some t o an ideal w o r l d that w e consider
t o be m o r a l l y above t h e physical o n e . T h u s , w e are really m a d e o f t w o beings
that are o r i e n t e d i n t w o d i v e r g e n t a n d v i r t u a l l y o p p o s i t e directions, o n e o f
w h i c h exercises supremacy over the other. S u c h is the p r o f o u n d m e a n i n g o f
the antithesis that all peoples have m o r e o r less clearly c o n c e i v e d : b e t w e e n
the b o d y a n d t h e soul, b e t w e e n t h e physical b e i n g a n d t h e s p i r i t u a l b e i n g that
coexist i n us. M o r a l i s t s a n d preachers have o f t e n h e l d that w e c a n n o t d e n y
the reality a n d sacredness o f d u t y w i t h o u t f a l l i n g i n t o m a t e r i a l i s m . A n d i n -
The Notion of Soul 267

123
deed, i f w e d i d n o t have t h e idea o f m o r a l a n d religious i m p e r a t i v e s , our
psychic life w o u l d be flattened o u t , all o u r states o f consciousness w o u l d be
o n the same plane, a n d all sense o f d u a l i t y w o u l d disappear. T o m a k e this d u -
ality i n t e l l i g i b l e , i t is b y n o means necessary t o i m a g i n e a mysterious a n d u n -
representable substance o p p o s e d t o the b o d y , u n d e r the n a m e " s o u l . " B u t i n
this case, t o o , as i n that o f the sacred, t h e e r r o r is i n t h e l i t e r a l character o f the
s y m b o l used, n o t i n t h e reality o f the fact s y m b o l i z e d . I t is t r u e that o u r n a -
ture is d o u b l e ; there t r u l y is a parcel o f d i v i n i t y i n us, because there is i n us a
parcel o f t h e g r a n d ideals that are the soul o f c o l l e c t i v i t y .
T h e i n d i v i d u a l soul is thus o n l y a p o r t i o n o f t h e group's collective soul.
I t is the a n o n y m o u s force o n w h i c h t h e c u l t is based b u t i n c a r n a t e d i n an i n -
d i v i d u a l w h o s e p e r s o n a l i t y i t cleaves t o : I t is m a n a i n d i v i d u a l i z e d . D r e a m i n g
may w e l l have h a d a role i n p r o d u c i n g c e r t a i n secondary characteristics o f the
idea. Perhaps the fluidity a n d i n s t a b i l i t y o f t h e images that o c c u p y o u r m i n d s
d u r i n g sleep, a n d t h e i r remarkable capacity t o be t r a n s f o r m e d i n t o o n e a n -
other, f u r n i s h e d t h e m o d e l o f that subtle, diaphanous, a n d p r o t e a n m a t e r i a l
o f w h i c h t h e soul is t h o u g h t t o be made. M o r e o v e r , the p h e n o m e n a o f f a i n t -
i n g , catalepsy, a n d so f o r t h m a y have suggested t h e idea that the soul was m o -
b i l e and, b e g i n n i n g i n this life, t e m p o r a r i l y left the b o d y ; this, i n t u r n , has
b e e n used t o e x p l a i n c e r t a i n dreams. B u t all these experiences a n d observa-
tions c o u l d o n l y have h a d i n c i d e n t a l , c o m p l e m e n t a r y influence, a n d i n d e e d
the existence o f that i n f l u e n c e is h a r d t o establish. W h a t is t r u l y f u n d a m e n -
tal t o the idea comes from elsewhere.
D o e s n o t this o r i g i n o f t h e idea o f soul m i s c o n c e i v e its f u n d a m e n t a l n a -
ture? I f soul is b u t a special f o r m o f the i m p e r s o n a l p r i n c i p l e that pervades
the g r o u p , t h e t o t e m i c species, a n d all k i n d s o f things that are attached t o
t h e m , t h e n i t t o o is at b o t t o m i m p e r s o n a l . A n d so, w i t h o n l y a f e w differ-
ences, i t m u s t therefore have t h e same properties as t h e force o f w h i c h i t is
o n l y a specialized f o r m — i n particular, the same diffuseness, the same capac-
i t y t o spread contagiously, a n d t h e same u b i q u i t y . N o w , q u i t e t h e contrary, i t
is easily i m a g i n e d as a d e f i n i t e , concrete b e i n g , w h o l l y self-contained a n d i n -
c o m m u n i c a b l e t o others; i t is m a d e t h e basis o f o u r personality.

123
If the religious and moral representations constitute the essential elements in the idea of soul, as I
believe they do, I nonetheless do not mean to say that these are the only ones. Other states of conscience
having this same quality, though to a lesser degree, come to group themselves around this central nucleus.
This is true of all the higher forms of intellectual life, by reason of the quite special value and status that
society attributes to them. When we live the life of science or art, we feel we are in contact with a circle
of things above sensation (this, by the way, I will have occasion to show with greater precision in the Con-
clusion). This is why the higher functions of the intellect have always been regarded as specific manifes-
tations of the soul's activity. But they probably could not have been enough to form the idea of soul.
268 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

B u t this w a y o f t h i n k i n g a b o u t soul is the p r o d u c t o f recent and p h i l o -

sophical d e v e l o p m e n t . T h e p o p u l a r c o n c e p t i o n , such as i t has emerged
spontaneously f r o m o r d i n a r y experience, is v e r y different, especially at the
b e g i n n i n g . F o r t h e A u s t r a l i a n , t h e s o u l is a v e r y vague entity, i n d e t e r m i -
nate and f l u i d i n f o r m , p e r v a d i n g t h e e n t i r e b o d y . A l t h o u g h i t is especially
manifest i n c e r t a i n parts, there are p r o b a b l y n o n e f r o m w h i c h i t is absent
altogether, so i t has a diffuseness, a contagiousness, a n d an omnipresence
comparable t o that o f mana. L i k e mana, i t can s u b d i v i d e a n d replicate itself
i n f i n i t e l y , all the w h i l e r e m a i n i n g w h o l e i n each o f those parts (the p l u r a l i t y
o f souls r e s u l t i n g f r o m those replications a n d divisions). I n a d d i t i o n , t h e d o c -
t r i n e o f r e i n c a r n a t i o n , w h o s e w i d e s p r e a d acceptance w e have established,
shows w h a t i m p e r s o n a l elements there are i n t h e idea o f s o u l a n d h o w f u n -
d a m e n t a l t h e y are. F o r the same s o u l t o be able t o take o n a n e w personality
i n each g e n e r a t i o n , the i n d i v i d u a l f o r m s i n w h i c h i t is successively c l o t h e d
m u s t also be e x t e r n a l t o i t a n d u n a t t a c h e d t o its t r u e nature. T h i s is a k i n d o f
generic substance that b e c o m e s i n d i v i d u a l i z e d o n l y secondarily and s u p e r f i -
cially. M o r e o v e r , this idea o f s o u l is far f r o m h a v i n g t o t a l l y disappeared. T h e
c u l t o f relics shows that, f o r o r d i n a r y believers even today, the soul o f a saint
c o n t i n u e s t o adhere t o his various bones, a n d w i t h all its essential p o w e r s —
w h i c h i m p l i e s that i t is i m a g i n e d t o be capable o f diffusing a n d s u b d i v i d i n g ,
a n d o f i n c o r p o r a t i n g i t s e l f i n t o all sorts o f different things at the same t i m e .
Just as w e f i n d i n s o u l the characteristic attributes o f mana, so t o o d o sec-
o n d a r y a n d superficial changes suffice f o r m a n a t o b e c o m e i n d i v i d u a l i z e d as
soul. O n e moves o n from the first idea t o t h e second w i t h o u t any radical
j u m p . E v e r y r e l i g i o u s force that is r e g u l a r l y attached t o a d e f i n i t e b e i n g par-
ticipates i n t h e characteristics o f that b e i n g , takes its f o r m , a n d becomes its
spirit duplicate. Tregear, i n his M a o r i - P o l y n e s i a n d i c t i o n a r y , b e l i e v e d he
c o u l d c o n n e c t the w o r d mana t o a w h o l e g r o u p o f o t h e r w o r d s , l i k e manawa,
manamana, a n d others, w h i c h seem t o be o f the same f a m i l y and m e a n
"heart," " l i f e , " "consciousness." Is this n o t t o say that some k i n s h i p b e t w e e n
the c o r r e s p o n d i n g ideas m u s t also exist, that is, b e t w e e n t h e ideas o f i m p e r -
124
sonal p o w e r a n d those o f i n w a r d life a n d m e n t a l f o r c e — i n a w o r d , o f s o u l ?
T h i s is w h y the q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r t h e c h u r i n g a is sacred because i t serves as
residence f o r a s o u l , as Spencer a n d G i l l e n believe, o r because i t has i m p e r -
sonal v i r t u e s , as S t r e h l o w believes, is o f h t d e interest t o m e a n d w i t h n o so-
c i o l o g i c a l i m p o r t . W h e t h e r t h e efficacy o f a sacred o b j e c t is i m a g i n e d i n
abstract f o r m o r ascribed t o some personal agent is n o t t h e heart o f the ques-
t i o n . T h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l roots o f b o t h beliefs are i d e n t i c a l . A t h i n g is sacred

l24
F. Tregear, The Maori-Polynesian Comparative Dictionary, pp. 203—205.
The Notion of Soul 269

because, i n some way, i t inspires a c o l l e c t i v e f e e l i n g o f respect that removes i t

f r o m profane c o n t a c t . T o u n d e r s t a n d this feeling, m e n sometimes relate i t t o
a vague a n d imprecise cause a n d sometimes t o a d e f i n i t e s p i r i t u a l b e i n g w i t h
a name a n d a history. B u t these v a r y i n g i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s are added t o a f u n d a -
m e n t a l process that is t h e same i n b o t h cases.
T h i s is w h a t explains those e x t r a o r d i n a r y m i x t u r e s , examples o f w h i c h
w e have e n c o u n t e r e d a l o n g t h e way. I said that t h e i n d i v i d u a l , the s o u l o f t h e
ancestor he reincarnates o r o f w h o m his o w n s o u l is an e m a n a t i o n , his
c h u r i n g a , a n d t h e animals o f the t o t e m i c species are partially equivalent a n d
interchangeable t h i n g s . T h i s is because, i n c e r t a i n respects, they all act u p o n
the c o l l e c t i v e consciousness i n the same way. I f the c h u r i n g a is sacred, i t is sa-
cred because t h e t o t e m i c e m b l e m engraved o n its surface provokes c o l l e c t i v e
feelings o f respect. T h e same feeling is attached t o the animals o r plants
w h o s e o u t w a r d f o r m t h e t o t e m copies, t o t h e soul o f the i n d i v i d u a l (since i t
is itself t h o u g h t o f i n t h e f o r m o f the t o t e m i c b e i n g ) , a n d finally t o t h e a n -
cestral s o u l o f w h i c h t h e p r e c e d i n g is o n l y a p a r t i c u l a r aspect. I n this way, a l l
these disparate objects, w h e t h e r real o r ideal, have a c o m m o n e l e m e n t b y
w h i c h t h e y arouse t h e same affective state i n consciousness and c o n s e q u e n d y
merge. T o the e x t e n t that t h e y are expressed b y o n e a n d the same represen-
t a t i o n , t h e y are indistinguishable. T h i s is w h y t h e A r u n t a c o u l d be l e d t o see
the c h u r i n g a as the b o d y c o m m o n t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l , t h e ancestor, a n d even
the t o t e m i c b e i n g . I t is a w a y o f saying t o h i m s e l f that the feelings o f w h i c h
those different things are t h e o b j e c t are i d e n t i c a l .
H o w e v e r , from the fact that the idea o f s o u l derives from the idea o f
mana, i t i n n o w a y f o l l o w s e i t h e r that the idea o f soul was a relatively late d e -
v e l o p m e n t o r t h a t there was a h i s t o r i c a l t i m e i n w h i c h m e n k n e w the r e l i -
gious forces o n l y i n t h e i r i m p e r s o n a l f o r m s . I f b y t h e w o r d " p r e a n i m i s m " w e
m e a n t o designate a h i s t o r i c a l p e r i o d d u r i n g w h i c h a n i m i s m is t h o u g h t t o
125
have b e e n u n k n o w n , w e set u p an a r b i t r a r y h y p o t h e s i s , f o r there is n o
p e o p l e a m o n g w h o m the idea o f s o u l a n d the idea o f mana d o n o t c o -
exist. W e thus have n o basis f o r s u p p o s i n g t h a t t h e y w e r e f o r m e d i n t w o
d i s t i n c t p e r i o d s ; all the evidence suggests instead that t h e y are m o r e o r less
c o n t e m p o r a n e o u s . Just as there is n o society w i t h o u t i n d i v i d u a l s , so the i m -
personal forces that arise from c o l l e c t i v i t y c a n n o t take f o r m w i t h o u t i n c a r -
n a t i n g themselves i n i n d i v i d u a l consciousnesses, i n w h i c h t h e y become
i n d i v i d u a l i z e d . These are n o t t w o different processes b u t t w o different aspects

125
This is the thesis of [Konrad Theodor] Preuss in the Globus articles I have cited several times. Mr.
Levy-Bruhl also seems inclined toward the same idea (See Fonctions mentales, etc., pp. 92—93).
270 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

o f o n e a n d the same process. T r u e , t h e y are n o t o f equal i m p o r t a n c e ,

since o n e is m o r e f u n d a m e n t a l t h a n the other. I f m a n a is t o be able t o i n d i -
v i d u a l i z e a n d fragment i n t o p a r t i c u l a r souls, i t m u s t first exist, a n d w h a t
i t is i n itself does n o t d e p e n d o n the f o r m s i t takes as i t individualizes. H e n c e
the idea o f m a n a does n o t presuppose that o f soul. Q u i t e the contrary, the
idea o f soul c a n n o t be u n d e r s t o o d except i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e idea o f mana. I n
this regard, o n e can i n d e e d say that i t is d u e t o a " s e c o n d a r y " formation—
b u t a secondary f o r m a t i o n i n t h e l o g i c a l , n o t t h e c h r o n o l o g i c a l , sense o f the
word.

V
B u t h o w d i d m e n c o m e t o believe that the s o u l survives t h e b o d y a n d can
even survive i t i n d e f i n i t e l y ?
W h a t emerges from the analysis I have c o n d u c t e d is that b e l i e f i n i m -
m o r t a l i t y was n o t at all f o r m e d u n d e r the i n f l u e n c e o f ideas about m o r a l i t y .
M a n d i d n o t i m a g i n e e x t e n d i n g his existence b e y o n d t h e t o m b so t h a t a j u s t
r e t r i b u t i o n o f m o r a l acts c o u l d b e p r o v i d e d i n a n o t h e r life, i f n o t i n this one.
W e have seen t h a t a l l considerations o f this sort w e r e f o r e i g n t o the p r i m i t i v e
idea o f the b e y o n d .
N o r are w e any b e t t e r o f f a c c e p t i n g the hypothesis that the o t h e r life was
i n v e n t e d as a means o f escape from t h e a n g u i s h i n g prospect o f a n n i h i l a t i o n .
First o f all, t h e n e e d f o r personal survival is far f r o m h a v i n g b e e n v e r y strong
at the b e g i n n i n g . T h e p r i m i t i v e generally accepts the idea o f death w i t h a
sort o f indifference. B r o u g h t u p t o take l i t t l e a c c o u n t o f his i n d i v i d u a l i t y a n d
1 2 6
accustomed t o e n d a n g e r i n g his life c o n t i n u a l l y , he easily lets g o o f i t . Sec-
o n d , the i m m o r t a l i t y that is p r o m i s e d t o h i m b y t h e r e l i g i o n s he practices is
n o t at all personal. I n m a n y cases, the s o u l does n o t c o n t i n u e the personality
o f the deceased, o r does n o t c o n t i n u e i t f o r l o n g , since, f o r g e t t i n g its p r e v i -
ous existence, i t goes f o r t h after a c e r t a i n time t o animate o t h e r bodies a n d
becomes t h e r e b y t h e h f e - g i v i n g p r i n c i p l e o f n e w personalities. E v e n a m o n g
m o r e advanced peoples, i t was n o t the colorless a n d sad existence l e d b y the
shades i n S h e o l o r Erebus that c o u l d ease the s o r r o w left b y the m e m o r y o f
the life lost.
T h e n o t i o n that connects t h e idea o f a p o s t h u m o u s life t o d r e a m e x p e -
riences is a m o r e satisfactory e x p l a n a t i o n . O u r dead relatives and friends

126
On this point, see my [Le] Suicide [elude de sociologie, Paris, F. Alcan, 1897], pp. 233ff.
The Notion of Soul 271

reappear t o us i n dreams. W e see t h e m a c t i n g a n d hear t h e m speaking; i t is

natural t o d r a w the c o n c l u s i o n that t h e y still exist. B u t i f those observations
c o u l d have served as c o n f i r m a t i o n o f t h e idea, o n c e b o r n , they d o n o t seem
capable o f h a v i n g called i t f o r t h f r o m n o t h i n g . T h e dreams i n w h i c h w e see
deceased persons alive again are t o o rare a n d t o o short, a n d the m e m o r i e s
they leave are i n themselves t o o vague, f o r dreams alone t o have suggested
such an i m p o r t a n t system o f beliefs t o m e n . T h e r e is a m a r k e d d i s p r o p o r t i o n
b e t w e e n t h e effect a n d the cause t o w h i c h i t is ascribed.
W h a t makes t h e q u e s t i o n t r o u b l e s o m e is that, b y itself, the idea o f the
soul d i d n o t entail the idea o f survival b u t seemed t o preclude i t . I n d e e d , w e
have seen that the soul, w h i l e distinct f r o m the body, is nevertheless t h o u g h t
to be closely l i n k e d w i t h i t . Since the soul g r o w s o l d w i t h the b o d y and r e -
acts t o all the body's illnesses, i t m u s t have seemed natural f o r the soul t o die
w i t h the b o d y . T h e b e l i e f m u s t at least have b e e n that i t ceased t o exist the
m o m e n t i t i r r e v o c a b l y lost its o r i g i n a l f o r m , w h e n n o t h i n g o f w h a t i t had
been r e m a i n e d . Yet i t is at j u s t this m o m e n t that a n e w life opens o u t b e -
fore i t .
T h e m y t h s I have p r e v i o u s l y r e p o r t e d f u r n i s h us w i t h the o n l y possible
e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h a t belief. W e have seen that t h e souls o f n e w b o r n s w e r e e i -
t h e r emanations o f ancestral souls o r those same souls reincarnated. B u t t o
have b e e n able e i t h e r t o reincarnate themselves o r t o give o f f n e w emana-
tions p e r i o d i c a l l y , t h e y h a d t o have o u t l i v e d t h e i r first possessors, so i t seems
that the idea o f the survival o f t h e dead was accepted i n o r d e r t o m a k e the
b i r t h o f the l i v i n g explicable. T h e p r i m i t i v e does n o t have the idea o f an a l l -
p o w e r f u l g o d that pulls souls o u t o f nothingness. I t seems t o h i m that o n e can
o n l y m a k e souls w i t h o t h e r souls. T h o s e that are b o r n i n this w a y can o n l y
be n e w f o r m s o f those that existed i n the past. C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h e y must go
o n e x i s t i n g so that others can be f o r m e d . I n s u m , b e l i e f i n the i m m o r t a l i t y o f
souls is the o n l y w a y m a n is able t o c o m p r e h e n d a fact that c a n n o t fail t o at-
tract his a t t e n t i o n : the p e r p e t u i t y o f the group's life. T h e individuals die, b u t
t h e c l a n survives, so t h e forces that c o n s t i t u t e his life m u s t have the same p e r -
p e t u i t y . These forces are t h e souls t h a t a n i m a t e t h e i n d i v i d u a l bodies, because
i t is i n a n d b y t h e m that t h e g r o u p realizes itself. F o r that reason, t h e y m u s t
endure. I n d e e d , w h i l e e n d u r i n g , t h e y also m u s t r e m a i n the same. Since the
clan always keeps its characteristic f o r m , t h e s p i r i t u a l substance o f w h i c h i t is
m a d e m u s t be c o n c e i v e d o f as qualitatively invariable. Since i t is always the
same c l a n w i t h the same t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e , i t m u s t also be the same souls, the
souls b e i n g n o t h i n g o t h e r t h a n the t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e f r a g m e n t e d a n d p a r t i c -
u l a r i z e d . T h u s , there is a m y s t i c a l sort o f g e r m i n a t i v e plasma that is t r a n s m i t -
t e d f r o m g e n e r a t i o n t o g e n e r a t i o n a n d that creates, o r at least is h e l d t o
272 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

create, the s p i r i t u a l u n i t y o f the clan over t i m e . A n d despite its s y m b o l i c na-

ture, this b e l i e f is n o t w i t h o u t objective t r u t h , f o r a l t h o u g h the g r o u p is n o t
i m m o r t a l i n the absolute sense o f the w o r d , yet i t is t r u e that t h e g r o u p lasts
above a n d b e y o n d the i n d i v i d u a l s a n d that i t is r e b o r n a n d reincarnated i n
each n e w g e n e r a t i o n .
O n e fact c o n f i r m s this i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . W e have seen that, a c c o r d i n g t o
Strehlow's account, the A r u n t a d i s t i n g u i s h t w o sorts o f souls: those o f the
A l c h e r i n g a ancestors a n d those o f the i n d i v i d u a l s w h o at any m o m e n t i n h i s -
t o r y c o n s t i t u t e t h e b o d y o f t h e t r i b e . T h e souls o f i n d i v i d u a l s o u t l i v e the
b o d y f o r o n l y a rather s h o r t t i m e a n d are s o o n n u l l i f i e d completely. O n l y
those o f t h e A l c h e r i n g a ancestors are i m m o r t a l : Just as t h e y are uncreated, so
they d o n o t p e r i s h . N o w , i t is t o be n o t i c e d that these are also the o n l y ones
w h o s e i m m o r t a l i t y is n e e d e d i n o r d e r t o e x p l a i n the p e r m a n e n c e o f the
g r o u p , f o r the f u n c t i o n o f e n s u r i n g t h e p e r p e t u i t y o f the clan falls t o t h e m
a n d t h e m alone: E v e r y c o n c e p t i o n is t h e i r d o i n g . I n this regard, the others
have n o role t o play. T h u s t h e souls are said t o be i m m o r t a l o n l y t o t h e e x -
t e n t that this i m m o r t a l i t y is useful i n m a k i n g the c o n t i n u i t y o f collective life
intelligible.
T h e causes o f the first beliefs a b o u t a n o t h e r life w e r e thus u n r e l a t e d t o
t h e f u n c t i o n s that i n s t i t u t i o n s b e y o n d t h e grave w o u l d later have t o f u l f i l l .
B u t , o n c e b o r n , t h e y w e r e s o o n p u t t o use f o r ends different f r o m those that
w e r e t h e i r i n i t i a l raison d'être. F r o m t h e A u s t r a l i a n societies o n , w e see those
causes b e g i n n i n g t o organize themselves t o this e n d . T o d o so, f u r t h e r m o r e ,
they h a d n o n e e d t o u n d e r g o f u n d a m e n t a l transformations. H o w t r u e i t is
that the same social i n s t i t u t i o n can f u l f i l l different f u n c t i o n s successively,
w i t h o u t c h a n g i n g its nature!

VI
T h e idea o f soul l o n g was a n d i n p a r t still is t h e m o s t w i d e l y h e l d f o r m o f the
127
idea o f p e r s o n a l i t y . B y e x a m i n i n g h o w t h e idea o f s o u l o r i g i n a t e d , t h e r e -
fore, w e s h o u l d c o m e t o u n d e r s t a n d h o w the idea o f p e r s o n a l i t y was f o r m e d .

127
It might be objected that unity is the characteristic of personalities, while the soul has always been
conceived as multiple and as capable of dividing and subdividing almost infinitely. But we know today that
the unity of the person is also made up of parts, that it is itself also capable of dividing and subdividing it-
self. Still, the idea of personality does not disappear merely because we have ceased to think of it as an in-
divisible, metaphysical atom. The same is true of those commonsense ideas of personality that have found
expression in the idea of soul. They show that all peoples have always felt that the human person did not
have the absolute unity certain metaphysicians have imputed to it.
The Notion of Soul 273

I t is a consequence o f the p r e c e d i n g that t w o sorts o f elements p r o d u c e d

the idea o f person. O n e is essentially i m p e r s o n a l : I t is t h e spiritual p r i n c i p l e
that serves as the s o u l o f t h e c o l l e c t i v i t y . T h a t p r i n c i p l e is t h e v e r y substance
o f w h i c h i n d i v i d u a l souls are made. I t is n o t the p r o p e r t y o f anyone i n par-
ticular b u t p a r t o f t h e c o l l e c t i v e p a t r i m o n y ; i n a n d t h r o u g h that p r i n c i p l e , all
the consciousnesses c o m m u n e . F r o m a different p o i n t o f v i e w , i f there are t o
be separate personalities, some factor m u s t i n t e r v e n e t o fragment a n d differ-
entiate this p r i n c i p l e ; i n o t h e r w o r d s , an e l e m e n t o f i n d i v i d u a t i o n is neces-
sary. T h e b o d y plays this role. Since bodies are d i s t i n c t f r o m o n e another,
since t h e y o c c u p y different positions i n t i m e a n d space, each is a special m i -
l i e u i n w h i c h the c o l l e c t i v e representations are gradually refracted a n d c o l -
ored differently. H e n c e , even i f all t h e consciousnesses situated i n those
bodies v i e w t h e same w o r l d — n a m e l y , t h e w o r l d o f ideas and feelings that
m o r a l l y u n i f y the g r o u p — t h e y d o n o t all v i e w i t from t h e same v i e w p o i n t ;
each expresses i t i n his o w n fashion.
O f those t w o equally indispensable factors, t h e i m p e r s o n a l e l e m e n t is
certainly n o t the less i m p o r t a n t , since i t is the o n e that furnishes the r a w m a -
terial f o r the idea o f s o u l . I t w i l l be s u r p r i s i n g , perhaps, t o see such an i m -
p o r t a n t r o l e a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e i m p e r s o n a l e l e m e n t i n the o r i g i n o f t h e idea o f
personality. B u t t h e p h i l o s o p h i c a l analysis o f that idea, w h i c h stole a m a r c h
o n s o c i o l o g i c a l analysis, a n d b y a l o t , a r r i v e d at similar results o n this p o i n t .
O f all t h e p h i l o s o p h e r s , L e i b n i z is o n e o f those w h o h a d the m o s t v i v i d sense
o f w h a t the p e r s o n a l i t y is, f o r the m o n a d is, first o f all, a personal a n d a u -
t o n o m o u s b e i n g . A n d yet, f o r L e i b n i z , t h e c o n t e n t o f all t h e monads is i d e n -
tical. A l l i n fact are consciousnesses that express o n e a n d t h e same object: the
w o r l d . A n d since t h e w o r l d itself is b u t a system o f representations, each i n -
d i v i d u a l consciousness is i n t h e e n d o n l y a r e f l e c t i o n o f the universal c o n -
sciousness. H o w e v e r , each expresses i t from its o w n p o i n t o f v i e w a n d i n its
own m a n n e r . W e k n o w h o w this difference o f perspectives arises from the
fact that the monads are d i f f e r e n d y placed w i t h respect t o o n e a n o t h e r a n d
w i t h respect t o t h e w h o l e system t h e y c o m p r i s e .
K a n t expresses this same awareness differently. F o r h i m , the cornerstone o f
personality is w i l l . W i l l is the capacity t o act i n accordance w i t h reason, a n d
reason is that w h i c h is m o s t i m p e r s o n a l i n us. R e a s o n is n o t m y reason; i t is
h u m a n reason i n general. I t is the p o w e r o f the m i n d t o rise above the p a r t i c -
ular, the c o n t i n g e n t , a n d the i n d i v i d u a l a n d t o t h i n k i n universal terms. F r o m
this p o i n t o f view, o n e can say that w h a t makes a m a n a person is that b y w h i c h
he is indistinguishable from o t h e r m e n ; i t is that w h i c h makes h i m m a n , rather
t h a n such and such a m a n . T h e senses, the body, i n short e v e r y t h i n g that i n d i -
vidualizes, is, t o the contrary, regarded b y K a n t as antagonistic t o p e r s o n h o o d .
274 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

T h i s is because i n d i v i d u a t i o n is n o t t h e essential characteristic o f the per-

son. A person is n o t o n l y a singular subject that is d i s t i n g u i s h e d f r o m all the
others. I t is, i n a d d i t i o n a n d m o s t o f all, a b e i n g t o w h i c h a relative a u t o n o m y
is i m p u t e d i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e m i l i e u w i t h w h i c h i t interacts m o s t direcdy. A
p e r s o n is c o n c e i v e d o f as b e i n g capable, i n a c e r t a i n measure, o f m o v i n g o n
its o w n . T h i s is w h a t L e i b n i z expressed i n an e x t r e m e fashion, saying that the
m o n a d is e n t i r e l y closed t o the outside. M y analysis enables us t o i m a g i n e
h o w this c o n c e p t i o n was f o r m e d a n d t o w h a t i t corresponds.
T h e nature o f t h e soul, w h i c h is i n fact a s y m b o l i c expression o f the per-
sonality, is t h e same. A l t h o u g h i n close u n i o n w i t h t h e b o d y , i t is presumed
t o b e p r o f o u n d l y d i s t i n c t from a n d b r o a d l y i n d e p e n d e n t o f t h e body. D u r i n g
life, i t can leave the b o d y t e m p o r a r i l y , a n d at death i t retires t h e r e f r o m for
g o o d . Far from b e i n g s u b o r d i n a t e d t o t h e b o d y , i t dominates t h e b o d y g i v e n
its h i g h e r status. I t m a y v e r y w e l l b o r r o w f r o m t h e b o d y t h e o u t w a r d f o r m i n
w h i c h i t becomes i n d i v i d u a l i z e d , b u t i t owes t h e b o d y n o t h i n g essential. T h i s
a u t o n o m y that a l l peoples have ascribed t o t h e s o u l is n o t m e r e i l l u s i o n , and
w e n o w k n o w its objective basis. G r a n t e d , the elements that c o n s t i t u t e the
idea o f the soul, a n d those that enter i n t o the idea [représentation] o f the body,
c o m e f r o m t w o sources different from a n d i n d e p e n d e n t o f o n e another. T h e
first are made o f impressions a n d images that c o m e f r o m every part o f the
b o d y ; t h e others consist o f ideas a n d feelings that c o m e from the society and
express i t . H e n c e , the first are n o t d e r i v e d from the second.
I n this way, there really is a p a r t o f us that is n o t d i r e c d y subordinate to
t h e organic factor: T h a t p a r t is e v e r y t h i n g that represents society i n us. T h e
general ideas that r e l i g i o n o r science impresses u p o n o u r m i n d s , the m e n t a l
operations t h a t these ideas presuppose, t h e beliefs a n d feelings o n w h i c h o u r
m o r a l life is based—all t h e h i g h e r f o r m s o f psychic a c t i v i t y that society s t i m -
ulates a n d develops i n us—are n o t , l i k e o u r sensations a n d b o d i l y states,
t o w e d a l o n g b y t h e b o d y . T h i s is so because, as I have s h o w n , the w o r l d o f
representations i n w h i c h social life unfolds is added t o its m a t e r i a l substrate,
far i n d e e d from o r i g i n a t i n g there. T h e d e t e r m i n i s m that reigns i n t h a t w o r l d
o f representations is thus far m o r e supple t h a n t h e d e t e r m i n i s m that is r o o t e d
in our flesh-and-blood c o n s t i t u t i o n , a n d i t leaves t h e agent w i t h a j u s t i f i e d
i m p r e s s i o n o f greater l i b e r t y . T h e m i l i e u i n w h i c h w e m o v e i n this w a y is
s o m e h o w less opaque a n d resistant. I n i t w e feel, a n d are, m o r e at ease. I n
o t h e r w o r d s , t h e o n l y means w e have o f l i b e r a t i n g ourselves from physical
forces is t o oppose t h e m w i t h c o l l e c t i v e forces.
W h a t w e have from society w e have i n c o m m o n w i t h o u r f e l l o w m e n ,
so i t is far from t r u e that t h e m o r e i n d i v i d u a l i z e d w e are, t h e m o r e personal
w e are. T h e t w o t e r m s are b y n o means s y n o n y m o u s . I n a sense, they oppose
The Notion of Soul 275

more t h a n t h e y i m p l y o n e another. Passion i n d i v i d u a l i z e s a n d yet enslaves.

O u r sensations are i n t h e i r essence i n d i v i d u a l . B u t t h e m o r e emancipated w e
are from t h e senses, a n d t h e m o r e capable w e are o f t h i n k i n g a n d a c t i n g c o n -
ceptually, t h e m o r e w e are persons. T h o s e w h o emphasize all that is social i n
the i n d i v i d u a l d o n o t m e a n b y that t o d e n y o r denigrate p e r s o n h o o d . T h e y
1 2 8
simply refuse t o c o n f o u n d i t w i t h t h e fact o f i n d i v i d u a t i o n .

128
For all that, I do not deny the importance of the individual factor, which is explainedfrommy
standpoint just as easily as its contrary. Even if the essential element of personality is that which is social in
us,fromanother standpoint, there can be no social life unless distinct individuals are associated within it;
and the more numerous and differentfromone another they are, the richer it is. Thus the individual fac-
tor is a condition of the personal factor. The reciprocal is no less true, for society itself is an important
source of individual differentiation (See De la Division du travail social, 3d ed. [Paris, F. Alcan (1893), 1902],
pp. 627ff.).
 CHAPTER NINE

THE NOTION OF SPIRITS

AND GODS

W i t h t h e n o t i o n o f soul, w e left the d o m a i n o f i m p e r s o n a l forces. B u t

even the A u s t r a l i a n r e l i g i o n s recognize h i g h e r - o r d e r m y t h i c a l entities,
above a n d b e y o n d t h e soul: spirits, c i v i l i z i n g heroes, a n d even gods, p r o p e r l y
so-called. W i t h o u t e n t e r i n g i n t o t h e m y t h o l o g i e s i n detail, w e m u s t t r y t o
discover w h a t f o r m these three categories o f s p i r i t u a l beings take i n Australia
a n d h o w t h e y f i t i n t o the r e l i g i o u s system as a w h o l e .

I
A soul is n o t a s p i r i t . A soul is shut u p i n a d e f i n i t e b o d y , a n d a l t h o u g h i t can
c o m e o u t at c e r t a i n times, n o r m a l l y i t is t h e body's prisoner. I t escapes f o r
g o o d o n l y at death, a n d even so w e have seen w i t h w h a t d i f f i c u l t y t h a t sep-
aration is m a d e final. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , a l t h o u g h a spirit is o f t e n closely t i e d
t o a p a r t i c u l a r object as its preferred residence—a s p r i n g , a r o c k , a tree, a star,
and so f o r t h — i t can leave at w i l l t o lead an i n d e p e n d e n t life i n space. As a r e -
sult, its i n f l u e n c e has a w i d e r radius. I t can act u p o n all i n d i v i d u a l s w h o ap-
p r o a c h i t o r are approached b y i t . B y contrast, the soul has almost no
i n f l u e n c e over a n y t h i n g o t h e r t h a n the b o d y i t animates; o n l y i n v e r y rare i n -
stances d u r i n g its e a r t h l y life does i t affect a n y t h i n g else.
B u t i f the soul lacks those features t h a t define t h e s p i r i t , i t acquires t h e m
t h r o u g h death, at least i n part. O n c e disincarnated, a n d so l o n g as i t has n o t
c o m e d o w n again i n t o a b o d y , i t has the same f r e e d o m o f m o v e m e n t as a
spirit. T o be sure, i t is t h o u g h t t o leave f o r the l a n d o f souls w h e n the rites o f
m o u r n i n g are c o m p l e t e d , b u t before that, i t remains i n the v i c i n i t y o f the
t o m b f o r a rather l o n g t i m e . F u r t h e r m o r e , even w h e n i t has left there f o r
1
g o o d , i t is t h o u g h t t o c o n t i n u e p r o w l i n g a r o u n d the c a m p . I t is generally

1
[Walter Edmund] Roth, Superstition, Magic, etc. [and Medicine, in North Queensland Ethnography, Bul-
letin no. 5, Brisbane, G. A. Vaughn, 1903], §65, 68; [Sir Baldwin] Spencer and [Francis James] Gillen [The
NativeTribes of Central Australia, London, Macmillan, 1899], pp. 514, 516.

276
The Notion of Spirits and Gods 277

i m a g i n e d as rather a k i n d l y b e i n g , especially b y t h e s u r v i v i n g m e m b e r s o f its

family. W e have seen, i n fact, t h a t t h e soul o f t h e father comes t o n u r t u r e t h e
g r o w t h o f his c h i l d r e n a n d g r a n d c h i l d r e n . S o m e t i m e s , however, d e p e n d i n g
2
entirely o n its m o o d a n d its t r e a t m e n t b y the l i v i n g , i t displays t r u e c r u e l t y .
T h u s , especially f o r w o m e n a n d c h i l d r e n , i t is advisable n o t t o v e n t u r e o u t -
3
side the camp at n i g h t , so as t o a v o i d the risk o f dangerous e n c o u n t e r s .
A ghost, however, is n o t a t r u e s p i r i t . First, its p o w e r is usually l i m i t e d ;
second, i t does n o t have d e f i n i t e f u n c t i o n s . I t is a v a g a b o n d b e i n g w i t h n o
clear-cut responsibility, since the effect o f death was t o set i t outside all t h e
regular structures. I n r e l a t i o n t o t h e l i v i n g , i t is d e m o t e d , as i t were. O n the
other h a n d , a s p i r i t always has some sort o f p o w e r , a n d i n d e e d i t is d e f i n e d b y
that p o w e r . I t has a u t h o r i t y over some range o f cosmic o r social p h e n o m e n a ;
it has a m o r e o r less precise f u n c t i o n t o p e r f o r m i n t h e w o r l d scheme.
B u t some souls m e e t this dual c o n d i t i o n a n d thus are spirits proper. These
are the souls o f m y t h i c a l personages that are placed b y p o p u l a r i m a g i n a t i o n at
the b e g i n n i n g o f time: the A l c h e r i n g a o r A l t j i r a n g a m i t j i n a people o f the
A r u n t a , the M u r a - m u r a s o f the Lake E y r e tribes, the M u k - K u r n a i s o f the K u r -
nai, and others. I n a sense, these actually are still souls, since they are t h o u g h t
to have a n i m a t e d bodies i n the past b u t t o have separated from t h e m at some
p o i n t . H o w e v e r , as w e have seen, even w h i l e they were l i v i n g earthly lives,
they already h a d e x c e p t i o n a l powers. T h e y had mana superior t o that o f o r d i -
nary m e n , a n d they k e p t i t thereafter. Besides, they have definite functions.
T o b e g i n w i t h , w h e t h e r w e accept Spencer a n d Gillen's a c c o u n t or
Strehlow's, t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r e n s u r i n g the p e r i o d i c r e c r u i t m e n t o f t h e
clan falls squarely o n t h e i r shoulders. M a t t e r s o f c o n c e p t i o n are t h e i r d o m a i n .
O n c e c o n c e p t i o n has t a k e n place, t h e ancestor's task is n o t f i n i s h e d . I t is
u p t o h i m t o w a t c h over the n e w b o r n . Later, w h e n the c h i l d has b e c o m e a
m a n , the ancestor accompanies h i m o n the h u n t a n d drives game t o w a r d
h i m , w a r n s h i m i n dreams o f dangers h e m a y e n c o u n t e r , protects h i m from
his enemies, a n d so f o r t h . O n this p o i n t , S t r e h l o w is i n entire agreement
4
w i t h Spencer a n d G i l l e n . G r a n t e d , o n e m a y w o n d e r h o w , o n t h e i r account,
the ancestor can p e r f o r m this f u n c t i o n . I t w o u l d seem that because h e r e i n -
carnates h i m s e l f at t h e m o m e n t o f c o n c e p t i o n , h e w o u l d have t o be assimi-

2
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 515, 521; [James] Dawson [Australian Aborigines: The Languages,
and Customs of Several Tribes ofAborigines in the Western District of Victoria, Australia, Melbourne, G. Robert-
son, 1881], p. 58; Roth, Superstition, Magic, §67.
'Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 517.
4
[Carl] Strehlow [DieAranda- und Loritja-Stamme in ZentralAustralien, Frankfurt, J. Baer, 1907], vol. II,
p. 76 and n. 1; Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 514, 516.
278 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

latecl w i t h the child's s o u l a n d thus c o u l d n o t possibly p r o t e c t i t f r o m outside.

B u t he can because he does n o t reincarnate h i m s e l f w h o l e , b u t instead p r o -
duces his d o u b l e . O n e p a r t enters the b o d y o f t h e w o m a n a n d impregnates
her; a n o t h e r c o n t i n u e s t o exist outside and, w i t h the special n a m e o f A r u m -
5
buringa, performs the function o f tutelary genie.
W e can see h o w closely a k i n that ancestral s p i r i t is t o t h e genius o f the
6
Latins a n d t h e 8ca'u.un> o f t h e G r e e k s . T h e i r f u n c t i o n s are c o m p l e t e l y i d e n t i -
cal. I n d e e d t h e genius is, above a l l , the o n e w h o engenders—qui gignit. T h e
7
genius expresses a n d personifies t h e generative f o r c e . A t t h e same t i m e , i t is
the p r o t e c t o r a n d g u i d e o f the p a r t i c u l a r i n d i v i d u a l t o w h o s e person i t is at-
8
t a c h e d . Finally, i t merges w i t h that i n d i v i d u a l ' s v e r y personality, representing
the set o f characteristic i n c l i n a t i o n s a n d tendencies that g i v e h i m d i s t i n c t i v e -
9
ness a m o n g o t h e r m e n . Hence t h e w e l l - k n o w n saying indulgere genio,
defraudare genium* i n the sense o f " f o l l o w one's n a t u r a l t e m p e r a m e n t . " F u n -
damentally, t h e genius is a n o t h e r f o r m of, a n d a d o u b l e of, the i n d i v i d u a l ' s
1 0
soul itself. T h e p a r t i a l s y n o n y m y o f genius a n d manes proves t h i s . T h e manes
are the genius after death, b u t t h e y are also the part o f the deceased that sur-
v i v e s — i n o t h e r w o r d s , the s o u l o f the deceased. I n t h e same way, the
A r u n t a ' s s o u l a n d t h e ancestral s p i r i t that serve as his genius are b u t t w o d i f -
ferent aspects o f the same b e i n g .
T h e ancestor has a d e f i n e d p o s i t i o n , h o w e v e r , n o t o n l y i n r e l a t i o n t o
persons b u t also i n r e l a t i o n t o t h i n g s . T h o u g h his t r u e residence is p r e s u m e d
t o be u n d e r g r o u n d , the ancestor is t h o u g h t t o keep h a u n t i n g t h e site o f his
nanja tree o r r o c k , o r o f the w a t e r h o l e t h a t was spontaneously f o r m e d at the
exact m o m e n t he disappeared i n t o the g r o u n d , after e n d i n g his first exis-
tence. Since that tree o r r o c k is t h o u g h t t o represent t h e b o d y o f the hero, his
soul itself is i m a g i n e d t o r e t u r n there c o n t i n u a l l y a n d t o reside there m o r e o r
less p e r m a n e n d y . T h e presence o f t h a t s o u l accounts f o r t h e r e l i g i o u s respect

T o indulge one's genius is to cheat one's genius. That is, to cater to one's genius, rather than letting
it assert itself, is to frustrate it. Trans.
5
[Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes], p. 513.
6
See [Augusto] Negrioli on this question, Dei Genii presso i Romani, [Bologna, Ditta Nicola Zanichelli,
1900]; the articles "Daimon" and "Genius" in Dictionnaire des antiquités [Grecques et Romaines, Paris, Ha-
chette, 1877-1919]; [Ludwig] Preller, Roemische Mythologie [Berlin, Weidmann, 1858], vol. II, pp. 195ÎF.
7
Negrioli, Dei Genii presso i Romani, p. 4.
8
Ibid., p. 8.
9
Ibid., p. 7.
10
Ibid., p. 11. Cf. Samter, "Der Ursprung des Larencultus," in Archiv Jiïr Religionswissenschaft, 1907,
pp. 368-393.
 The Notion of Spirits and Gods 279

evoked b y those places. N o o n e m a y snap a b r a n c h o f the nanja tree w i t h o u t

1 1
risk o f f a l l i n g i l l . " A t o n e time, t h e act o f f e l l i n g o r d a m a g i n g i t was p u n -
ished w i t h death. K i l l i n g an a n i m a l o r b i r d that takes refuge there is f o r b i d -
den. E v e n t h e s u r r o u n d i n g b u s h has t o be respected—the grass m u s t n o t be
b u r n e d . T h e rocks, t o o , m u s t be treated w i t h respect. T o m o v e o r break
12
t h e m is f o r b i d d e n . " Since this q u a l i t y o f sacredness is ascribed t o t h e ances-
1 3
tor, he seems t o be t h e s p i r i t o f that tree, r o c k , w a t e r h o l e , o r s p r i n g — l e t
1 4
the s p r i n g be considered as h a v i n g t o d o w i t h the r a i n , and he becomes a
spirit o f t h e r a i n . T h u s , these same souls that, i n o n e o f t h e i r aspects, serve
m e n as p r o t e c t i v e genies also p e r f o r m cosmic f u n c t i o n s . O n e o f R o t h ' s texts
is p r o b a b l y t o be u n d e r s t o o d i n this w a y : I n N o r t h Q u e e n s l a n d , the nature
spirits are said t o be souls o f the dead that have chosen t o reside i n the forests
15
or i n caves.
N o w w e have s p i r i t beings that are s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n w a n d e r i n g
16
souls w i t h o u t specific p o w e r s . S t r e h l o w calls t h e m g o d s , b u t this t e r m is i n -
appropriate, at least i n t h e vast m a j o r i t y o f cases. A n d i n a society such as that
o f the A r u n t a , w h e r e each i n d i v i d u a l has a p r o t e c t i n g ancestor, there w o u l d
be as m a n y gods as i n d i v i d u a l s , o r m o r e . T o a p p l y t h e n o u n " g o d " t o a sacred
b e i n g that has o n l y o n e adherent w o u l d p r o m o t e t e r m i n o l o g i c a l c o n f u s i o n .
I t is t r u e t h a t an ancestor figure can sometimes b e c o m e enlarged t o the p o i n t
that i t resembles a d e i t y proper. A m o n g t h e W a r r a m u n g a , as I have p o i n t e d
1 7
out, t h e entire clan is t h o u g h t t o b e descended f r o m a single ancestor. H o w ,
u n d e r c e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s , this c o l l e c t i v e ancestor c o u l d have b e c o m e the o b -
j e c t o f collective d e v o t i o n is easily c o m p r e h e n d e d . T h i s h a p p e n e d t o the

"[Rev. Louis] Schulze, "Aborigines of the Upper and Middle Finke River," RSSA, vol. XIV [1891],
p. 237.
12
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, p. 5. Cf. Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 133; S. Gason, in [Edward
Micklethwaite] Curr, [ The Australian Race: Its Origin, Languages, Customs, Place of Landing in Australia and the
Routes by Which It Spread Itself over That Continent, Melbourne, J. Ferres, 1886-1887], vol. II, p. 69.
13
See, in [Alfred William] Howitt [The NativeTribes of South East Australia, London, Macmillan, 1904],
p. 482), the case of a Mura-mura who is regarded as the spirit of certain hot springs.
"[Baldwin Spencer and Francis James Gillen], Northern Tribes [of Central Australia London, Macmillan,
1904], pp. 313-314; [Robert Hamilton] Mathews, "[Ethnological Notes on the] Aboriginal Tribes of
New South Wales and Victoria," RSNSW, vol. XXXVIII [1904], p. 351. Similarly, among the Dieri, there
is a Mura-mura whose function is to produce rain (Howitt, NativeTribes, pp. 798—799).
15
Roth, Superstition, Magic, §67. Cf. Dawson, Australian Aborigines, p. 58.
16
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, pp. 2ff.
"See above, p. 252, n. 53.
280 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

18
snake W o l l u n q u a , t o take o n e e x a m p l e . A c c o r d i n g t o belief, this m y t h i c a l
a n i m a l ( f r o m w h i c h the clan o f the same n a m e is t h o u g h t t o o r i g i n a t e ) c o n -
tinues t o live i n a w a t e r h o l e that is h e l d i n religious v e n e r a t i o n . M o r e o v e r , i t
is the object o f a c u l t that t h e clan celebrates collectively. T h e y t r y t o please
i t a n d g a i n its favor b y means o f p a r t i c u l a r rites, m a k i n g prayers o f a sort t o
i t , a n d so f o r t h . T h u s , o n e can say this m y t h i c a l a n i m a l is l i k e the g o d o f the
clan. B u t this is a v e r y unusual case even, a c c o r d i n g t o Spencer and G i l l e n , a
u n i q u e one. N o r m a l l y , " s p i r i t " is t h e o n l y w o r d that is suitable f o r designat-
i n g these ancestral personages.
As t o the m a n n e r i n w h i c h that idea was f o r m e d , w e m a y say that i t is
o b v i o u s from all that has b e e n said u p t o n o w .
As I have s h o w n , o n c e the existence o f souls was accepted, i t c o u l d n o t
be c o m p r e h e n d e d w i t h o u t i m a g i n i n g , at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f things, an o r i g i n a l
f u n d o f f u n d a m e n t a l souls from w h i c h all t h e others d e r i v e d . These arche-
t y p i c a l souls m u s t necessarily have b e e n i m a g i n e d as c o n t a i n i n g i n themselves
the source o f all r e l i g i o u s efficacy, for, since t h e i m a g i n a t i o n goes b a c k n o
further, all the sacred things are h e l d t o c o m e from t h e m : t h e i n s t r u m e n t s o f
the c u l t , the m e m b e r s o f the clan, t h e animals o f t h e t o t e m i c species. T h e y
incarnate all t h e religiousness that is diffused t h r o u g h o u t t h e t r i b e a n d t h e
w o r l d . T h i s is w h y p o w e r s are a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e m that are m a r k e d l y s u p e r i o r
t o those enjoyed b y the m e r e souls o f m e n . M o r e o v e r , t i m e itself increases
and reinforces the sacredness o f t h e things. A v e r y o l d c h u r i n g a elicits far
19
greater respect t h a n a m o d e r n o n e a n d is t h o u g h t t o have m o r e v i r t u e s . It
is as t h o u g h the feelings o f v e n e r a t i o n i t has received t h r o u g h successive g e n -
erations' h a n d l i n g are a c c u m u l a t e d i n i t . F o r the same reason, t h e personages
that have b e e n t h e subjects o f m y t h s t r a n s m i t t e d respectfully f o r centuries
f r o m m o u t h t o m o u t h , a n d t h a t are p e r i o d i c a l l y enacted b y rites, w e r e b o u n d
t o take an altogether special place i n p o p u l a r i m a g i n a t i o n .
B u t h o w does i t h a p p e n t h a t instead o f r e m a i n i n g outside t h e f r a m e w o r k
o f society, t h e y have b e c o m e regular m e m b e r s o f it? T h e reason is that each
i n d i v i d u a l is the d o u b l e o f an ancestor. N o w , w h e n t w o beings are so closely
a k i n , t h e y are naturally t h o u g h t o f as u n i f i e d ; since t h e y share the same n a -
ture, w h a t affects o n e seems necessarily t o affect the other. I n this way, t h e
t r o o p o f the m y t h i c a l ancestors became attached t o t h e society o f the l i v i n g
b y a m o r a l b o n d ; the same interests a n d passions w e r e i m p u t e d t o b o t h ; a n d

18
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, chap. VII.
"Ibid., p. 277.
The Notion of Spirits and Gods 281

they w e r e seen as associates. B u t since the ancestors h a d h i g h e r status t h a n

the l i v i n g , this association entered t h e p u b l i c m i n d as a relationship b e t w e e n
superiors a n d subordinates, patrons a n d clients, helpers a n d h e l p e d . T h u s was
b o r n the c u r i o u s n o t i o n o f the t u t e l a r y genie attached t o each i n d i v i d u a l .
H o w t h e ancestor was p l a c e d i n c o n t a c t n o t o n l y w i t h m e n b u t also w i t h
things m i g h t appear a m o r e t r o u b l e s o m e q u e s t i o n . A t first glance, i t is n o t
obvious w h a t relationship c o u l d exist b e t w e e n a personage o f this k i n d a n d a
tree o r r o c k . B u t a piece o f i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t w e o w e t o S t r e h l o w provides us
w i t h at least a plausible s o l u t i o n t o this p r o b l e m .
T h o s e trees and rocks are n o t situated j u s t a n y w h e r e i n the t r i b a l t e r r i -
t o r y b u t are massed f o r t h e m o s t p a r t a r o u n d c e r t a i n sanctuaries (called e r t -
n a t u l u n g a b y Spencer a n d G i l l e n a n d arknanaua b y S t r e h l o w ) , w h e r e the
2 0
churingas o f t h e c l a n are k e p t . H o w deeply these places are respected w e
k n o w from the v e r y fact that t h e m o s t precious c u l t i n s t r u m e n t s are k e p t
there. I n a d d i t i o n , each o f t h e m radiates sanctity. T h i s is w h y the nearby trees
and rocks seem sacred, w h y i t is f o r b i d d e n t o destroy o r damage t h e m , a n d
w h y any v i o l e n c e against t h e m is sacrilege. T h i s sacredness stems from the
p h e n o m e n o n o f psychic c o n t a g i o n . T o a c c o u n t f o r i t , t h e native is o b l i g e d t o
grant that these different objects are i n relations w i t h the beings that he sees
as the source o f a l l r e l i g i o u s p o w e r — t h a t is, w i t h t h e A l c h e r i n g a ancestors.
T h e r e i n originates t h e system o f m y t h s I have r e c o u n t e d . E a c h e r t n a t u l u n g a
was i m a g i n e d t o m a r k t h e place w h e r e a g r o u p o f ancestors w e r e s w a l l o w e d
u p b y the earth. T h e m o u n d s a n d trees t h a t t h e n covered the g r o u n d were
t h o u g h t t o represent t h e i r bodies. B u t because the soul generally retains a
c e r t a i n affinity f o r the b o d y i n w h i c h i t o n c e l i v e d , p e o p l e naturally came t o
believe that these ancestral souls p r e f e r r e d t o keep frequenting the places
w h e r e t h e i r physical envelope r e m a i n e d . H e n c e t h e y w e r e l o c a l i z e d i n trees,
rocks, a n d w a t e r holes. I n this way, each o f t h e m , w h i l e r e m a i n i n g attached
t o the guardianship o f a d e f i n i t e i n d i v i d u a l , f o u n d itself t r a n s f o r m e d i n t o a
21
sort o f genius loci* a n d p e r f o r m e d t h e f u n c t i o n o f o n e .

* A spirit attached to a place. Standard Roman belief was that every place had one.
20
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, p. 5.
21
It is true that some nanja trees and rocks are not situated around the ertnatulunga but are scattered
across various parts of the territory. They are said to correspond to places where a lone ancestor disap-
peared into the ground, lost an appendage, spilled some blood, or forgot a churinga that was transformed
into either a tree or a rock. But these totemic sites have only secondary importance; Strehlow calls them
kleinere Totemplatze (Aranda, vol. I, pp. 4—5). So we can imagine that they took on this character only by
analogy with the principal totemic centers. The trees and rocks that in some way resembled those found
in the neighborhood of the ertnatulunga stirred similar feelings, so as a result the myth that formed a pro¬
pos of the place extended to the things.
282 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

T h u s elucidated, these ideas p u t us i n a p o s i t i o n t o u n d e r s t a n d a f o r m o f

t o t e m i s m that u n t i l n o w h a d t o be left u n e x p l a i n e d : i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m i s m .
A n i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m is d e f i n e d b y essentially t h e t w o f o l l o w i n g charac-
teristics: (1) i t is a b e i n g i n t h e f o r m o f an a n i m a l o r p l a n t w h o s e f u n c t i o n is
t o p r o t e c t an i n d i v i d u a l ; (2) t h e fate o f the i n d i v i d u a l a n d that o f its p a t r o n
are closely i n t e r d e p e n d e n t . E v e r y t h i n g that affects t h e p a t r o n is passed o n
sympathetically t o the i n d i v i d u a l . T h e ancestral spirits j u s t discussed f i t the
same d e f i n i t i o n . T h e y also b e l o n g , at least i n part, t o t h e r e a l m o f animals o r
o f plants. T h e y t o o are t u t e l a r y genies. Finally, a sympathetic b o n d attaches
each i n d i v i d u a l t o his p r o t e c t i n g ancestor. T h e nanja tree, t h e m y s t i c a l b o d y
o f that ancestor, c a n n o t be destroyed w i t h o u t the man's f e e l i n g threatened.
T r u e , this b e l i e f is l o s i n g some o f its force n o w , b u t Spencer a n d G i l l e n f o u n d
22
i t still i n existence, a n d t h e y j u d g e i t t o have b e e n w i d e s p r e a d i n t h e p a s t .
T h a t these t w o ideas are i d e n t i c a l can be seen even i n the details. T h e a n -
cestral souls live i n trees o r rocks that are considered sacred. Similarly, a m o n g
the E u a h l a y i , t h e s p i r i t o f t h e a n i m a l t h a t serves as an i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m is h e l d
23
t o live i n a tree o r s t o n e . T h i s tree o r stone is sacred: N o o n e m a y t o u c h i t ,
except the o n e w h o s e t o t e m i t is; and, w h e n i t is a stone o r a r o c k , t h e p r o -
24
h i b i t i o n is a b s o l u t e . T h e result is that these are t r u e places o f refuge.
Finally, w e have seen that t h e i n d i v i d u a l soul is b u t a different aspect o f
the ancestral s p i r i t ; i n a way, this s p i r i t serves, t o use Strehlow's phrase, as a
25
second self. Similarly, t o use M r s . Parker's phrase, t h e i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m o f
the E u a h l a y i , called Y u n b e a i , is an alter ego o f the i n d i v i d u a l : " T h e s o u l o f
2 6
the m a n is i n his Y u n b e a i , a n d the s o u l o f his Y u n b e a i is i n h i m . " I n essence,
t h e n , i t is o n e soul i n t w o bodies. T h e k i n s h i p o f these t w o ideas is so great
that t h e y are sometimes expressed w i t h o n e a n d the same w o r d . T h i s is t r u e
i n Melanesia a n d Polynesia: atai o n the island o f M o t a , tamaniu o n t h e island
o f A u r o r a , a n d talegia at M o t l a w designate b o t h the soul o f an i n d i v i d u a l and
2 7 28
his personal t o t e m . T h e same is t r u e o f aitu i n S a m o a . T h i s is because the

22
[Spencer and Gillen], Native Tribes, p. 139.
a
{K. Langloh] Parker, [Catherine Sommerville Field Parker], The Euahlayi [Tribe, London, A. Con-
stable, 1905], p. 21. The tree that serves this purpose is generally one of those that figure among the in-
dividual's subtotems. The reason given for this choice is that, being of the same family, they are probably
more inclined to help him.
24
Ibid., p. 36.
25
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, p. 81.
^Parker, Euahlayi Tribe , p. 21.
27
[Robert Henry] Codrington, The Melanesians [Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1891], pp. 249—253.
28
[George] Turner, Samoa, London, Macmillan, 1884, p. 17.
The Notion of Spirits and Gods 283

i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m is t h e o u t w a r d a n d visible form o f the self, the personality,

2 9
and the soul is its i n w a r d a n d invisible f o r m .
T h u s , the i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m has all the essential characteristics o f t h e p r o -
tecting ancestor a n d plays t h e same role. A l l this is so because its o r i g i n is the
same, a n d i t arises f r o m t h e same idea.
I n fact, b o t h i n v o l v e a d u p l i c a t i o n o f t h e soul. L i k e the ancestor, the
t o t e m is the i n d i v i d u a l ' s soul, b u t the s o u l e x t e r n a l i z e d and invested w i t h
greater p o w e r s t h a n those i t is b e l i e v e d t o have w h i l e inside the b o d y . T h i s
d u p l i c a t i o n arises f r o m a p s y c h o l o g i c a l need, f o r all i t does is e x p l a i n the n a -
ture o f t h e soul w h i c h , as w e have seen, is d o u b l e . I t is ours i n a sense, i t e x -
presses o u r personality. B u t i t is outside us at the same time, since i t is the
extension inside us o f a r e l i g i o u s force that is outside us. W e c a n n o t b e c o m e
fully m e r g e d w i t h i t because w e ascribe t o i t a stature a n d a respect that l i f t i t
above us a n d o u r e m p i r i c a l i n d i v i d u a l i t y . T h e r e is a p a r t o f us, t h e n , that w e
t e n d t o p r o j e c t outside ourselves. T h i s w a y o f c o n c e i v i n g ourselves is so w e l l
established i n o u r nature t h a t even w h e n w e t r y t o conceive o f ourselves
w i t h o u t u s i n g any r e l i g i o u s s y m b o l , w e c a n n o t escape i t . O u r m o r a l c o n -
sciousness is l i k e the nucleus a r o u n d w h i c h the idea o f soul t o o k f o r m , a n d
yet w h e n i t speaks t o us, i t seems t o be a p o w e r outside o f and greater t h a n
us, l a y i n g d o w n t h e l a w t o a n d j u d g i n g us, b u t also h e l p i n g a n d s u p p o r t i n g
us. W h e n w e have i t o n o u r side, w e feel stronger a m i d t h e trials o f life a n d
m o r e c e r t a i n o f o v e r c o m i n g , j u s t as the A u s t r a l i a n w h o has confidence i n his
30
ancestor o r his personal t o t e m feels m o r e valiant against his e n e m i e s . Thus
there is s o m e t h i n g objective at the basis o f these different ideas—be t h e y the
R o m a n genius, the i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m , o r t h e A l c h e r i n g a ancestor—and that is
the reason t h e y have s u r v i v e d i n v a r i o u s f o r m s u n t i l today. E v e r y t h i n g w o r k s
o u t as i f w e really d i d have t w o souls: o n e that is i n us—or, rather, is us; a n -
o t h e r that is above us, a n d w h o s e f u n c t i o n is t o oversee and assist the first.
Frazer h a d an i n k l i n g that there was an e x t e r n a l soul i n t h e i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m ,

29
These are the very words used by Codrington, The Melanesians (p. 251).
30
This close relationship among the soul, the protective genie, and the moral consciousness of the in-
dividual is especially apparent among certain peoples of Indonesia: "One of the seven souls of the Toba-
batak is buried with the placenta; while it prefers to reside there, it can leave to give warnings to the
individual or to show approval when he conducts himself well. Thus, in a certain sense, it plays the role
of moral conscience. However, its warnings do not extend only to the domain of moral affairs. It is called
the younger brother of the soul, just as the placenta is called the younger brother of the child. . . . In war,
it inspires the man with the courage to march against the enemy" ([Johannes Gustav] Warneck, Der
bataksche Ahnen und Geisterkult, in Allgemeine Missionszeitschrift, Berlin, 1904, p. 10. Cf. [Albertus Christi-
aan] Kruijt, Het Animisme in den indischen Archipel ['s Gravenhage, M. Nijhoff, 1906], p. 25).
284 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

b u t he b e l i e v e d that e x t e r n a l i t y was the result o f an artifice o r a magician's

31
t r i c k . I n reality, i t is i m p l i c i t i n the v e r y c o n s t i t u t i o n o f the idea o f s o u l .

II
I n the m a i n , the spirits j u s t discussed are k i n d . N o d o u b t , they sometimes
32
p u n i s h the m a n w h o does n o t treat t h e m p r o p e r l y , b u t d o i n g h a r m is n o t
their function.
I n itself, however, the s p i r i t can be used f o r e v i l as w e l l as f o r g o o d . T h i s
is w h y a class o f clever genies n a t u r a l l y came i n t o b e i n g opposite the a u x i l i a r y
a n d t u t e l a r y spirits, w h i c h a l l o w e d m e n t o e x p l a i n the e n d u r i n g evils they
33 34 35
had to suffer—nightmares, illnesses, tornadoes, s t o r m s , and so f o r t h .
Doubdess, this is n o t because all h u m a n miseries appeared t o be t o o a b n o r -
m a l t o be e x p l a i n e d o t h e r w i s e t h a n b y supernatural forces, b u t because, back
t h e n , all those forces w e r e t h o u g h t o f i n r e l i g i o u s f o r m . A r e l i g i o u s p r i n c i p l e
is regarded as the source o f life; hence i t was l o g i c a l f o r all t h e events that dis-
t u r b o r destroy life t o b e b r o u g h t b a c k t o a p r i n c i p l e o f the same k i n d .
T h e s e h a r m f u l spirits seem t o have b e e n c o n c e i v e d a c c o r d i n g t o the
same m o d e l as the b e n e f i c e n t genies j u s t discussed. T h e y are c o n c e i v e d i n the

31
StiIl to be discovered is how it happens that, from some point in evolution on, this doubling of the
soul was done in the form of the individual totem rather than that of the protecting ancestor. The ques-
tion has perhaps more ethnographic than sociological interest. Still, here is how the origin of this substi-
tution might be imagined.
The individual totem must have played a purely complementary role at first. The individuals who
wished to acquire powers above the ordinary were not content, and could not be content, with only the
protection of the ancestor. Hence they sought to fit themselves out with another auxiliary of the same
kind. And so it is that, among the Euahlayi, the magicians are the only ones who have, or could have, pro-
cured individual totems. Since each of them also has a collective totem, they end up with several souls.
There is nothing surprising about that multiplicity of souls; It is the condition of superior efficacy.
Once collective totemism lost ground and, in consequence, the notion of the protecting ancestor be-
gan to efface that of spirits, it became necessary to imagine the nature of the soul, which was still felt, dif-
ferendy. The idea remained that outside each individual soul there was another, responsible for watching
over thefirst.In order to uncover that protective power, since it was not designated by the fact of birth
itself, it seemed natural to use means similar to those magicians use to enter into dealings with the forces
whose help those means ensure.
32
See, for example, Strehlow, Aranda, vol. II, p. 82.
33
[J. P.] Wyatt, "Adelaide and Encounter Bay Tribes," in [James Dominick] Woods, [77ie NativeTribes
of South Australia, Adelaide, E. S. Wigg, 1879], p. 168.
'"[Rev. George] Taplin, "The Narrinyeri" [in Woods, The Native Tribes of South Australia], pp. 62-63;
Roth, Superstition, Magic, §116; Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 356, 358; Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, pp. 11-12.
35
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, pp. 13—14; Dawson, Australian Aborigines, p. 49.
The Notion of Spirits and Gods 285

3 6
form o f an a n i m a l , o r as p a r t a n i m a l a n d p a r t h u m a n , b u t people t e n d n a t -
3 7
urally t o ascribe e n o r m o u s d i m e n s i o n s a n d repulsive appearance t o t h e m .
L i k e the souls o f ancestors, t h e y are t h o u g h t t o live i n trees, rocks, w a t e r
38
holes, a n d u n d e r g r o u n d c a v e r n s . M a n y are presented t o us as the souls o f
39
persons w h o have l i v e d e a r t h l y l i v e s . Spencer a n d G i l l e n say explicitly, so
far as the A r u n t a i n p a r t i c u l a r are c o n c e r n e d , that these b a d genies, k n o w n
40
b y the name O r u n c h a , are A l c h e r i n g a b e i n g s . A m o n g the personages o f
m y t h i c a l times, there w e r e different temperaments. C e r t a i n o f t h e m h a d a n d
41
still have c r u e l a n d m e a n i n s t i n c t s , w h i l e others w e r e o f i n n a t e l y p o o r c o n -
s t i t u t i o n — t h i n a n d haggard. T h e r e f o r e , w h e n t h e y w e n t d o w n i n t o the
g r o u n d , t h e nanja rocks t o w h i c h t h e y gave b i r t h w e r e considered t o be c e n -
42
ters o f dangerous i n f l u e n c e s .
C e r t a i n characteristics d i s t i n g u i s h t h e m from t h e i r b r e t h r e n , the A l c h e r -
inga heroes. T h e y d o n o t reincarnate themselves; t h e y are never represented
43
a m o n g the l i v i n g ; a n d t h e y are w i t h o u t h u m a n p r o g e n y . So w h e n , a c c o r d -
i n g t o c e r t a i n signs, a c h i l d is b e l i e v e d t o be the p r o d u c t o f t h e i r labors, i t is
4 4
p u t t o death as s o o n as i t is b o r n . I n a d d i t i o n , these h a r m f u l spirits d o n o t
b e l o n g t o any d e f i n i t e t o t e m i c center a n d are outside the social organiza-
45
tion. T h r o u g h all these traits, w e see t h a t such powers are far m o r e m a g i c

^Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, pp. 11-14; [Richard] Eylmann [Die Eingeborenen der Kolonie Sud Australien,
Berlin, D. Reumer], pp. 182, 185, Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 211; [Rev. C. W.] Schürmann, The
Aboriginal Tribes of Port Lincoln, in Woods [The Native Tribes of South Australia], p. 239.
37
Eylmann, Eingeborenen, p. 182.
38
Mathews, "Aboriginal Tribes," p. 345; [Lorimer] Fison and [Alfred William] Howitt, Kamilaroi and
Kurnai [Melbourne, G. Robertson, 1880], p. 467; Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, p. 11.
39
Roth, Superstition, Magic, §115; Eylmann, Eingeborenen, p. 190.

""Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 390—391. Strehlow calls the bad spirits Erintja, but this word
and Oruncha are obviously equivalents. Yet they are presented in different ways. The Oruncha, according
to Spencer and Gillen, are more malicious than evil; indeed, according to these observers (p. 328), totally
evil beings are unknown to the Arunta. By contrast, Strehlow's Erintja have the routine function of do-
ing evil. Furthermore, according to certain myths that Spencer and Gillen themselves report (Native Tribes,
p. 390), it seems that they have embellished the Orunchafiguressomewhat. Originally, they were more
like ogres (ibid., p. 331).
•"Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 390—391.
42
Ibid., p. 551.
43
Ibid., pp. 326-327.
44
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, p. 14. When there are twins, the firstborn is thought to have been con-
ceived in that way.
45
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 327.
286 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

t h a n t h e y are r e l i g i o u s . A n d i n d e e d , t h e y are above all i n contact w i t h the

4 6
m a g i c i a n , w h o o f t e n obtains his p o w e r s f r o m t h e m . I thus arrive at the
p o i n t w h e r e the w o r l d o f r e l i g i o n ends a n d that o f m a g i c begins; a n d since
47
m a g i c is b e y o n d the scope o f m y research, I n e e d p u s h that study n o f u r t h e r .

Ill
T h e appearance o f the idea o f spirit marks an i m p o r t a n t advance i n the i n d i -
v i d u a t i o n o f religious forces. Nevertheless, the spirit beings discussed u p t o
now c o n t i n u e t o be o n l y secondary personages. E i t h e r t h e y are e v i l genies
that b e l o n g m o r e t o m a g i c t h a n t o r e l i g i o n , o r else, attached t o a definite i n -
d i v i d u a l a n d place, they can m a k e t h e i r i n f l u e n c e felt o n l y w i t h i n a v e r y l i m -
i t e d radius. T h e r e f o r e they can be the objects o f o n l y private a n d local rites.
B u t once the idea o f spirit t o o k f o r m , i t n a t u r a l l y e x t e n d e d i n t o the h i g h e r
spheres o f religious life. A n d i n this way, h i g h e r - o r d e r m y t h i c a l personalities
were b o r n .
A l t h o u g h the ceremonies p r o p e r t o each clan differ f r o m o n e another,
t h e y b e l o n g t o the same r e l i g i o n nonetheless, a n d so there are basic s i m i l a r i -
ties. Since every clan is b u t a p a r t o f o n e a n d t h e same t r i b e , t h e u n i t y o f the
t r i b e c a n n o t fail t o s h o w t h r o u g h the d i v e r s i t y o f p a r t i c u l a r cults. A n d as i t
t u r n s o u t , there is i n d e e d n o t o t e m i c g r o u p t h a t does n o t have churingas a n d
b u l l roarers, w h i c h are used e v e r y w h e r e i n a similar way. T h e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f
the t r i b e i n t o phratries, m a r r i a g e classes, a n d clans, a n d t h e e x o g a m i c p r o h i -
b i t i o n s attached thereto, are also g e n u i n e l y t r i b a l i n s t i t u t i o n s . A l l the festivals
o f i n i t i a t i o n i n v o l v e c e r t a i n basic p r a c t i c e s — t o o t h e x t r a c t i o n , c i r c u m c i s i o n ,
s u b i n c i s i o n , a n d o t h e r s — t h a t d o n o t v a r y b y t o t e m w i t h i n a single t r i b e .
U n i f o r m i t y i n this m a t t e r is t h e m o r e easdy established since i n i t i a t i o n always
takes place i n the presence o f t h e t r i b e , o r at least before an assembly t o
w h i c h different clans have b e e n s u m m o n e d . T h e reason is that the a i m o f i n i -
t i a t i o n is t o i n t r o d u c e t h e n o v i c e i n t o t h e r e l i g i o u s life o f the t r i b e as a w h o l e ,
n o t m e r e l y that o f t h e c l a n i n t o w h i c h he was b o r n . T h e r e f o r e the v a r i e d as-
pects o f the t r i b a l r e l i g i o n m u s t be enacted before h i m and, i n a sense, pass
before his eyes. T h i s is the occasion o n w h i c h t h e m o r a l a n d r e l i g i o u s u n i t y
o f the t r i b e is best d e m o n s t r a t e d .

^Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 358, 381, 385; Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 334; Northern Tribes,
p. 327.
"Nevertheless, the spirit beings discussed up to now continue to be spirits whose only function is to
do ill; the others' role is to prevent or neutralize the evil influence of thefirst.Cases of this kind are to be
found in Northern Tribes, pp. 501—502. What brings out clearly that both are magical is that, among the
Arunta, both have the same name. Hence, these are different aspects of the same magical power.
The Notion of Spirits and Gods 287

H e n c e there are i n each society a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f rites that are d i s t i n -

guished f r o m all the others b y t h e i r h o m o g e n e i t y a n d t h e i r universality. B e -
cause such a remarkable c o n c o r d a n c e d i d n o t seem explainable except b y
c o m m o n o r i g i n , i t was i m a g i n e d that each g r o u p o f similar rites h a d b e e n i n -
stituted b y o n e a n d the same ancestor, w h o h a d c o m e t o reveal t h e m t o the
t r i b e as a w h o l e . T h u s , a m o n g t h e A r u n t a , an ancestor o f the W i l d c a t clan,
48
named Putiaputia, is h e l d t o have t a u g h t m e n h o w t o make churingas a n d
4 9
use t h e m r i t u a l l y ; a m o n g t h e W a r r a m u n g a , i t is M u r t u - m u r t u ; a m o n g the
5 0 5 1
U r a b u n n a , i t is W i t u r n a ; A t n a t u a m o n g the K a i t i s h and T u n d u n among
5 2
the K u r n a i . Similarly, the practices o f c i r c u m c i s i o n are ascribed b y the east-
53
e r n D i e r i a n d several o t h e r t r i b e s t o t w o specific M u r a - m u r a s , a n d b y the
A r u n t a t o an A l c h e r i n g a h e r o o f the L i z a r d t o t e m , n a m e d Mangarkun-
5 4
jerkunja. T o the same personage are ascribed the i n s t i t u t i o n o f m a r r i a g e
p r o h i b i t i o n s a n d the social o r g a n i z a t i o n t h e y e n t a i l , the discovery o f fire, the
i n v e n t i o n o f the spear, t h e shield, t h e b o o m e r a n g , a n d so f o r t h . Incidentally,
the i n v e n t o r o f t h e b u l l roarer is o f t e n considered t o be the f o u n d e r o f the
5 5
i n i t i a t i o n rites, as w e l l .
These special ancestors c o u l d n o t be placed o n a par w i t h the others. For
o n e t h i n g , the feelings o f v e n e r a t i o n t h e y i n s p i r e d w e r e n o t l i m i t e d t o o n e
clan b u t w e r e c o m m o n t o the w h o l e t r i b e . F o r another, all that was v a l u e d
m o s t i n the t r i b a l c i v i l i z a t i o n was a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e m . F o r this t w o f o l d reason,
t h e y became the o b j e c t o f special v e n e r a t i o n . F o r example, i t is said that

48
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, p. 9. Moreover, Putiaputia is not the only personage of this kind that is
mentioned in the Arunta myths. Certain parts of the tribe give a different name to the hero to whom they
attribute the same invention. It should be borne in mind that the breadth of the territory occupied by the
Arunta does not permit the mythology to be perfecdy homogeneous.
49
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 493.
"Ibid., p. 498.
51
Ibid., pp. 498-499.
52
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 135.

"Ibid., pp. 476ff.

54
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, pp. 6—8. Later, the work of Mangarkunjerkunja had to be taken in hand
again by other heroes; according to a belief that is not peculiar to the Arunta, a moment came when men
forgot the teachings of theirfirstinitiators and compromised themselves. [Here, Durkheim may well have
been thinking of the biblical prophets. Notice that this point is unrelated to the one made in the text.
Trans.]
"This is the case, for example, of Atnatu (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 153), and of Witurna
(ibid., p. 498). If Tundun did not initiate the rites, it is he who is charged with directing their celebration
(Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 670).
288 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

A t n a t u was b o r n i n the sky, even before A l c h e r i n g a times, a n d that he made

a n d n a m e d h i m s e l f T h e stars are his wives o r his daughters. B e y o n d the sky
w h e r e he lives, there is a n o t h e r w i t h a n o t h e r s u n . * H i s name is sacred and
5 6
m u s t never be said before w o m e n o r t h e u n i n i t i a t e d .
S t i l l , n o m a t t e r h o w great t h e stature o f these personages, there was never
any reason t o establish special rites i n t h e i r h o n o r , f o r t h e y are themselves n o
m o r e t h a n the r i t e p e r s o n i f i e d . T h e o n l y reason t h e y exist is t o e x p l a i n the
practices that exist. T h e y are b u t a different aspect o f those practices. T h e
c h u r i n g a is inseparable from t h e ancestor w h o i n v e n t e d i t ; t h e y sometimes
57
have the same n a m e . W h e n t h e b u l l roarer is s o u n d e d , the v o i c e o f the a n -
58
cestor is said t o be m a k i n g i t s e l f h e a r d . B u t because each o f these heroes is
m e r g e d w i t h t h e c u l t he is said t o have i n s t i t u t e d , he is t h o u g h t t o oversee the
m a n n e r i n w h i c h i t is celebrated. N o t satisfied unless t h e faithful p e r f o r m
59
t h e i r duties exacdy, he punishes those w h o are n e g l e c t f u l . T h u s he is c o n -
sidered the g u a r d i a n o f t h e r i t e as w e l l as its f o u n d e r , a n d f o r that reason he
6 0
becomes invested w i t h an a u t h e n t i c a l l y m o r a l r o l e .

IV
Yet even this m y t h o l o g i c a l f o r m a t i o n is n o t the m o s t advanced that is t o be
f o u n d a m o n g the Australians. Several tribes have achieved t h e c o n c e p t i o n o f
a g o d w h o , i f n o t the o n l y one, is at the least the supreme one, and o n e t o
w h o m a p r e e m i n e n t p o s i t i o n a m o n g all the o t h e r r e l i g i o u s entities is ascribed.
61
T h e existence o f that b e l i e f was l o n g ago r e p o r t e d b y various observers,
b u t H o w i t t has c o n t r i b u t e d m o s t t o establishing t h a t i t is relatively w i d e -

*In the first edition, "sun" and "moon" are not capitalized, but in the second they are. The rationale
for capitalizing them probably was that they sometimes serve as proper names. In both editions, "Kanga-
roo," "Emu," and other nouns are capitalized when they refer to clans. Trans.
^[Spencer and Gillen], Northern Tribes, p. 499.
"Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 493; [Fison and Howitt], Kamilaroi and Kurnai, pp. 197, 267; Spencer and
Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 492.
58
See, for example, Northern Tribes, p. 499.
59
Ibid., pp. 338, 347, 499.
Spencer and Gillen contend that these mythical beings play no moral role 'Northern Tribes, p. 493),
true enough; but this is because they give the word too narrow a sense. Religious duties are duties; hence
the fact of watching over the manner in which they are performed concerns morality—all the more be-
cause, at that moment, all morality is religious in character.
61
This fact had been documented as far back as 1845 by [Edward John] Eyre, Journals [of Expeditions of
Discovery into Central Australia, London, T. and W. Boone, 1845], vol. II, p. 362, and before Eyre, by Hen-
derson, in his Observations on the Colonies of New South Wales and Van Diemen's Land [Calcutta, Baptist Mis-
sion Press, 1832], p. 147.
The Notion of Spirits and Gods 289

spread. I n d e e d , he has d o c u m e n t e d i t f o r a v e r y w i d e geographic area

c o m p r i s i n g V i c t o r i a State a n d N e w S o u t h Wales, a n d e x t e n d i n g as far as
62
Queensland. T h r o u g h o u t that entire r e g i o n , a large n u m b e r o f tribes b e -
lieve i n the existence o f a g e n u i n e l y t r i b a l d e i t y that has different names i n
6 3
different regions. T h e m o s t frequendy e m p l o y e d are B u n j i l o r P u n j d , Dara-
6 4 65 6 6
mulun, and Baiame. B u t w e also f i n d the names N u r a l i e o r N u r e l l e ,
6 7 6 8
Kohin, and M u n g a n - n g a u a . T h e same idea is f o u n d farther west, a m o n g
6 9
the N a r r i n y e r i , w h e r e t h e h i g h g o d is called N u r u n d e r i o r N g u r r u n d e r i .
A m o n g t h e D i e r i , i t is q u i t e probable that, above the M u r a - m u r a s o r o r d i -
70
nary ancestors, there is o n e that enjoys a k i n d o f supremacy. Finally, i n c o n -
trast t o Spencer a n d G i l l e n , w h o c l a i m n o t t o have observed any b e l i e f i n a
7 1
g o d p r o p e r a m o n g the A r u n t a , S t r e h l o w assures us this people, as w e l l as
7 2
the L o r i t j a , recognize a t r u e " g o o d g o d , " w i t h t h e n a m e A l t j i r a .
T h e characteristics o f this personage are f u n d a m e n t a l l y the same every-
w h e r e . I t is an i m m o r t a l a n d i n d e e d an eternal b e i n g , since i t is d e r i v e d from

62
[Howitt], Native Tribes, pp. 488-508.
63
Among the Kulin, the Wotjobaluk, and the Woeworung (Victoria).
64
Among the Yuin, the Ngarrigo, and the Wolgal (New South Wales).
65
Among the Kamilaroi and the Euahlayi (the northern part of New South Wales); and more toward
the center of the same province, among the Wonghibon and the Wiradjuri.
66
Among the Wiimbaio and the tribes of Lower Murry, [William] Ridley, Kamilaroi, [and Other Aus-
tralian Languages, Sydney, T. Richards, 1875], p. 137; [Robert] Brough Smyth, [The Aborigines ofVictoria,
Melbourne, J. Ferres, 1878], vol. I, p. 423 n. 431).
"Among the tribes of the Herbert River (Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 498).
68
Among the Kurnai.
69
Taplin, "Narrinyeri," p. 55; Eylmann, Eingeborenen, p. 182.
70
It is probably to this supreme Mura-mura that Gason alludes in the passage already cited ([Edward
M.] Curr, [The Australian Race], vol. II, p. 55).
71
[Spencer and Gillen], Native Tribes, p. 246.
72
The difference between Baiame, Bunjil, and Daramulun, on the one hand, and Altjira, on the other,
would be that the last named is totally indifferent to everything that concerns humanity. It is not he who
made men, and he does not concern himself with what they do. The Arunta neither love nor fear him.
But even if that idea was accurately observed and analyzed, it is quite difficult to accept as original, for if
Altjira plays no role, explains nothing, and serves no purpose, what would have made the Arunta imag-
ine him? Perhaps he must be seen as a sort of Baiame who lost his former prestige, a former god whose
memory gradually faded. Perhaps, as well, Strehlow wrongly interpreted the accounts he collected. Ac-
cording to Eylmann (who, granted, is neither a competent nor a very reliable observer), Altjira made men
(Eingeborenen, p. 184). In addition, among the Loritja, the personage that, with the name Tukura, corre-
sponds to the Altjira of the Arunta is believed to conduct the ceremonies of initiation himself.
290 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

n o other. A f t e r h a v i n g l i v e d o n earth f o r a time, he l i f t e d himself, o r was car-

73
ried, to the sky. H e continues t o live there s u r r o u n d e d b y his f a m i l y — o n e
o r several w i v e s b e i n g w i d e l y a t t r i b u t e d t o h i m , as w e l l as c h i l d r e n and b r o t h -
74
ers w h o s o m e t i m e s assist h i m i n his f u n c t i o n s . Because o f a stay i n the sky
(together w i t h the f a m i l y a t t r i b u t e d t o h i m ) , he is o f t e n i d e n t i f i e d w i t h par-
75
t i c u l a r stars. M o r e o v e r , he is said t o have p o w e r over the stars. I t is he w h o
7 6 77
set u p the m o v e m e n t o f the sun a n d the m o o n ; he orders t h e m a b o u t . It
is he w h o causes l i g h t n i n g t o leap f o r t h from t h e clouds a n d w h o hurls
78
the t h u n d e r . Because he is t h e t h u n d e r , he is associated w i t h the r a i n as
7 9
well, a n d i t is he w h o m u s t be addressed w h e n there is w a n t o f water o r t o o
8 0
much.
H e is spoken o f as a sort o f creator. H e is called t h e father o f m e n a n d is
said t o have m a d e t h e m . A c c o r d i n g t o a l e g e n d o n c e c u r r e n t near M e l -
b o u r n e , B u n j i l is said t o have m a d e t h e first m a n i n t h e f o l l o w i n g m a n n e r :
H e m a d e a statuette o u t o f clay;* t h e n he d a n c e d all a r o u n d i t several times,
8 1
b r e a t h e d i n t o its nostrils, a n d the statuette came alive a n d began t o w a l k .
A c c o r d i n g t o a n o t h e r m y t h , he l i t the sun, w h e r e u p o n the earth w a r m e d u p
8 2 8 3
a n d m e n came o u t o f i t . A t the same t i m e as he m a d e m e n , this d i v i n e

* Curiously, despite the Australian context, Swain (p. 324) wrote "white clay," although Durkheim
merely said argile.
73
For Bunjil, see Brough Smyth [Aborigines of Victoria], vol. I, p. 417; for Baiame, Ridley, Kamilaroi,
p. 136;forDaramulun, Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 495.
"On the composition of Bunjil's family, for example, see Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 128, 129, 489, 491;
Brough Smyth [Aborigines of Victoria], vol. I, pp. 417, 423; for that of Baiame, Parker, The Euahlayi, pp. 7,
66, 103; Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 407, 502, 585; for that of Nurunderi, Taplin, "The Narrinyeri" [in
Woods, 77ie Native Tribes of South Australia] pp. 57-58. Besides, the manner in which the families of the
high gods are conceived has all sorts of variations. Such and such a personage is here the brother and else-
where called the son. The number of wives and their names vary according to region.
"Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 128.
76
Brough Smyth [Aborigines of Victoria], vol. I, pp. 430, 431.
77
Ibid., vol. I, p. 432 n.
™Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 498, 538; Mathews, "Aboriginal Tribes," RSNSW vol. XXXVIII, p. 343;
Ridley, Kamilorai p. 136.
79
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 538; Taplin, The Narrinyeri, pp. 57-58.
^Parker, The Euahlayi, p. 8
81
Brough Smyth [Aborigines of Victoria], vol. I, p. 424.
82
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 492.

"According to certain myths, he made men and not women; this is what is said of Bunjil. But the ori-
gin of women is attributed to his son-brother, Pallyan (Brough Smyth [Aborigines of Victoria], vol. 1,
pp. 417, 423).
The Notion of Spirits and Gods 291

84
personage made t h e animals a n d t h e trees, a n d all t h e arts o f l i f e—w e a p o n s ,
85
language, t r i b a l r i t e s — a r e thanks t o h i m . H e is the benefactor o f h u m a n i t y .
Even today, he plays t h e role o f a k i n d o f P r o v i d e n c e f o r h u m a n i t y . I t is he
86
w h o provides his o w n w i t h a l l that is n e e d f u l i n t h e i r e x i s t e n c e . He com-
87
municates w i t h t h e m d i r e c t l y o r t h r o u g h i n t e r m e d i a r i e s . A n d b e i n g at the
same t i m e t h e guardian o f t r i b a l m o r a l i t y , he punishes w h e n that m o r a l i t y is
88
violated. F u r t h e r m o r e , i f w e can r e l y o n t h e w o r d o f c e r t a i n observers, he
performs t h e f u n c t i o n o f j u d g e after death, d i s t i n g u i s h i n g b e t w e e n t h e g o o d
89
and t h e b a d a n d n o t t r e a t i n g b o t h t h e s a m e . I n any event, he is o f t e n p r e -
90
sented as gatekeeper f o r t h e l a n d o f t h e d e a d , w e l c o m i n g the souls w h e n
9 1
they arrive i n the b e y o n d .
Since i n i t i a t i o n is t h e p r i n c i p a l f o r m o f the t r i b a l c u l t , t h e rites o f i n i t i a -
t i o n are associated especially w i t h h i m , a n d he is central t o t h e m . H e is o f t e n
represented i n those rites b y an i m a g e carved i n tree b a r k o r m o d e l e d o u t o f
earth. People dance a r o u n d i t , sing i n its h o n o r , a n d i n d e e d actually pray t o
9 2
it. T h e y e x p l a i n t o t h e y o u n g m e n w h o t h e personage is that t h e image
represents, t e l l i n g t h e m t h e secret n a m e that w o m e n a n d t h e u n i n i t i a t e d m u s t
n o t k n o w , r e c o u n t i n g t o t h e m his h i s t o r y a n d his role i n t h e life o f the t r i b e
a c c o r d i n g t o t r a d i t i o n . A t o t h e r m o m e n t s , t h e y raise t h e i r hands t o w a r d t h e
sky, w h e r e he is t h o u g h t t o reside, o r p o i n t t h e weapons o r t h e r i t u a l i n s t r u -
93
ments t h e y have i n h a n d i n t h e same d i r e c t i o n — m e a n s o f e n t e r i n g i n t o
c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h h i m . T h e y feel his presence e v e r y w h e r e . H e watches
94
over t h e n o v i c e w h i l e he is secluded i n t h e f o r e s t . H e is v i g ü a n t a b o u t t h e
m a n n e r i n w h i c h t h e rites are c o n d u c t e d . Since i n i t i a t i o n is his c u l t , he

84
Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 489, 492; Mathews, "Aboriginal Tribes," p. 340.
85
Parker, The Euahlayi, p. 7; Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 630.
86
Ridley, Kamilaroi, p. 136; L. Parker, The Euahlayi, p. 114.
87
[K. Langloh], Parker, More Australian Legendary Tales [London, D. Nutt, 1898], pp. 84-99, 90-91.
88
Howitt, Native Tribes, pp.495, 498, 543, 563, 564; Brough Smyth [Aborigines of Victoria], vol. I,
p. 429; L. Parker, The Euahlayi, p. 79.
89
Ridley, Kamilaroi, p. 137.
'"Parker, The Euahlayi, pp. 90-91.
91
Howitt, NativeTribes, p. 495; Taplin, "The Narrinyeri," in Woods, The NativeTribes of South Australia,
p. 58.
92
Howitt, NativeTribes, pp. 538, 543, 553, 555, 556; Mathews, "Aboriginal Tribes," p. 318; Parker, The
Euahlayi, pp. 6, 79, 80.
93
Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 498, 528.
94
Ibid., p. 493; Parker, The Euahlayi, p. 76.
292 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

makes sure that these rites, i n particular, are c o r r e c t l y observed. W h e n there

95
are mistakes o r negligence, he punishes those i n a t e r r i b l e w a y .
T h e a u t h o r i t y each o f these h i g h gods has is n o t restricted t o a single
t r i b e b u t is r e c o g n i z e d as w e l l b y a n u m b e r o f n e i g h b o r i n g tribes. B u n j i l is
w o r s h i p p e d i n nearly t h e w h o l e state o f V i c t o r i a , B a i a m e i n a sizable part o f
N e w S o u t h Wales, a n d so f o r t h — f a c t s that e x p l a i n w h y there are so f e w gods
f o r a relatively large geographic area. T h e cults o f w h i c h t h e y are objects
therefore have an i n t e r n a t i o n a l character. S o m e t i m e s , i n fact, the diverse
m y t h o l o g i e s b l e n d i n t o , c o m b i n e w i t h , a n d b o r r o w f r o m o n e another. T h u s ,
the m a j o r i t y o f t h e tribes that believe i n B a i a m e also accept t h e existence o f
D a r a m u l u n , a l t h o u g h t h e y a c c o r d h i m l o w e r standing. T h e y take h i m t o be
9 6
a son o r a b r o t h e r o f B a i a m e , a n d subordinate t o h i m . T h u s i n various
f o r m s , faith i n D a r a m u l u n is general t h r o u g h o u t N e w S o u t h Wales. H e n c e
religious i n t e r n a t i o n a l i s m is far f r o m b e i n g the exclusive p r o v i n c e o f t h e m o s t
m o d e r n a n d advanced regions. F r o m t h e b e g i n n i n g o f history, religious b e -
liefs s h o w a t e n d e n c y n o t t o c o n f i n e themselves w i t h i n a n a r r o w l y d e l i m i t e d
p o l i t i c a l society. T h e y n a t u r a l l y g o b e y o n d b o u n d a r i e s , spreading a n d b e -
c o m i n g i n t e r n a t i o n a l . T h e r e c e r t a i n l y have b e e n peoples a n d times i n w h i c h
that spontaneous a p t i t u d e was h e l d i n c h e c k b y v a r i o u s social necessities.
Nevertheless, i t is real and, as w e see, v e r y p r i m i t i v e .
T o T y l o r this idea seemed t o be o f such advanced t h e o l o g y that h e r e -
fused t o see i t as a n y t h i n g b u t a E u r o p e a n i m p o r t a t i o n , a s o m e w h a t d i s t o r t e d
97 9 8
Christian idea. B y contrast, A . L a n g considers i t t o be i n d i g e n o u s . B u t at
the same t i m e he accepts t h e n o t i o n that i t is i n contrast w i t h A u s t r a l i a n b e -
liefs as a w h o l e a n d rests u p o n w h o l l y different p r i n c i p l e s . A n d he concludes
that the r e l i g i o n s o f Australia are m a d e u p o f t w o heterogeneous systems, o n e
s u p e r i m p o s e d o n t h e other, a n d thus have a d o u b l e o r i g i n . First c o m e the
ideas relative t o totems a n d spirits, suggested t o m e n b y the spectacle o f cer-
t a i n n a t u r a l p h e n o m e n a . A t t h e same t i m e , h o w e v e r , b y a sort o f i n t u i t i o n
99
(the nature o f w h i c h he refuses t o e x p l a i n ) , the h u m a n i n t e l l e c t suddenly

95
Parker, The Euahlayi, p. 76; Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 493, 612.

'"Ridley, Kamilaroi, p. 153; Parker, T?ie Euahlayi, p. 67; Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 585; Mathews, "Abo-
riginal Tribes," p. 343. Daramulun is sometimes presented in opposition to Baiame as an inherendy evil
spirit (L. Parker, The Euahlayi; [William] Ridley, in Brough Smyth [Aborigines of Victoria], vol. II, p. 285).
"[Edward Burnett Tylor, "On the Limits of Savage Religion,"] J/U, vol. XXI [1892], pp. 292ff.
''[Andrew] Lang, The Making of Religion [London, Longmans, 1898], pp. 187-293.
"Ibid., p. 331. Mr. Lang says only that the hypothesis of St. Paul seems to him the least defective ([not]
the most unsatisfactory). [The reference is probably to St. Paul on the road to Damascus, when he "saw a
great light," after which "the scales fell"fromhis eyes and he became a believer in Jesus Christ. Trans.]
The Notion of Spirits and Gods 293

manages t o conceive o f o n e g o d , creator o f the w o r l d , legislator o f the m o r a l

order. L a n g even j u d g e s that at t h e b e g i n n i n g , i n A u s t r a l i a especially, this idea
is purer o f all f o r e i g n elements t h a n i n t h e civilizations i m m e d i a t e l y f o l l o w -
ing. O v e r t i m e , i t supposedly is l i t t l e b y l i t t l e o v e r g r o w n and obscured b y the
constandy g r o w i n g mass o f a n i m i s t a n d t o t e m i s t superstitions. I n this way, i t
undergoes a sort o f progressive d e g e n e r a t i o n u n t i l t h e day w h e n , u n d e r the
influence o f a p r i v i l e g e d c u l t u r e , i t manages t o recover and reaffirm itself,
100
w i t h a b r i l l i a n c e a n d c l a r i t y that i t d i d n o t o r i g i n a l l y h a v e .
B u t t h e facts d o n o t s u p p o r t e i t h e r the skeptical hypothesis o f T y l o r o r
the t h e o l o g i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f L a n g . I n the first place, w e k n o w t o d a y f o r
certain that t h e ideas relative t o t h e t r i b a l h i g h g o d are i n d i g e n o u s . T h e y
were r e p o r t e d w h e n t h e i n f l u e n c e o f the missionaries h a d n o t yet h a d time
1 0 1
to m a k e itself f e l t . B u t that t h e y m u s t be a t t r i b u t e d t o a mysterious revela-
t i o n does n o t f o l l o w . I t is far f r o m t r u e that t h e y o r i g i n a t e d elsewhere. Q u i t e
the contrary, t h e y f l o w l o g i c a l l y from the sources o f t o t e m i s m a n d are its
m o s t advanced f o r m .
W e have seen that the v e r y p r i n c i p l e s o n w h i c h t o t e m i s m rests i m p l y the
idea o f m y t h i c a l ancestors, since each o f those ancestors is a t o t e m i c b e i n g .
A l t h o u g h the h i g h gods are surely s u p e r i o r t o t h e m , t h e differences are o n l y
o f degree; o n e passes from the first t o t h e second w i t h o u t a radical break. I n
fact, a h i g h g o d is h i m s e l f an ancestor o f special i m p o r t a n c e . H e is spoken o f
as a m a n , o n e g i f t e d w i t h m o r e t h a n h u m a n p o w e r s , o f course, b u t o n e w h o

I00
Father [Wilhelm] Schmidt has taken up the thesis of A. Lang in Anthropos ["L'Origine de l'idée de
dieu," vol. III (1908), pp. 125-162, 336-368, 559-611, 801-836, vol. IV (1909), pp. 207-250, 505-524,
1075—1091]. Against Sidney Hardand, who had criticized Lang's theory in an article of Folk-Lore (vol. IX
[1898], pp. 290tT., pp. 290ff.), tided "The 'High Gods' of Australia," Father Schmidt set out to demon-
strate that Baiame, Bunjil, and the others are eternal gods, creators, omnipotent and omniscient, and
guardians of the moral order. I will not enter into that discussion, which seems to me without interest and
import. If those different adjectives are understood in a relative sense, in harmony with the Australian turn
of mind, I am quite prepared to take them up on my own account and have even used them. From this
point of view, "all-powerful" means one who has more power than the other sacred beings; "omniscient,"
one who sees things that escape the ordinary person and even the greatest magicians; and "guardian of the
moral order," one who sees to it that the rules of Australian morality are respected, however different that
morality may befromour own. But if one wants to give those words a meaning that only a Christian spir-
itualist can give them, it seems to me poindess to discuss an opinion so at odds with the principles of his-
torical method.

""On that question, see N[orthcote] W[hitridge] Thomas, "Baiame and Bell-bird: A Note on Aus-
tralian Religion," in Man, vol. V (1905), 28. Cf. Lang, Magic and Religion, p. 25. [Theodor] Waitz had al-
ready argued for the original character of this idea in Anthropologie der Naturvölker [Leipzig, F. Fleischer,
1877], pp. 796-798.
294 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

1 0 2 1 0 3
has l i v e d a f u l l y h u m a n life o n e a r t h . H e is d e p i c t e d as a great h u n t e r ,
1 0 4 1 0 5
a powerful m a g i c i a n , a n d t h e f o u n d e r o f the t r i b e . H e is the first o f
1 0 6
men. H e is even presented i n o n e l e g e n d as a t i r e d o l d m a n w h o can barely
1 0 7
move. I f , a m o n g the D i e r i , there was a h i g h g o d called M u r a - m u r a , that
w o r d is significant, since i t is used t o designate ancestors as a class. I n t h e
same way, N u r a l i e , the n a m e o f the h i g h g o d a m o n g t h e tribes o f t h e M u r -
ray R i v e r , is sometimes used as a collective phrase, c o l l e c t i v e l y a p p l i e d t o the
1 0 8
g r o u p o f m y t h i c a l beings that t r a d i t i o n places at the b e g i n n i n g o f t h i n g s .
109
T h e y are e n t i r e l y comparable t o the A l c h e r i n g a personages. W e have a l -
ready e n c o u n t e r e d i n Q u e e n s l a n d a g o d A n j e - a o r A n j i r , w h o makes m e n
1 1 0
and yet w h o seems o n l y t o be the first o f t h e m .
W h a t has h e l p e d t h e t h o u g h t o f the Australians t o advance f r o m t h e p l u -
rality o f ancestral genies t o t h e idea o f t h e t r i b a l g o d is that a m i d d l e t e r m
f o u n d its place b e t w e e n t h e t w o extremes a n d served as a t r a n s i t i o n : the c i v -
i l i z i n g heroes. T h e m y t h i c a l beings called b y this n a m e are actually m e r e a n -
cestors t o w h o m m y t h o l o g y has ascribed a p r e e m i n e n t r o l e i n t h e h i s t o r y o f
the t r i b e a n d has therefore placed above t h e others. W e have even seen that
t h e y w e r e n o r m a l l y p a r t o f the t o t e m i c o r g a n i z a t i o n : M a n g a r k u n j e r k u n j a is
o f the Lizard t o t e m and Putiaputia, o f the W i l d c a t t o t e m . B u t from another
p o i n t o f view, the f u n c t i o n s t h e y are said t o p e r f o r m , o r t o have p e r f o r m e d ,
resemble those assigned t o the h i g h g o d v e r y closely. H e t o o is b e l i e v e d t o
have i n i t i a t e d m e n i n t o the arts o f c i v i l i z a t i o n , t o have b e e n t h e f o u n d e r o f
the p r i n c i p a l social i n s t i t u t i o n s , a n d t o b e t h e o n e w h o revealed the great r e -
l i g i o u s ceremonies, w h i c h are still u n d e r his c o n t r o l . I f he is the father o f
m e n , i t is f o r h a v i n g m a d e rather t h a n e n g e n d e r e d t h e m ; b u t M a n g a r k u n -

102
Dawson, Australian Aborigines, p. 49; [Rev. A.] Meyer, "Encounter Bay Tribe," in Woods [The Na-
tiveTribes of South Australia], pp. 205, 206; Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 481, 491, 492, 494; Ridley, Kamilaroi,
p. 136.
103
Taplin, "The Narrinyeri," in Woods, pp. 55-56.
104
L . Parker, More Australian Legendary Tales, p. 94.
!05
Taplin, "The Narrinyeri," in Woods, p. 61.
,06
Brough Smyth [Aborigines of Victoria], vol. I, pp. 425^127.
107
Taplin, "The Narrinyeri," in Woods, p. 60.
mR
"The world was created by beings called the Nuralie; some of these beings, which have existed for
a long time, had the form of the crow and others, that of the eaglehawk" (Brough Smyth [Aborigines of
Victoria], vol. I, pp. 423-424).
109
"Byamee," says Mrs. L. Parker, "is for the Euahlayi what the Alcheringa is for the Arunta" (The Eu-
ahlayi, p. 6).

"°See above, p. 261.

The Notion of Spirits and Gods 295

j e r k u n j a d i d as m u c h . B e f o r e h i m , there w e r e n o m e n , b u t o n l y masses o f
formless flesh i n w h i c h t h e different b o d y parts a n d even the different i n d i -
viduals w e r e n o t separated from o n e another. I t is he w h o sculpted this r a w
1 1 1
material a n d w h o d r e w p r o p e r l y h u m a n beings o u t o f i t . T h e r e are o n l y
slight shadings o f difference b e t w e e n this m e t h o d o f f a b r i c a t i o n a n d the o n e
ascribed t o B u n j i l b y t h e m y t h I c i t e d . M o r e o v e r , the fact that a k i n r e l a t i o n
is sometimes set u p b e t w e e n these t w o k i n d s o f f i g u r e b r i n g s o u t the c o n -
n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e m . A m o n g the K u r n a i a n d t h e T u n d u n , the hero o f t h e
1 1 2
b u l l roarer is the son o f t h e h i g h g o d M u n g a n n g a u a . A m o n g the E u a h l a y i ,
i n a similar way, D a r a m u l u n , t h e son o r b r o t h e r o f Baiame, is i d e n t i c a l t o
1 1 3
Gayandi, w h o is the equivalent o f T u n d u n a m o n g the K u r n a i .
W e c e r t a i n l y m u s t n o t c o n c l u d e from all these facts that the h i g h g o d is
n o m o r e t h a n a c i v i l i z i n g hero. T h e r e are cases i n w h i c h these t w o p e r s o n -
ages are clearly differentiated. B u t w h i l e t h e y c a n n o t be assimilated, t h e y are
at least a k i n . Sometimes, therefore, i t is rather h a r d t o differentiate b e t w e e n
t h e m , a n d some o f t h e m can be classified equally w e l l i n e i t h e r category.
T h u s , w e have s p o k e n o f A t n a t u as a c i v i l i z i n g hero, b u t he is v e r y close t o
being a high god.
I n d e e d , the n o t i o n o f h i g h g o d is so closely d e p e n d e n t u p o n the ensem-
ble o f t o t e m i c beliefs that i t still b e a n t h e i r m a r k . T u n d u n is a d i v i n e hero w h o
is v e r y close t o the t r i b a l deity, as w e have j u s t seen. N o w , a m o n g the K u r n a i ,
1 1 4
the same w o r d means " t o t e m . " Similarly, " A l t j i r a " is the name o f t h e h i g h
1 1 5
g o d a m o n g the A r u n t a a n d also the n a m e o f the m a t e r n a l t o t e m . Addi-
tionally, a n u m b e r o f h i g h gods have an o b v i o u s l y t o t e m i c f o r m . D a r a m u l u n
116 1 1 7
is an e a g l e h a w k ; his m o t h e r is an e m u . B a i a m e h i m s e l f is p o r t r a y e d w i t h
1 1 8
the characteristics o f an e m u . T h e A l t j i r a o f the A r u n t a has the legs o f an

"'In another myth reported by Spencer and Gillen, an entirely similar role is performed by two per-
sonages who live in the sky and are called Ungambikula (Native Tribes, pp. 388ff.).
2
" Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 493.
113
L . Parker, The Euahlayi, pp. 67, 62-66. Because the high god is in close relationship with the bull
roarer, it is identified with the thunder, the rumbling that ritual instrument makes being assimilated to that
of thunder.
114
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 135. The word that means "totem" is spelled by Howitt as thundung.
115
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, pp. 1—2, and vol. II, p. 59. It will be recalled that, quite probably, among
the Arunta the maternal totem was originally the totem, period.
1I6
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 555.
117
Ibid„ pp. 546, 560.
n8
Ridley, Kamilaroi, pp. 136, 156. He is depicted in that form during the initiation rites of the Kami¬
laroi. According to another legend, he is a black swan (Parker, More Australian Legendary Tales, p. 94).
296 T H E ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

1 1 9
emu. A s w e saw, before b e i n g the name o f a h i g h g o d , N u r a l i e referred to
the f o u n d i n g ancestors o f the t r i b e ; some o f those ancestors w e r e crows and
1 2 0 1 2 1
others, h a w k s . According to H o w i t t , B u n j i l is always represented i n h u -
m a n f o r m ; however, the same w o r d is used t o denote the t o t e m o f a phratry,
the eaglehawk. A t least o n e son o f his is o n e o f t h e totems that c o m p r i s e the
1 2 2
p h r a t r y t o w h i c h he gave o r l e n t his n a m e . H i s b r o t h e r is Pallyan, the bat;
1 2 3
t h e bat serves as a men's sexual t o t e m i n m a n y tribes o f V i c t o r i a .
W e can g o even f u r t h e r a n d specify t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p t h a t the h i g h gods
have w i t h t h e t o t e m i c system. D a r a m u l u n , l i k e B u n j i l , is an eaglehawk, and
w e k n o w that this a n i m a l is a p h r a t r y t o t e m i n m a n y o f the southeastern
1 2 4
tribes. A s I have said, N u r a l i e seems t o have b e e n at first a collective t e r m
that designated t h e eaglehawks o r t h e crows, interchangeably. I n t h e tribes
w h e r e this m y t h has b e e n f o u n d , t h e c r o w serves as t h e t o t e m o f o n e o f the
1 2 5
t w o phratries, the eaglehawk o f the o t h e r . I n a d d i t i o n , t h e legendary h i s -
t o r y o f the h i g h gods closely resembles that o f the p h r a t r y t o t e m s . T h e
m y t h s , a n d sometimes t h e rites, c o m m e m o r a t e t h e battles that each o f these
deities h a d t o wage against a c a r n i v o r o u s b i r d that t h e y d i d n o t easily defeat.
B u n j i l , o r the first m a n , h a v i n g made K a r w e e n , t h e second m a n , came i n t o
c o n f l i c t w i t h h i m and, i n a k i n d o f d u e l , gravely w o u n d e d h i m and changed
1 2 6
h i m into a crow. T h e t w o f o r m s o f N u r a l i e are d e p i c t e d as t w o e n e m y
1 2 7
groups that, at the b e g i n n i n g , w e r e constandy at w a r . F o r his part, B a i a m e
f o u g h t against M u l l i a n , the c a n n i b a l eaglehawk ( w h o , m o r e o v e r , is i d e n t i c a l
1 2 8
to D a r a m u l u n ) . N o w , as w e have seen, there is also a sort o f innate h o s t i l -
i t y b e t w e e n the p h r a t r y t o t e m s . T h i s parallelism f u l l y demonstrates that the
m y t h o l o g y o f t h e h i g h gods a n d that o f the t o t e m s are closely related. T h i s

119
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, p. 1.
120
Brough Smyth [Aborigines of Victoria ], vol. I, pp. 423-424.
121
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 492.
122
Ibid., p. 128.
123
Brough Smyth [Aborigines of Victoria], vol. I, pp. 417—423.
124
See above, p. 106.
125
These are the tribes whose phratries bear the names Kilpara (crow) and Mukwara. This explains
even the myth reported by Brough Smyth ([Aborigines of Victoria], vol. I, pp. 423—424).
126
Brough Smyth [Aborigines of Australia ], vol. I, pp. 425-427; cf. Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 486; in this
latter case, Karween is identified with the blue heron.
127
Brough Smyth [Aborigines of Victoria ], vol. I, p. 423.
128
Ridley, Kamilaroi, p. 136; Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 585; Mathews, "Aboriginal Tribes," p. 111.
The Notion of Spirits and Gods 297

kinship w i l l stand o u t even m o r e clearly i f w e n o t i c e that the r i v a l o f the g o d

is usually e i t h e r t h e c r o w o r t h e eaglehawk a n d t h a t these are v e r y c o m m o n
1 2 9
phratry t o t e m s .
So B a i a m e , D a r a m u l u n , N u r a l i e , a n d B u n j i l seem t o be p h r a t r y totems
that have b e e n d e i f i e d — a n d here is h o w w e can e n v i s i o n this apotheosis as
h a v i n g c o m e a b o u t . Clearly, i t is i n t h e assemblies h e l d f o r i n i t i a t i o n that this
idea was d e v e l o p e d ; for, b e i n g strangers t o the o t h e r r e l i g i o u s ceremonies,
o n l y i n these rites d o t h e h i g h gods play a role o f any i m p o r t a n c e . M o r e o v e r ,
since i n i t i a t i o n is the p r i n c i p a l f o r m o f the t r i b a l c u l t , a t r i b a l m y t h o l o g y
c o u l d have b e e n b o r n o n l y o n this occasion. W e have already seen that the
rituals o f c i r c u m c i s i o n a n d s u b i n c i s i o n t e n d e d t o w a r d spontaneous p e r s o n i -
f i c a t i o n as c i v i l i z i n g heroes. B u t these heroes h a d n o supremacy; they w e r e
o n the same f o o t i n g as the o t h e r l e g e n d a r y benefactors o f the society. O n t h e
o t h e r h a n d , w h e r e t h e t r i b e t o o k o n a m o r e v i v i d awareness o f itself, this
awareness was e m b o d i e d q u i t e n a t u r a l l y i n a personage t h a t became its s y m -
b o l . T o c o m p r e h e n d t h e ties that b o u n d t h e m t o o n e another, n o m a t t e r
w h a t clan t h e y b e l o n g e d t o , m e n i m a g i n e d t h a t t h e y w e r e o f the same stock,
that t h e y w e r e c h i l d r e n o f the same father, t o w h o m t h e y o w e d t h e i r exis-
tence even t h o u g h he o w e d his o w n existence t o n o o n e . T h e g o d o f i n i t i a -
t i o n was p e r f e c d y suited f o r this r o l e . A c c o r d i n g t o a phrase that o f t e n recurs
o n the Hps o f the natives, the specific p u r p o s e o f i n i t i a t i o n is t o make, t o f a b -
ricate, m e n . T h u s , a creative p o w e r was i m p u t e d t o this g o d , a n d f o r all these
reasons, he came t o be e n d o w e d w i t h a prestige that set h i m w e l l above the
o t h e r heroes o f m y t h o l o g y . T h e others became his subordinates a n d helpers;
t h e y w e r e made i n t o his sons o r his y o u n g e r b r o t h e r s , l i k e T u n d u n , G a y a n d i ,
K a r w e e n , Pallyan, a n d so o n . B u t there already w e r e o t h e r sacred beings that
h e l d a n equally p r o m i n e n t place i n t h e r e l i g i o u s system o f t h e t r i b e ; these
w e r e t h e p h r a t r y t o t e m s . W h e r e v e r these have e n d u r e d , they are t h o u g h t t o
have d o m i n i o n over the c l a n t o t e m s . I n this way, t h e y h a d all t h e y needed t o
b e c o m e t r i b a l d i v i n i t i e s themselves. N a t u r a l l y , these t w o sorts o f m y t h i c a l
figures p a r t i a l l y m e r g e d , a n d so i t was t h a t o n e o f t h e t w o basic t o t e m s o f t h e
t r i b e l e n t his traits t o t h e h i g h g o d . B u t since i t was necessary t o e x p l a i n w h y
o n l y o n e o f t h e m was called t o this status, a n d t h e o t h e r e x c l u d e d , the latter
was p r e s u m e d t o have lost o u t d u r i n g a f i g h t against his r i v a l , the e x c l u s i o n
b e i n g t h e consequence o f his defeat. T h i s idea was t h e m o r e easily accepted
because i t a c c o r d e d w i t h t h e m y t h o l o g y as a w h o l e , i n w h i c h t h e p h r a t r y
totems are generally v i e w e d as enemies o f o n e another.

129
See above, p. 146; cf. P. Schmidt, "L'Origine de l'idée de Dieu," in Anthropos, 1909.
298 THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS

130
A m y t h a m o n g the Euahlayi studied by M r s . Parker can serve t o c o r -
r o b o r a t e this e x p l a n a t i o n , f o r i t translates that e x p l a n a t i o n figuratively. A s the
s t o r y goes, t h e totems i n this t r i b e w e r e at first o n l y t h e names g i v e n t o d i f -
ferent parts o f Baiame's b o d y . I n that sense, t h e clans are l i k e fragments o f the
d i v i n e b o d y . Is this n o t a n o t h e r w a y o f saying that t h e h i g h g o d is the s y n -
thesis o f all t h e t o t e m s a n d hence t h e p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n o f t h e t r i b e as a w h o l e ?
A t the same t i m e , however, B a i a m e t o o k o n an i n t e r n a t i o n a l character.
I n fact, t h e m e m b e r s o f t h e t r i b e t o w h i c h t h e y o u n g initiates b e l o n g are n o t
t h e o n l y ones w h o a t t e n d t h e i n i t i a t i o n ceremonies. Representatives o f the
n e i g h b o r i n g tribes are specifically i n v i t e d t o these festivals, w h i c h are rather
131
l i k e i n t e r n a t i o n a l fairs a n d are b o t h r e l i g i o u s a n d secular. Beliefs that are
fashioned i n such social m i l i e u x c a n n o t r e m a i n the exclusive p a t r i m o n y o f
any o n e nationality. T h e f o r e i g n e r t o w h o m t h e y have b e e n revealed takes
t h e m back i n t o his native t r i b e . A n d since, sooner o r later, he m u s t i n t u r n
i n v i t e his hosts o f yesterday, c o n t i n u a l exchanges o f ideas b e t w e e n one s o c i -
ety a n d a n o t h e r are created. I n this way, an i n t e r n a t i o n a l m y t h o l o g y was
f o r m e d . Since the m y t h o l o g y h a d its o r i g i n i n t h e rites o f i n i t i a t i o n , w h i c h
the g o d serves t o personify, the h i g h g o d was q u i t e n a t u r a l l y t h e basic ele-
m e n t i n i t . H i s n a m e thus passed from o n e language t o another, a l o n g w i t h
the symbols attached t o i t . T h e fact that t h e names o f t h e phratries are u s u -
ally c o m m o n t o v e r y different tribes c o u l d o n l y facilitate that diffusion. T h e
i n t e r n a t i o n a l i s m o f the p h r a t r y t o t e m s blazed a t r a i l f o r the i n t e r n a t i o n a l i s m
o f the h i g h g o d .

V
T h u s w e a r r i v e at the m o s t advanced idea that t o t e m i s m achieved. T h i s is t h e
p o i n t at w h i c h i t resembles a n d prepares t h e w a y f o r the r e l i g i o n s that are t o
f o l l o w a n d helps us t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e m . A t t h e same t i m e , w e can see that
this c u l m i n a t i n g idea is c o n t i n u o u s w i t h the m o r e r u d i m e n t a r y beliefs that
w e analyzed at the outset.

130
Parker, The Euahlayi Tribe, p. 7. Among the same people, the principal wife of Baiame is also de-
picted as the mother of all the totems, without belonging to any totem herself (ibid., pp. 7, 78).
131
See Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 511-512, 513, 602ff.; Mathews, "Aboriginal Tribes," RSNSW, vol.
XXXVIII (1904), p. 270. Invited to the feasts of initiation are not only the tribes with which a regular
connubium is established but also those with which there are quarrels to settle. Vendettas that are half-cer-
emonial and half-serious take place on these occasions.
The Notion of Spirits and Gods 299

T h e t r i b a l h i g h g o d is actually n o n e o t h e r t h a n an ancestral spirit that

eventually w o n a p r o m i n e n t place. T h e ancestral spirits are n o n e o t h e r t h a n
entities f o r g e d i n t h e i m a g e o f the i n d i v i d u a l souls, the o r i g i n o f w h i c h t h e y
are m e a n t t o a c c o u n t for. T h e souls, i n t u r n , are n o n e o t h e r t h a n the f o r m
taken b y the i m p e r s o n a l forces that w e f o u n d at t h e basis o f t o t e m i s m , as
these b e c o m e i n d i v i d u a l i z e d i n p a r t i c u l a r bodies. T h e u n i t y o f the system is
as great as its c o m p l e x i t y .
T h e idea o f s o u l has u n d o u b t e d l y played an i m p o r t a n t part i n this w o r k
o f e l a b o r a t i o n . T h r o u g h i t , t h e idea o f personality was i n t r o d u c e d i n t o the
d o m a i n o f r e l i g i o n . B u t w h a t t h e theorists o f a n i m i s m c l a i m is far f r o m
t r u e — t h a t i t contains the seed o f t h e w h o l e r e l i g i o n . F o r o n e t h i n g , this idea
presupposes that o f m a n a o r o f t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e , o f w h i c h i t is o n l y a par-
ticular f o r m . F o r another, i f t h e spirits a n d gods c o u l d n o t be c o n c e i v e d o f
before the s o u l was, still t h e y are s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n mere h u m a n souls
freed b y death. O t h e r w i s e , w h e r e w o u l d t h e y get t h e i r s u p e r h u m a n powers?
T h e idea o f s o u l has served o n l y t o o r i e n t t h e m y t h o l o g i c a l i m a g i n a t i o n i n a
n e w d i r e c t i o n a n d t o suggest t o i t c o n s t r u c t i o n s o f a n e w sort. T h e basic m a -
t e r i a l f o r those c o n s t r u c t i o n s was n o t t a k e n from the idea o f soul b u t was i n -
stead d r a w n f r o m that reservoir o f a n o n y m o u s a n d diffuse forces w h i c h is the
o r i g i n a l f o u n t o f r e l i g i o n s . T h e c r e a t i o n o f m y t h i c a l personalities was o n l y
a n o t h e r w a y o f c o n c e i v i n g these f u n d a m e n t a l forces.
T u r n i n g t o t h e h i g h g o d , that n o t i o n is w h o l l y attributable t o an aware-
ness w h o s e i n f l u e n c e w e have already observed i n the o r i g i n o f the m o r e
specifically t o t e m i c beliefs: the awareness o f t r i b e . W e have seen that t o t e m -
i s m was n o t the isolated w o r k o f t h e clans b u t that i t was always elaborated i n
the m i d s t o f a t r i b e that was t o some e x t e n t conscious o f its u n i t y . I t is f o r this
reason that the various cults p e c u l i a r t o each clan c o m e t o g e t h e r a n d c o m -
1 3 2
p l e m e n t o n e a n o t h e r i n such a w a y as t o f o r m a u n i f i e d w h o l e . I t is this
same f e e l i n g o f t r i b a l u n i t y that is expressed i n t h e idea o f a h i g h g o d c o m -
m o n t o t h e w h o l e t r i b e . F r o m the b o t t o m t o the t o p o f this religious system,
t h e n , the same causes are at w o r k .
U p t o n o w , w e have considered these r e l i g i o u s representations as i f t h e y
w e r e sufficient u n t o themselves a n d c o u l d be e x p l a i n e d o n l y i n terms o f
themselves. I n fact, t h e y are inseparable f r o m the rites, n o t o n l y because the
representations appear i n the rites b u t also because t h e rites i n f l u e n c e t h e m .
T h e c u l t n o t o n l y rests o n b u t also reacts o n t h e beliefs. T o understand those
better, i t is i m p o r t a n t t o u n d e r s t a n d the c u l t better. T h e t i m e has c o m e t o
take u p that study.

132
See above, pp. 155-156.
 BOOK THREE

THE DRINCIPAL
Q D E S
M
OF D ITUAL
pONDUCT*

*Les Principales attitudesrituelles.The contrast between croyances and attitudes in the odes of Books Two
and Three, respectively, is that between thought and action.
 CHAPTER ONE

THE NEGATIVE CULT

AND ITS FUNCTIONS
The Ascetic Rites

I n w h a t f o l l o w s , I w i l l n o t u n d e r t a k e a f u l l d e s c r i p t i o n o f the p r i m i t i v e c u l t .
Since m y m a i n goal is t o a r r i v e at w h a t is m o s t e l e m e n t a l a n d f u n d a m e n -
tal i n r e l i g i o u s life, I w i l l m a k e n o a t t e m p t at a detailed r e p r o d u c t i o n o f all
r i t u a l acts i n t h e i r o f t e n c h a o t i c m u l t i p l i c i t y . B u t i n o r d e r t o test and, i f n e e d
1
be, f i n e - t u n e t h e results t o w h i c h m y analysis o f t h e beliefs has l e d , I w i l l t r y
to choose from t h e e x t r e m e l y diverse practices t h e m o s t characteristic that
the p r i m i t i v e f o l l o w s i n t h e c e l e b r a t i o n o f his c u l t , t o classify the m o s t c e n -
tral f o r m s o f his rites, a n d t o d e t e r m i n e t h e i r o r i g i n s a n d significance.
E v e r y c u l t has t w o aspects: o n e negative, the o t h e r positive. A c t u a l l y the
two sorts o f rites are i n t e r t w i n e d ; as w e w i l l see, t h e y presuppose o n e a n -
other. B u t since t h e y are different, w e m u s t d i s t i n g u i s h b e t w e e n t h e m , i f o n l y
to u n d e r s t a n d t h e i r relationships.

I
B y d e f i n i t i o n , sacred beings are beings set apart. W h a t distinguishes t h e m is
a d i s c o n t i n u i t y b e t w e e n t h e m a n d profane beings. N o r m a l l y , the t w o sorts o f
beings are separate from o n e another. A w h o l e c o m p l e x o f rites seeks t o
b r i n g a b o u t that separation, w h i c h is essential. T h e s e rites prevent unsanc-
t i o n e d m i x t u r e a n d contact, a n d p r e v e n t e i t h e r d o m a i n f r o m e n c r o a c h i n g o n
the other. H e n c e t h e y can o n l y prescribe abstinences, that is, negative acts.
For this reason, I propose t o use t h e t e r m "negative c u l t " f o r the system

'I will completely leave aside one form of ritual: oral ritual, which is to be studied in a special volume
of the Collection of the année sociologique.

303
304 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

f o r m e d b y these p a r t i c u l a r rites. T h e y d o n o t m a n d a t e obligations to be car-

r i e d o u t b y the faithful b u t instead p r o h i b i t c e r t a i n ways o f acting. A c c o r d -
ingly, all take t h e f o r m o f p r o h i b i t i o n s , or, t o f o l l o w c o m m o n usage i n
ethnography, the f o r m o f taboo. Taboo is the t e r m used i n t h e Polynesian l a n -
guages t o d e n o t e the i n s t i t u t i o n i n accordance w i t h w h i c h c e r t a i n things are
2
w i t h d r a w n f r o m o r d i n a r y use; i t is also an adjective that expresses the dis-
t i n c t i v e characteristic o f those sorts o f things. I have already h a d occasion t o
s h o w h o w p r o b l e m a t i c i t is t o t r a n s f o r m a l o c a l a n d dialectal t e r m i n t o a
generic one. Since there is n o r e l i g i o n i n w h i c h p r o h i b i t i o n s d o n o t exist a n d
play an i m p o r t a n t part, i t is regrettable t h a t this accepted t e r m i n o l o g y s h o u l d
seem t o m a k e such a widespread i n s t i t u t i o n a p e c u l i a r i t y specific t o P o l y n e -
3
sia. T h e t e r m s " i n t e r d i c t i o n s " o r " p r o h i b i t i o n s " * seem t o m e preferable b y
far. S t i l l , l i k e the w o r d " t o t e m , " the w o r d " t a b o o " is so w i d e l y used that t o
a v o i d i t altogether w o u l d be an excess o f p u r i s m . Besides, its liabilities d i -
m i n i s h i f its m e a n i n g a n d scope are carefully specified.
B u t p r o h i b i t i o n s are o f different k i n d s , a n d i t is i m p o r t a n t t o distinguish
t h e m . W e n e e d n o t treat every sort o f p r o h i b i t i o n i n this chapter.
T o b e g i n , aside f r o m those that b e l o n g t o r e l i g i o n , there are others that
b e l o n g t o m a g i c . W h a t b o t h have i n c o m m o n is that t h e y define c e r t a i n
things as i n c o m p a t i b l e a n d prescribe t h e separation o f t h e things so d e f i n e d .
B u t there are also p r o f o u n d differences. First, the p u n i s h m e n t s are n o t the
same i n t h e t w o cases. C e r t a i n l y , as w i l l be p o i n t e d o u t b e l o w , the v i o l a t i o n
o f r e l i g i o u s p r o h i b i t i o n s is o f t e n t h o u g h t a u t o m a t i c a l l y t o cause physical dis-
orders from w h i c h t h e g u i l t y p e r s o n is t h o u g h t t o suffer a n d w h i c h are c o n -
sidered p u n i s h m e n t f o r his a c t i o n . B u t even w h e n that really does occur, this
spontaneous a n d a u t o m a t i c sanction does n o t stand alone. I t is always sup-
p l e m e n t e d b y a n o t h e r that requires h u m a n i n t e r v e n t i o n . E i t h e r a p u n i s h -
ment p r o p e r l y so-called is added ( i f i t does n o t actually precede the
a u t o m a t i c sanction), a n d that p u n i s h m e n t is p u r p o s e l y i n f l i c t e d b y h u m a n
beings; or, at the v e r y least, there is b l a m e a n d p u b l i c disapproval. E v e n w h e n

*Between these two terms there is afinegrading of abstractness, interdiction being more mundane or
applied, and interdit more abstract; but Durkheim uses the two interchangeably, although interdit is more
frequent. Both "interdict" and "interdiction" are good English words, but I have preferred their com-
moner synonyms: "prohibition," "restriction," "ban," and the like. Trans.
2
See the article "Taboo" in the Encyclopedia Britannica, the author of which is [James George] Frazer
[Edinburgh, Adam & Charles Black, 1887].
3
The facts prove this to be a real liability. There is no dearth of writers who, taking the word literally,
have believed that the institution designated by it was peculiar to primitive societies in general or even to
the Polynesian peoples only (see [Albert] Réville, Religion des peuples non civilisés, Paris, Fischbacher, 1883,
vol. II, p. 55; [Gaston] Richard, La Femme dans l'histoire [étude sur l'évolution de la condition sociale de la
femme, Paris, O. Doin et Fils, 1909], p. 435).
The Negative Cult and Its Functions 305

sacrilege has already b e e n p u n i s h e d b y the sickness o r n a t u r a l death o f its p e r -

petrator, i t is also d e n o u n c e d . I t offends o p i n i o n , w h i c h reacts against i t , a n d
it places the c u l p r i t i n a state o f sin. B y contrast, a m a g i c a l p r o h i b i t i o n is sanc-
t i o n e d o n l y b y the t a n g i b l e consequences that t h e f o r b i d d e n act is h e l d t o
produce w i t h a k i n d o f physical necessity. B y d i s o b e y i n g , o n e takes risks l i k e
those a sick p e r s o n takes b y n o t f o l l o w i n g the advice o f his d o c t o r ; b u t i n this
case disobedience does n o t c o n s t i t u t e sin a n d does n o t p r o d u c e i n d i g n a t i o n .
I n m a g i c , there is n o such t h i n g as sin.
I n a d d i t i o n , t h e fact that the sanctions are n o t t h e same is p a r t a n d parcel
o f a p r o f o u n d difference i n the nature o f the p r o h i b i t i o n s . A religious p r o h i -
b i t i o n necessarily involves the idea o f the sacred. I t arises from the respect
evoked b y t h e sacred object, a n d its p u r p o s e is t o prevent any disrespect. B y
contrast, m a g i c p r o h i b i t i o n s presuppose an e n t i r e l y secular idea o f p r o p -
e r t y — n o t h i n g m o r e . T h e things that the m a g i c i a n r e c o m m e n d s keeping
separated are things that, because o f t h e i r characteristic properties, c a n n o t b e
m i x e d o r b r o u g h t near o n e a n o t h e r w i t h o u t danger. A l t h o u g h he m a y ask his
clients t o keep t h e i r distance from c e r t a i n sacred t h i n g s , he does n o t d o so
o u t o f respect f o r those t h i n g s o r o u t o f fear that t h e y m a y be p r o f a n e d (since,
4
as w e k n o w , m a g i c thrives o n p r o f a n a t i o n s ) . H e does so o n l y f o r reasons o f
secular u t i l i t y . I n short, r e l i g i o u s p r o h i b i t i o n s are categorical imperatives a n d
magic ones are u t i l i t a r i a n m a x i m s , the earliest f o r m o f h y g i e n i c a n d m e d i c a l
p r o h i b i t i o n s . T w o orders o f facts that are so different c a n n o t be s t u d i e d at the
same t i m e , a n d u n d e r the same r u b r i c , w i t h o u t c o n f u s i o n . H e r e w e n e e d
5
c o n c e r n ourselves o n l y w i t h r e l i g i o u s p r o h i b i t i o n s .
B u t a f u r t h e r d i s t i n c t i o n a m o n g these p r o h i b i t i o n s themselves is neces-
sary: T h e r e are r e l i g i o u s p r o h i b i t i o n s w h o s e p u r p o s e is t o separate different
kinds o f sacred things from o n e another. W e recall, f o r example, that a m o n g
the W a k e l b u r a , the scaffold o n w h i c h a dead p e r s o n is l a i d o u t m u s t b e b u i l t
exclusively w i t h materials b e l o n g i n g t o t h e p h r a t r y o f the deceased. A l l c o n -
tact is f o r b i d d e n b e t w e e n the corpse, w h i c h is sacred, a n d things o f t h e o t h e r
phratry, w h i c h are sacred t o o , b u t i n a different r i g h t . Elsewhere, the
weapons used t o h u n t an a n i m a l m u s t n o t be m a d e o f a w o o d that is classi-
6
fied i n the same social g r o u p as t h e a n i m a l itself. T h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t o f

4
See p. 40, above.
5
This is not to say that there is a radical discontinuity between religious and magic prohibitions. To
the contrary, there are some whose true nature is ambiguous. In folklore, there are prohibitions that often
cannot be easily said to be either religious or magic. Even so, the distinction is necessary, for magic pro-
hibitions can be understood, I believe, only in relation to religious ones.
6
See above, p. 150.
306 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

these p r o h i b i t i o n s are e x a m i n e d i n a later chapter: those a i m e d at p r e v e n t i n g

all c o n t a c t b e t w e e n t h e sacred p u r e a n d t h e sacred i m p u r e , as w e l l as b e t w e e n
things that are sacred a n d auspicious a n d those that are sacred a n d disastrous.
A l l o f these p r o h i b i t i o n s have a c o m m o n trait: T h e y d o n o t arise f r o m the
fact that some things are sacred a n d others n o t b u t f r o m the fact that there are
relations o f d i s p a r i t y a n d i n c o m p a t i b i l i t y a m o n g sacred t h i n g s . H e n c e , they
are n o t based u p o n w h a t is f u n d a m e n t a l t o t h e idea o f the sacred. Conse-
quently, the observance o f these p r o h i b i t i o n s can give rise o n l y t o isolated,
particular, a n d rather e x c e p t i o n a l rites, b u t t h e y c a n n o t m a k e u p a cult,
proper, f o r a c u l t is above all made u p o f regular relations b e t w e e n the p r o -
fane a n d t h e sacred as such.
T h e r e is a n o t h e r m u c h m o r e extensive a n d i m p o r t a n t system o f religious
p r o h i b i t i o n s — n o t the system that separates different species o f sacred things
b u t the o n e that separates all that is sacred f r o m all that is profane. T h i s sys-
t e m o f r e l i g i o u s p r o h i b i t i o n s derives d i r e c d y f r o m t h e n o t i o n o f sacredness,
w h i c h i t expresses a n d i m p l e m e n t s . T h i s system furnishes t h e r a w m a t e r i a l
f o r a g e n u i n e c u l t and, i n d e e d , a c u l t t h a t f o r m s t h e basis o f all the rest; f o r
i n t h e i r dealings w i t h sacred things, t h e f a i t h f u l m u s t never depart from the
c o n d u c t i t prescribes. T h i s is w h a t I call the negative c u l t . These p r o h i b i t i o n s
7
can be said t o be r e l i g i o u s p r o h i b i t i o n s par e x c e l l e n c e . T h e y alone w i l l be
the subject o f the f o l l o w i n g pages.
T h e y take m a n y f o r m s . H e r e are the p r i n c i p a l types f o u n d i n Australia.
First a n d foremost c o m e t h e p r o h i b i t i o n s o f contact. These are the p r i -
m a r y taboos, a n d the others are l i t d e m o r e t h a n p a r t i c u l a r varieties o f t h e m .
T h e y rest o n the p r i n c i p l e that the profane m u s t n o t t o u c h the sacred. W e

'Many of the prohibitions between sacred things are reducible, I think, to the prohibition between sa-
cred and profane. This is true for prohibitions of age or grade. In Australia, for example, there are sacred
foodstuffs that are reserved exclusively for the initiated. But those foodstuffs are not all equally sacred;
there is a hierarchy among them. Nor are all the initiated equal. They do not enjoy the plenitude of their
religious rights immediately, but rather enter into the domain of sacred things gradually. They must pass
through a series of grades that are conferred upon them, one after the other, following ordeals and special
ceremonies; it takes them months, sometimes even years, to reach the highest. Definite foods are assigned
to each of these grades. Men of the lower grades must not touch foods that belong, as a matter of right,
to men of the higher grades (see [Robert Hamilton] Mathews, "Ethnological Notes on the [Aboriginal
Tribes of New South Wales and Victoria," RSNSW. vol. XXXVIII (1904)], pp. 262fT.; Mrs. [Langloh]
Parker [Catherine Sommerville Field Parker], The Euahlayi Tribe [London, A. Constable, 1905], p. 23; [Sir
Baldwin] Spencer and [Francis James] Gillen, Northern Tribes [of Central Australia, London, Macmillan,
1904], pp. 61 Iff.; [Sir Baldwin] Spencer and [F.James] Gillen, NativeTribes [of Central Australia, London,
Macmillan, 1899], pp. 470ff.). The more sacred repels the less sacred, but this is because, compared to the
first, the second is profane. In sum, all the religious prohibitions fall into two classes: the prohibitions be-
tween the sacred and the profane and those between the sacred pure and the sacred impure.
The Negative Cult and Its Functions 307

have already seen that t h e churingas o r the b u l l roarers must u n d e r n o c i r -

cumstances be h a n d l e d b y the u n i n i t i a t e d . I f adults have free use o f those o b -
jects, that is o n l y because i n i t i a t i o n has c o n f e r r e d u p o n t h e m a q u a l i t y o f
sacredness. B l o o d ( m o r e specifically, the b l o o d that flows d u r i n g i n i t i a t i o n )
8 9
has a r e l i g i o u s v i r t u e a n d is subject t o the same p r o h i b i t i o n . T h e same is
10
true o f h a i r . A dead p e r s o n is a sacred b e i n g because t h e soul that a n i m a t e d
the b o d y adheres t o the corpse. F o r this reason, i t is sometimes f o r b i d d e n t o
carry the bones o f the corpse i n any w a y o t h e r t h a n w r a p p e d i n a sheet o f
11
bark. T h e v e r y place w h e r e the death o c c u r r e d m u s t be avoided, f o r the
soul o f t h e deceased is t h o u g h t t o r e m a i n there still. T h i s is w h y the people
12
break c a m p a n d m o v e some distance away. Sometimes they destroy t h e
13
camp a n d all i t c o n t a i n s , a n d a p e r i o d o f time passes before they m a y r e t u r n
14
to the same p l a c e . S o m e t i m e s t h e p e r s o n w h o is d y i n g creates a v a c u u m
a r o u n d himself, t h e others deserting h i m after h a v i n g settled h i m as c o m -
15
fortably as possible.
T h e c o n s u m p t i o n o f f o o d b r i n g s a b o u t an especially i n t i m a t e f o r m o f
contact. T h e n c e arises t h e p r o h i b i t i o n against e a t i n g sacred animals o r plants,
16
especially those s e r v i n g as t o t e m s . S u c h an act appears so sacrilegious that
the p r o h i b i t i o n covers even adults, o r at least m o s t adults, and o n l y o l d m e n
attain sufficient r e l i g i o u s status t o be n o t always subject t o i t . T h i s p r o h i b i -
t i o n has sometimes b e e n e x p l a i n e d i n terms o f t h e m y t h i c a l k i n s h i p that

8
See above, p. 136.
'Spencer and Gülen, Native Tribes, p. 463.
10
Ibid., p. 538; Spencer and Gülen, Northern Tribes, p. 604.
"Spencer and Gülen, Northern Tribes, p. 531.
,2
Ibid., pp. 518-519; [Alfred William] Howitt, NativeTribes [of South-EastAustralia, London, Macmil-
lan, 1904], p. 449.
13
Spencer and Gülen, Native Tribes, p. 498; [Rev. Louis] Schulze, "Aboriginal Tribes of Upper and
Middle Finke River," RSSA, vol. XIV [1891], p. 231.
"Spencer and Gülen, Native Tribes, p. 499.
15
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 451. [The point made is not at this place in Howitt. Trans.]
16
The alimentary restrictions applied to the totemic plant or animal are the most important, but they
are far from being the only ones. We have seen that there are foods that, because they are considered sa-
cred, are forbidden to the uninitiated. Very different causes can make those foods sacred. For example, as
we will see below, the animals that climb to the tops of trees are reputed to be sacred because they are
neighbors of the high god that lives in the heavens. It is also possible that, for different reasons, the flesh
of certain animals was reserved especiaUy for old men and that, as a result, it seemed to participate in the
sacredness that old men are acknowledged to have.
308 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

unites m a n w i t h t h e animals w h o s e n a m e he bears—the animals b e i n g p r o -

1 7
tected, presumably, b y the s y m p a t h y t h e y inspire, as k i n . T h a t the o r i g i n o f
this p r o h i b i t i o n is n o t s i m p l y r e v u l s i o n caused b y t h e sense o f f a m i l i a l soli-
d a r i t y is b r o u g h t o u t b y the f o l l o w i n g : C o n s u m p t i o n o f the f o r b i d d e n flesh
is p r e s u m e d t o cause sickness a n d death automatically. T h u s , forces o f a dif-
ferent sort have c o m e i n t o play—forces analogous t o those forces i n all r e l i -
gions that are p r e s u m e d t o react against sacrilege.
F u r t h e r , w h i l e c e r t a i n foods, because sacred, are f o r b i d d e n t o t h e p r o -
fane, o t h e r foods, because profane, are f o r b i d d e n t o persons e n d o w e d w i t h
special sacredness. T h u s , c e r t a i n animals are o f t e n specifically designated as
f o o d f o r w o m e n . F o r this reason, t h e y are believed t o participate i n female-
ness a n d hence are profane. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e y o u n g i n i t i a t e undergoes
an especially harsh set o f rites. A n e x c e p t i o n a l l y p o w e r f u l b e a m o f religious
forces is focused u p o n h i m , so as t o m a k e i t possible t o t r a n s m i t t o h i m the
v i r t u e s that w i l l enable h i m t o enter the w o r l d o f sacred things, f r o m w h i c h
he h a d p r e v i o u s l y b e e n e x c l u d e d . Since he is t h e n i n a state o f sanctity that
repels all that is profane, he is n o t a l l o w e d t o eat game that is considered t o
1 8
be w o m e n ' s .
C o n t a c t can be established b y means o t h e r t h a n t o u c h i n g . O n e is i n c o n -
tact w i t h a t h i n g s i m p l y b y l o o k i n g at i t ; t h e gaze is a means o f establishing
contact. T h i s is w h y , i n c e r t a i n cases, t h e sight o f sacred things is f o r b i d d e n
t o the profane. A w o m a n m u s t never see t h e c u l t i n s t r u m e n t s and at m o s t is
19
a l l o w e d t o glimpse t h e m from afar. T h e same applies t o t o t e m i c p a i n t i n g
20
d o n e o n the bodies o f celebrants f o r especially i m p o r t a n t c e r e m o n i e s . In
certain tribes, t h e e x c e p t i o n a l s o l e m n i t y o f i n i t i a t i o n rites makes i t i m p o s s i -
21
ble f o r w o m e n even t o see the place w h e r e t h e y have b e e n c e l e b r a t e d o r the
22
novice himself. T h e sacredness t h a t is i m m a n e n t i n t h e entire c e r e m o n y is

l7
See [James George] Frazer, Totemism [and Exogamy London, Macmillan, 1910] p. 7.
"Howitt, NativeTribes, p. 674. I do not address one prohibition of contact because its precise nature is
not easy to determine: sexual contact. There are religious periods in which men must not have contact
with women (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 293, 295; Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 387). Is it because
the woman is profane or because the sexual act is a dreaded act? This question cannot be setded in pass-
ing. I postpone it along with everything related to conjugal and sexual rites. They are too closely bound
up with the problem of marriage and the family to be separated from it.
"Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 134; Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 354.
20
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 624.
2l
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 572.
22
Ibid., p. 661.
17te Negative Cult and Its Functions 309

f o u n d as w e l l i n the persons o f those w h o d i r e c t i t o r w h o take any part i n

i t — w i t h t h e result that t h e n o v i c e m u s t n o t raise his eyes t o t h e m , a p r o h i b i -
2 3
t i o n that c o n t i n u e s even after the r i t e has b e e n c o m p l e t e d . A corpse, t o o , is
sometimes t a k e n o u t o f sight, t h e face b e i n g covered i n such a w a y that i t
24
cannot be s e e n .
Speech is a n o t h e r means o f c o m i n g i n t o c o n t a c t w i t h persons o r t h i n g s .
T h e e x h a l e d b r e a t h establishes contact, since i t is a p a r t o f ourselves that
spreads outside us. T h u s the profane are b a r r e d from speaking t o sacred b e -
ings o r even speaking i n t h e i r presence. Just as the n e o p h y t e must l o o k at n e i -
ther those p r e s i d i n g n o r those i n attendance, so he is also b a r r e d f r o m t a l k i n g
t o t h e m i n any w a y o t h e r t h a n w i t h signs. T h i s p r o h i b i t i o n continues u n t i l i t
2 5
is l i f t e d b y means o f a special r i t e . A m o n g all the A r u n t a , there are m o m e n t s
26
i n t h e g r a n d ceremonies w h e n silence is o b l i g a t o r y . As s o o n as the
churingas are displayed, t a l k i n g stops; or, i f there is t a l k i n g , i t is i n a l o w v o i c e
2 7
and w i t h the Hps o n l y .
I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e t h i n g s that are sacred, there are w o r d s and sounds that
have the same q u a l i t y ; t h e y m u s t n o t b e f o u n d o n t h e Hps o f t h e profane o r
reach t h e i r ears. T h e r e are r i t u a l songs that w o m e n m u s t n o t hear, o n p a i n o f
28
death. T h e y m a y hear t h e noise o f the b u l l roarers, b u t o n l y from a distance.
E v e r y personal n a m e is considered an essential e l e m e n t o f the person w h o
carries i t . Since i t is closely associated w i t h t h e idea o f that person, the n a m e
participates i n the feelings that p e r s o n arouses. I f the p e r s o n is sacred, so is t h e
name; hence i t m a y n o t b e p r o n o u n c e d i n the course o f profane life. A m o n g
the W a r r a m u n g a is a t o t e m that receives special v e n e r a t i o n , the m y t h i c a l ser-
29
p e n t n a m e d W o l l u n q u a ; that name is t a b o o . T h e same holds t r u e f o r B a -
i a m e , D a r a m u l u n , a n d B u n j i l ; t h e esoteric f o r m s o f t h e i r names m u s t n o t be
3 0
revealed t o t h e u n i n i t i a t e d . D u r i n g the p e r i o d o f m o u r n i n g , the n a m e o f
the dead person m u s t b e m e n t i o n e d , at least b y his relatives, o n l y i n cases o f

23
Spencer and Gülen, Native Tribes, p. 386; Hewitt, Native Tribes, pp. 655, 665.
24
Among the Wiimbaio, Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 451.
25
Ibid„ pp. 624, 661, 663, 667; Spencer and Gülen, Native Tribes, pp. 221, 382ff.; Spencer and Gülen,
Northern Tribes, pp. 335, 344, 353, 369.
26
Spencer and Gülen, Native Tribes, pp. 221, 262, 288, 303, 367, 378, 380.
27
Ibid„ p. 302.
28
Howitt, Native Tribes, p> 88.1.

''Spencer and Gülen, Northern Tribes, p. 227.

'"See above, p. 291.
310 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

3 1
absolute necessity, a n d even t h e n t h e y m u s t o n l y w h i s p e r i t . This restriction
32
is o f t e n p e r m a n e n t f o r t h e w i d o w a n d c e r t a i n f a m i l y m e m b e r s . Among
certain peoples, i t extends even b e y o n d t h e family, everyone w h o has the
33
same n a m e as the deceased b e i n g r e q u i r e d t o change i t t e m p o r a r i l y . Fur-
t h e r m o r e , relatives a n d close friends b a n c e r t a i n w o r d s f r o m everyday l a n -
guage, p r o b a b l y because t h e y w e r e used b y t h e deceased. T h e gaps are f i l l e d
34
w i t h c i r c u m l o c u t i o n s o r w i t h b o r r o w i n g s from some f o r e i g n d i a l e c t . I n ad-
d i t i o n t o t h e i r o r d i n a r y , p u b l i c n a m e , m e n have a n o t h e r that is k e p t secret.
W o m e n and c h i l d r e n d o n o t k n o w i t , a n d i t is never used i n o r d i n a r y life b e -
35
cause i t has a r e l i g i o u s q u a l i t y . I n d e e d , there are ceremonies d u r i n g w h i c h
the participants are r e q u i r e d t o speak i n a special language w h o s e use is f o r -
36
b i d d e n i n profane dealings. H e r e is a b e g i n n i n g o f sacred l a n g u a g e .
N o t o n l y are sacred beings separated f r o m profane ones, b u t i n a d d i t i o n ,
n o t h i n g t h a t d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c d y concerns profane life m u s t b e m i n g l e d
w i t h r e l i g i o u s life. T o t a l nakedness is o f t e n r e q u i r e d o f t h e native as t h e p r e -
3 7
c o n d i t i o n o f his b e i n g a l l o w e d t o take p a r t i n a r i t e . H e m u s t take o f f all his
usual o r n a m e n t s , even those he values m o s t a n d from w h i c h he separates
3 8
h i m s e l f the less w i l l i n g l y because he i m p u t e s t o t h e m p r o t e c t i v e v i r t u e s . I f
he m u s t decorate h i m s e l f f o r his r i t u a l role, that d e c o r a t i o n m u s t be made es-
39
pecially f o r t h e occasion; i t is a c e r e m o n i a l costume, a feast-day v e s t m e n t .
Since these o r n a m e n t s are sacred b y v i r t u e o f the use m a d e o f t h e m , t h e i r use
i n profane activities is f o r b i d d e n . O n c e the c e r e m o n y is over, t h e y are b u r i e d
4 0
or b u r n e d ; a n d i n d e e d the m e n m u s t wash themselves, so as n o t t o take
4 1
away w i t h t h e m any trace o f t h e decorations that a d o r n e d t h e m .

"Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes, p. 498; Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 526; [George] Taplin
"The Narrinyeri" [in James Dominick Woods, The Native Tribes of South Australia, Adelaide, E. S. Wigg,
1879], p. 19.
32
Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 466, 469£F.
33
[J. P.] Wyatt, "Adelaide and Encounter Bay Tribes," in Woods, [The Native Tribes of South Australia],
p. 165.
34
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 470. [It is actually at p. 466. Trans.]
35
Ibid., p. 657; Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 139; Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 580fF.
36
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 537.
37
Ibid., pp. 544, 597, 614, 620.
38
For example, the hair belt that he usually wears (Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes, p. 171).
39
Ibid„ pp. 624ff.
""Howitt, NativeTribes, p. 556.
41
Ibid„ p. 587.
The Negative Cult and Its Functions 311

M o r e generally, the t y p i c a l actions o f o r d i n a r y life are f o r b i d d e n so l o n g

as those o f religious life are i n progress. T h e act o f e a t i n g is profane i n itself.
A daily o c c u r r e n c e , i t satisfies basically u t i l i t a r i a n a n d physical needs and is
42
part o f o u r o r d i n a r y e x i s t e n c e . T h i s is w h y eating is p r o h i b i t e d d u r i n g r e l i -
gious periods. T h u s , w h e n a t o t e m i c g r o u p has l e n t its c h u r i n g a t o a f o r e i g n
clan, the m o m e n t w h e n t h e y are b r o u g h t b a c k a n d r e t u r n e d t o the e r t n a t u -
lunga is o n e o f great solemnity. A l l those w h o take p a r t i n the c e r e m o n y m u s t
43
abstain f r o m eating as l o n g as i t lasts, a n d i t lasts a l o n g time. T h e same r u l e
44
is f o l l o w e d d u r i n g t h e c e l e b r a t i o n o f t h e r i t e s t o be treated i n t h e n e x t
4 5
chapter, as w e l l as at c e r t a i n times d u r i n g i n i t i a t i o n .
F o r t h e same reason, all secular occupations are suspended w h e n t h e
great r e l i g i o u s ceremonies take place. A c c o r d i n g t o an o b s e r v a t i o n b y
4 6
Spencer a n d G i l l e n , c i t e d previously, t h e life o f the A u s t r a l i a n has t w o q u i t e
distinct parts: O n e is t a k e n u p w i t h h u n t i n g , fishing, a n d w a r ; the o t h e r is
dedicated t o the c u l t . These t w o f o r m s o f a c t i v i t y are m u t u a l l y exclusive a n d
repel o n e another. T h e universal i n s t i t u t i o n o f r e l i g i o u s days o f rest is based
o n this p r i n c i p l e . I n all k n o w n r e l i g i o n s , t h e d i s t i n g u i s h i n g feature o f feast
days is t h e cessation o f w o r k and, b e y o n d that, t h e suspension o f p u b l i c a n d
private life, insofar as i t has n o r e l i g i o u s object. T h i s pause is n o t m e r e l y a
k i n d o f t e m p o r a r y r e l a x a t i o n that m e n take, so as t o a b a n d o n themselves
m o r e freely t o the feelings o f e l a t i o n that holidays generally arouse, since i t is
n o less o b l i g a t o r y d u r i n g those sad holidays that are d e v o t e d t o m o u r n i n g
a n d penance. T h e reason f o r t h e pause is that w o r k is t h e p r e e m i n e n t f o r m
o f profane activity. I t has n o apparent a i m o t h e r t h a n m e e t i n g the secular
needs o f life, a n d i t puts us i n c o n t a c t o n l y w i t h o r d i n a r y things. D u r i n g h o l y
days, o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , r e l i g i o u s life attains unusual intensity. Because the
contrast b e t w e e n these t w o sorts o f existence is p a r t i c u l a r l y m a r k e d at that

42
Granted, this act takes on a religious character when thefoodeaten is sacred. But the act in itself is
profane, to such an extent that the consumption of a sacred food always constitutes a profanation. The
profanation can be permitted or even prescribed but, as we will see below, only if rites to attenuate or ex-
piate the profanation precede or accompany it. The existence of these rites clearly shows that the sacred
thing itself resists being consumed.
43
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 263.
"Spencerand Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 171.
45
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 674. It may be that the prohibition against speaking during the great reli-
gious ceremonies derives in partfromthe same cause. In ordinary life, people speak, and in particular peo-
ple speak loudly; therefore, in religious life, they must keep silent or speak in a low voice. The same
consideration is germane to the dietary restrictions. (See above, p. 127).
46
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 33.
312 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

t i m e , t h e y c a n n o t abut o n e another. M a n c a n n o t approach his g o d i n t i m a t e l y

w h i l e still b e a r i n g t h e marks o f his profane life; inversely, he c a n n o t r e t u r n to
his o r d i n a r y occupations w h e n the r i t e has j u s t sanctified h i m . R i t u a l cessa-
t i o n o f w o r k is thus n o m o r e t h a n a special case o f the general i n c o m p a t i b i l -
i t y that divides the sacred a n d the profane, a n d i t is the result o f a p r o h i b i t i o n .
T h e r e is n o w a y t o e n u m e r a t e every k i n d o f p r o h i b i t i o n that is observed,
even i n the A u s t r a l i a n r e l i g i o n s alone. L i k e the n o t i o n o f the sacred o n w h i c h
it rests, the system o f p r o h i b i t i o n s extends i n t o t h e m o s t v a r i e d relations. I t is
47
even used i n t e n t i o n a l l y f o r u t i l i t a r i a n p u r p o s e s . B u t h o w e v e r c o m p l e x this
system m a y be, i n the e n d i t comes d o w n t o t w o f u n d a m e n t a l p r o h i b i t i o n s
that e p i t o m i z e a n d g o v e r n i t .
First, r e l i g i o u s and profane life c a n n o t coexist i n the same space. I f r e l i -
gious life is t o develop, a special place m u s t be prepared f o r i t , o n e f r o m
w h i c h profane life is e x c l u d e d . T h e i n s t i t u t i o n o f temples a n d sanctuaries
arises f r o m this. These are spaces assigned t o sacred things a n d beings, serv-
i n g as t h e i r residence, f o r t h e y c a n n o t establish themselves o n the g r o u n d e x -
cept b y f u l l y a p p r o p r i a t i n g a part o f i t f o r themselves. A r r a n g e m e n t s o f this
k i n d are so indispensable t o all r e l i g i o u s life t h a t even t h e simplest r e l i g i o u s
c a n n o t d o w i t h o u t t h e m . T h e e r t n a t u l u n g a , t h e place w h e r e the churingas
are stored, is a t r u e sanctuary. T h e u n i n i t i a t e d are b a n n e d f r o m a p p r o a c h i n g
i t , a n d i n d u l g i n g i n any k i n d o f profane o c c u p a t i o n is f o r b i d d e n there. W e
w i l l see that there are o t h e r sanctified places w h e r e i m p o r t a n t ceremonies are
48
conducted.

47
Since, from the beginning, there is a sacred principle within each man, the soul, the individual has
been surrounded by prohibitions, thefirstformof the moral prohibitions that today insulate and protect
the human person. It is in this way that the body of the victim is considered dangerous by the murderer
(Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 492) and is forbidden to him. Prohibitions that have this origin are
often used by individuals as a means of withdrawing certain things from common use and establishing a
right of property over them. "Does a man depart from camp, leaving weapons, food, etc. there?" asks
[waiter Edmund] Roth with regard to the Palmer River tribes (North Queensland). "If he urinates near
objects that he has thus left behind, they become tami (equivalent of the word "taboo"), and he can be as-
sured offindingthem intact upon his return" [possibly, "Marriage Ceremonies and Infant Life," North
Queensland Ethnography, Bull. 10] in RAM, [Sydney, 1908], vol. VII, part 2, p. 75). This is because the
urine, like the blood, is held to contain a part of the sacred force that is personal to the individual. Thus
it keeps strangers at a distance. For the same reasons, speech also can serve as a vehicle for these same in-
fluences. This is why it is possible to ban access to an object simply by verbal declaration. Further, this
power of creating prohibitions is variable according to individuals—the greater their sacredness, the
greater this power. Men have the privilege of this power to the virtual exclusion of women (Roth cites a
single example of a taboo imposed by women). It is at its maximum among chiefs and elders, who use it
to monopolize the things they choose ([Walter Edmund] Roth, Superstition, Magic and Medicine [Brisbane,
G. A. Vaughn, 1903], in North Queensland Ethnography, Bulletin No. 5, p. 77). In this way, religious pro-
hibition becomes property right and administrative regulation.
48
Bk. 3, chap. 2.
The Negative Cult and Its Functions 313

Likewise, religious a n d profane life c a n n o t coexist at the same t i m e . I n

consequence, r e l i g i o u s life m u s t have specified days o r periods assigned t o i t
from w h i c h all profane occupations are w i t h d r a w n . T h u s were h o l y days
b o r n . T h e r e is n o r e l i g i o n , a n d h e n c e n o society, that has n o t k n o w n a n d
practiced this d i v i s i o n o f time i n t o t w o d i s t i n c t parts that alternate w i t h o n e
another a c c o r d i n g t o a p r i n c i p l e that varies w i t h peoples a n d civilizations. I n
fact, p r o b a b l y the necessity o f that a l t e r n a t i o n l e d m e n t o insert distinctions
and differentiations i n t o the h o m o g e n e i t y a n d c o n t i n u i t y o f d u r a t i o n that i t
49
does n o t n a t u r a l l y h a v e . O f course, i t is v i r t u a l l y impossible f o r r e l i g i o n ever
to reach t h e p o i n t o f b e i n g c o n c e n t r a t e d h e r m e t i c a l l y i n the spatial a n d t e m -
poral m i l i e u x that are assigned t o i t ; a l i t d e o f i t i n e v i t a b l y filters o u t . T h e r e
are always sacred things outside t h e sanctuaries a n d rites that can be cele-
brated d u r i n g w o r k d a y s , b u t those are sacred things o f the second r a n k a n d
rites o f lesser i m p o r t a n c e . C o n c e n t r a t i o n is still the p r e d o m i n a n t characteris-
tic o f this structure; a n d i n d e e d , c o n c e n t r a t i o n is generally t o t a l w i t h respect
to the p u b l i c c u l t , w h i c h m u s t be celebrated collectively. T h e p r i v a t e , i n d i -
v i d u a l c u l t is t h e o n l y o n e that m i n g l e s m o r e o r less closely w i t h secular life.
Therefore, because the i n d i v i d u a l c u l t is at its least d e v e l o p e d i n the l o w e r so-
cieties, such as t h e A u s t r a l i a n tribes, the contrast b e t w e e n these t w o succes-
50
sive phases o f h u m a n life is at its m o s t e x t r e m e t h e r e .

II
T h u s far w e have seen the negative c u l t o n l y as a system o f abstinences. I t ap-
pears capable o n l y o f i n h i b i t i n g activity, n o t s t i m u l a t i n g a n d i n v i g o r a t i n g i t .
Nevertheless, t h r o u g h an u n e x p e c t e d r e a c t i o n t o this i n h i b i t i n g affect, i t e x -
erts a positive a n d h i g h l y i m p o r t a n t i n f l u e n c e u p o n the religious a n d m o r a l
nature o f the i n d i v i d u a l .
Because o f the b a r r i e r that sets the sacred apart f r o m the profane, m a n
can enter i n t o close relations w i t h sacred t h i n g s o n l y i f he strips h i m s e l f o f
w h a t is profane i n h i m . H e c a n n o t live a r e l i g i o u s life o f any i n t e n s i t y unless
he first w i t h d r a w s m o r e o r less c o m p l e t e l y from secular hfe. T h e negative
c u l t i n a sense is a means t o an e n d ; i t is the p r e c o n d i t i o n o f access t o the pos-
itive c u l t . N o t c o n f i n e d t o p r o t e c t i n g t h e sacred beings from o r d i n a r y c o n -
tact, i t acts u p o n the w o r s h i p p e r h i m s e l f a n d m o d i f i e s his state positively.

49
See above, p. 9.
50
See above, p. 220.
314 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

A f t e r h a v i n g s u b m i t t e d t o t h e p r e s c r i b e d p r o h i b i t i o n s , m a n is n o t the same as
he was. Before, he was an o r d i n a r y b e i n g a n d f o r that reason h a d t o keep at
a distance f r o m r e l i g i o u s forces. A f t e r , he is o n a m o r e nearly equal f o o t i n g
w i t h t h e m , since he has approached the sacred b y the v e r y act o f p l a c i n g
h i m s e l f at a distance from the profane. H e has p u r i f i e d a n d sanctified h i m s e l f
b y d e t a c h i n g h i m s e l f from t h e l o w a n d t r i v i a l things that p r e v i o u s l y e n c u m -
b e r e d his nature. L i k e positive rites, therefore, negative rites confer positive
capacities; b o t h can increase t h e religious zest o f i n d i v i d u a l s . As has b e e n
r i g h d y observed, n o o n e can engage i n a r e l i g i o u s c e r e m o n y o f any i m p o r -
tance w i t h o u t first s u b m i t t i n g t o a sort o f i n i t i a t i o n that i n t r o d u c e s h i m g r a d -
5 1
ually i n t o the sacred w o r l d . A n o i n t i n g s , p u r i f i c a t i o n s , a n d blessings can be
used f o r this, a l l b e i n g essentially positive operations; b u t t h e same results can
be achieved t h r o u g h fasts a n d v i g i l s , o r t h r o u g h retreat a n d silence—that is,
b y r i t u a l abstinences t h a t are n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n d e f i n i t e p r o h i b i t i o n s p u t
i n t o practice.
W h e n negative rites are considered o n l y o n e b y one, t h e i r positive i n f l u -
ence is usually t o o Htde m a r k e d t o be easily perceptible; b u t t h e i r effects c u -
mulate, a n d b e c o m e m o r e apparent, w h e n a f u l l system o f p r o h i b i t i o n s is
focused o n a single person. T h i s occurs i n Australia d u r i n g i n i t i a t i o n . T h e
n o v i c e is subjected t o an e x t r e m e v a r i e t y o f negative rites. H e must w i t h d r a w
f r o m t h e society w h e r e h e has spent his life u n t i l t h e n , a n d from v i r t u a l l y all
h u m a n society. H e is n o t o n l y f o r b i d d e n t o see w o m e n a n d u n i n i t i a t e d
5 2
men, b u t he also goes t o live i n the bush, far from his peers, u n d e r the su-
53
p e r v i s i o n o f a f e w o l d m e n s e r v i n g as g o d f a t h e r s . So m u c h is the forest c o n -
sidered his n a t u r a l m i l i e u that, i n q u i t e a f e w tribes, the w o r d f o r i n i t i a t i o n
54
means " t h a t w h i c h is o f t h e forest." F o r the same reason, the n o v i c e is o f -
55
t e n decorated w i t h leaves d u r i n g t h e ceremonies he a t t e n d s . I n this way, he
5 6
spends l o n g m o n t h s punctuated from t i m e t o time b y rites i n w h i c h he

51
See [Henri] Hubert and [Marcel] Mauss, "Essai sur la nature et la fonction du sacrifice," in Mélanges
d'histoire des religions [Paris, F. Alcan, 1909], pp. 22ff.
52
Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 560, 657, 659, 661. Not even a woman's shadow must fall on him (ibid.,
p. 633). What he touches must not be touched by a woman (ibid., p. 621).
53
Ibid., pp. 561, 563, 670-671; Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes, p. 223; Spencer and Gillen, Northern
Tribes, pp. 340, 342.
54
The word jeraeil, for example, among the Kurnai; kuringal among the Yuin and the Wolgat (Howitt,
NativeTribes, pp. 518, 617).
55
Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes, p. 348.
56
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 561.
The Negative Cult and Its Functions 315

must participate. F o r h i m , this is a t i m e f o r every sort o f abstinence. H e is f o r -

b i d d e n a great m a n y foods, a n d he is a l l o w e d o n l y as m u c h f o o d as is strictly
57 58
necessary t o sustain l i f e . I n d e e d , r i g o r o u s fasting is o f t e n o b l i g a t o r y , o r he
5 9
is made t o eat disgusting f o o d . W h e n he eats, he m u s t n o t t o u c h the f o o d
6 0
w i t h his hands; his godfathers p u t i t i n his m o u t h . I n some cases, he must
61 62
beg for his subsistence. H e sleeps o n l y as m u c h as is indispensable. He
must abstain f r o m speaking unless s p o k e n t o a n d i n d i c a t e his needs w i t h
63 64 65
signs. H e is f o r b i d d e n all r e c r e a t i o n . H e must n o t bathe; sometimes he
6 6
must n o t m o v e . H e remains l y i n g o n t h e g r o u n d , i m m o b i l e , without cloth-
6 7
i n g o f any k i n d . T h e result o f these m u l t i p l e p r o h i b i t i o n s is t o b r i n g a b o u t
a radical change i n t h e status o f the n e o p h y t e . B e f o r e the i n i t i a t i o n , he l i v e d
w i t h w o m e n a n d was e x c l u d e d f r o m t h e c u l t . F r o m n o w o n , he is a d m i t t e d
i n t o t h e society o f m e n ; he takes part i n the rites a n d has gained a q u a l i t y o f
sacredness. So c o m p l e t e is the m e t a m o r p h o s i s that i t is often p o r t r a y e d as a
second b i r t h . T h e profane p e r s o n that p r e v i o u s l y was the y o u n g m a n is i m a g -
i n e d t o have d i e d , t o have b e e n k i l l e d a n d taken away b y the G o d o f i n i t i a -
t i o n — B u n j i l , Baiame, o r D a r a m u l u n — a n d t o have b e e n replaced b y an
68
altogether different i n d i v i d u a l f r o m the o n e w h o existed p r e v i o u s l y . Thus
w e capture i n the r a w the positive effects o f w h i c h t h e negative rites are ca-
pable. I d o n o t m e a n t o c l a i m that these rites alone p r o d u c e so p r o f o u n d a
t r a n s f o r m a t i o n , b u t t h e y c e r t a i n l y c o n t r i b u t e t o i t , a n d substantially.
I n l i g h t o f these facts, w e can u n d e r s t a n d w h a t asceticism is, w h a t place
i t holds i n r e l i g i o u s life, a n d w h e r e t h e v i r t u e s that are w i d e l y i m p u t e d t o i t

"Ibid., pp. 633, 538, 560.

58
Ibid., p. 674; Parker, The Euahlayi Tribe, p. 75.
59
[William] Ridley, Kamilaroi [and Other Australian Languages, Sydney, T. Richards, 1875], p. 154.
""Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 563.
61
Ibid., p. 611.
62
Ibid., pp. 549, 674.
63
Ibid., pp. 580, 596, 604, 668, 670; Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes, pp. 223, 351.
M
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 567. [This note and the phrase to which it is attached are missingfromthe
Swain translation. Trans.]
65
Ibid„ p. 557.
"'Ibid., p. 604; Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes, p. 351.
67
Howitt, NativeTribes, p. 611.
68
Ibid., p. 589.
316 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

o r i g i n a t e . I n actuality, there is n o p r o h i b i t i o n w h o s e observance is n o t t o

some degree l i k e asceticism. T o abstain f r o m s o m e t h i n g that m a y be useful o r
f r o m an a c t i v i t y that, because h a b i t u a l , m u s t m e e t a h u m a n need, is o f n e -
cessity t o i m p o s e restrictions a n d r e n u n c i a t i o n s u p o n oneself. F o r there t o be
asceticism p r o p e r l y so-called, i t is e n o u g h f o r these practices t o develop i n
such a w a y as t o b e c o m e t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r a g e n u i n e system o f life. T h e
negative c u l t usually serves as barely m o r e t h a n an i n t r o d u c t i o n t o , a n d a
p r e p a r a t i o n for, the positive c u l t . B u t i t sometimes escapes that s u b o r d i n a t i o n
a n d becomes central, t h e system o f p r o h i b i t i o n s s w e l l i n g a n d a g g r a n d i z i n g i t -
self t o t h e p o i n t o f i n v a d i n g t h e w h o l e o f life. I n this way, systematic asceti-
c i s m is b o r n ; i t is thus n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n a b l o a t i n g o f the negative c u l t . T h e
special v i r t u e s i t is said t o confer are o n l y those c o n f e r r e d t h r o u g h the prac-
tice o f any p r o h i b i t i o n , t h o u g h i n m a g n i f i e d f o r m . T h e y have t h e same o r i -
g i n , f o r b o t h rest o n the p r i n c i p l e that the v e r y effort t o separate oneself f r o m
the profane sanctifies. T h e p u r e ascetic is a m a n w h o raises h i m s e l f above
m e n a n d w h o acquires a special sanctity t h r o u g h fasts, v i g i l s , retreat, a n d s i -
l e n c e — i n a w o r d , m o r e b y p r i v a t i o n s t h a n b y acts o f positive p i e t y (offerings,
sacrifices, prayers, etc.). H i s t o r y shows w h a t heights o f r e l i g i o u s prestige are
attainable b y those means. T h e B u d d h i s t saint is f u n d a m e n t a l l y an ascetic,
a n d he is equal o r s u p e r i o r t o the gods.
I t f o l l o w s that asceticism is n o t a rare, e x c e p t i o n a l , a n d almost a b n o r m a l
fruit o f religious life, as o n e m i g h t t h i n k , b u t q u i t e the c o n t r a r y : an essential
e l e m e n t o f i t . E v e r y r e l i g i o n has at least the seed o f asceticism, f o r there is
n o n e w i t h o u t a system o f p r o h i b i t i o n s . I n this respect, the o n l y possible d i f -
ference b e t w e e n cults is that this seed is m o r e o r less d e v e l o p e d w i t h i n t h e m .
A n d i t is w e l l t o add that there p r o b a b l y is n o t even a single o n e i n w h i c h this
d e v e l o p m e n t does n o t at least t e m p o r a r i l y a d o p t t h e characteristic traits o f as-
c e t i c i s m proper. T h i s generally happens at c e r t a i n c r i t i c a l periods, w h e n a
p r o f o u n d change i n an i n d i v i d u a l ' s c o n d i t i o n m u s t be b r o u g h t a b o u t i n a r e l -
atively s h o r t t i m e . I n that case, i n o r d e r t o b r i n g h i m m o r e r a p i d l y i n t o the
circle o f sacred things w i t h w h i c h h e m u s t be p u t i n contact, he is a b r u p t l y
separated from t h e profane w o r l d . T h i s does n o t o c c u r w i t h o u t increased ab-
stinences a n d an e x t r a o r d i n a r y i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n i n the system o f p r o h i b i t i o n s .
Precisely this occurs i n Australia at t h e time o f i n i t i a t i o n . T o t r a n s f o r m t h e
y o u t h s i n t o m e n , t h e y are r e q u i r e d t o lead the life o f ascetics. M r s . Parker
69
q u i t e accurately calls t h e m t h e m o n k s o f B a i a m e .

69
These ascetic practices may be compared to the ones used during a magicians initiation. Like the
young neophyte, the apprentice magician is subjected to a multitude of prohibitions the observance of
which helps him acquire his specific powers (see "L'Origine des pouvoirs magiques," in Mélanges d'histoire
des religions, by Hubert and Mauss, pp. 171, 173, 176). It is the same for husbands on the eve of their mar-
Die Negative Cult and Its Functions 317

Abstinences a n d p r i v a t i o n s are n o t w i t h o u t suffering. W e h o l d t o the

profane w o r l d w i t h every fiber o f o u r flesh. O u r sensuous nature attaches us
to i t ; o u r life depends u p o n i t . N o t o n l y is the profane w o r l d the n a t u r a l t h e -
ater o f o u r a c t i v i t y ; i t enters us from every d i r e c t i o n ; i t is p a r t o f us. W e c a n -
not detach ourselves from i t w i t h o u t d o i n g v i o l e n c e t o o u r nature and
w i t h o u t p a i n f u l l y clashing w i t h o u r instincts. I n o t h e r w o r d s , the negative
cult c a n n o t develop unless i t causes suffering. P a i n is its necessary c o n d i t i o n .
B y this r o u t e , p e o p l e came t o regard p a i n as a sort o f r i t e i n itself. T h e y saw
it as a state o f grace t o be sought after a n d i n d u c e d , even artificially, because
o f the powers a n d privileges i t confers i n the same r i g h t as those systems o f
p r o h i b i t i o n s t o w h i c h i t is t h e n a t u r a l a c c o m p a n i m e n t . T o m y k n o w l e d g e ,
70
Preuss was the first t o b e c o m e aware o f t h e r e l i g i o u s role that is ascribed t o
pain i n the l o w e r societies. H e cites cases: the A r a p a h o w h o i n f l i c t t o r t u r e
u p o n themselves as p r o t e c t i o n f r o m the dangers o f battle; the G r o s - V e n t r e
Indians w h o s u b m i t t o t o r t u r e o n the eve o f m i l i t a r y e x p e d i t i o n s ; t h e H u p a
w h o s w i m i n freezing rivers a n d afterward r e m a i n stretched o u t o n the shore
as l o n g as possible, t o ensure t h e success o f t h e i r u n d e r t a k i n g s ; t h e Karaya
w h o p e r i o d i c a l l y d r a w b l o o d from t h e i r arms a n d legs w i t h scrapers made o f
fish teeth, t o f i r m t h e i r muscles; t h e m e n o f D a l l m a n n h a f e n ( E m p e r o r
W i l l i a m ' s L a n d i n N e w G u i n e a ) w h o c o m b a t sterility i n t h e i r wives b y m a k -
71
i n g b l o o d y cuts o n the w o m e n ' s u p p e r t h i g h s .
B u t similar d o i n g s can be f o u n d w i t h o u t l e a v i n g Australia, especially i n
the course o f i n i t i a t i o n rites. M a n y o f those rites i n v o l v e the systematic i n -
fliction o f suffering o n t h e n e o p h y t e , f o r the p u r p o s e o f a l t e r i n g his state a n d

riage or on the day after (taboos offiancesand of newlyweds); this is because marriage also involves an
important change in status. I confine myself to noting these briefly without lingering over them. The for-
mer concern magic, which is not my subject, while the latter belong to that system ofjuridico-religious
rules that refer to commerce between the sexes; the study of those will be possible only in conjunction
with the other precepts of primitive conjugal morality.
70
True, Preuss interprets these facts by saying that pain is a means of increasing a man's magical power
(die menschliche Zauberkraft); it might be thought, following this statement, that suffering is a magic rite and
not a religious one. But as I have already pointed out, Preuss calls all anonymous and impersonal forces
magic, without great precision, whether they belong to magic or to religion. There no doubt are tortures
that serve to make magicians, but many of those he describes are part of authentically religious cere-
monies. Hence their aim is to modify the religious states of individuals.
71
[Konrad Theodor] Preuss, "Der Ursprung der Religion und der Kunst," Globus, LXXXVII [1904],
pp. 309—400. Preuss categorizes many disparate rites under the same rubric, for example, the sheddings of
blood that act through the positive qualities ascribed to blood rather than through the sufferings they in-
volve. I single out only those phenomena in which pain is the essential element of the rite and the source
of its efficacy.
318 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

m a k i n g h i m take o n the d i s t i n g u i s h i n g qualities o f a m a n . A m o n g the

Larakia, w h i l e the y o u t h s are o n retreat i n the forest, t h e i r godfathers a n d
overseers c o n s t a n t l y assault t h e m w i t h b r u t a l b l o w s , w i t h o u t advance w a r n -
72
i n g a n d f o r n o apparent r e a s o n . A m o n g t h e U r a b u n n a , at a g i v e n m o m e n t ,
t h e n o v i c e lies stretched o u t o n t h e g r o u n d w i t h his face d o w n . A l l t h e m e n
present beat h i m b r u t a l l y ; t h e n t h e y m a k e a series o f f o u r t o e i g h t incisions
o n his back, d o w n b o t h sides o f his spine, a n d o n e a l o n g t h e m i d l i n e o f his
7 3
neck. A m o n g t h e A r u n t a , the first r i t e o f i n i t i a t i o n consists o f tossing t h e
subject; the m e n t h r o w h i m i n t o t h e air, catch h i m w h e n he comes d o w n ,
74
and then t h r o w h i m again. I n that same t r i b e , at t h e e n d o f a l o n g series o f
ceremonies, t h e y o u n g m a n is m a d e t o He d o w n o n a b e d o f leaves w i t h live
coals u n d e r i t ; a n d he c o n t i n u e s t o l i e there i m m o b i l e , i n t h e m i d s t o f the
75
heat a n d suffocating s m o k e . T h e U r a b u n n a practice a similar r i t e , b u t the
7 6
i n i t i a t e is beaten o n the b a c k as w e l l . So m u c h are his exertions o f this k i n d
that h e seems pathetic a n d half-dazed w h e n he is a l l o w e d t o resume o r d i n a r y
7 7
life. I t is t r u e t h a t all these practices are o f t e n presented as ordeals t o test the
novice's w o r t h a n d t o m a k e k n o w n his w o r t h i n e s s f o r acceptance i n t o r e l i -
78
gious s o c i e t y . A c t u a l l y , h o w e v e r , the p r o b a t i o n a r y f u n c t i o n o f the r i t e is b u t
a n o t h e r aspect o f its efficacy, f o r t h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h the n o v i c e bears the
ordeal proves that the r i t e has a c c o m p l i s h e d e x a c d y w h a t i t was m e a n t t o : t o
confer o n h i m the qualities that are its p r i m a r y raison d'être.
I n o t h e r cases, these r i t u a l t o r m e n t s are a p p l i e d n o t t o the w h o l e b o d y
b u t t o a n o r g a n o r a tissue, i n o r d e r t o stimulate its vitality. A m o n g the

72
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 331—332.
73
Ibid., p. 335. A similar practice is found among the Dieri (Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 658ff.).
74
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 214ff. From this example, we see that the rites of initiation
sometimes have the characteristics of hazing. This is so because hazing is a true social institution that arises
spontaneously whenever two groups that are unequal in their moral and social situationsfindthemselves
in intimate contact. In this case, the group that views itself as superior to the other resists the intrusion of
the newcomers; it reacts against them in such a way as to make them understand how superior it feels.
That reaction, which occurs automatically and takes the form of more or less severe torments, is also
aimed at adapting individuals to their new life and assimilating them into their new milieu. It thus con-
stitutes a sort of initiation. In this way, we can explain why initiation constitutes a sort of hazing. It does
because the group of elders is superior in religious and moral status to that of the young, and yet the el-
ders must take in the youths. All the conditions of hazing are present.
75
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 372.
76
Ibid., p. 335.
"Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 675.
78
Ibid., pp. 569, 604.
The Negative Cult and Its Functions 319

79
A r u n t a , the W a r r a m u n g a , a n d several o t h e r t r i b e s , at a c e r t a i n m o m e n t
d u r i n g the i n i t i a t i o n , delegated i n d i v i d u a l s p l u n g e t h e i r t e e t h i n t o the
novice's scalp. T h i s is so p a i n f u l that usually t h e patient c a n n o t bear i t w i t h -
8 0
o u t c r y i n g o u t . Its p u r p o s e is t o m a k e the hair g r o w . T h e same t r e a t m e n t is
applied t o m a k e t h e beard g r o w . T h e r i t e o f hair r e m o v a l , w h i c h H o w i t t r e -
81
ports f o r o t h e r tribes, m a y w e l l have t h e same raison d'être A m o n g the
A r u n t a a n d the K a i t i s h , a c c o r d i n g t o E y l m a n n , m e n a n d w o m e n m a k e small
w o u n d s o n t h e i r arms w i t h r e d - h o t sticks so as t o b e c o m e skillful at m a k i n g
8 2
fire o r g a i n t h e strength t h e y n e e d t o c a r r y heavy loads o f w o o d . Accord-
i n g t o the same observer, W a r r a m u n g a girls amputate the second a n d t h i r d
j o i n t s o f t h e i n d e x f i n g e r o n o n e h a n d , b e l i e v i n g that the f i n g e r becomes
83
m o r e skillful at u n c o v e r i n g t h e yams t h e r e b y .
I t is n o t impossible that t h e e x t r a c t i o n o f t e e t h m i g h t sometimes be i n -
t e n d e d t o b r i n g a b o u t effects o f t h e same k i n d . I t is c e r t a i n , i n any case, that
the p u r p o s e o f such c r u e l rites as c i r c u m c i s i o n a n d s u b i n c i s i o n is t o confer
special p o w e r s o n t h e g e n i t a l organs. Since the y o u n g m a n owes special
virtues t o those rites, h e is n o t a l l o w e d t o m a r r y u n t i l he has undergone
t h e m . W h a t makes this sui generis i n i t i a t i o n indispensable is t h e fact that, i n
all the l o w e r societies, sexual u n i o n is e n d o w e d w i t h a q u a l i t y o f r e l i g i o u s -
ness. I t is t h o u g h t t o b r i n g i n t o play awesome forces that m a n can approach
w i t h o u t danger o n l y i f he has g a i n e d t h e requisite i m m u n i t y t h r o u g h r i t u a l
84
procedures. A w h o l e series o f positive a n d negative rites, o f w h i c h c i r c u m -
c i s i o n a n d s u b i n c i s i o n are the f o r e r u n n e r s , have this purpose. A n o r g a n is
g i v e n sacredness b y p a i n f u l m u t i l a t i o n , f o r that v e r y act enables i t t o w i t h -
stand sacred forces that o t h e r w i s e i t w o u l d be unable t o c o n f r o n t .
I said at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f this w o r k t h a t all the essential elements o f r e l i -
gious t h o u g h t a n d life s h o u l d be f o u n d , at least i n seed, as far b a c k as the
m o s t p r i m i t i v e r e l i g i o n s . T h e f o r e g o i n g facts reinforce t h a t c l a i m . I f o n e b e -
l i e f is h e l d t o b e specific t o t h e m o s t m o d e r n a n d idealistic r e l i g i o n s , i t is the

79
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 251; Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 341, 352.
^Consequendy, among the Warramunga, the operation must be done by individuals favored with
beautiful heads of hair.
81
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 675, which is about the tribes of Lower Darling.
^[Richard] Eylmann, [Die Eingeborenen der Kolonie Sud Australien, Berlin, D. Reumer, 1908], p. 212.
83
Ibid.
84
Information on this question is to be found in my article "La Prohibition de l'inceste et ses origines"
(Année Sociologique, vol. I [1898], pp. Iff.) and in [Alfred Ernest] Crawley, The Mystic Rose [London,
Macmillan, 1902], pp. 37ff.
320 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

o n e that attributes sanctifying p o w e r t o p a i n . T h e rites j u s t e x a m i n e d are

based u p o n t h e same belief, w h i c h is v a r i o u s l y i n t e r p r e t e d , d e p e n d i n g u p o n
the h i s t o r i c a l p e r i o d i n w h i c h i t is e x a m i n e d . F o r the C h r i s t i a n , p a i n is
t h o u g h t t o act above all u p o n the s o u l — r e f i n i n g , e n n o b l i n g , a n d s p i r i t u a l i z -
i n g i t . F o r t h e A u s t r a l i a n , i t acts u p o n the b o d y — i n c r e a s i n g its v i t a l energies,
m a k i n g the beard a n d hair g r o w , t o u g h e n i n g the l i m b s . B u t i n b o t h cases, t h e
p r i n c i p l e is t h e same. I n b o t h , p a i n is h e l d t o be generative o f e x c e p t i o n a l
forces. N o r is this b e l i e f u n f o u n d e d . I n fact, the g r a n d e u r o f a m a n is m a d e
manifest b y the w a y he braves t h e p a i n . N e v e r does he rise above h i m s e l f
m o r e spectacularly t h a n w h e n he subdues his nature t o the p o i n t o f m a k i n g
i t f o l l o w a p a t h c o n t r a r y t o the o n e i t w o u l d take o n its o w n . I n that way, h e
makes h i m s e l f u n i q u e a m o n g all the o t h e r creatures, w h i c h g o b l i n d l y w h e r e
pleasure leads t h e m . I n t h a t way, he takes a special place i n the w o r l d . P a i n is
the sign that c e r t a i n o f the ties that b i n d h i m t o t h e profane w o r l d are b r o -
k e n . Because p a i n attests that h e is p a r t i a l l y e m a n c i p a t e d from that w o r l d , i t
is r i g h t l y considered t h e t o o l o f his deliverance, so h e w h o is delivered i n this
w a y is n o t t h e v i c t i m o f m e r e i l l u s i o n w h e n h e believes h e is e n d o w e d w i t h
a k i n d o f mastery over t h i n g s . B y t h e v e r y act o f r e n o u n c i n g things, he has
risen above things. Because he has silenced nature, he is stronger t h a n nature.
F u r t h e r m o r e , t h a t v i r t u e is far from h a v i n g o n l y aesthetic value. R e l i -
gious life as a w h o l e presupposes i t . Sacrifices a n d offerings d o n o t g o u n a c -
c o m p a n i e d b y p r i v a t i o n s that exact a p r i c e from the w o r s h i p p e r . E v e n i f t h e
rites d o n o t r e q u i r e t a n g i b l e things o f h i m , t h e y take his t i m e a n d strength.
T o serve his gods, he m u s t f o r g e t himself. T o create f o r t h e m the place i n his
life t o w h i c h t h e y are e n t i d e d , he m u s t sacrifice some o f his profane interests.
T h e positive c u l t is possible, t h e n , o n l y i f m a n is t r a i n e d t o r e n u n c i a t i o n , ab-
n e g a t i o n , a n d d e t a c h m e n t from self—hence, t o suffering. H e m u s t n o t dread
suffering, f o r h e can c a r r y p u t his duties j o y f u l l y o n l y i f he i n some measure
loves i t . I f that is t o c o m e a b o u t , h e m u s t t r a i n h i m s e l f t o suffering, a n d this
is w h e r e t h e ascetic practices lead. T h e sufferings t h e y i m p o s e are n o t a r b i -
t r a r y a n d sterde cruelties, t h e n , b u t a necessary s c h o o l i n w h i c h m a n shapes
a n d steels himself, a n d i n w h i c h he gains t h e qualities o f disinterestedness a n d
endurance w i t h o u t w h i c h there is n o r e l i g i o n . I n fact, i f this result is t o be
achieved, i t helps i f t h e ascetic ideal is e m i n e n d y i n c a r n a t e d i n c e r t a i n i n d i -
viduals w h o are specialized, as i t were, i n that aspect o f r i t u a l life, almost t o
excess. T h o s e c e r t a i n i n d i v i d u a l s a m o u n t t o so m a n y l i v i n g m o d e l s that e n -
courage s t r i v i n g . S u c h is the h i s t o r i c a l role o f the great ascetics. W h e n w e a n -
alyze i n detail t h e things t h e y d o , w e w o n d e r w h a t t h e useful p o i n t o f those
things c o u l d be. T h e c o n t e m p t t h e y profess f o r all that o r d i n a r i l y impassions
m e n strikes us as bizarre. B u t those extremes are necessary t o m a i n t a i n a m o n g
The Negative Cult and Its Functions 321

the faithful an adequate level o f distaste f o r easy l i v i n g a n d m u n d a n e plea-

sures. A n elite m u s t set the g o a l t o o h i g h so that the mass does n o t set i t t o o
low. Some must g o t o extremes so that the average m a y r e m a i n h i g h e n o u g h .
B u t asceticism serves m o r e t h a n r e l i g i o u s ends. H e r e , as elsewhere, r e l i -
gious interests are o n l y social a n d m o r a l interests i n s y m b o l i c f o r m . T h e ideal
beings t o w h i c h cults are addressed are n o t alone i n d e m a n d i n g o f t h e i r ser-
vants a c e r t a i n c o n t e m p t f o r p a i n ; society, t o o , is possible o n l y at that p r i c e .
E v e n w h e n e x a l t i n g t h e powers o f m a n , i t is o f t e n b r u t a l t o w a r d i n d i v i d u a l s .
O f necessity, i t requires p e r p e t u a l sacrifices o f t h e m . Precisely because s o c i -
ety lifts us above ourselves, i t does constant v i o l e n c e t o o u r natural appetites.
So that w e can f u l f i l l o u r duties t o w a r d i t , o u r c o n d i t i o n i n g must ready us t o
overcome o u r instincts at t i m e s — w h e n necessary, t o g o u p t h e d o w n stair-
case o f nature. T h e r e is an i n h e r e n t asceticism i n all social life t h a t is destined
to o u d i v e all m y t h o l o g i e s a n d all dogmas; i t is an i n t e g r a l part o f all h u m a n
culture. A n d , fundamentally, that asceticism is t h e rationale a n d j u s t i f i c a t i o n
o f the asceticism that r e l i g i o n s have t a u g h t since t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t i m e .

Ill
H a v i n g d e t e r m i n e d w h a t the system o f p r o h i b i t i o n s consists o f a n d w h a t its
negative a n d positive f u n c t i o n s are, w e m u s t n o w u n c o v e r its causes.
I n a sense, the v e r y n o t i o n o f t h e sacred l o g i c a l l y entails i t . E v e r y t h i n g
that is sacred is the o b j e c t o f respect, a n d every f e e l i n g o f respect is translated
i n t o stirrings o f i n h i b i t i o n i n the person w h o has that feeling. Because o f the
e m o t i o n i t inspires, a respected b e i n g is always expressed i n consciousness b y
a representation that is h i g h l y charged w i t h m e n t a l energy. H e n c e , i t is a r m e d
i n such a w a y as t o t h r o w any representation that w h o l l y o r p a r t l y contradicts
i t far away f r o m itself. A n t a g o n i s m characterizes t h e relationship t h e sacred
w o r l d has w i t h the profane one. T h e t w o c o r r e s p o n d t o t w o f o r m s o f life
that are m u t u a l l y exclusive, o r at least that c a n n o t be l i v e d at the same time
w i t h t h e same intensity. W e c a n n o t be d e v o t e d e n t i r e l y t o the ideals t o w h i c h
the c u l t is addressed, a n d e n t i r e l y t o ourselves a n d o u r sensuous interests also;
e n t i r e l y t o the c o l l e c t i v i t y a n d e n t i r e l y t o o u r e g o i s m as w e l l . H e r e i n are t w o
states o f consciousness that are o r i e n t e d t o w a r d , a n d that o r i e n t o u r b e h a v i o r
t o w a r d , t w o opposite poles. W h i c h e v e r is m o r e p o w e r f u l must p u s h the
o t h e r o u t o f consciousness. W h e n w e t h i n k o f sacred things, t h e idea o f a
profane o b j e c t c a n n o t present itself t o t h e m i n d w i t h o u t m e e t i n g resistance,
s o m e t h i n g w i t h i n us that opposes its settlement there. T h e idea o f t h e sacred
does n o t tolerate such a n e i g h b o r . B u t this psychic antagonism, this m u t u a l
e x c l u s i o n o f ideas, m u s t necessarily c u l m i n a t e i n the e x c l u s i o n o f t h e things
322 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

that c o r r e s p o n d t o t h e m . I f t h e ideas are n o t t o coexist, t h e things m u s t n o t

t o u c h o n e a n o t h e r o r c o m e i n t o c o n t a c t i n any way. S u c h is the v e r y p r i n c i -
ple o f t h e p r o h i b i t i o n .
M o r e o v e r , the w o r l d o f the sacred is a w o r l d apart, b y d e f i n i t i o n . Since
the sacred is o p p o s e d t o the profane w o r l d b y all t h e features I have m e n -
t i o n e d , i t m u s t be treated i n a w a y that is appropriate t o i t . I f , i n o u r dealings
w i t h the things that c o m p r i s e the sacred w o r l d , w e used the actions, l a n -
guage, and attitudes that serve us i n o u r relations w i t h profane things, that
w o u l d be t o m i s a p p r e h e n d t h e nature o f t h e sacred w o r l d a n d c o n f o u n d i t
w i t h w h a t i t is n o t . W e m a y freely handle profane t h i n g s , a n d w e talk freely
to o r d i n a r y beings. So w e w i l l n o t t o u c h sacred beings o r w i l l t o u c h t h e m
o n l y w i t h reserve, and w e w i l l n o t talk i n t h e i r presence o r n o t talk i n the o r -
d i n a r y language. A l l that is c u s t o m a r y i n o u r dealings w i t h o n e set o f things
m u s t be e x c l u d e d i n o u r d e a l i n g w i t h the other.
B u t w h i l e this e x p l a n a t i o n is n o t inaccurate, still i t is inadequate. I n fact, a
g o o d m a n y beings that are objects o f respect exist w i t h o u t b e i n g protected by
strict systems o f p r o h i b i t i o n s , such as I have been describing. Doubdess, the i n -
tellect has a sort o f general tendency t o situate different things i n different e n -
v i r o n m e n t s , especially w h e n they are i n c o m p a t i b l e w i t h o n e another. B u t the
profane e n v i r o n m e n t and the sacred o n e are n o t m e r e l y distinct b u t also closed
to one another; there is a g u l f b e t w e e n t h e m . I n the nature o f sacred beings,
there m u s t be some special cause that necessitates this c o n d i t i o n o f unusual iso-
l a t i o n and m u t u a l e x c l u s i o n . A n d voila: B y a sort o f c o n t r a d i c t i o n , the sacred
w o r l d is as t h o u g h i n c l i n e d b y its v e r y nature t o spread i n t o the same profane
w o r l d that i t otherwise excludes. W h i l e r e p e l l i n g the profane w o r l d , the sa-
cred w o r l d tends at the same time t o f l o w i n t o the profane w o r l d w h e n e v e r
that latter w o r l d comes near i t . T h a t is w h y they must be kept at a distance
from each other and w h y , i n some sense, a v o i d must be o p e n e d between t h e m .
W h a t necessitates such precautions is the e x t r a o r d i n a r y contagiousness
that sacredness has. Far from r e m a i n i n g attached t o the things that are m a r k e d
w i t h i t , sacredness possesses a c e r t a i n transience. E v e n the. m o s t superficial o r
i n d i r e c t c o n t a c t is e n o u g h f o r i t t o spread from o n e o b j e c t t o another. R e l i -
gious forces are so i m a g i n e d as t o appear always o n the p o i n t o f escaping the
places they o c c u p y a n d i n v a d i n g all that passes w i t h i n t h e i r reach. T h e nanja
tree i n w h i c h an ancestral spirit lives is sacred f o r the i n d i v i d u a l w h o c o n s i d -
ers h i m s e l f a r e i n c a r n a t i o n o f that ancestor. B u t every b i r d that comes t o l i g h t
u p o n that tree shares i n t h e same q u a l i t y ; so t o t o u c h the b i r d is f o r b i d d e n as
8 5
w e l l . 1 have already s h o w n h o w t h e m e r e t o u c h o f a c h u r i n g a is e n o u g h t o

85
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 133.
The Negative Cult and Its Functions 323

86
sanctify p e o p l e a n d t h i n g s . M o r e t h a n that, all rites o f consecration are
f o u n d e d u p o n this p r i n c i p l e , the contagiousness o f the sacred. Such, i n d e e d ,
is the churinga's sacredness that i t makes its i n f l u e n c e felt at a distance. A s w e
recall, this sacredness spreads n o t o n l y t o the c a v i t y i n w h i c h churingas are
kept b u t also t o t h e w h o l e s u r r o u n d i n g area, t o t h e animals t a k i n g refuge
there ( w h i c h m a y n o t be k i l l e d ) , a n d t o the plants g r o w i n g there ( w h i c h m a y
8 7
n o t be p l u c k e d ) . A snake t o t e m has its center at a place w h e r e there is a w a -
ter h o l e . T h e sacredness o f t h e t o t e m is passed o n t o t h e place, t o the w a t e r
hole, a n d t o t h e w a t e r itself, w h i c h is f o r b i d d e n t o all m e m b e r s o f the
8 8
totemic g r o u p . T h e n e o p h y t e lives i n an atmosphere f u l l o f religiousness,
8 9
and h e h i m s e l f is as t h o u g h suffused w i t h i t . A s a result, e v e r y t h i n g he has
and e v e r y t h i n g he touches is f o r b i d d e n t o w o m e n a n d w i t h d r a w n from c o n -
tact w i t h t h e m , d o w n t o the b i r d he has s t r u c k w i t h his stick, the kangaroo
90
he has r u n t h r o u g h w i t h his spear, a n d the fish that has s t r u c k his fishhook.
B u t a n o t h e r side o f i t is that t h e rites he undergoes a n d t h e things that
play a r o l e i n t h e m have greater sacredness t h a n he. T h a t sacredness is passed
o n c o n t a g i o u s l y t o e v e r y t h i n g t h a t b r i n g s e i t h e r t o m i n d . T h e t o o t h that has
91
been p u l l e d f r o m his m o u t h is regarded as v e r y sacred. T h e r e f o r e , he c a n -
n o t eat o f animals that have p r o m i n e n t t e e t h , since t h e y b r i n g t o m i n d the
92
extracted t o o t h . T h e ceremonies o f the K u r i n g a l e n d w i t h r i t u a l w a s h i n g .
A q u a t i c birds are f o r b i d d e n t o the n o v i c e because t h e y evoke this r i t e . T h e
animals that c l i m b all the w a y t o the tops o f trees are sacrosanct t o h i m as
w e l l , because t h e y are t o o m u c h t h e n e i g h b o r s o f D a r a m u l u n , the g o d o f i n i -
93
t i a t i o n , w h o lives i n the heavens. T h e s o u l o f a dead m a n is a sacred b e i n g .
W e have already seen that the same p r o p e r t y passes t o t h e b o d y i n w h i c h that
soul has l i v e d , t o the place w h e r e i t is b u r i e d , the c a m p w h e r e t h e m a n l i v e d

86
See above, p. 120.
87
Spencer and Gülen, Native Tribes, pp. 134—135; [Carl] Strehlow, [Die Aranda- und Loritja-stamme in
Zentral-Australien, Frankfurt, J. Baer, 1907], vol. II, p. 78.
88
Spencer and Gülen, Northern Tribes, pp. 167, 299.
89
Apart from the ascetic rites of which I have spoken, there are positive ones whose purpose is to fill
or, as Howitt says, to saturate the neophyte with religiousness (Howitt, NativeTribes, p. 535). True, instead
of speaking of religiousness, Howitt speaks of magic powers, but we know that, for the majority of ethno-
graphers, this word simply means religious virtues that are impersonal in nature.
'"Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 674-675.
91
Spencer and Gülen, NativeTribes, p. 454. Cf. Howitt, NativeTribes, p. 561.
92
Howitt, NativeTribes, p. 557.
"Ibid., p. 560.
324 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

his life ( w h i c h is destroyed o r abandoned), the n a m e he had, his w i f e , a n d his

94
relations. I t is as t h o u g h t h e y themselves are invested w i t h sacredness, so
o n e keeps at a distance f r o m t h e m a n d does n o t treat t h e m as mere profane
beings. I n the societies s t u d i e d b y D a w s o n , t h e i r names, l i k e that o f t h e dead
9 5
m a n , m u s t n o t be spoken d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d o f m o u r n i n g . C e r t a i n o f the
9 6
animals he ate m a y be p r o h i b i t e d as w e l l .
97
T h i s contagiousness o f t h e sacred is t o o w e l l k n o w n a f a c t f o r there t o
be any n e e d t o demonstrate its existence w i t h n u m e r o u s examples. I have
sought o n l y t o establish that i t is as t r u e o f t o t e m i s m as i t is o f m o r e advanced
religions. O n c e n o t e d , that contagiousness readily explains t h e e x t r e m e r i g o r
o f the p r o h i b i t i o n s that d i v i d e the sacred f r o m the profane. B y v i r t u e o f that
e x c e p t i o n a l v o l a t i l i t y , t h e slightest contact, t h e least p r o x i m i t y o f a profane
b e i n g , w h e t h e r physical o r s i m p l y m o r a l , is e n o u g h t o d r a w the r e l i g i o u s
forces outside t h e i r d o m a i n . O n the o t h e r h a n d , since t h e y c a n n o t e x i t w i t h -
o u t b e l y i n g t h e i r nature, a w h o l e system o f measures t o keep t h e t w o w o r l d s
at a respectful distance apart b e c o m e s indispensable. T h i s is w h y o r d i n a r y
p e o p l e are f o r b i d d e n n o t o n l y t o t o u c h b u t also t o see o r hear that w h i c h is
sacred, a n d w h y these t w o k i n d s o f life m u s t n o t m i n g l e i n consciousness.
Precautions t o keep t h e m apart are all the m o r e necessary because they t e n d
t o m e r g e , even w h i l e o p p o s i n g o n e another.
A t the same time as w e u n d e r s t a n d the m u l t i p l i c i t y o f these p r o h i b i t i o n s ,
w e u n d e r s t a n d h o w t h e y a n d t h e sanctions attached t o t h e m f u n c t i o n . O n e
result o f t h e contagiousness i n h e r e n t i n all that is sacred is this: A profane b e -
i n g c a n n o t v i o l a t e a p r o h i b i t i o n w i t h o u t h a v i n g the r e l i g i o u s force that he
has i m p r o p e r l y approached e x t e n d t o h i m a n d take h i m over. B u t since there
is a n t a g o n i s m b e t w e e n h i m s e l f and that force, h e finds h i m s e l f subject t o a

94
See above, pp. 307, 310. Cf. Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 498; Spencer and Gillen, Northern
Tribes, pp. 506-507, 518-519, 526; Howitt, NativeTribes, pp. 449, 461, 469; Mathews, "Aboriginal Tribes
of New South Wales and Victoria," RSNSW. vol. XXXVIII [1904], p. 274; Schulze, "Aborigines of. . .
Finke River," p. 231; Wyatt, Adelaide and Encounter Bay Tribes, in Woods [The Native Tribes of South Aus-
tralia], pp. 165, 198.
95
[James Dawson], Australian Aborigines, [The Languages and Customs of SeveralTribes ofAborigines in the
Western District of Victoria, Australia, Melbourne, G. Robertson, 1881], p. 42.

^Howitt, NativeTribes, pp. 470-471.

"On this question, see [William] Robertson Smith, [Lectures on] the Religion of the Semites [London, A.
& C. Black, 1889], pp. 152ff., 446, 481; Frazer, "Taboo," in Encyclopedia Britannica; [Frank Byron] Jevons,
Introduction to the History of Religions [London, Methuen, 1896], pp. 59ff.; Crawley, Mystic Rose, Chaps.
2-9; Arnold] Van Gennep, Tabou et totémisme à Madagascar [étude descriptive et théorique, Paris, E. Leroux,
1904], chap. 3.
The Negative Cult and Its Functions 325

hostile p o w e r , the h o s t i l i t y o f w h i c h is i n e v i t a b l y manifested i n v i o l e n t reac-

tions that t e n d t o destroy h i m . T h i s is w h y sickness a n d death are p r e s u m e d
to be the n a t u r a l consequences o f all such transgressions, and such are the
consequences that are p r e s u m e d t o o c c u r b y themselves w i t h a sort o f p h y s -
ical necessity. T h e c u l p r i t feels i n v a d e d b y a force t h a t takes h i m over a n d
against w h i c h he is powerless. Has h e eaten the t o t e m i c animal? H e feels i t
p e r v a d i n g h i m a n d g n a w i n g at his entrails; he lies o n the g r o u n d a n d awaits
98
death. E v e r y p r o f a n a t i o n i m p l i e s a consecration, b u t o n e that is dreadful t o
w h o e v e r is consecrated a n d w h o e v e r comes near h i m . I n d e e d the results o f
9 9
that consecration i n p a r t s a n c t i o n t h e p r o h i b i t i o n .
N o t i c e that this e x p l a n a t i o n o f the p r o h i b i t i o n s does n o t d e p e n d u p o n
the v a r i e d symbols w i t h w h o s e help t h e r e l i g i o u s forces can be i m a g i n e d . I t
is o f l i t t l e consequence w h e t h e r t h e y are i m a g i n e d as a n o n y m o u s a n d i m -
personal energies o r as personalities e n d o w e d w i t h consciousness a n d feeling.
To be sure, t h e y are t h o u g h t i n the first case t o react against p r o f a n i n g trans-
gressions m e c h a n i c a l l y a n d unconsciously, whereas i n the second they are
t h o u g h t t o o b e y goadings o f passion aroused b y the offense. Fundamentally,
however, these t w o c o n c e p t i o n s ( w h i c h , b y t h e way, have the same practical
effects) d o n o m o r e t h a n express o n e a n d the same psychic m e c h a n i s m i n t w o
different languages. B o t h are based o n t h e a n t a g o n i s m b e t w e e n the sacred
and t h e profane, plus the remarkable capacity o f t h e first t o be passed o n t o
the second. T h e a n t a g o n i s m a n d the contagiousness act i n the same way,
w h e t h e r sacredness is i m p u t e d t o b l i n d forces o r t o consciousnesses. So a u -
t h e n t i c a l l y r e l i g i o u s life is far f r o m b e g i n n i n g o n l y w h e r e m y t h i c a l p e r s o n a l -
ities exist, f o r w e see i n this case that t h e r i t e remains the same w h e t h e r o r
n o t t h e r e l i g i o u s beings are p e r s o n i f i e d . T h i s o b s e r v a t i o n is o n e I w i l l have
occasion t o repeat i n each o f t h e chapters t o c o m e .

IV
I f the contagiousness o f t h e sacred helps t o e x p l a i n the system o f p r o h i b i -
tions, h o w is this contagiousness itself t o be explained?
S o m e have t h o u g h t t h e y c o u l d a c c o u n t f o r i t b y t h e w e l l - k n o w n laws

98
See the references above, p. 128, n. 1. Cf. Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 323, 324; Spencer
and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 168; Taplin, The Narrinyeri, p. 16; Roth, [possibly "Marriage Ceremonies"],
p. 76.
"Bear in mind that when the prohibition violated is religious, these sanctions are not the only ones;
there is, besides, either an actual punishment or a public stigma.
326 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

g o v e r n i n g the association o f ideas. Feelings e v o k e d b y a p e r s o n o r a t h i n g

spread contagiously, f r o m t h e idea o f that t h i n g o r p e r s o n t o t h e representa-
tions associated w i t h i t , a n d from there t o t h e objects w i t h w h i c h those r e p -
resentations b e c o m e associated. T h e respect w e have f o r a sacred b e i n g is
t h e r e b y c o m m u n i c a t e d t o a l l that touches this b e i n g a n d t o all that resembles
i t o r calls i t t o m i n d . O f course, an educated m a n is n o t t h e d u p e o f such
associations. H e k n o w s t h a t t h e e m o t i o n s result from m e r e plays o f images,
e n t i r e l y m e n t a l c o m b i n a t i o n s , a n d he w i l l n o t a b a n d o n h i m s e l f t o the super-
stitions that those i l l u s i o n s t e n d t o create. B u t , i t is said, t h e p r i m i t i v e o b j e c -
tifies these impressions naively, w i t h o u t c r i t i q u i n g t h e m . D o e s a t h i n g inspire
reverent fear i n h i m ? F r o m t h e fear, t h e c o n c l u s i o n : A majestic a n d awesome
force does i n d e e d l i v e i n i t , so he keeps his distance from that t h i n g a n d treats
1 0 0
i t as i f i t was sacred, even t h o u g h i t is i n n o w a y e n t i t l e d t o b e .
T o say this, h o w e v e r , is t o f o r g e t that t h e m o s t p r i m i t i v e r e l i g i o n s are n o t
t h e o n l y ones that have ascribed t o sacredness such an a b i l i t y t o propagate.
E v e n t h e m o s t m o d e r n cults have a set o f rites based o n this p r i n c i p l e . D o e s
n o t every c o n s e c r a t i o n b y a n o i n t i n g o r w a s h i n g t r a n s m i t t h e sanctifying
v i r t u e s o f a sacred o b j e c t i n t o a profane one? A l t h o u g h that m o d e o f t h i n k -
i n g has n o n a t u r a l e x p l a n a t i o n o r j u s t i f i c a t i o n , still i t is h a r d t o see today's e n -
l i g h t e n e d C a t h o l i c as a k i n d o f b a c k w a r d savage. M o r e o v e r , t h e t e n d e n c y t o
o b j e c t i f y every e m o t i o n is ascribed t o t h e p r i m i t i v e q u i t e arbitrarily. I n
everyday life, i n t h e details o f his secular o c c u p a t i o n s , he does n o t a t t r i b u t e
t o o n e t h i n g t h e properties o f its n e i g h b o r , o r v i c e versa. T o b e sure, he is less
infatuated w i t h c l a r i t y a n d distinctness t h a n w e are. E v e n so, i t is far f r o m
t r u e that l i v i n g i n h i m is w h o - k n o w s - w h a t d e p l o r a b l e i n c l i n a t i o n t o s c r a m -
ble e v e r y t h i n g , t o r u n e v e r y t h i n g together. I t is r e l i g i o u s t h o u g h t alone that
has a m a r k e d i n c l i n a t i o n t o w a r d fusions o f this sort. Clearly, t h e n , i t is n o t i n
t h e general laws o f h u m a n i n t e l l i g e n c e that w e m u s t seek t h e o r i g i n o f these
predispositions b u t i n t h e special nature o f r e l i g i o u s t h i n g s .
W h e n a force o r a p r o p e r t y seems t o us t o be an i n t e g r a l part, a c o n -
stituent e l e m e n t , o f w h a t e v e r i t i n h a b i t s , w e d o n o t easdy i m a g i n e i t as capa-
b l e o f d e t a c h i n g i t s e l f a n d g o i n g elsewhere. A b o d y is d e f i n e d b y its mass a n d
a t o m i c c o m p o s i t i o n ; w e d o n o t i m a g i n e e i t h e r t h a t i t can pass o n any o f
these d i s t i n g u i s h i n g properties b y m e r e c o n t a c t . O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , i f t h e
force is o n e that has e n t e r e d t h e b o d y from outside, t h e idea that i t s h o u l d be

100
See Jevons, Introduction to the History of Religion, pp. 67—68.1 will say nothing about the (by the way,
barely formulated) theory of Crawley (Mystic Rose, chaps. 4—7), in which the reason taboos are contagious
is that certain phenomena of contagion are erroneously interpreted. That is arbitrary. As Jevons quite cor-
recdy observes in the passage to which I refer the reader, the contagiousness of the sacred is affirmed a pri-
ori, and not on the basis of improperly interpreted experiences.
The Negative Cult and Its Functions 327

able t o escape f r o m that b o d y is i n n o w a y u n i m a g i n a b l e , f o r n o t h i n g attaches

it there. T h u s , t h e heat o r e l e c t r i c i t y that any o b j e c t has received f r o m o u t -
side can be t r a n s m i t t e d t o the s u r r o u n d i n g m i l i e u , a n d the m i n d readily ac-
cepts the p o s s i b i l i t y o f that transmission. I f r e l i g i o u s forces are generally
conceived o f as e x t e r n a l t o t h e beings i n w h i c h t h e y reside, t h e n there is n o
surprise i n the e x t r e m e ease w i t h w h i c h r e l i g i o u s forces radiate a n d diffuse.
This is precisely w h a t t h e t h e o r y I have p u t f o r w a r d i m p l i e s .
R e l i g i o u s forces are i n fact o n l y transfigured collective forces, that is,
m o r a l forces; t h e y are m a d e o f ideas a n d feelings that t h e spectacle o f society
awakens i n us, n o t o f sensations that c o m e t o us f r o m the physical w o r l d .
T h u s , t h e y are quahtatively different from the tangible things i n w h i c h w e l o -
calize t h e m . F r o m those things t h e y m a y v e r y w e l l b o r r o w the o u t w a r d a n d
physical f o r m s i n w h i c h t h e y are i m a g i n e d , b u t t h e y o w e n o n e o f t h e i r p o w e r
to those things. T h e y are n o t h e l d b y i n t e r n a l b o n d s t o t h e various supports
o n w h i c h t h e y eventually settle a n d are n o t r o o t e d i n t h e m . T o use a w o r d I
1 0 1
have used already a n d that best characterizes t h e m , they are superadded.
T h u s n o objects, t o the e x c l u s i o n o f others, are predisposed t o r e c e i v i n g
those forces. T h e m o s t i n s i g n i f i c a n t objects, even t h e m o s t commonplace
ones, can play this role. C h a n c e circumstances decide w h i c h are the elect. L e t
us recall t h e terms i n w h i c h C o d r i n g t o n speaks o f mana: " I t is a force that is
by no means fixed on a material object, but that can be carried on almost any sort of
102
object!' Similarly, M i s s Fletcher's D a k o t a p o r t r a y e d w a k a n f o r us as a k i n d
o f m o v i n g force that comes a n d goes t h r o u g h o u t the w o r l d , a l i g h t i n g here o r
1 0 3
there w i t h o u t s e t t l i n g a n y w h e r e o n c e a n d f o r a l l . T h e religiousness that is
i n h e r e n t i n m a n is n o different. I t is t r u e that, i n t h e w o r l d o f experience, n o
b e i n g is closer t o t h e v e r y source o f r e l i g i o u s life; n o n e participates i n i t m o r e
direcdy, f o r h u m a n consciousness is the place w h e r e i t develops. A n d yet w e
k n o w that t h e r e l i g i o u s p r i n c i p l e that animates m a n , the soul, is p a r t l y e x t e r -
nal t o h i m .
I f t h e r e l i g i o u s forces d o n o t have a place o f t h e i r o w n a n y w h e r e , t h e i r
m o b i l i t y becomes easy t o e x p l a i n . Since n o t h i n g binds t h e m t o the things i n
w h i c h w e localize t h e m , i t is n o t s u r p r i s i n g that t h e y escape from those
things u p o n the slightest contact—against t h e i r w i l l , so t o speak. T h e i r i n -
tensity pushes t h e m o n t o w a r d diffusion, w h i c h e v e r y t h i n g facilitates. T h i s is
w h y the soul itself, t h o u g h h o l d i n g o n t o t h e b o d y w i t h e n t i r e l y personal

101
See above, p. 230.
102
See above, p. 197. [I have rendered this passage by Codrington according to the two slighdy differ-
ent renderings by Dürkheim. Trans.]
103
See above, p. 201.
328 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

bonds, c o n t i n u a l l y threatens t o leave i t ; all t h e openings a n d pores o f the

b o d y are so m a n y channels t h r o u g h w h i c h i t tends t o spread a n d diffuse to
104
the o u t s i d e .
B u t t h e p h e n o m e n o n w e are t r y i n g t o u n d e r s t a n d w i l l be e x p l a i n e d bet-
ter still i f , instead o f c o n s i d e r i n g the f u l l y f o r m e d c o n c e p t o f religious forces,
w e go b a c k t o the m e n t a l process from w h i c h i t results.
W e have seen that t h e sacredness o f a b e i n g d i d n o t d e p e n d u p o n any one
o f its i n h e r e n t characteristics. I t is n o t because the t o t e m i c a n i m a l has this o r
that appearance o r p r o p e r t y that i t inspires r e l i g i o u s feelings. T h e causes o f
those feelings are e n t i r e l y f o r e i g n t o t h e nature o f t h e o b j e c t o n w h i c h they
eventually settle. W h a t constitutes those feelings are t h e impressions o f reas-
surance a n d dependence that are created i n consciousness t h r o u g h t h e w o r k -
ings o f society. B y themselves, these e m o t i o n s are n o t b o u n d t o the idea o f
any d e f i n i t e object. B u t since t h e y are e m o t i o n s , a n d especially intense ones,
t h e y are e m i n e n t l y c o n t a g i o u s as w e l l . H e n c e , t h e y are l i k e an o i l slick; they
spread t o all t h e o t h e r m e n t a l states t h a t o c c u p y t h e m i n d . T h e y pervade and
c o n t a m i n a t e especially those representations i n w h i c h are expressed the var-
ious objects that the m a n at that v e r y m o m e n t has i n his hands o r before his
eyes: T o t e m i c designs that cover his body, b u l l roarers t h a t he causes t o res-
onate, rocks that s u r r o u n d h i m , g r o u n d that he tramps u n d e r f o o t , and so o n .
So i t is that these objects themselves take o n r e l i g i o u s significance that is n o t
i n t r i n s i c t o t h e m b u t is c o n f e r r e d o n t h e m from outside. H e n c e c o n t a g i o n is
n o t a k i n d o f secondary process b y w h i c h sacredness propagates, o n c e ac-
q u i r e d , b u t is instead t h e v e r y process b y w h i c h sacredness is acquired. I t set-
des by contagion; we s h o u l d n o t be surprised that i t is t r a n s m i t t e d
contagiously. A special e m o t i o n gives i t t h e reality i t has; i f sacredness b e -
comes attached t o an object, that happens because t h e e m o t i o n has e n c o u n -
tered the o b j e c t o n its p a t h . I t n a t u r a l l y spreads from the o b j e c t t o all the
others i t finds n e a r b y — t h a t is, t o all that some cause has b r o u g h t close t o the
first i n the m i n d , w h e t h e r physical c o n t i g u i t y o r m e r e similarity.
T h u s , t h e c o n t a g i o u s q u a l i t y o f sacredness finds its e x p l a n a t i o n i n the
t h e o r y o f r e l i g i o u s forces that I have p r o p o s e d , a n d that v e r y fact serves as
1 0 5
confirmation o f the t h e o r y . A t t h e same t i m e , i t helps us u n d e r s t a n d a fea-
t u r e o f p r i m i t i v e m e n t a l i t y t o w h i c h I p r e v i o u s l y called a t t e n t i o n .

104
This Preuss clearly demonstrated in the Globus articles I cited previously.
105
It is true that the contagiousness is not peculiar to religious forces, for those belonging to magic
have the same property. And yet it is evident that those forces do not correspond to objectified social feel-
ings. This is because the magic forces were conceived on the model of religious forces. I will return later
to this point (see p. 366).
The Negative Cult and Its Functions 329

106
W e have s e e n h o w easily the p r i m i t i v e assimilates disparate k i n g d o m s
o f nature a n d sees the m o s t disparate things as i d e n t i c a l — m e n , animals,
plants, stars, a n d so f o r t h . W e n o w see o n e o f the causes that c o n t r i b u t e d
most t o f a c i l i t a t i n g these fusions. Because r e l i g i o u s forces are e m i n e n t l y c o n -
tagious, a single p r i n c i p l e is c o n t i n u a l l y f o u n d t o b e a n i m a t i n g the m o s t dis-
parate things. I t passes a m o n g t h e m as a result o f m e r e physical nearness o r
mere similarity, even superficial similarity. So i t is that m e n , animals, plants,
and rocks are h e l d t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e same t o t e m : t h e m e n because they
carry the n a m e o f the a n i m a l ; t h e plants because t h e y serve as f o o d f o r t h e
animal; t h e rocks because t h e y stand w h e r e t h e ceremonies are c o n d u c t e d .
T h e r e l i g i o u s forces are considered the source o f all that is p o w e r f u l ; as a r e -
sult, beings that h a d the same r e l i g i o u s p r i n c i p l e m u s t have seemed t o be o f
the same essence a n d t o differ f r o m o n e a n o t h e r o n l y i n secondary charac-
teristics. T h i s is w h y i t seemed e n t i r e l y n a t u r a l t o p u t t h e m i n t h e same cat-
e g o r y a n d t o v i e w t h e m as varieties w i t h i n a single genus a n d as transmutable
i n t o o n e another.
O n c e established, this relationship makes the p h e n o m e n a o f c o n t a g i o n
appear i n a n e w l i g h t . B y themselves, they seem aben t o logical Ufe. D o they
n o t b r i n g a b o u t the m i n g l i n g a n d fusion o f things, despite the natural differ-
ences o f those things? B u t w e have seen that these fusions and participations
have played a logical role, and o n e o f great u t i l i t y : T h e y have served t o c o n -
nect things that sensation leaves separate f r o m o n e another. T h u s , the sort o f
fundamental i r r a t i o n a l i t y that w e are at first l e d t o i m p u t e to c o n t a g i o n , the
source o f that b r i n g i n g together a n d m i x i n g , is far f r o m b e i n g its distinctive
m a r k . C o n t a g i o n prepared the w a y f o r the scientific explanations o f the future.

106
See above, p. 237.
 CHAPTER TWO

THE POSITIVE CULT

The Elements of the Sacrifice

W hatever its i m p o r t a n c e a n d a l t h o u g h i t has i n d i r e c t l y positive effects,

t h e negative c u l t is n o t an e n d i n itself. I t gives access t o religious life
b u t presupposes, rather t h a n constitutes, that life. I f t h e negative c u l t c o m -
mands the faithful t o flee the profane w o r l d , the p o i n t is t o d r a w t h e m closer
t o t h e sacred w o r l d . M a n has never i m a g i n e d that his duties t o w a r d the r e l i -
gious forces c o u l d be h m i t e d t o abstinence f r o m all c o m m e r c e . H e has always
t h o u g h t o f h i m s e l f as m a i n t a i n i n g positive bilateral relations w i t h them,
w h i c h a set o f r i t u a l practices regulate a n d organize. T o this special system o f
rites I g i v e the n a m e " p o s i t i v e c u l t . "
For a l o n g t i m e , w e w e r e almost e n t i r e l y i g n o r a n t o f w h a t the positive c u l t
o f t o t e m i c r e l i g i o n m i g h t i n c l u d e . W e k n e w almost n o t h i n g b e y o n d the i n i t i -
a t i o n rites, a n d those inadequately. T h i s gap i n o u r k n o w l e d g e has been par-
tially f i l l e d b y the studies o f Spencer a n d G i l l e n o n the tribes o f central
Australia, f o r w h i c h Schulze paved the w a y a n d w h i c h S t r e h l o w has c o n -
f i r m e d . T h e r e is o n e celebration i n particular that these explorers were espe-
cially i n t e n t o n d e s c r i b i n g a n d that seem t o d o m i n a t e the t o t e m i c cult: the o n e
that, a c c o r d i n g t o Spencer and G i l l e n , the A r u n t a call the I n t i c h i u m a . I t is t r u e
that S t r e h l o w disputes this m e a n i n g o f the w o r d . A c c o r d i n g t o h i m , intichiuma
(or as he spells i t , intijiuma) means " t o t e a c h " a n d designates the ceremonies
that are p e r f o r m e d before the y o u n g m a n f o r the purpose o f i n i t i a t i n g h i m
i n t o the traditions o f the t r i b e . H e says that the feast I w i l l describe bears the
1
name mbatjalkatiuma, w h i c h means " t o f e r t i l i z e " o r " t o repair." I w i l l n o t t r y
to setde this question o f vocabulary, w h i c h is beside the p o i n t — a l l the m o r e
so, i n that the rites t o be discussed are also c o n d u c t e d d u r i n g i n i t i a t i o n . B e -

'[Carl] Strehlow, [DieAranda- und Loritja-Stämme in Zentral-Australien, Frankfurt, J. Baer, 1907], vol. I,
p.4.

330
The Positive Cult 331

sides, since today the w o r d " I n t i c h i u m a " belongs t o the c o m m o n parlance o f

2
ethnography, t o substitute another w o u l d seem poindess.
T h e date o n w h i c h t h e I n t i c h i u m a takes place depends largely o n t h e
time o f year. I n c e n t r a l A u s t r a l i a there are t w o clearly m a r k e d seasons: a d r y
season, w h i c h lasts a l o n g time, a n d a r a i n y one, w h i c h b y contrast is s h o r t
and o f t e n irregular. A s s o o n as t h e rains c o m e , t h e plants s p r i n g f r o m the
g r o u n d as i f b y a spell, t h e animals m u l t i p l y , a n d lands that w e r e b u t sterile
deserts the day before are r a p i d l y covered again w i t h l u x u r i a n t flora a n d
fauna. T h e I n t i c h i u m a is celebrated at t h e precise m o m e n t w h e n the g o o d
season seems at h a n d . B u t because t h e r a i n y season is q u i t e variable, the date
o f the ceremonies c a n n o t be set o n c e a n d f o r a l l . I t varies a c c o r d i n g t o c l i -
matic c o n d i t i o n s , w h i c h o n l y t h e head o f t h e t o t e m i c g r o u p , t h e A l a t u n j a , is
qualified t o assess. O n t h e day he j u d g e s t o be appropriate, he i n f o r m s his
3
people that the t i m e has c o m e .
E a c h t o t e m i c g r o u p has its o w n I n t i c h i u m a . A l t h o u g h the r i t e is f o u n d
t h r o u g h o u t t h e societies o f t h e center, i t is n o t t h e same e v e r y w h e r e . A m o n g
the W a r r a m u n g a i t is n o t t h e same as i t is a m o n g the A r u n t a , and i t varies n o t
o n l y b y t r i b e b u t also b y clan w i t h i n the same t r i b e . S t i l l , the various p r o c e -
dures i n use are t o o a k i n t o o n e a n o t h e r t o b e c o m p l e t e l y dissociable. T h e r e
are p r o b a b l y n o ceremonies that d o n o t have several o f those mechanisms,
b u t q u i t e u n e q u a l l y d e v e l o p e d . W h a t exists o n l y as a seed i n o n e case d o m i -
nates elsewhere, a n d v i c e versa. Still i t is i m p o r t a n t t o d i s t i n g u i s h t h e m care-
fully. T h e y c o n s t i t u t e so m a n y different r i t u a l types that w e m u s t describe
a n d e x p l a i n separately—and o n l y after that t r y t o discern w h e t h e r t h e y all
have a c o m m o n o r i g i n . I w i l l b e g i n w i t h those that are observed m o r e
specifically a m o n g t h e A r u n t a .

I
T h e feast has t w o successive phases. T h e series o f rites that o c c u r o n e after
the o t h e r i n the first phrase are i n t e n d e d t o ensure t h e w e l l - b e i n g o f the a n -
i m a l o r p l a n t species that serves as the t o t e m o f the clan. T h e means used f o r
this p u r p o s e are r e d u c i b l e t o a f e w m a i n types.

2
The word designating that feast varies by tribe. The Urabunna call it Pijinta ([Sir Baldwin] Spencer
and [Francis James] Gillen, Northern Tribes [of Central Australia, London, Macmillan, 1904], p. 284); the
Warramunga, Thalaminta (ibid., p. 297), etc.
3
[R_ev. Louis] Schulze, "Aborigines of the Upper and Middle Finke River," RSSA, vol. XIV [1891],
p. 243; [Sir Baldwin] Spencer and [Francis James] Gillen, Native Tribes [of Central Australia, London,
Macmillan, 1904], pp. 169-170.
332 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

R e c a l l that t h e m y t h i c a l ancestors f r o m w h i c h each clan is t h o u g h t t o

descend o n c e l i v e d o n earth a n d left traces o f t h e i r passage. I n particular,
those traces i n c l u d e stones o r rocks that t h e y are t h o u g h t t o have set d o w n i n
c e r t a i n places o r that w e r e f o r m e d at t h e places w h e r e t h e y sank i n t o the
g r o u n d . T h e rocks and stones are considered t o be the bodies o r b o d y parts
o f the ancestors w h o s e m e m o r y t h e y evoke a n d w h o m t h e y represent. Since
an i n d i v i d u a l a n d his t o t e m are one, i t f o l l o w s that t h e y also represent t h e a n -
imals a n d plants that w e r e t h e t o t e m s o f those same ancestors. Consequently,
the same reality a n d the same properties are a c c o r d e d t o t h e m as t o t h e a n i -
mals a n d plants o f t h e same sort that live today. T h e advantage they have over
these latter is t o be i m m o r t a l — t o k n o w n e i t h e r sickness n o r death. I n this
way, t h e y c o n s t i t u t e s o m e t h i n g l i k e a p e r m a n e n t , u n c h a n g i n g , and always
available stock o f a n i m a l a n d p l a n t life. A n d i n a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f cases, i t is
this reserve that p e o p l e d r a w u p o n a n n u a l l y t o ensure the r e p r o d u c t i o n o f the
species.
H e r e , as an example, is h o w t h e W i t c h e t t y G r u b clan, at A l i c e Springs,
4
conducts its I n t i c h i u m a .
O n t h e day set b y t h e chief, all t h e m e m b e r s o f the t o t e m i c g r o u p gather
at t h e m a i n camp. T h e m e n o f o t h e r t o t e m s retire a c e r t a i n distance; a m o n g
the A r u n t a , t h e y are f o r b i d d e n t o be present at t h e c e l e b r a t i o n o f the r i t e ,
5
w h i c h has all the characteristics o f a secret c e r e m o n y . Sometimes an i n d i -
v i d u a l o f the same p h r a t r y b u t a different t o t e m m a y be i n v i t e d as a courtesy,
b u t o n l y as a witness. U n d e r n o circumstances m a y h e take an active role.
O n c e the m e n o f t h e t o t e m have gathered, t h e y depart, l e a v i n g o n l y t w o
o r three o f t h e i r n u m b e r at t h e camp. C o m p l e t e l y naked, w i t h o u t weapons,
a n d w i t h o u t any o f t h e i r usual o r n a m e n t s , t h e y w a l k single fde, i n p r o f o u n d
silence. T h e i r a t t i t u d e a n d pace are m a r k e d w i t h r e l i g i o u s solemnity, because
t h e act i n w h i c h t h e y are t a k i n g p a r t is, i n t h e i r eyes, o n e o f e x c e p t i o n a l i m -
p o r t a n c e . I n a d d i t i o n , t h e y m u s t observe a r i g o r o u s fast u n t i l t h e e n d o f the
ceremony.
T h e l a n d t h e y cross is f i l l e d w i t h m e m e n t o s left b y t h e g l o r i o u s ances-
tors. F i n a l l y t h e y reach a place w h e r e a large b l o c k o f q u a r t z i t e is stuck i n the
earth, s u r r o u n d e d b y small, r o u n d e d stones. T h e b l o c k represents the w i t c h -
e t t y g r u b i n its a d u l t state. T h e A l a t u n j a hits i t w i t h a sort o f small w o o d e n
6
plate, called an apmara, w h i l e i n t o n i n g a chant w h o s e o b j e c t is t o i n v i t e the

"Ibid., pp. 170fF.

5
Of course, the same obligation binds the women.
6
The Apmara [Dürkheim capitalized here. Trans.] is the only object he has brought from the camp.
The Positive Cult 333

animal t o lay eggs. H e does the same w i t h t h e stones, w h i c h represent the

eggs o f the a n i m a l , and, u s i n g o n e o f t h e m , he rubs the stomach o f each p e r -
son i n attendance. T h i s d o n e , t h e y all descend a l i t t l e l o w e r , t o the f o o t o f a
rock that t h e A l c h e r i n g a m y t h s also celebrate, a n d at the base o f w h i c h is
f o u n d a n o t h e r stone that again represents the w i t c h e t t y g r u b . T h e A l a t u n j a
strikes i t w i t h his apmara; the m e n a c c o m p a n y i n g h i m d o the same w i t h g u m
tree branches that t h e y have gathered o n the way, all this a m i d h y m n s repeat-
i n g the i n v i t a t i o n earlier addressed t o t h e a n i m a l . N e a r l y t e n different places,
sometimes a m i l e apart, are v i s i t e d o n e after the other. A t each o f t h e m , i n
the back o f a sort o f cave o r h o l e , is a stone that is said t o represent the w i t c h -
etty g r u b i n o n e o f its aspects o r phases o f life, a n d the same ceremonies are
repeated o n each o f these stones.
T h e m e a n i n g o f t h e r i t e is apparent. T h e A l a t u n j a strikes the sacred
stones i n o r d e r t o detach some dust from i t . T h e grains o f this v e r y h o l y *
dust are regarded as so m a n y seeds o f life, each c o n t a i n i n g a s p i r i t u a l p r i n c i -
ple that, b y e n t e r i n g an o r g a n i s m o f the same species, w i l l give b i r t h t h e r e i n
t o a n e w b e i n g . T h e tree branches that t h e participants c a r r y are used t o
spread this precious dust i n all d i r e c t i o n s ; i t goes f o r t h i n all directions t o d o
its w o r k o f i m p r e g n a t i o n . B y this means, t h e y believe t h e y have ensured the
abundant r e p r o d u c t i o n o f the a n i m a l species that the c l a n watches over, so t o
speak, a n d t o w h i c h i t belongs.
T h e natives themselves i n t e r p r e t the r i t e i n this way. I n the clan o f the
I l p i r l a (a sort o f m a n n a ) , t h e y p r o c e e d i n t h e f o l l o w i n g way. W h e n the day o f
the I n t i c h i u m a has c o m e , t h e g r o u p meets at a place w h e r e a large r o c k ,
a b o u t five feet h i g h , stands; a second r o c k that l o o k s v e r y m u c h l i k e the first
rises o n t o p o f i t , a n d smaller rocks s u r r o u n d this one. B o t h represent a c c u -
m u l a t i o n s o f m a n n a . T h e A l a t u n j a digs i n the g r o u n d at the f o o t o f these
rocks a n d b r i n g s f o r t h a c h u r i n g a that is said t o have b e e n b u r i e d there i n
A l c h e r i n g a times a n d that itself is l i k e t h e quintessence o f mana. H e t h e n
climbs t o the t o p o f the h i g h e r r o c k a n d rubs i t first w i t h this c h u r i n g a , t h e n
w i t h t h e smaller stones that are a r o u n d i t . Finally, u s i n g tree branches, he
sweeps t h e dust that has c o l l e c t e d o n t h e surface o f the r o c k . E a c h o f the
o t h e r participants does t h e same t h i n g i n t u r n . N o w , say Spencer a n d G i l l e n ,
the t h o u g h t o f the natives "is that t h e dust thus dispersed w i l l g o a n d rest o n
the m u l g a trees a n d there p r o d u c e m a n n a . " T h e s e operations are a c c o m p a -
7
n i e d b y a h y m n s u n g b y t h e participants that expresses this idea.
T h e same r i t e is f o u n d , w i t h variations, i n o t h e r societies. A m o n g the

*Sainte.

'Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 185-186.

334 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

U r a b u n n a , there is a r o c k representing an ancestor o f the L i z a r d clan; stones

are detached f r o m i t a n d t h r o w n i n all d i r e c t i o n s i n o r d e r t o o b t a i n abundant
8
lizard b i r t h s . I n this same t r i b e , there is a sand b a n k that m y t h o l o g i c a l r e c o l -
l e c t i o n closely associates w i t h the t o t e m o f the louse. T h e r e are t w o trees at
the same p l a c e — o n e called t h e tree o f t h e o r d i n a r y louse, the o t h e r that o f
the crab louse. T h e w o r s h i p p e r s take some o f t h e sand, r u b i t against those
trees, a n d t h r o w i t i n all directions, b e i n g c o n v i n c e d that b y this means m a n y
9
lice w i l l be b o r n . T h e M a r a g o a b o u t t h e I n t i c h i u m a o f bees b y spreading
10
dust that has b e e n detached f r o m sacred r o c k s . A somewhat different
m e t h o d is used f o r the plains kangaroo. T h e y c o l l e c t some kangaroo d u n g
a n d w r a p i t i n a grass t h a t the a n i m a l is v e r y f o n d o f a n d that therefore b e -
longs t o the kangaroo t o t e m . T h e y place the d u n g o n t h e g r o u n d i n the
w r a p p i n g , b e t w e e n t w o layers o f the same grass, a n d t h e n set fire t o all o f this.
W i t h the flame that results, t h e y l i g h t tree branches and t h e n shake t h e m , so
sparks f l y i n all directions. T h e s e sparks play the same role as t h e dust o f the
11
p r e c e d i n g cases.
12
I n a n u m b e r o f clans, t h e m e n m i x some o f t h e i r o w n substance w i t h
that o f the stone, i n o r d e r t o m a k e this r i t e m o r e efficacious. Y o u n g m e n
o p e n t h e i r veins a n d let the b l o o d gush o n t o t h e r o c k . T h i s occurs, f o r e x -
ample, i n t h e Hakea F l o w e r I n t i c h i u m a , a m o n g the A r u n t a . T h e c e r e m o n y
is h e l d at a sacred place, a r o u n d a stone that is also sacred a n d that, i n the eyes
o f the natives, represents hakea flowers. A f t e r several p r e l i m i n a r y operations,
" t h e o l d m a n w h o is c o n d u c t i n g the r i t e asks a y o u n g m a n t o o p e n his veins.
T h e y o u n g m a n obeys and lets his b l o o d f l o w freely o n t o the stone, w h i l e
those present c o n t i n u e t o sing. T h e b l o o d flows u n t i l t h e stone is c o m p l e t e l y
1 3
covered w i t h i t . " T h e o b j e c t o f this practice is t o infuse n e w life i n t o the
v i r t u e s t h e stone contains a n d m a k e i t m o r e p o w e r f u l . Bear i n m i n d t h a t the
clansmen themselves are relatives o f the p l a n t o r a n i m a l w h o s e name they
bear. T h e same l i f e - p r i n c i p l e resides i n t h e m , especially i n t h e i r b l o o d . N a t -
urally, t h e n , this b l o o d a n d the mystical seeds c a r r i e d a l o n g b y i t are used t o
ensure t h e regular r e p r o d u c t i o n o f the t o t e m i c species. W h e n a m a n is sick
o r t i r e d , i t is c o m m o n a m o n g the A r u n t a f o r o n e o f his y o u n g c o m p a n i o n s

8
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 288.
9
Ibid.
10
Ibid., p. 312.
"Ibid.
12
We will see below that these clans are much more numerous than Spencer and Gillen say.
"Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 184-185.
The Positive Cult 335

to o p e n his o w n veins a n d s p r i n k l e t h e a d i n g m a n w i t h the b l o o d t o revive

1 4
him. I f b l o o d can thus reawaken life i n a m a n , i t is n o t s u r p r i s i n g that b l o o d
can also serve t o awaken life i n the a n i m a l o r p l a n t species w i t h w h i c h the
m e n o f the clan are i d e n t i f i e d .
T h e same t e c h n i q u e is used i n the K a n g a r o o I n t i c h i u m a at U n d i a r a
( A r u n t a ) . T h e setting f o r the c e r e m o n y is a w a t e r h o l e p r e c i p i t o u s l y over-
h u n g b y a r o c k . T h i s r o c k represents an A l c h e r i n g a a n i m a l - k a n g a r o o that was
k i l l e d a n d set i n this place b y a m a n - k a n g a r o o o f t h e same p e r i o d . F o r that
reason, m a n y spirits o f kangaroos are t h o u g h t t o reside here. A f t e r a n u m b e r
o f sacred stones have b e e n r u b b e d against o n e a n o t h e r i n the m a n n e r I have
described, several o f those present c l i m b o n t o t h e r o c k a n d let t h e i r b l o o d
1 5
flow all a l o n g i t . " T h e p u r p o s e o f this ceremony, a c c o r d i n g t o w h a t the n a -
tives say, is actually t h e f o l l o w i n g . T h e b l o o d o f the m a n - k a n g a r o o is spilled
o n the r o c k i n o r d e r t o free t h e spirits o f animal-kangaroos and scatter t h e m
16
i n all d i r e c t i o n s ; the effect m u s t be t o increase the n u m b e r o f kangaroos."
T h e r e is even a case a m o n g t h e A r u n t a i n w h i c h b l o o d seems t o be the
active p r i n c i p l e o f t h e r i t e . I n t h e E m u g r o u p , n e i t h e r stones n o r a n y t h i n g r e -
s e m b l i n g stones are used. T h e A l a t u n j a a n d c e r t a i n o f those w i t h h i m s p r i n -
kle the g r o u n d w i t h t h e i r b l o o d . O n t h e g r o u n d thus m o i s t e n e d , they trace
lines o f various colors, w h i c h represent the various parts o f the emu's body.
T h e y k n e e l a r o u n d this d r a w i n g a n d chant a m o n o t o n o u s h y m n . F r o m the
Active e m u i n c a n t e d i n this way, hence from the b l o o d used i n d o i n g so, l i f e -
p r i n c i p l e s c o m e f o r t h that w i l l animate the e m b r y o s o f t h e n e w g e n e r a t i o n
1 7
and thus p r e v e n t the species from d y i n g o u t .
1 8
A clan a m o n g t h e W o n k g o n g a r u has a c e r t a i n k i n d o f f i s h as its t o t e m ;
i n t h e I n t i c h i u m a o f this t o t e m as w e l l , b l o o d plays the central role. A f t e r
h a v i n g p a i n t e d h i m s e l f ceremonially, the c h i e f o f t h e g r o u p enters a w a t e r

14
Ibid., pp. 438, 461, 464; Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 596£F.
''Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 201.
16
Ibid., p. 206.1 use the language of Spencer and Gillen and say, as they do, that it is the spirits of kan-
garoos that come awayfromthe rocks (spirits or spirit parts of kangaroos). Strehlow, Aranda (vol. Ill, p. 7),
disputes the accuracy of this phrase. According to him, it is real kangaroos, living bodies, that the rite
causes to appear. But quite like the dispute over the notion of ratapa (see p. 254—255 above), this one is
without interest. Since the kangaroo seeds that escape from the rocks are invisible, they are not made of
the same substance as the kangaroos our senses perceive. That is all Spencer and Gillen mean. It is quite
certain, moreover, that these are not pure spirits as a Christian might conceive of them. Just like human
souls, they have physical forms.
17
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 181.
18
A tribe living east of Lake Eyre.
336 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

h o l e a n d sits d o w n i n i t . T h e n , u s i n g l i t t l e p o i n t e d bones, h e pierces his scro-

t u m a n d t h e n t h e s k i n a r o u n d his navel. " T h e b l o o d that flows f r o m these
19
various w o u n d s spreads i n the w a t e r a n d gives rise t o f i s h . "
T h e D i e r i believe t h e y m a k e t w o o f t h e i r totems reproduce, the carpet
snake a n d t h e w o m a snake (an o r d i n a r y snake), b y a similar practice. A M u r a -
m u r a called M i n k a n i is b e l i e v e d t o live u n d e r a d u n e . H i s b o d y is represented
b y fossil bones o f animals o r reptiles such as are f o u n d , H o w i t t tells us, i n the
deltas o f t h e rivers t h a t e m p t y i n t o Lake E y r e . W h e n t h e day o f the c e r e m o n y
comes, the m e n assemble a n d g o t o the place w h e r e M i n k a n i is t o be f o u n d .
T h e r e t h e y d i g u n t i l t h e y reach a layer o f d a m p earth, w h i c h t h e y call " t h e
e x c r e m e n t o f M i n k a n i . " F r o m t h e n o n , t h e y c o n t i n u e t o sift t h r o u g h the soil
w i t h great care u n t i l " t h e e l b o w o f M i n k a n i " is u n c o v e r e d . T h e n t w o m e n
o p e n t h e i r veins a n d let t h e b l o o d flow o n t h e sacred stone. T h e songs o f
M i n k a n i are sung w h i l e the participants, caught u p i n a veritable frenzy,
strike o n e a n o t h e r w i t h t h e i r weapons. T h e battle c o n t i n u e s u n t i l t h e i r r e -
t u r n t o camp, a b o u t a m i l e away. T h e r e the w o m e n i n t e r v e n e and e n d the
f i g h t i n g . T h e b l o o d that flows f r o m t h e w o u n d s is c o l l e c t e d a n d m i x e d w i t h
t h e " e x c r e m e n t o f M i n k a n i " ; t h e p r o d u c t s o f the m i x t u r e are sowed o n the
d u n e . H a v i n g c a r r i e d o u t the r i t e , t h e y are c o n v i n c e d that carpet snakes w i l l
20
be b o r n i n a b u n d a n c e .
I n some cases, t h e substance used as a v i t a l i z i n g p r i n c i p l e is t h e same o n e
they are t r y i n g t o p r o d u c e . A m o n g t h e K a i t i s h , a sacred stone representing
the m y t h i c a l heroes o f the W a t e r clan is s p r i n k l e d d u r i n g t h e r a i n m a k i n g cer-
emony. I t is apparendy b e l i e v e d that t h e p r o d u c t i v e v i r t u e s o f the stone are
b y this means increased, j u s t as t h e y are w i t h b l o o d , a n d f o r the same rea-
21
sons. A m o n g the M a r a , the celebrant goes t o d r a w w a t e r i n a sacred h o l e ,
2 2
d r i n k s some a n d spits some i n each d i r e c t i o n . A m o n g the Wbrgaia, w h e n
the yams b e g i n t o g r o w , t h e head o f t h e Y a m c l a n sends p e o p l e b e l o n g i n g t o
the p h r a t r y t o w h i c h he h i m s e l f does n o t b e l o n g t o harvest some o f the
plants; they b r i n g h i m some a n d ask h i m t o i n t e r v e n e so that the species w i l l
23
develop w e l l . H e takes one, bites i t a n d t h r o w s pieces i n all d i r e c t i o n s .

"Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 287-288.

^[Alfred William] Howitt, Native Tribes [of South-East Australia, London, Macmillan, 1904], p. 798.
Cf. Howitt, "Legends of the Dieri and Kindred Tribes of Central Australia," JAI, vol. XXIV [1885],
pp. 124ff. Howitt believes that the ceremony is conducted by the people of the totem but is not in a po-
sition to certify this fact.
2l
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 295.
22
Ibid., p. 314
23
Ibid., pp. 296-297.
The Positive Cult 337

A m o n g the K a i t i s h , w h e n (after various rites w h i c h I w i l l n o t describe) a

certain seed grass called e r l i p i n n a comes t o f u l l m a t u r i t y , the c h i e f o f the
t o t e m b r i n g s a l i t t l e t o the men's c a m p a n d g r i n d s i t b e t w e e n t w o stones. T h e
dust thereby o b t a i n e d is p i o u s l y c o l l e c t e d , a n d several grains o f i t are placed
o n the hps o f the chief, w h o b l o w s , scattering t h e m i n all directions. U n -
doubtedly, the p u r p o s e o f this c o n t a c t w i t h t h e m o u t h o f the chief, w h i c h
has a special sacramental v i r t u e , is t o stimulate the v i t a l i t y o f the seeds c o n -
tained w i t h i n these kernals a n d that, p r o p e l l e d t o a l l p o i n t s o f the h o r i z o n ,
24
w i l l spread t h e i r f e r t i l i z i n g properties t o t h e p l a n t s .
F o r the native, the efficacy o f these rites is b e y o n d d o u b t : H e is c o n -
v i n c e d that they m u s t p r o d u c e the results he expects o f t h e m , a n d w i t h a sort
o f necessity. I f the o u t c o m e does n o t live u p t o his hopes, he m e r e l y c o n -
cludes that they have b e e n cancelled o u t b y the e v i l deeds o f some hostile
group. I n any case, i t does n o t enter his m i n d that a favorable o u t c o m e m i g h t
be o b t a i n e d b y o t h e r means. I f , b y chance, the vegetation grows, o r i f the
animals m u l t i p l y before he has c a r r i e d o u t the I n t i c h i u m a , he assumes that
another I n t i c h i u m a has b e e n celebrated—under the earth, b y the souls o f
the ancestors—and that the l i v i n g reap the benefits o f this u n d e r g r o u n d cer-
25
emony.

24
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 170.
25
Ibid., p. 519. The analysis of the rites just studied has been made only with the observations that we
owe to Spencer and Gillen. After this chapter was written, Strehlow published the third installment of his
work, which treats the positive cult and, in particular, the Intichiuma—or, as he says, the rites of mbat-
jalkatiuma, I have found nothing in this publication that obliges me to alter the preceding description, or
even to make major amendments. Of greatest interest in what Strehlow teaches us on this subject is that
the sheddings and offerings of blood are much more common than might have been suspected from the
account of Spencer and Gillen (see Strehlow, Aranda, vol. Ill, pp. 13, 14, 19, 29, 39, 43, 46, 56, 67, 80,
89).
Incidentally, Strehlow's information on the cult must be used circumspecdy, for he did not witness the
rites he describes. He settled for collecting oral accounts, and in general these are rather sketchy (see vol.
Ill, preface of Leonhardi, p. v). One can even ask whether he has not gone too far in assimilating the
totemic ceremonies of initiation to those he calls mbatjalkatiuma. To be sure, he has not failed to make a
laudable effort to distinguish them: indeed, he has brought out clearly two of their differentiating charac-
teristics. First, the Intichiuma is always conducted in a consecrated place, to which the memory of some
ancestor is attached, whereas the initiation ceremonies may be conducted anywhere. Second, offerings of
blood are specific to the Intichiuma, which proves that they are part and parcel of what is most essential
to these rites (vol. Ill, p. 7). In the description of the rites that he gives, wefindmingled together infor-
mation that refers indiscriminately to both kinds of rite. In fact, in the ones he describes for us under the
name mbatjalkatiuma, the young men generally play an important role (see, for example, pp. 11, 13,
etc.)—which is characteristic of initiation. Similarly, it even appears that the location of the rite is up to
the participants, since they build an artificial stage. They dig a hole and go into it; throughout no refer-
ence is made to rocks or sacred trees and to their ritual role.
338 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

II
S u c h is act o n e o f t h e feast.
Actually, there is n o c e r e m o n y as such i n the p e r i o d that i m m e d i a t e l y
f o l l o w s , yet r e l i g i o u s life remains intense. I t reveals itself t h r o u g h a h e i g h t e n -
i n g i n the usual system o f p r o h i b i t i o n s . T h e sacredness o f the t o t e m is some-
h o w r e i n f o r c e d ; there is less i n c l i n a t i o n t o t o u c h i t . W h e r e a s the A r u n t a may
eat t h e i r t o t e m i c a n i m a l o r p l a n t i n o r d i n a r y times, p r o v i d e d they d o so w i t h
m o d e r a t i o n , this r i g h t is suspended the day after the I n t i c h i u m a . T h e dietary
p r o h i b i t i o n is strict a n d u n q u a l i f i e d . I t is b e l i e v e d that any v i o l a t i o n w i l l n e u -
tralize the b e n e f i c i a l effects o f t h e r i t e a n d arrest the r e p r o d u c t i o n o f the
species. A l t h o u g h the p e o p l e o f o t h e r totems w h o h a p p e n t o be i n the same
l o c a l i t y are n o t subject t o the same r e s t r i c t i o n , t h e y are n o t as free at this t i m e
as t h e y o r d i n a r i l y are. T h e y m a y n o t eat the t o t e m i c a n i m a l j u s t a n y w h e r e —
i n the bush, f o r e x a m p l e — b u t are r e q u i r e d t o b r i n g i t t o the camp, a n d only
2 6
there m a y i t be c o o k e d .
T h e r e is a f i n a l c e r e m o n y t o b r i n g these e x t r a o r d i n a r y p r o h i b i t i o n s t o an
e n d a n d a d j o u r n this l o n g series o f rites. A l t h o u g h i t varies s o m e w h a t ac-
c o r d i n g t o clan, the essential elements are t h e same e v e r y w h e r e . H e r e are
t w o o f the p r i n c i p a l f o r m s the c e r e m o n y takes a m o n g the A r u n t a . O n e refers
t o the W i t c h e t t y G r u b a n d the o t h e r t o the K a n g a r o o .
O n c e the caterpillars have reached f u l l m a t u r i t y a n d p r o v e t o be a b u n -
dant, the p e o p l e o f t h e t o t e m , as w e l l as others, c o l l e c t as m a n y as possible.
E v e r y o n e t h e n b r i n g s those t h e y have f o u n d t o c a m p a n d c o o k t h e m u n t i l
they b e c o m e h a r d a n d crisp. T h e c o o k e d p r o d u c t s are k e p t i n a t y p e o f
w o o d e n c o n t a i n e r called a pitchi. Caterpillars can be harvested f o r o n l y a very
s h o r t t i m e , as t h e y appear o n l y after the r a i n . W h e n t h e y b e g i n t o be less
plentiful, the Alatunja summons everyone t o the men's camp; at the
Alatunja's i n v i t a t i o n , each b r i n g s his supply. T h e outsiders place theirs before
t h e p e o p l e o f t h e t o t e m . W i t h t h e h e l p o f his c o m p a n i o n s , t h e A l a t u n j a takes
o n e p i t c h i a n d g r i n d s the contents b e t w e e n t w o stones. H e t h e n eats a little
o f the p o w d e r thus o b t a i n e d , a n d the rest is g i v e n t o the p e o p l e o f the other
clans, w h o f r o m n o w o n m a y d o w h a t t h e y w a n t w i t h i t . T h e p r o c e d u r e is
exactly the same f o r the supply the A l a t u n j a has made. F r o m this m o m e n t
o n , the m e n a n d w o m e n o f t h e t o t e m m a y eat some, b u t o n l y a l i t d e . I f they
exceeded the permissible l i m i t s , t h e y w o u l d lose t h e strength they n e e d to
celebrate the I n t i c h i u m a , a n d the species w o u l d n o t r e p r o d u c e . B u t i f they

26
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 203. Cf. [Rev. A.] Meyer, The Encounter Bay Tribe, in [James Do-
minick] Woods, [The Native Tribes of South Australia, Adelaide, E. S. Wigg, 1879], p. 187.
The Positive Cult 339

ate n o n e o f i t at a l l , a n d especially i f the A l a t u n j a t o t a l l y abstained f r o m eat-

i n g any i n t h e circumstances j u s t m e n t i o n e d , t h e y w o u l d be s t r i c k e n w i t h the
same i m p o t e n c e .
I n the t o t e m i c g r o u p o f the K a n g a r o o that has its center at U n d i a r a , cer-
tain features o f the c e r e m o n y are m o r e o b v i o u s . A f t e r the rites o n the sacred
rock that I have described are d o n e w i t h , the y o u n g m e n leave t o h u n t the
kangaroo a n d b r i n g the game b a c k t o t h e men's camp. T h e elders, i n the
midst o f w h o m stands the A l a t u n j a , eat a l i t t l e o f the animal's flesh a n d w i t h
its fat a n o i n t t h e bodies o f those w h o have taken part i n t h e I n t i c h i u m a . T h e
rest is shared a m o n g t h e assembled m e n . N e x t , the m e n o f the t o t e m d e c o -
rate themselves w i t h t o t e m i c designs, a n d the n i g h t is spent i n s i n g i n g that
recalls t h e e x p l o i t s o f the m e n - a n d animal-kangaroos i n A l c h e r i n g a times.
O n t h e f o l l o w i n g day, the y o u n g m e n g o h u n t i n g again i n the forest, b r i n g -
i n g back m o r e kangaroos t h a n t h e y d i d t h e first t i m e , a n d the c e r e m o n y o f
27
the previous n i g h t r e s u m e s .
W i t h variations o f detail, the same r i t e is f o u n d i n the o t h e r A r u n t a
28 2 9 30 31
clans, a m o n g the U r a b u n n a , the K a i t i s h , the U n m a t j e r a , a n d the E n -
3 2
counter Bay t r i b e . E v e r y w h e r e i t comprises the same basic elements. Several
specimens o f the t o t e m i c p l a n t o r a n i m a l are presented t o the head o f the clan,
w h o s o l e m n l y eats some and is r e q u i r e d t o d o so. I f he d i d n o t f u l f i l l this o b l i g -
ation, he w o u l d lose his p o w e r t o celebrate the I n t i c h i u m a efficaciously—that
is, t o create the species each year. Sometimes the r i t u a l eating is f o l l o w e d b y
an a n o i n t i n g d o n e w i t h the fat o f the a n i m a l o r w i t h certain parts o f the
33
plant. Generally, the r i t e is repeated afterward b y the m e n o f the t o t e m , o r at
least b y the elders. O n c e i t is over, the special restrictions are lifted.
A t present, there is n o such c e r e m o n y a m o n g the tribes farther n o r t h ,
34
the W a r r a m u n g a a n d n e i g h b o r i n g societies. Nonetheless, o n e still finds
traces that seem t o evidence a t i m e w h e n that was n o t u n k n o w n . I t is t r u e

27
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 204.
28
Ibid., pp. 205-207.
29
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 286-287.
30
Ibid., p. 294.
31
lbid., p. 296.
32
Meyer, ["The Encounter Bay Tribe"] in Woods [The Native Tribes of South Australia], p. 187.
33
I have already cited one case of this; others are to be found in Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes,
p. 205; Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 286.
34
The Walpari, Wulmala, Tjingili, Umbaia.
340 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

that t h e head o f the clan never eats the t o t e m r i t u a l l y a n d o b l i g a t o r i l y . B u t i n

certain cases, the p e o p l e w h o are n o t o f the t o t e m w h o s e I n t i c h i u m a has j u s t
b e e n c o n d u c t e d are r e q u i r e d t o b r i n g the a n i m a l o r p l a n t t o the camp a n d of-
fer i t t o t h e head, asking h i m i f he wishes t o eat some. H e refuses a n d adds:
3 5
" I have m a d e this f o r y o u ; y o u m a y eat freely o f i t . " Thus the custom o f
presentation persists a n d the q u e s t i o n asked o f the c h i e f seems t o h a r k back
36
t o a t i m e w h e n r i t u a l e a t i n g was p r a c t i c e d .

Ill
W h a t gives t h e system o f rites j u s t described its interest is that i t contains all
the p r i n c i p a l elements, a n d i n the m o s t e l e m e n t a r y f o r m n o w k n o w n , o f a
great r e l i g i o u s i n s t i t u t i o n that was destined t o b e c o m e a f o u n d a t i o n o f the
positive c u l t i n the h i g h e r r e l i g i o n s : t h e i n s t i t u t i o n o f sacrifice.
I t is w e l l k n o w n h o w m u c h t h e w o r k s o f R o b e r t s o n S m i t h have r e v o l u -
37
tionized the traditional theory o f sacrifice. U n t i l S m i t h , sacrifice was seen
o n l y as a sort o f t r i b u t e o r h o m a g e , e i t h e r o b l i g a t o r y o r freely g i v e n , and

35
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 318.
'"For this second part of the ceremony, as for the first, I have followed Spencer and Gillen. On this
point, Strehlow's recent volume confirms the observations of his predecessors, at least in essentials. He
recognizes, indeed, that after thefirstceremony (on p. 13 he says two months after), the head of the clan
ritually eats a bit of the totemic animal or plant, and that they then proceed to the lifting of the prohibi-
tions; he calls this operation die Freigabe des Totems zum allgemeinen Gebrauch (vol. Ill, p. 7). He even in-
forms us that this operation is important enough to be designated by a special word in the Arunta
language. True, he adds that this ritual consumption is not the only one, that sometimes the chief and el-
ders also eat the sacred plant or animal before the initial ceremony, and that the celebrant in the rite does
the same after the celebration. There is nothing implausible about this. Such acts of consumption are so
many means used by the celebrants or the participants to confer on themselves the virtues they wish to
acquire; it is not surprising that they should be multiple. None of that invalidates the account of Spencer
and Gillen, for the rite they emphasize, not without reason, is the Freigabe des Totems.
Strehlow disputes the claims of Spencer and Gillen on only two points. In thefirstplace, he declares
that the act of ritual consumption does not always take place. That fact is beyond question, because some
totemic animals and plants are inedible. But the fact remains that the rite is very common; Strehlow him-
self cites numerous examples of it (pp. 13, 14, 19, 23, 33, 36, 50, 59, 67, 68, 71, 75, 80, 84, 89, 93). In
the second place, we have seen that (according to Spencer and Gillen) if the chief of the clan did not par-
take of the totemic animal or plant, he would lose his powers. Strehlow assures us that native testimony
does not corroborate this assertion. But this question seems to me altogether secondary. The certain fact
is that this ritual consumption is prescribed—hence that it is judged to be useful or necessary. Like all
communions, its only purpose is to confer on the communicant the virtues he needs. It does not follow
from the fact that the natives, or some of them, have forgotten that this function of the rite is not real.
Must it be repeated that worshippers most often do not know the real reasons for the practices that they
carry out?
37
See [William Robertson Smith, Lectures on] the Religion of the Semites, 2d. ed., London, A. & C.
Black, 1894], Lectures VI to XI, and the article "Sacrifice" in the Encyclopedia Britannica [Edinburgh,
Adam & Charles Black, 1891].
The Positive Cult 341

analogous t o those that subjects o w e t h e i r princes. R o b e r t s o n S m i t h was the

first t o d r a w a t t e n t i o n t o t h e fact that this t r a d i t i o n a l e x p l a n a t i o n d i d n o t ac-
count f o r t w o f u n d a m e n t a l features o f the r i t e . First, i t is a meal; the sub-
stance o f sacrifice is f o o d . Second, i t is a m e a l o f w h i c h the faithful w h o offer
it partake at t h e same t i m e as t h e g o d t o w h o m i t is offered. C e r t a i n parts o f
the v i c t i m are reserved f o r the d e i t y ; others are c o n f e r r e d o n the celebrants,
w h o c o n s u m e t h e m . T h i s is w h y , i n t h e B i b l e , the sacrifice is sometimes
called a m e a l prepared before Y a h w e h . I n m a n y societies, the m e a l is taken i n
c o m m o n t o create a b o n d o f artificial k i n s h i p a m o n g the participants. K i n are
beings w h o are m a d e o f t h e same flesh a n d the same b l o o d . A n d since f o o d
constantly remakes t h e substance o f the body, shared f o o d can create the
same effects as shared o r i g i n . A c c o r d i n g t o S m i t h , the object o f sacrificial
banquets is t o have the f a i t h f u l a n d t h e g o d c o m m u n e i n one a n d the same
flesh, t o t i e a k n o t o f k i n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e m . F r o m this perspective, sacrifice
came i n t o v i e w i n an altogether n o v e l way. Its essence was n o l o n g e r the act
o f r e n u n c i a t i o n that t h e w o r d "sacrifice" usually expresses, as was so l o n g b e -
lieved; i t was first a n d foremost an act o f a l i m e n t a r y c o m m u n i o n .
I n p a r t i c u l a r details, n o d o u b t , this m a n n e r o f e x p l a i n i n g w h a t sacrificial
banquets achieve m u s t be q u a l i f i e d . W h a t t h e y achieve does n o t result e x -
clusively f r o m the fact o f sharing a c o m m o n table. M a n does n o t sanctify
h i m s e l f o n l y because, i n some sense, he sits d o w n at t h e same table as t h e g o d ,
b u t p r i n c i p a l l y because the f o o d that he consumes i n the r i t u a l m e a l has sa-
credness. I n d e e d , as has b e e n s h o w n , a w h o l e series o f p r e l i m i n a r y steps i n
the sacrifice (washings, anointings, prayers, a n d so o n ) t r a n s f o r m the a n i m a l
t o be i m m o l a t e d i n t o a sacred t h i n g , the sacredness o f w h i c h is thereafter
3 8
c o m m u n i c a t e d t o t h e faithful w h o partake o f i t . B u t i t is n o less t r u e that
a l i m e n t a r y c o m m u n i o n is a m o n g t h e essential elements o f sacrifice. N o w , i f
w e go back t o t h e r i t e that ends the I n t i c h i u m a ceremonies, i t t o o consists i n
an act o f this k i n d . W h e n the t o t e m i c a n i m a l is k i l l e d , the A l a t u n j a a n d the
elders s o l e m n l y partake o f i t . T h u s t h e y c o m m u n e w i t h the sacred p r i n c i p l e
that inhabits i t , a n d t h e y absorb that p r i n c i p l e i n t o themselves. T h e o n l y d i f -
ference i n this c o n t e x t is that the a n i m a l is sacred naturally, whereas o r d i n a r -
i l y i t acquires sacredness o n l y artificially i n the course o f t h e sacrifice.
F u r t h e r m o r e , the f u n c t i o n o f this c o m m u n i o n is manifest. E v e r y m e m -
ber o f t h e t o t e m i c clan carries w i t h i n h i m s e l f a k i n d o f mystic substance that
makes u p the h i g h e r p a r t o f his b e i n g : H i s soul is m a d e f r o m that substance.
H e becomes a p e r s o n t h r o u g h i t ; t h e p o w e r s he ascribes t o himself, a n d his

38
See Hubert and Mauss, "Essai sur la nature et la fonction du sacrifice," in Mélanges d'histoire des reli-
gions [Paris, F. Alcan, 1909], pp. 40ff.
342 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

social role, c o m e t o h i m from i t . So he has a v i t a l interest i n p r e s e r v i n g i t i n -

tact and i n k e e p i n g i t i n a state o f p e r p e t u a l y o u t h as m u c h as possible. Alas,
all forces, even the m o s t s p i r i t u a l , are w o r n away w i t h t h e passage o f t i m e i f
n o t h i n g replenishes the energy t h e y lose i n t h e o r d i n a r y course o f events:
H e r e i n lies a v i t a l necessity that, as w e w i l l see, is t h e p r o f o u n d cause o f the
positive c u l t . T h e p e o p l e o f a t o t e m c a n n o t r e m a i n themselves unless they
p e r i o d i c a l l y r e n e w the t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e that is i n t h e m , a n d since t h e y c o n -
ceive this p r i n c i p l e i n t h e f o r m o f a p l a n t o r an a n i m a l , t h e y g o to that a n i -
m a l o r p l a n t t o seek the strength t h e y n e e d t o r e n e w a n d rejuvenate i t . A m a n
o f the K a n g a r o o clan believes he is, a n d feels he is, a kangaroo. T h r o u g h that
q u a l i t y he defines himself, a n d i t d e t e r m i n e s his place i n society. I n o r d e r to
m a i n t a i n that quality, from t i m e t o t i m e he causes a l i t t l e flesh o f that a n i m a l
to pass i n t o his o w n substance. A f e w bits are e n o u g h , i n accordance w i t h the
3 9
r u l e that the part is as g o o d as the w h o l e .
T o m a k e all the h o p e d - f o r results possible, h o w e v e r , i t is i m p o r t a n t that
this p r o c e d u r e n o t o c c u r at j u s t any t i m e . T h e t i m e w h e n the n e w genera-
t i o n has j u s t reached its f u l l d e v e l o p m e n t is the m o s t o p p o r t u n e , f o r that is
also w h e n the forces that animate t h e t o t e m i c species c o m e i n t o f u l l b l o o m .
T h e y have j u s t b e e n extracted f r o m t h e r i c h reservoirs o f life that are the sa-
c r e d trees a n d rocks. Besides, all sorts o f means have b e e n used t o h e i g h t e n
t h e i r intensity, such b e i n g the p u r p o s e o f t h e rites that have o c c u r r e d i n the
first p a r t o f the I n t i c h i u m a . W h a t is m o r e , b y t h e i r v e r y appearance, the first
fruits o f the harvest m a k e the energy t h e y c o n t a i n manifest. I n those first
fruits, the t o t e m i c g o d asserts h i m s e l f i n all the splendor o f y o u t h . T h i s is
why, t h r o u g h o u t the ages, the first fruits have b e e n considered v e r y sacred
f o o d , reserved t o v e r y sacred beings. N a t u r a l l y , therefore, t h e A u s t r a l i a n uses
t h e m t o regenerate h i m s e l f spiritually. I n this way, b o t h t h e date and the c i r -
cumstances o f the c e r e m o n y are e x p l a i n e d .
Perhaps i t w i l l seem s u r p r i s i n g that such sacred f o o d is eaten b y mere
profane beings, b u t there is n o positive c u l t that does n o t m o v e w i t h i n this
c o n t r a d i c t i o n . A l l beings that are sacred stand b e y o n d the reach o f the p r o -
fane, b y reason o f t h e i r d i s t i n g u i s h i n g trait. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , t h e y w o u l d
lose t h e i r w h o l e raison d'être i f t h e y w e r e n o t p l a c e d i n a relationship w i t h
those same faithful w h o m u s t o t h e r w i s e stay respectfully at a distance from
t h e m . T h e r e is n o positive r i t e that does n o t f u n d a m e n t a l l y c o n s t i t u t e a v e r -
itable sacrilege. M a n can have n o dealings w i t h the sacred beings w i t h o u t
crossing the b a r r i e r that m u s t o r d i n a r i l y keep h i m separate from t h e m .
A l l that matters is that t h e sacrilege be c a r r i e d o u t w i t h m i t i g a t i n g p r e -

39
For an explanation of this rule, see above, pp. 230-231.
The Positive Cult 343

cautions. T h e c o m m o n e s t o f those consist o f p r e p a r i n g the t r a n s i t i o n a n d i n -

t r o d u c i n g the faithful i n t o the w o r l d o f sacred things slowly, a n d o n l y i n
stages. B r o k e n u p a n d d i l u t e d i n this way, the sacrilege does n o t strike the re-
ligious consciousness abrupdy. N o t felt as such, i t vanishes. T h i s is w h a t is
h a p p e n i n g i n t h e case before us. T h e effect o f a w h o l e sequence o f cere-
m o n i e s c o n d u c t e d p r i o r t o t h e m o m e n t w h e n t h e t o t e m is s o l e m n l y eaten
has b e e n gradually t o sanctify t h e participants. I t is essentially a religious p e -
r i o d , w h i c h they c o u l d n o t go t h r o u g h w i t h o u t transformation o f their reli-
gious state. L i t t l e b y l i t t l e , t h e fasts, the c o n t a c t o f sacred rocks and the
40
churingas, t o t e m i c decorations, a n d so f o r t h , have c o n f e r r e d a sacredness
o n t h e m that t h e y d i d n o t have before a n d t h a t p e r m i t s t h e m , w i t h o u t scan-
dalous a n d dangerous p r o f a n a t i o n , t o c o n f r o n t the dangerous a n d awesome
4 1
food ordinarily forbidden to t h e m .
I f t h e act b y w h i c h a sacred b e i n g is offered u p a n d t h e n eaten b y those
w h o venerate i t can be called a sacrifice, t h e r i t e j u s t discussed is e n t i d e d t o
the same name. M o r e o v e r , t h e similarities i t has w i t h o t h e r practices f o u n d
i n m a n y agrarian cults clarify its m e a n i n g . As i t t u r n s o u t , even among
peoples w h o have attained a h i g h level o f c i v i l i z a t i o n , a c o m m o n r u l e is that
the first p r o d u c t s o f the harvest are used as t h e substance o f r i t u a l meals, the
42
paschal m e a l b e i n g t h e b e s t - k n o w n e x a m p l e . Since agrarian rites are at the
v e r y f o u n d a t i o n o f w o r s h i p i n its m o s t advanced f o r m s , w e see that the I n -
t i c h i u m a o f A u s t r a l i a n societies is closer t o us t h a n its apparent crudeness
m i g h t have l e d us t o believe.
B y a stroke o f genius, S m i t h h a d an i n t u i t i o n o f these facts w i t h o u t
k n o w i n g t h e m . T h r o u g h a string o f ingenious deductions ( w h i c h need not
43
be repeated here, since t h e y are o f o n l y h i s t o r i c i n t e r e s t ) , he came t o b e -
lieve he c o u l d establish that at the b e g i n n i n g t h e a n i m a l offered u p i n t h e sac-
rifices m u s t at first have b e e n considered as q u a s i - d i v i n e a n d as the close k i n
o f those w h o offered i t . N o w , these are precisely t h e characteristics b y w h i c h
the t o t e m i c species is d e f i n e d . T h u s , S m i t h came t o suppose that t o t e m i s m
m u s t have k n o w n a n d p r a c t i c e d a r i t e v e r y s i m i l a r t o the o n e w e have j u s t e x -
a m i n e d . I n d e e d , h e t e n d e d t o see this k i n d o f sacrifice as the o r i g i n o f the

"•"See Strehlow, Aranda, vol. Ill, p. 3.

•"Besides, it should not be forgotten that among the Arunta, eating of the totemic animal is not for-
bidden altogether.
42
See other examples in [James George] Frazer, The Golden Bough, 2d. ed. [London, Macmillan,
1894], pp. 348ff.
41
The Religion of the Semites, pp. 275ff.
344 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

4 4
sacrificial i n s t i t u t i o n as a w h o l e . A t t h e b e g i n n i n g , sacrifice is i n s t i t u t e d n o t
t o create a b o n d o f artificial k i n s h i p b e t w e e n m a n a n d his gods b u t t o
m a i n t a i n a n d r e n e w the n a t u r a l k i n s h i p that at t h e b e g i n n i n g u n i t e d m e n .
H e r e , as elsewhere, t h e artifice is b o r n o n l y t o i m i t a t e nature. B u t i n Smith's
b o o k , this hypothesis was presented as l i t d e m o r e t h a n a m e n t a l c o n s t r u c t ,
w h i c h the facts t h e n k n o w n d i d n o t at all adequately w a r r a n t . T h e f e w
cases o f t o t e m i c sacrifice that he cites i n s u p p o r t o f his thesis d o not
m e a n w h a t he says t h e y d o , a n d t h e animals that figure i n i t w e r e n o t real
45
totems. B u t today, o n e m a y say that this has b e e n p r o v e d , o n o n e p o i n t at
least: W e have j u s t seen that t o t e m i c sacrifice, as S m i t h c o n c e i v e d i t , is
o r was p r a c t i c e d i n a large n u m b e r o f societies. G r a n t e d , w e have n o p r o o f
that this practice is necessarily i n h e r e n t i n t o t e m i s m o r that i t is t h e seed
from w h i c h all the o t h e r types o f sacrifice have e m e r g e d . B u t i f the u n i v e r -
sality o f the r i t e is h y p o t h e t i c a l , its existence can n o l o n g e r be disputed.
W e m u s t consider i t established from n o w o n that the m o s t mystical f o r m
o f a l i m e n t a r y c o m m u n i o n is f o u n d as early as t h e m o s t r u d i m e n t a r y r e l i g i o n
now known.

IV
O n a n o t h e r p o i n t , h o w e v e r , t h e n e w facts w e have at h a n d u n d e r m i n e
Smith's theories. A c c o r d i n g t o h i m , c o m m u n i o n was n o t o n l y an essential e l -
e m e n t o f sacrifice b u t also t h e o n l y e l e m e n t , at least i n i t i a l l y . H e t h o u g h t n o t
o n l y that i t was a mistake t o reduce sacrifice t o a m e r e act o f t r i b u t e o r o f -
f e r i n g b u t also that the idea o f o f f e r i n g was i n i t i a l l y absent; that this idea
made o n l y a late appearance, i n f l u e n c e d b y e x t e r n a l circumstances; a n d that,
far from h e l p i n g us t o u n d e r s t a n d the t r u e nature o f the r i t u a l m e c h a n i s m ,
the idea o f o f f e r i n g masked i t . S m i t h b e l i e v e d that he d e t e c t e d t o o gross an
absurdity i n the v e r y idea o f sacrifice f o r i t t o b e v i e w e d as t h e p r o f o u n d
cause o f such a great i n s t i t u t i o n . O n e o f the m o s t i m p o r t a n t f u n c t i o n s that
fall squarely u p o n the shoulders o f t h e d e i t y is t o see that m e n have t h e f o o d
they n e e d t o live, so i t w o u l d seem impossible that sacrifice s h o u l d i n v o l v e a
presentation o f f o o d t o t h e deity. I t seems c o n t r a d i c t o r y f o r t h e gods t o e x -
pect t h e i r f o o d from m a n , w h e n i t is b y t h e m that m a n h i m s e l f is fed. H o w

•"Ibid., pp. 318-319.

45
See on this point Hubert and Mauss, Mélanges d'histoire des religions, preface, pp. vff.
The Positive Cult 345

c o u l d they n e e d his h e l p t o c l a i m t h e i r j u s t p o r t i o n o f the things that he r e -

ceives f r o m t h e i r hands? F r o m these considerations, S m i t h c o n c l u d e d that
the c o m b i n e d idea o f s a c r i f i c e - o f f e r i n g c o u l d have b e e n b o r n o n l y i n the
great r e l i g i o n s . I n t h e m o n c e the gods w e r e separated from the things w i t h
w h i c h they w e r e o r i g i n a l l y m e r g e d , t h e y w e r e c o n c e i v e d as rather l i k e kings,
foremost o w n e r s o f the l a n d a n d its p r o d u c t s . F r o m t h e n o n , a c c o r d i n g t o
S m i t h , sacrifice was c o n f o u n d e d w i t h t h e t r i b u t e that subjects pay t h e i r
p r i n c e i n r e t u r n f o r t h e r i g h t s c o n c e d e d t o t h e m . I n reality, however, this
n e w i n t e r p r e t a t i o n was an a l t e r a t i o n a n d even a c o r r u p t i o n o f the o r i g i n a l
idea. F o r w h e n the n o t i o n that " t h e idea o f p r o p e r t y makes e v e r y t h i n g i t
touches m a t e r i a l " becomes p a r t o f sacrifice, sacrifice is denatured a n d made
46
into a k i n d o f bartering between m a n and the deity.
T h e facts I have set f o r t h u n d e r m i n e that a r g u m e n t . T h e rites I have d e -
scribed are c e r t a i n l y a m o n g the m o s t p r i m i t i v e ever observed. As yet, n o def-
i n i t e m y t h i c a l p e r s o n a l i t y is seen t o m a k e its appearance i n t h e m ; there are
n e i t h e r gods n o r spirits as such, a n d o n l y vague, a n o n y m o u s , i m p e r s o n a l
forces are at w o r k . Yet the reasoning t h e y presuppose is exactly t h e reasoning
S m i t h declared impossible because o f its absurdity.
L e t us l o o k again at the first act o f t h e I n t i c h i u m a : the rites i n t e n d e d t o
b r i n g a b o u t t h e f e r t i l i t y o f t h e a n i m a l o r p l a n t species that serves as the t o t e m
o f the clan. T h i s species is t h e sacred t h i n g . I t incarnates w h a t I was l e d t o
call, i n a m e t a p h o r i c a l sense, t h e t o t e m i c deity. B u t w e have seen that i t needs
man's h e l p t o p e r p e t u a t e itself. I t is m a n w h o dispenses life t o a n e w genera-
tion each year; w i t h o u t h i m , i t w o u l d n o t see t h e l i g h t o f day. I f m a n stopped
celebrating t h e I n t i c h i u m a , t h e sacred beings w o u l d disappear from the face
o f the earth. I n a sense, i t is f r o m h i m that t h e y have t h e i r b e i n g . I n a n o t h e r
sense, however, i t is from t h e m that he has his o w n . O n c e t h e y have attained
m a t u r i t y , i t is from t h e m that h e w i l l b o r r o w the strength n e e d e d f o r the
maintenance a n d repair o f his s p i r i t u a l b e i n g . H e n c e i t is m a n w h o makes his
gods, o n e can say, o r at least, i t is m a n w h o makes t h e m endure; b u t at the
same t i m e , i t is t h r o u g h t h e m that he h i m s e l f endures. T h u s he regularly
closes the circle that, a c c o r d i n g t o S m i t h , is entailed b y t h e v e r y n o t i o n o f
sacrificial t r i b u t e . H e gives t o sacred beings a l i t d e o f w h a t he receives from
t h e m a n d he receives from t h e m , all that he gives t h e m .
T h e r e is m o r e : T h e offerings that he is r e q u i r e d t o make each year are
n o t different i n nature f r o m those that w i l l be m a d e later, i n sacrifices p r o p -

'[William Robertson Smith], The Religion of the Semites, pp. 390ff.

346 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

erly so-called. T h e sacrificer offers an a n i m a l so that t h e life-principles

w i t h i n i t separate f r o m the o r g a n i s m a n d g o f o r t h t o feed the deity. Similarly,
the grains o f dust that t h e A u s t r a l i a n detaches from the sacred r o c k are so
m a n y p r i n c i p l e s that spread t h r o u g h space so that t h e y w i l l vitalize the
t o t e m i c species a n d b r i n g a b o u t its r e n e w a l . T h e m o v e m e n t b y w h i c h this
spreading is d o n e is also t h e o n e that n o r m a l l y accompanies offerings. I n cer-
t a i n cases, the resemblance b e t w e e n the t w o rites goes as far as t h e details o f
the m o v e m e n t s made. W e have seen t h a t t h e K a i t i s h p o u r w a t e r o n a stone
i n o r d e r t o have r a i n ; a m o n g c e r t a i n peoples, t h e priest p o u r s w a t e r o n the
47
altar f o r the same p u r p o s e . T h e sheddings o f b l o o d , w h i c h are customary
i n some I n t i c h i u m a s , are t r u e offerings. Just as t h e A r u n t a o r t h e D i e r i s p r i n -
k l e the r o c k o r t h e sacred design w i t h b l o o d , so i n t h e m o r e advanced cults
is t h e b l o o d o f the sacrificed v i c t i m , o r t h e believer, i n m a n y cases p o u r e d
48
o u t o n , o r i n front of, the a l t a r . I n this case, i t is g i v e n t o t h e gods, w h o s e
favorite f o o d i t is. I n Australia, i t is g i v e n t o t h e sacred species. T h u s there are
n o l o n g e r any g r o u n d s f o r the v i e w t h a t t h e idea o f offerings is a recent p r o d -
uct o f civilization.
A d o c u m e n t f o r w h i c h w e are i n d e b t e d t o S t r e h l o w b r i n g s o u t this k i n -
ship b e t w e e n the I n t i c h i u m a a n d sacrifice. I t is a h y m n a c c o m p a n y i n g the
K a n g a r o o I n t i c h i u m a t h a t describes the c e r e m o n y a n d states its h o p e d - f o r ef-
fects. A piece o f the kangaroo's fat has b e e n placed b y the c h i e f o n a s u p p o r t
made o f branches. T h e t e x t says that this fat makes the fat o f the kangaroos
4 9
grow. I n this case, therefore, t h e y d o n o t c o n f i n e themselves t o spreading
sacred dust o r h u m a n b l o o d ; the a n i m a l itself is i m m o l a t e d — o n e can say sac-
r i f i c e d , placed o n a k i n d o f a l t a r — a n d offered t o t h e species w h o s e life i t
must maintain.
W e see n o w i n w h a t sense i t is permissible t o say t h a t t h e I n t i c h i u m a
contains the seeds o f the sacrificial system. I n t h e f o r m i t takes w h e n fully
c o n s t i t u t e d , sacrifice comprises t w o essential elements: an act o f c o m m u n i o n
and an act o f o f f e r i n g . T h e f a i t h f u l c o m m u n e w i t h t h e g o d b y i n g e s t i n g a
sacred f o o d a n d simultaneously m a k e an o f f e r i n g t o this g o d . W e find
these t w o acts i n t h e I n t i c h i u m a as j u s t described. T h e o n l y difference is that

47
R . Smith himself cites such cases, ibid., p. 231.
48
See for example Exodus, 29:10-14; Leviticus, 9:8-11; the priests of Baal let their own blood flow
on the altar (I Kings 18:8). [Compare Exodus 39:13 with Dürkheims discussion of special treatment given
to the liver, fat, and other parts of sacrificed animals. In I Kings 18:28, we learn about the Baal priests' en-
counter with Elijah, where Durkheim's claim that "there are no religions that are false" is dramatically
contradicted. Trans.]
49
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. Ill, p. 12, verse 7.
The Positive Cult 347

they are d o n e s i m u l t a n e o u s l y o r i m m e d i a t e l y after o n e another i n sacrifice

50
proper, whereas t h e y are separated i n t h e A u s t r a l i a n ceremony. I n the first
case, t h e y are p a r t o f o n e i n d i v i s i b l e r i t e ; i n t h e second, they o c c u r at differ-
ent times a n d m a y even be separated b y a rather l o n g i n t e r v a l , b u t basically
the m e c h a n i s m is the same. T a k e n as a w h o l e , the I n t i c h i u m a is a sacrifice,
b u t o n e w h o s e parts are n o t yet j o i n e d a n d o r g a n i z e d .
T h i s c o m p a r i s o n has t h e t w o f o l d advantage o f h e l p i n g us u n d e r s t a n d the
nature o f b o t h t h e I n t i c h i u m a a n d sacrifice better.
W e understand the I n t i c h i u m a better. I n d e e d , the c o n c e p t i o n p u t f o r t h
by Frazer, w h o m a d e i t o u t t o be s i m p l y a m a g i c a l o p e r a t i o n d e v o i d o f any r e -
51
ligious character, n o w seems untenable. T o place outside r e l i g i o n a r i t e that
appears t o be the h e r a l d o f such a great religious i n s t i t u t i o n is u n i m a g i n a b l e .
W e also u n d e r s t a n d better w h a t sacrifice itself is. I n the first place, the
equal i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e t w o elements that enter i n t o i t is h e n c e f o r t h estab-
lished. I f t h e A u s t r a l i a n makes offerings t o his sacred beings, there is n o basis
at all f o r supposing that t h e idea o f o f f e r i n g was f o r e i g n t o the o r i g i n a l o r g a -
n i z a t i o n o f t h e sacrificial i n s t i t u t i o n a n d d i s t u r b e d its natural h a r m o n y .
5 2
Smith's t h e o r y m u s t b e revised o n this p o i n t . Sacrifice is c e r t a i n l y a process
o f c o m m u n i o n i n p a r t . B u t i t is also, a n d n o less fundamentally, a gift, an act
o f r e n u n c i a t i o n . I t always presupposes that the w o r s h i p p e r relinquishes t o t h e
gods some p a r t o f his substance o r his goods. A n y a t t e m p t t o reduce o n e o f
these elements t o t h e o t h e r is poindess. I n d e e d , the o f f e r i n g m a y have m o r e
5 3
lasting effects t h a n the c o m m u n i o n .
I n t h e second place, i t seems that sacrifice i n general, a n d i n p a r t i c u l a r
the sacrificial o f f e r i n g , can be m a d e o n l y t o personal beings. T h e offerings
w e have j u s t e n c o u n t e r e d i n A u s t r a l i a d o n o t e n t a i l any such n o t i o n . I n o t h e r
w o r d s , sacrifice is i n d e p e n d e n t o f t h e variable f o r m s i n w h i c h religious forces
are t h o u g h t of; i t has deeper causes, w h i c h w e w i l l e x a m i n e b e l o w .
I t is clear, h o w e v e r , that the act o f o f f e r i n g n a t u r a l l y awakens i n people
the idea o f a m o r a l subject that the o f f e r i n g is m e a n t t o satisfy. T h e r i t u a l acts

50
At least, when it is performed in its entirely; in certain cases it can be reduced to only one of these
elements.
''According to Strehlow [Aranda] vol. Ill, p. 9, the natives "regard these ceremonies as a sort of divine
service, in the same way as the Christian regards the practices of his religion."
52
It might be well to ask whether the sheddings of blood and offerings of hair that Smith sees as acts
of communion are not typical offerings. (See Smith, The Religion of the Semites, pp. 320ff.)
53
The piacular sacrifices, of which I will speak more specifically in Bk. 3, chap. 5, consist entirely of
offerings. They serve as communions only secondarily.
348 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

I have described b e c o m e easier t o u n d e r s t a n d w h e n t h e y are b e l i e v e d t o be

addressed t o persons. T h u s , even w h i l e o n l y b r i n g i n g i m p e r s o n a l powers
i n t o play, the practices o f the I n t i c h i u m a paved the w a y f o r a different c o n -
5 4
ception. T o be sure, t h e y c o u l d n o t have b e e n sufficient t o p r o d u c e t h e idea
o f m y t h i c personalities straightaway. B u t o n c e f o r m e d , t h e idea was d r a w n
i n t o the c u l t b y the v e r y nature o f the rites. A t t h e same t i m e , i t became less
abstract. A s i t i n t e r a c t e d m o r e d i r e c d y w i t h a c t i o n a n d life, i t t o o k o n greater
reality b y the same stroke. T h u s w e can believe that practice o f the c u l t e n -
c o u r a g e d t h e p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n o f r e l i g i o u s f o r c e s — i n a secondary way, n o
d o u b t , b u t o n e that deserves n o t i c e .

V
T h e ' c o n t r a d i c t i o n that R . S m i t h saw as inadmissible, a piece o f blatant i l -
l o g i c , m u s t still be e x p l a i n e d .
I f sacred beings always manifested t h e i r p o w e r s i n a p e r f e c d y equal m a n -
ner, i t w o u l d appear i n c o n c e i v a b l e that m a n s h o u l d have d r e a m e d o f o f f e r i n g
t h e m favors. I t is h a r d t o see w h a t t h e y c o u l d have needed f r o m h i m . B u t as
l o n g as t h e y are m e r g e d w i t h things a n d seen as cosmic p r i n c i p l e s o f life, t h e y
are subject t o its r h y t h m . T h a t life unfolds t h r o u g h oscillations b a c k and f o r t h
that succeed o n e a n o t h e r i n accordance w i t h a d e f i n i t e law. A t some times,
life affirms itself i n all its splendor; at others, i t fades so m u c h that o n e w o n -
ders w h e t h e r i t w i l l n o t e n d altogether. E v e r y year, t h e plants die. W i l l t h e y
be reborn? T h e a n i m a l species t e n d t o d i m i n i s h t h r o u g h n a t u r a l o r v i o l e n t
death. W i l l t h e y r e n e w themselves i n t i m e , a n d as t h e y should? A b o v e a l l , the
r a i n is u n c e r t a i n , a n d f o r l o n g p e r i o d s i t seems t o have disappeared, never t o
r e t u r n . W h a t these weakenings o f nature bear witness t o is that, at the c o r r e -
s p o n d i n g seasons, t h e sacred beings t o w h i c h t h e animals, plants, r a i n , a n d so
f o r t h are subject pass t h r o u g h t h e same c r i t i c a l states, so t h e y t o o have t h e i r
p e r i o d s o f b r e a k d o w n . M a n can never take p a r t i n these spectacles as an i n -
different watcher. I f he is t o live, life m u s t c o n t i n u e universally, a n d therefore
the gods m u s t n o t die. H e therefore seeks t o s u p p o r t a n d a i d t h e m ; and t o d o
this, he puts at t h e i r service t h e forces he has at his disposal a n d m o b i l i z e s f o r
that purpose. T h e b l o o d f l o w i n g i n his veins has f e c u n d a t i n g virtues; h e w i l l

54
This has caused these ceremonies often to be spoken of as though they were addressed to personal
deities. (See, for example, a text of Krichauff and another of Kempe cited by [Richard] Eylmann, [Die
Eingeborenen der Kolonie Sud Australien, Berlin, D. Reumer, 1908], pp. 202—203.)
The Positive Cult 349

p o u r i t o u t . H e w i l l d r a w u p o n the seeds o f life that s l u m b e r i n the sacred

rocks that his clan possesses, a n d he w i l l sow t h e m i n the w i n d . I n a w o r d , he
w i l l m a k e offerings.
I n a d d i t i o n , these e x t e r n a l a n d physical crises go h a n d i n h a n d w i t h i n -
ternal a n d m e n t a l crises that t e n d t o w a r d the same result. T h e sacred beings
are sacred o n l y because t h e y are i m a g i n e d as sacred. L e t us stop b e l i e v i n g i n
t h e m , a n d t h e y w i l l be as i f t h e y w e r e n o t . I n this respect, even those that
have a physical f o r m , a n d are k n o w n t o us t h r o u g h sense experience, d e p e n d
on the t h o u g h t o f the faithful w h o venerate t h e m . T h e sacredness that d e -
fines t h e m as objects o f the c u l t is n o t g i v e n i n t h e i r n a t u r a l m a k e u p ; i t is s u -
peradded t o t h e m b y belief. T h e k a n g a r o o is o n l y an a n i m a l , l i k e any o t h e r ;
for the K a n g a r o o p e o p l e , however, i t contains a p r i n c i p l e that sets i t apart
f r o m o t h e r beings, a n d this p r i n c i p l e exists o n l y i n the m i n d s that t h i n k o f
5 5
it. I f , o n c e c o n c e i v e d , t h e sacred beings d i d n o t n e e d m e n i n o r d e r t o live,
the representations that express t h e m w o u l d have t o r e m a i n t h e same. T h i s
stability is impossible. I n actuality, i t is i n g r o u p life that these representations
are f o r m e d , a n d g r o u p life is b y nature i n t e r m i t t e n t . O f necessity, t h e n , t h e y
share t h e same i n t e r m i t t e n c e . T h e y achieve t h e i r greatest i n t e n s i t y w h e n the
individuals are assembled a n d i n d i r e c t relations w i t h o n e another, at the m o -
m e n t w h e n everyone c o m m u n e s i n t h e same idea o r e m o t i o n . O n c e t h e as-
sembly is dissolved a n d each p e r s o n has r e t u r n e d t o his o w n existence, those
representations lose m o r e a n d m o r e o f t h e i r o r i g i n a l energy. O v e r l a i d l i t t l e b y
l i t t l e b y the r i s i n g flood o f d a y - t o - d a y sensations, t h e y w o u l d eventually dis-
appear i n t o the unconscious, unless w e f o u n d some means o f c a l l i n g t h e m
back t o consciousness a n d r e v i t a l i z i n g t h e m . N o w t h e y c a n n o t w e a k e n w i t h -
out t h e sacred beings' l o s i n g t h e i r reality, because the sacred beings exist o n l y
i n a n d t h r o u g h t h e i r representations.* I f w e t h i n k less h a r d a b o u t t h e m , t h e y
c o u n t f o r less t o us a n d w e c o u n t less o n t h e m ; t h e y exist t o a lesser degree.
T h u s , here again is a p o i n t o f v i e w from w h i c h t h e favors o f m e n are neces-
sary t o t h e m . T h i s second reason t o h e l p t h e m is even m o r e i m p o r t a n t t h a n
the first, f o r i t has existed from t i m e i m m e m o r i a l . T h e i n t e r m i t t e n c e s o f
physical life affect r e l i g i o u s beliefs o n l y w h e n r e l i g i o n s are n o t yet detached
from t h e i r cosmic m a g m a . B u t the i n t e r m i t t e n c e s o f social life are inevitable,
and even t h e m o s t idealistic r e l i g i o n s can never escape t h e m .
M o r e o v e r , i t is because t h e gods are i n this state o f dependence o n the

This sentence is missing from the Swain translation.

53
In a philosophical sense, the same is true of anything, for things exist only through representation.
But as 1 have shown (pp. 228—229), this proposition is doubly true of religious forces, because there is
nothing in the makeup of things that corresponds to sacredness.
350 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

t h o u g h t o f m a n that m a n can believe his h e l p t o be efficacious. T h e o n l y

w a y t o r e n e w the collective representations that refer t o sacred beings is
t o p l u n g e t h e m again i n t o the v e r y source o f r e l i g i o u s life: assembled
groups. T h e e m o t i o n s aroused b y the p e r i o d i c crises t h r o u g h w h i c h external
things pass i n d u c e the m e n w i t n e s s i n g t h e m t o c o m e together, so that they
can see w h a t i t is best t o do. B u t b y t h e v e r y fact o f b e i n g assembled, they
c o m f o r t o n e another; t h e y f i n d t h e r e m e d y because t h e y seek i t together.
T h e shared f a i t h comes t o life again q u i t e n a t u r a l l y i n the m i d s t o f r e c o n -
s t i t u t e d c o l l e c t i v i t y . I t is r e b o r n because i t finds itself o n c e again i n the same
c o n d i t i o n s i n w h i c h i t was first b o r n . O n c e i t is restored, i t easdy overcomes
all the p r i v a t e doubts that h a d m a n a g e d t o arise i n i n d i v i d u a l m i n d s . T h e
m e n t a l i m a g e * o f the sacred things regains strength sufficient t o w i t h s t a n d
the i n w a r d o r e x t e r n a l causes that t e n d e d t o w e a k e n i t . D e s p i t e t h e o b -
v i o u s failures, o n e can n o l o n g e r believe that t h e gods w i l l die, because
t h e y are felt t o live again i n t h e depths o f one's o w n self. N o m a t t e r h o w
c r u d e t h e techniques used t o h e l p the gods, t h e y c a n n o t seem u n a v a i l i n g ,
because e v e r y t h i n g happens as i f t h e y really w e r e w o r k i n g . People are m o r e
c o n f i d e n t because t h e y feel stronger, a n d t h e y are stronger i n reality b e -
cause t h e strength that was f l a g g i n g has b e e n reawakened i n t h e i r conscious-
nesses.
I t is necessary, t h e n , t o refrain from b e l i e v i n g , w i t h S m i t h , that t h e c u l t
was i n s t i t u t e d o n l y f o r t h e b e n e f i t o f m e n a n d that t h e gods have n o use f o r
i t . T h e y still n e e d i t as m u c h as t h e i r faithful d o . N o d o u b t , the m e n c o u l d
n o t live w i t h o u t t h e gods; b u t o n the o t h e r h a n d , the gods w o u l d die i f they
w e r e n o t w o r s h i p p e d . T h u s the p u r p o s e o f t h e c u l t is n o t o n l y t o b r i n g the
profane i n t o c o m m u n i o n w i t h sacred beings b u t also t o keep t h e sacred b e -
ings alive, t o remake a n d regenerate t h e m perpetually. T o be sure, the m a t e -
r i a l offerings d o n o t p r o d u c e this r e m a k i n g t h r o u g h t h e i r o w n virtues b u t
t h r o u g h m e n t a l states that reawaken a n d a c c o m p a n y these doings, w h i c h are
e m p t y i n themselves. T h e t r u e raison d'être o f even those cults that are m o s t
materialistic i n appearance is n o t t o be s o u g h t i n the actions t h e y prescribe
b u t i n the i n w a r d a n d m o r a l r e n e w a l that the actions h e l p t o b r i n g about.
W h a t the w o r s h i p p e r i n reality gives his g o d is n o t t h e f o o d he places o n the
altar o r the b l o o d that he causes t o f l o w f r o m his veins: I t is his t h o u g h t . N e v -
ertheless, there remains a m u t u a l l y r e i n f o r c i n g exchange o f g o o d deeds
b e t w e e n the d e i t y a n d his w o r s h i p p e r s . T h e r u l e do ut desj b y w h i c h the
p r i n c i p l e o f sacrifice has sometimes b e e n d e f i n e d , is n o t a recent i n v e n t i o n

*Durkheim said image, which here refers to a mental, rather than a physical, representation.

*I give in order that you might give.

The Positive Cult 351

by u t i l i t a r i a n theorists; i t s i m p l y makes e x p l i c i t t h e mechanics o f t h e sacrifi-

cial system itself and, m o r e generally, that o f t h e w h o l e positive c u l t . T h u s ,
the circle S m i t h p o i n t e d o u t is q u i t e real, b u t n o t h i n g a b o u t i t offends the i n -
telligence. I t arises f r o m the fact that a l t h o u g h sacred beings are s u p e r i o r t o
m e n , they can live o n l y i n h u m a n consciousnesses.
B u t i f , pressing the analysis f u r t h e r a n d s u b s t i t u t i n g f o r the religious s y m -
bols the realities t h e y express, w e i n q u i r e i n t o t h e w a y those realities behave
w i t h i n the r i t e , this circle w i l l seem t o us even m o r e natural, and w e w i l l b e t -
ter u n d e r s t a n d its sense a n d purpose. I f , as I have t r i e d t o establish, the sacred
p r i n c i p l e is n o t h i n g o t h e r t h a n society hypostasized a n d transfigured, i t
s h o u l d be possible t o i n t e r p r e t r i t u a l life i n secular a n d social t e r m s . L i k e r i t -
ual life, social life i n fact moves i n a circle. O n the o n e hand, the i n d i v i d u a l
gets the best p a r t o f h i m s e l f f r o m s o c i e t y — a l l that gives h i m a distinctive
character a n d place a m o n g o t h e r beings, his i n t e l l e c t u a l a n d m o r a l c u l t u r e .
Let language, sciences, arts, a n d m o r a l beliefs be taken f r o m m a n , a n d he falls
to the r a n k o f a n i m a h t y ; therefore the d i s t i n c t i v e attributes o f h u m a n nature
c o m e t o us f r o m society. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , h o w e v e r , society exists a n d lives
o n l y i n and t h r o u g h i n d i v i d u a l s . L e t t h e idea o f society be e x t i n g u i s h e d i n i n -
d i v i d u a l m i n d s , let the beliefs, t r a d i t i o n s , a n d aspirations o f the c o l l e c t i v i t y be
felt a n d shared b y i n d i v i d u a l s n o l o n g e r , a n d the society w i l l die. T h u s w e can
repeat a b o u t society w h a t was p r e v i o u s l y said a b o u t the deity: I t has reality
o n l y t o the e x t e n t that i t has a place i n h u m a n consciousnesses, a n d that
place is m a d e f o r society b y us. W e n o w glimpse t h e p r o f o u n d reason w h y
the gods can n o m o r e d o w i t h o u t t h e i r f a i t h f u l t h a n the faithful can d o w i t h -
o u t t h e i r gods. I t is that society, o f w h i c h t h e gods are o n l y the s y m b o l i c e x -
pression, can n o m o r e d o w i t h o u t i n d i v i d u a l s t h a n i n d i v i d u a l s can do
w i t h o u t society.
H e r e w e t o u c h t h e s o l i d r o c k o n w h i c h all the cults are b u i l t a n d that has
made t h e m e n d u r e as l o n g as h u m a n societies have. W h e n w e see w h a t the
rites are m a d e o f a n d w h a t t h e y seem t o be d i r e c t e d t o w a r d , w e w o n d e r w i t h
astonishment h o w m e n c o u l d have a r r i v e d at t h e idea and, especially, h o w
they r e m a i n e d attached t o i t so faithfully. W h e r e c o u l d t h e y have g o t t e n the
i l l u s i o n that, w i t h a f e w grains o f sand t h r o w n t o the w i n d o r a f e w drops o f
b l o o d p o u r e d o n a r o c k o r o n the stone o f an altar, t h e life o f an a n i m a l
species o r a g o d c o u l d be maintained? W h e n , f r o m beneath these o u t w a r d
and s e e m i n g l y i r r a t i o n a l doings, w e have u n c o v e r e d a m e n t a l m e c h a n i s m that
gives t h e m sense a n d m o r a l i m p o r t , w e have m a d e a step t o w a r d s o l v i n g this
p r o b l e m . B u t n o t h i n g assures us that t h e m e c h a n i s m i t s e l f is a n y t h i n g b u t a
play o f h a l l u c i n a t o r y images. I have i n d e e d s h o w n w h a t p s y c h o l o g i c a l
processes m a k e the faithful t h i n k that the r i t e makes the s p i r i t u a l forces t h e y
352 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

n e e d c o m e t o life again a r o u n d t h e m ; b u t from t h e fact that i t can be e x -

p l a i n e d p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y does n o t f o l l o w that this b e l i e f has objective value.
T o have a s o u n d basis f o r seeing the efficacy that is i m p u t e d t o the rites as
something other than offspring o f a chronic delusion w i t h w h i c h humanity
deceives itself, i t m u s t be possible t o establish t h a t the effect o f t h e c u l t is p e -
r i o d i c a l l y t o recreate a m o r a l b e i n g o n w h i c h w e d e p e n d , as i t depends u p o n
us. N o w , this b e i n g exists: I t is society.
I n fact, i f religious ceremonies have any i m p o r t a n c e at all, i t is that they
set c o l l e c t i v i t y i n m o t i o n ; groups c o m e t o g e t h e r t o celebrate t h e m . T h u s
t h e i r first result is t o b r i n g i n d i v i d u a l s together, m u l t i p l y the contacts be-
t w e e n t h e m , and m a k e those contacts m o r e i n t i m a t e . T h a t i n itself modifies
the c o n t e n t o f the consciousnesses. O n o r d i n a r y days, t h e m i n d is chiefly o c -
c u p i e d w i t h u t i l i t a r i a n a n d i n d i v i d u a h s t i c affairs. E v e r y o n e goes about his
o w n personal business; f o r m o s t p e o p l e , w h a t is m o s t i m p o r t a n t is t o m e e t
the demands o f m a t e r i a l life; the p r i n c i p a l m o t i v e o f e c o n o m i c a c t i v i t y has
always b e e n p r i v a t e interest. O f course, social feelings c o u l d n o t be absent a l -
together. W e r e m a i n i n relationship w i t h o u r f e l l o w m e n ; the habits, ideas,
a n d tendencies that u p b r i n g i n g has stamped o n us, a n d that o r d i n a r i l y p r e -
side over o u r relations w i t h others, c o n t i n u e t o m a k e t h e i r i n f l u e n c e felt. B u t
t h e y are constandy frustrated a n d h e l d i n c h e c k b y t h e o p p o s i n g tendencies
that the r e q u i r e m e n t s o f the d a y - i n , d a y - o u t struggle p r o d u c e a n d p e r p e t u -
ate. D e p e n d i n g o n the i n t r i n s i c energy o f those social feelings, they h o l d u p
m o r e o r less successfully; b u t that energy is n o t r e n e w e d . T h e y live o n t h e i r
past, and, i n consequence, they w o u l d i n t i m e be d e p l e t e d i f n o t h i n g came
t o give back a l i t d e o f the strength t h e y lose t h r o u g h this incessant c o n f l i c t
and friction.
W h e n t h e Australians h u n t o r fish i n scattered small groups, t h e y lose
sight o f w h a t concerns t h e i r clan o r t r i b e . T h e y t h i n k o n l y o f t a k i n g as m u c h
game as possible. O n feast days, h o w e v e r , these concerns are overshadowed
o b l i g a t o r i l y ; since t h e y are i n essence profane, t h e y are shut o u t o f sacred p e -
r i o d s . W h a t t h e n occupies t h e m i n d are t h e beliefs h e l d i n c o m m o n : the
m e m o r i e s o f great ancestors, t h e c o l l e c t i v e ideal t h e ancestors e m b o d y — i n
short, social things. E v e n t h e m a t e r i a l interests that the great r e l i g i o u s cere-
m o n i e s a i m t o satisfy are p u b l i c a n d hence social. T h e w h o l e society has an
interest i n an abundant harvest, i n t i m e l y r a i n t h a t is n o t excessive, and i n t h e
n o r m a l r e p r o d u c t i o n o f the animals. H e n c e i t is society that is foremost i n
every consciousness a n d that d o m i n a t e s a n d directs c o n d u c t , w h i c h a m o u n t s
t o saying that at such times i t is even m o r e alive, m o r e active, a n d thus m o r e
real t h a n at profane times. A n d so w h e n m e n feel there is s o m e t h i n g outside
The Positive Cult 353

themselves that is r e b o r n , forces that are reanimated, a n d a life that reawak-

ens, they are n o t d e l u d e d . T h i s r e n e w a l is i n n o w a y imaginary, a n d the i n -
dividuals themselves b e n e f i t f r o m i t , f o r t h e particle o f social b e i n g that each
i n d i v i d u a l bears w i t h i n h i m s e l f necessardy participates i n this collective
remaking. T h e i n d i v i d u a l soul itself is also regenerated, b y i m m e r s i n g
itself o n c e m o r e i n the v e r y w e l l s p r i n g o f its life. As a result, that soul
feels stronger, m o r e mistress o f itself, a n d less d e p e n d e n t u p o n physical n e -
cessities.
W e k n o w that t h e positive c u l t tends n a t u r a l l y t o take o n p e r i o d i c f o r m s ;
this is o n e o f its d i s t i n g u i s h i n g traits. O f course, there are rites that m a n c e l -
ebrates occasionally, t o deal w i t h t e m p o r a r y situations. B u t these episodic
practices never play m o r e t h a n a secondary role, even i n the religions w e are
s t u d y i n g i n this b o o k . T h e essence o f the c u l t is t h e cycle o f feasts that are
regularly repeated at d e f i n i t e times. W e are n o w i n a p o s i t i o n t o understand
w h e r e that i m p u l s e t o w a r d p e r i o d i c i t y comes f r o m . T h e r h y t h m that r e l i -
gious life obeys o n l y expresses, a n d results f r o m , t h e r h y t h m o f social life. So-
ciety c a n n o t revitalize t h e awareness i t has o f itself unless i t assembles, b u t i t
cannot r e m a i n c o n t i n u o u s l y i n session. T h e demands o f hfe d o n o t p e r m i t i t
to stay i n c o n g r e g a t i o n i n d e f i n i t e l y , so i t disperses, o n l y t o reassemble anew
w h e n i t again feels the need. I t is t o these necessary alternations that the r e g -
ular a l t e r n a t i o n o f sacred a n d profane t i m e responds. Because at least the
manifest f u n c t i o n o f t h e c u l t is i n i t i a l l y t o regularize t h e course o f natural
p h e n o m e n a , the r h y t h m o f cosmic life set its m a r k u p o n t h e r h y t h m o f r i t u a l
life. H e n c e , f o r a l o n g t i m e the feasts w e r e seasonal; w e have observed that
such was already a trait o f t h e A u s t r a l i a n I n t i c h i u m a . B u t the seasons m e r e l y
p r o v i d e d t h e e x t e r n a l f r a m e w o r k o f this o r g a n i z a t i o n , n o t the p r i n c i p l e o n
w h i c h i t rests, f o r even the cults that have exclusively s p i r i t u a l ends have r e -
m a i n e d p e r i o d i c . T h e reason is that this p e r i o d i c i t y has different causes. B e -
cause the seasonal changes are c r i t i c a l periods f o r nature, they are a natural
occasion f o r gatherings a n d thus f o r religious ceremonies. B u t o t h e r events
c o u l d play, a n d have i n fact played, the role o f occasional causes. Yet i t must
be a c k n o w l e d g e d that this f r a m e w o r k , a l t h o u g h p u r e l y e x t e r n a l , has s h o w n
remarkable endurance, f o r its vestige is still f o u n d i n the religions that are
furthest r e m o v e d f r o m any physical basis. Several C h r i s t i a n feasts are b o u n d
w i t h u n b r o k e n c o n t i n u i t y t o the pastoral a n d a g r i c u l t u r a l feasts o f the a n -
c i e n t Israelites, even t h o u g h they are n e i t h e r pastoral n o r a g r i c u l t u r a l any
longer.
T h e f o r m o f this cycle is apt t o v a r y f r o m o n e society t o another. W h e r e
the p e r i o d o f dispersion is l o n g o r the dispersion v e r y great, the p e r i o d o f
354 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

c o n g r e g a t i o n is p r o l o n g e d i n t u r n , a n d there are veritable orgies o f collective

a n d r e l i g i o u s life. Feasts c o m e o n e after the o t h e r f o r weeks o r m o n t h s , and
r i t u a l life sometimes rises t o o u t r i g h t frenzy. T h i s is t r u e o f the Australian
5 6
tribes a n d o f several societies i n the A m e r i c a n N o r t h a n d N o r t h w e s t . Else-
w h e r e , b y contrast, these t w o phases o f social life f o l l o w o n e a n o t h e r m o r e
closely, a n d t h e contrast b e t w e e n t h e m is less m a r k e d . T h e m o r e societies
develop, the less is t h e i r tolerance f o r i n t e r r u p t i o n s that are t o o p r o n o u n c e d .

56
See Mauss, Essai sur les variations saisonnières des sociétés Eskimos, in AS, vol. IX [1906], pp. 96ff.
 CHAPTER THREE

THE POSITIVE CULT

(CONTINUED)
Mimetic Rites and the Principle of Causality

T he techniques j u s t discussed are n o t t h e o n l y ones used t o b r i n g a b o u t

the f e r t i l i t y o f the t o t e m i c species. O t h e r s w i t h the same p u r p o s e either
accompany t h e m o r take t h e i r place.

I
I n the same ceremonies I have described, various rites apart f r o m b l o o d o r
o t h e r sacrifices are o f t e n p e r f o r m e d t o s u p p l e m e n t o r reinforce t h e effects o f
those practices. T h e y are c o m p o s e d o f m o v e m e n t s and cries i n t e n d e d t o
m i m i c the b e h a v i o r o r traits o f t h e a n i m a l w h o s e r e p r o d u c t i o n is h o p e d for.
For this reason, I call t h e m mimetic.
A m o n g the A r u n t a , the W i t c h e t t y G r u b I n t i c h i u m a involves m o r e t h a n
the rites that are c a r r i e d o u t o n t h e sacred rocks, as discussed above. O n c e
those have b e e n c o m p l e t e d , the participants start b a c k t o w a r d t h e camp.
W h e n t h e y are n o m o r e t h a n a b o u t a m i l e away f r o m i t , t h e y call a_halt a n d
decorate themselves ritually, after w h i c h t h e y c o n t i n u e t h e i r m a r c h . T h e i r
a d o r n m e n t announces that an i m p o r t a n t c e r e m o n y is t o c o m e . A n d so i t
does. W h i l e the d e t a c h m e n t was away, o n e o f t h e elders left o n g u a r d at the
camp has b u i l t a shelter o u t o f l o n g , n a r r o w branches; i t is called the Umbana
and represents t h e chrysalis f r o m w h i c h the insect emerges. A l l those w h o
have taken p a r t i n the earlier ceremonies gather near the place w h e r e this
structure has b e e n p u t u p ; t h e n t h e y s l o w l y advance, s t o p p i n g f r o m time t o
t i m e u n t i l t h e y reach the U m b a n a , w h i c h t h e y enter. I m m e d i a t e l y , all those
w h o d o n o t b e l o n g t o the p h r a t r y t o w h i c h t h e W i t c h e t t y G r u b t o t e m b e -
longs (but w h o are o n the scene, t h o u g h at a distance) he face d o w n o n the
g r o u n d ; t h e y m u s t stay i n this posture u n t i l t h e y are g i v e n p e r m i s s i o n t o get

355
356 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

up. D u r i n g this t i m e , a h y m n rises f r o m w i t h i n the U m b a n a . I t recounts the

various phases the a n i m a l goes t h r o u g h i n the course o f his d e v e l o p m e n t and
t h e m y t h s c o n c e r n i n g the sacred rocks. A t t h e e n d o f this h y m n , the A l a t u n j a
glides o u t o f the U m b a n a a n d , still c r o u c h i n g , s l o w l y advances o n the g r o u n d
i n f r o n t o f i t . H e is f o l l o w e d b y all his c o m p a n i o n s , w h o i m i t a t e his ges-
tures. T h e y apparently m e a n t o p o r t r a y the insect as i t emerges from the
chrysalis. T h e s i n g i n g that is heard at the same m o m e n t , a k i n d o f oral c o m -
m e n t a r y o n the r i t e , is i n fact a d e s c r i p t i o n o f the m o v e m e n t s the a n i m a l
1
makes at this stage o f its d e v e l o p m e n t .
2
I n a n o t h e r I n t i c h i u m a , celebrated a propos o f a n o t h e r sort o f g r u b , the
3
unchalka g r u b , this characteristic is even m o r e p r o n o u n c e d . T h e participants
i n the r i t e a d o r n themselves w i t h designs representing the u n c h a l k a bush, o n
w h i c h this g r u b lives at the b e g i n n i n g o f its life; t h e n t h e y cover a shield w i t h
c o n c e n t r i c circles o f d o w n that represent a n o t h e r k i n d o f bush o n w h i c h the
adult insect lays its eggs. W h e n these preparations are c o m p l e t e , everyone sits
o n the g r o u n d i n a semicircle f a c i n g the p r i n c i p a l celebrant. T h e celebrant
alternately curves his b o d y i n t w o b y b e n d i n g t o w a r d the g r o u n d and r i s i n g
o n his knees; at the same t i m e , he shakes his outspread arms, a w a y o f r e p r e -
senting the w i n g s o f the insect. F r o m t i m e t o t i m e , he leans over the shield,
i m i t a t i n g the m a n n e r i n w h i c h the b u t t e r f l y hovers over t h e shrubs i n w h i c h
i t lays its eggs. W h e n this c e r e m o n y is over, a n o t h e r begins at a different
place, t o w h i c h t h e y g o i n silence. T h i s t i m e , t w o shields are used. O n one,
the tracks o f the g r u b are represented b y zigzag lines; o n the o t h e r are c o n -
c e n t r i c circles o f u n e q u a l size, some representing the eggs o f t h e insect a n d
the others t h e seeds o f the e r e m o p h i l e bush, o n w h i c h i t feeds. As i n the first
ceremony, everyone sits i n sdence w h i l e the celebrant moves about, i m i t a t -
i n g the m o v e m e n t s o f t h e a n i m a l w h e n i t leaves the chrysalis a n d struggles t o
take f l i g h t .
Spencer a n d G i l l e n p o i n t o u t a f e w m o r e practices f r o m a m o n g the
A r u n t a , w h i c h are s i m i l a r b u t o f lesser i m p o r t a n c e . F o r example, i n the I n -
t i c h i u m a o f t h e E m u , t h e participants at a g i v e n m o m e n t t r y t o c o p y the gait
4
a n d appearance o f this b i r d i n t h e i r o w n b e h a v i o r ; i n an I n t i c h i u m a o f the

'[Sir Baldwin Spencer and Francis James Gillen, The Native Tribes of Central Australia, London, Macmil-
lan, 1899], p. 176.
2
[Sir Baldwin Spencer and Francis James Gillen, The Northern Tribes of Central Australia, London,
Macmillan, 1904], p. 179. It is true that Spencer and Gillen do not say explicidy that the ceremony is an
Intichiuma, but the context leaves no doubt about the meaning of the rite.
3
In the index of names of totems, Spencer and Gillen spell it Untjalka (Northern Tribes, p. 772).
4
[Spencer and Gillen], Native Tribes, p. 182.
The Positive Cult (Continued) 357

Water, the m e n o f the t o t e m m a k e t h e characteristic c r y o f the plover, a c r y

5
that i n t h e i r m i n d s is associated w i t h the r a i n y season. B u t all i n all, these
t w o explorers n o t e d rather f e w instances o f m i m e t i c rites. I t is certain, h o w -
ever, that t h e i r relative silence o n this p o i n t arises e i t h e r f r o m the fact that
they d i d n o t observe e n o u g h I n t i c h i u m a s o r that t h e y o v e r l o o k e d this aspect
o f the ceremonies. Schulze, o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , was s t r u c k b y the e x t r e m e l y
m i m e t i c character o f t h e A r u n t a rites. " T h e sacred c o r r o b o r é e s , " he says,
"are f o r t h e m o s t p a r t ceremonies that represent animals"; he calls t h e m " a n -
6
i m a l t j u r u n g a s , " a n d the d o c u m e n t s S t r e h l o w c o l l e c t e d have c o r r o b o r a t e d
his r e p o r t i n g . I n Strehlow's w o r k , t h e examples are so n u m e r o u s that i t is i m -
possible t o cite t h e m all; there are v i r t u a l l y n o ceremonies i n w h i c h some i m -
itative gesture is n o t n o t e d . A c c o r d i n g t o the nature o f t h e t o t e m s w h o s e
feast is celebrated, t h e y j u m p i n t h e m a n n e r o f kangaroos and i m i t a t e the
m o v e m e n t s kangaroos m a k e w h e n eating. T h e y i m i t a t e the f l i g h t o f w i n g e d
ants, the characteristic noise t h e bat makes, t h e c r y o f the w i l d t u r k e y a n d
that o f t h e eagle, t h e hissing o f the snake, t h e c r o a k i n g o f the frog, a n d so
7 8 9
f o r t h . W h e n the t o t e m is a p l a n t , t h e y gesture as t h o u g h p i c k i n g o r e a t i n g
it, for example.
A m o n g t h e W a r r a m u n g a , the I n t i c h i u m a generally takes a v e r y unusual
f o r m (described i n the n e x t chapter) that differs from those s t u d i e d u p t o
now. Nonetheless, a t y p i c a l case o f a p u r e l y m i m e t i c I n t i c h i u m a exists a m o n g
this p e o p l e : that o f the W h i t e C o c k a t o o . T h e c e r e m o n y Spencer a n d G i l l e n
described began at t e n at n i g h t . A l l n i g h t l o n g , t h e head o f the clan i m i t a t e d
the c r y o f the b i r d w i t h distressing m o n o t o n y . H e stopped o n l y w h e n he h a d
used u p all his strength a n d was replaced b y his son; t h e n h e began again as
soon as h e felt a l i t t l e rested. T h e s e e x h a u s t i n g exercises c o n t i n u e d w i t h o u t
1 0
break u n t i l m o r n i n g .
L i v i n g beings are n o t t h e o n l y ones t h e y t r y t o i m i t a t e . I n a large n u m -
ber o f tribes, t h e I n t i c h i u m a o f t h e R a i n basically consists o f i m i t a t i v e rites.
T h a t celebrated a m o n g the U r a b u n n a is o n e o f the simplest. T h e head o f t h e

5
Ibid., p. 193.
6
[Rev. Louis] Schulze, "Aborigines of the Upper and Middle Finke River," RSSA, vol. XIV [1891],
p. 221; cf. p. 243.
7
[Carl] Strehlow, [DieAranda- und Loritja-Stamme in Zentral-Australien, Frankfurt, J. Baer, 1907], vol.
Ill, pp. 11, 84, 31, 36, 37, 68, 72.
8
Ibid., p. 100.
9
Ibid., pp. 81, 100, 112, 115.
'"[Spencer and Gillen], Northern Tribes, p. 310.
358 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

clan is seated o n the g r o u n d , decorated i n w h i t e d o w n a n d h o l d i n g a lance.

H e moves every w h i c h way, p r o b a b l y t o shake o f f the d o w n that is attached
t o his b o d y a n d represents the clouds w h e n they are dispersed i n t h e air. I n
that way, he imitates the great A l c h e r i n g a m a n - c l o u d s that, a c c o r d i n g t o l e g -
e n d , h a d t h e h a b i t o f r i s i n g t o t h e sky t o f o r m the clouds f r o m w h i c h the r a i n
t h e n came back t o earth. I n short, t h e object o f the entire r i t e is t o d e p i c t the
11
f o r m a t i o n a n d ascent o f the r a i n - b e a r i n g c l o u d s .
A m o n g the K a i t i s h , the c e r e m o n y is m u c h m o r e c o m p l e x . I have already
n o t e d o n e o f the means e m p l o y e d : T h e celebrant p o u r s w a t e r o n the sacred
stones a n d o n himself. O t h e r rites strengthen the effect this sort o f o f f e r i n g
has. T h e r a i n b o w is t h o u g h t t o be closely c o n n e c t e d t o t h e r a i n . I t is the son,
the K a i t i s h say, a n d i t is always i n a h u r r y t o c o m e o u t a n d stop the r a i n . So
i f the r a i n is t o fall, t h e r a i n b o w m u s t n o t appear. T h e y t h i n k they can get this
result i n the f o l l o w i n g way. O n a shield t h e y d r a w a design representing the
r a i n b o w . T h e y take this shield t o camp, carefully k e e p i n g i t h i d d e n from all
eyes. T h e y are c o n v i n c e d that, i n m a k i n g this i m a g e o f the r a i n b o w invisible,
they are p r e v e n t i n g t h e appearance o f the r a i n b o w itself. M e a n w h d e , w i t h a
p i t c h i f u l l o f w a t e r at his side, the head o f t h e clan t h r o w s tufts o f w h i t e
d o w n , representing t h e clouds, i n all d i r e c t i o n s . R e p e a t e d i m i t a t i o n s o f the
plover's c r y r o u n d o u t the ceremony, w h i c h seems t o have special solemnity.
F o r as l o n g as i t lasts, those w h o participate i n i t , w h e t h e r as actors o r as
m e m b e r s o f the c o n g r e g a t i o n , m u s t have n o contact w i t h t h e i r wives, n o t
1 2
even t o speak w i t h t h e m .
T h e m e t h o d s o f d e p i c t i o n are n o t t h e same a m o n g t h e D i e r i . T h e r a i n is
d e p i c t e d n o t b y w a t e r b u t b y b l o o d , w h i c h m e n cause t o f l o w from their
13
veins o n t o those i n a t t e n d a n c e . A t the same time, t h e y t h r o w handfuls o f
w h i t e d o w n , w h i c h s y m b o l i z e t h e clouds. I n t o a h u t that has b e e n b u i l t
ahead o f t i m e , t h e y place t w o large stones that represent the b a n k i n g u p o f
clouds, a sign o f r a i n . H a v i n g left t h e m there f o r a t i m e , t h e y m o v e the stones
a certain distance away a n d place t h e m as far u p as possible o n the tallest tree
they can f i n d . T h i s is a w a y o f m a k i n g the clouds m o u n t i n t o the sky. S o m e
p o w d e r e d g y p s u m is t h r o w n i n t o a w a t e r h o l e , at the sight o f w h i c h t h e r a i n

"Ibid., pp. 285—286. It may be that the movements of the lance are to pierce the clouds.
12
[Spencer and Gillen] Northern Tribes, pp. 294—296. On the other hand, interestingly enough, among
the Anula, the rainbow is held to bring about rain. (Ibid., p. 314.)
13
The same procedure is used among the Arunta (Strehlow, Aranda, vol. Ill, p. 132). True, the ques-
tion arises whether this shedding of blood might not be an offering for the purpose of bringing forth the
principles that produce rain. However, Gason says emphatically that it is a way of imitating the falling rain.
The Positive Cult (Continued) 359

spirit i m m e d i a t e l y makes clouds appear. F i n a l l y everyone, y o u n g a n d o l d ,

come t o g e t h e r a r o u n d the h u t and, w i t h t h e i r heads d o w n , rush t o w a r d i t .
T h e y pass v i o l e n t l y t h r o u g h i t , repeating the m o v e m e n t several times, u n t i l
the o n l y p a r t o f the structure that remains standing is its s u p p o r t i n g posts.
T h e n they attack t h e posts as w e l l , s h a k i n g a n d t e a r i n g at t h e m u n t i l the
w h o l e structure collapses. T h e o p e r a t i o n o f p i e r c i n g the h u t all over is i n -
tended t o represent the clouds p a r t i n g ; a n d the collapse o f its structure, the
1 4
falling o f the r a i n .
1 5
A m o n g the tribes o f the n o r t h w e s t s t u d i e d b y C l e m e n t , w h i c h occupy
the t e r r i t o r y b e t w e e n the Fortescue a n d F i t z r o y rivers, there are ceremonies
c o n d u c t e d f o r exactly the same p u r p o s e as t h e I n t i c h i u m a s o f the A r u n t a and
that seem i n t h e m a i n t o be essentially m i m e t i c .
A m o n g these peoples, t h e n a m e tarlow is g i v e n t o piles o f stones that are
apparently sacred because, as w e w i l l see, t h e y are the o b j e c t o f i m p o r t a n t
16
rites. E a c h a n i m a l a n d p l a n t — e a c h t o t e m o r s u b t o t e m — i s represented b y a
17
tarlow, o f w h i c h a s p e c i f i c clan is the custodian. T h e s i m i l a r i t y b e t w e e n
these tarlows a n d the sacred stones o f t h e A r u n t a is easy t o see.
W h e n kangaroos are scarce, f o r e x a m p l e , the head o f t h e c l a n t o w h i c h
the t a r l o w o f t h e kangaroos belongs goes t o the t a r l o w w i t h some o f his
c o m p a n i o n s . T h e r e t h e y execute various rites. T h e p r i n c i p a l ones consist o f
j u m p i n g a r o u n d t h e t a r l o w as t h e kangaroos j u m p a n d d r i n k i n g as t h e y
d r i n k — i n short, i m i t a t i n g t h e i r m o s t characteristic m o v e m e n t s . T h e w e a p -
ons used i n h u n t i n g t h e a n i m a l play an i m p o r t a n t role i n these rites. T h e y are
brandished, t h r o w n against the stones, a n d so f o r t h . W h e n i t is a m a t t e r o f
emus, t h e y g o t o t h e t a r l o w o f the emus; t h e y w a l k a n d r u n as those birds do.
T h e cleverness that t h e natives display i n these i m i t a t i o n s is apparendy q u i t e
remarkable.
O t h e r tarlows are dedicated t o plants—grass seeds, f o r example. I n this

14
[S.] Gason, "The Dieyerie Tribe," in [Edward Micklethwaite Curr, The Australian Race: Its Origin,
Languages, Customs, Place of Landing in Australia and the Routes by Which It Spread Itself over That Continent,
Melbourne, J. Ferres, 1886-1887], vol. II, pp. 66-68; [Alfred William] Howitt (The NativeTribes [of South-
east Australia, London, Macmillan, 1904], pp. 798-800) mentions another Dieri rite to get rain.
15
[E.] Clement, "Ethnographical Notes on the Western-Australian Aborigines [with a Descriptive
Catalogue of Ethnographical ObjectsfromWestern Australia]," in Internationales Archiv fur Ethnographic,
vol. XVI [1903], pp. 6-7. Cf. Withnal, Marriage Rites and Relationship, in [Science of] Man: [Australasian
Anthropological Journal, vol. VI], 1903, p. 42.
16
I assume that a subtotem can have a tarlow because, according to Clement, certain clans have several
totems.
17
Clement says a tribal family.
360 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

case, t h e techniques used i n w i n n o w i n g o r m i n i n g those seeds are m i m e d .

A n d since, i n o r d i n a r y life, i t is w o m e n w h o are o r d i n a r i l y responsible
for such tasks, i t is also t h e y w h o p e r f o r m the r i t e a m i d songs and dances.

II
A l l o f these rites b e l o n g t o t h e same category. T h e p r i n c i p l e o n w h i c h they
1 8
are based is o n e o f those o n w h i c h w h a t is c o m m o n l y (and i m p r o p e r l y )
called sympathetic m a g i c is based.
1 9
T h i s p r i n c i p l e m a y usually be s u b d i v i d e d i n t o t w o .
T h e first can be stated i n this w a y : Whatever touches an object also touches
everything that has any relationship of proximity or solidarity with that object. T h u s ,
w h a t e v e r affects the p a r t affects the w h o l e ; any force e x e r t e d o n an i n d i v i d -
ual is t r a n s m i t t e d t o his n e i g h b o r s , his k i n , a n d e v e r y t h i n g w i t h w h i c h he is
u n i t e d i n any w a y at all. A l l these cases are s i m p l y applications o f the l a w o f
c o n t a g i o n , w h i c h w e s t u d i e d earlier. A g o o d o r b a d state o r q u a l i t y is trans-
m i t t e d c o n t a g i o u s l y from o n e subject t o a n o t h e r that has any relationship
w i t h the first.
T h e second p r i n c i p l e is usually s u m m a r i z e d i n this f o r m u l a : Like produces
like. T h e d e p i c t i o n o f a b e i n g o r a state produces that b e i n g o r state. T h i s is
the m a x i m that the rites j u s t described p u t i n t o o p e r a t i o n , a n d its character-
istic traits can b e grasped best w h e n t h e y occur. T h e classic example o f b e -
w i t c h m e n t , w h i c h is generally presented as t h e t y p i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f this
same precept, is m u c h less significant. I n d e e d , t h e p h e n o m e n o n i n b e w i t c h -
m e n t is largely a m e r e transfer. T h e idea o f the i m a g e is associated i n the
m i n d w i t h the idea o f the m o d e l . As a result, the effects o f any a c t i o n o n the
statuette are passed o n c o n t a g i o u s l y t o t h e p e r s o n w h o s e traits i t m i m i c s . I n
r e l a t i o n t o the o r i g i n a l , the i m a g e plays the role o f the p a r t i n r e l a t i o n t o the
w h o l e ; i t is an agent o f transmission. T h u s i t is b e l i e v e d that o n e can o b t a i n
the same result b y b u r n i n g the hair o f the p e r s o n o n e wants t o get at. T h e
o n l y difference b e t w e e n these t w o k i n d s o f o p e r a t i o n is that, i n one, the
c o m m u n i c a t i o n is d o n e b y means o f similarity, a n d i n the other, b y means o f
contiguity.
T h e rites that c o n c e r n us are a different case. T h e y presuppose n o t

18
I will explain the nature of this impropriety below (p. 517).
19
On this classification see [James George] Frazer, Lectures on the Early History of Kingship, [London,
Macmillan, 1905], pp. 37ff.; [Henri] Hubert and [Marcel] Mauss, ["Esquisse d'une] théorie générale de la
magie," [AS, vol. VII, 1904], pp. 61ff.
The Positive Cult (Continued) 361

merely the passage o f a g i v e n state o r q u a l i t y f r o m o n e object i n t o a n o t h e r

but the c r e a t i o n o f s o m e t h i n g altogether new. T h e v e r y act o f d e p i c t i n g the
animal gives b i r t h t o that a n i m a l a n d creates i t — i n i m i t a t i n g the noise o f the
w i n d o r the f a l l i n g water, o n e causes the clouds t o f o r m a n d dissolve i n t o
rain, a n d so f o r t h . I n b o t h k i n d s o f rites, resemblance u n d o u b t e d l y has a role
but a v e r y different one. I n b e w i t c h m e n t , resemblance o n l y guides the force
exerted i n a p a r t i c u l a r w a y ; i t orients a p o w e r that is n o t its o w n i n a c e r t a i n
d i r e c t i o n . I n the rites j u s t considered, i t acts b y itself a n d is d i r e c t l y effica-
cious. Besides, c o n t r a r y t o the usual d e f i n i t i o n s , w h a t really differentiates t h e
t w o p r i n c i p l e s o f the m a g i c called sympathetic a n d its c o r r e s p o n d i n g p r a c -
tices is n o t that c o n t i g u i t y acts i n some cases a n d resemblance i n others, b u t
that, i n the first, there is m e r e l y c o n t a g i o u s c o m m u n i c a t i o n and, i n the sec-
20
ond, production and creation.
T h u s t o e x p l a i n t h e m i m e t i c rites is t o e x p l a i n t h e second o f these p r i n -
ciples, a n d v i c e versa.
I w i l l n o t t a r r y l o n g over the e x p l a n a t i o n that the a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l s c h o o l
has p u t f o r w a r d , n o t a b l y T y l o r a n d Frazer. T h e y call u p o n the association
o f ideas, j u s t as t h e y d o t o a c c o u n t f o r the contagiousness o f the sacred.
" H o m e o p a t h i c magic," says Frazer, w h o prefers this t e r m t o that o f " m i m e t i c
magic," "rests o n the association o f ideas b y similarity, a n d contagious m a g i c
o n the association o f ideas b y c o n t i g u i t y . H o m e o p a t h i c m a g i c errs b y t a k i n g
21
things that resemble o n e a n o t h e r as i d e n t i c a l . " B u t this is t o m i s u n d e r s t a n d
the specific character o f the practices u n d e r discussion. F r o m o n e p o i n t o f
view, Frazer s f o r m u l a c o u l d b e a p p l i e d s o m e w h a t j u s t i f i a b l y t o the case o f
2 2
bewitchment. I n that c o n t e x t , i t actually is t w o d i s t i n c t t h i n g s — t h e image
and the m o d e l i t represents m o r e o r less s c h e m a t i c a l l y — t h a t are assimilated
t o o n e a n o t h e r because o f t h e i r p a r t i a l resemblance. B u t o n l y the i m a g e is
g i v e n i n the m i m e t i c rites w e have j u s t studied, a n d as f o r the m o d e l , there is
none, since t h e n e w g e n e r a t i o n o f the t o t e m i c species is still n o m o r e t h a n a
hope, a n d an u n c e r t a i n h o p e at that. T h u s there can be n o q u e s t i o n o f as-
s i m i l a t i o n , m i s t a k e n o r n o t ; there is c r e a t i o n , i n the f u l l sense o f t h e w o r d ,
and h o w t h e association o f ideas c o u l d ever lead o n e t o believe i n this cre-

20
I say nothing about the so-called law of contrariety. As Hubert and Mauss have shown, the contrary
produces its contrary only by means of its like (Théorie générale de la magie, p. 70).
2 1
[Frazer], Lectures on the Early History of Kingship, p. 39.
22
It is applicable in the sense that there really is an amalgamation of the statuette and the person be-
witched. But this amalgamation is far from being a mere product of the association of ideas by similarity.
As I have shown, the true determining cause of the phenomenon is the contagiousness that is character-
istic of religious forces.
362 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

a t i o n is n o t clear. H o w c o u l d t h e m e r e fact o f r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e m o v e m e n t s o f
an a n i m a l p r o d u c e c e r t a i n t y that t h e a n i m a l w i l l be r e b o r n i n abundance?
T h e general properties o f h u m a n n a t u r e c a n n o t e x p l a i n such o d d prac-
tices. Instead o f c o n s i d e r i n g t h e p r i n c i p l e o n w h i c h t h e y rest i n its general
a n d abstract f o r m , l e t us p u t i t b a c k i n t o t h e m o r a l m i l i e u t o w h i c h i t belongs
a n d i n w h i c h w e have j u s t observed i t . L e t us r e c o n n e c t i t w i t h t h e set o f
ideas a n d feelings that are t h e o r i g i n o f t h e rites i n w h i c h i t is a p p l i e d , and
w e w i l l be i n a b e t t e r p o s i t i o n t o d i s c e r n its causes.
T h e m e n w h o gather f o r these rites believe t h e y really are animals o r
plants o f t h e species w h o s e n a m e t h e y bear. T h e y are conscious o f an a n i m a l
or p l a n t nature, a n d i n t h e i r eyes that n a t u r e constitutes w h a t is m o s t essen-
tial a n d m o s t e x c e l l e n t a b o u t themselves. W h e n t h e y are assembled, t h e n ,
t h e i r first act m u s t be t o a f f i r m t o o n e a n o t h e r this q u a l i t y that t h e y ascribe
to themselves a n d b y w h i c h t h e y define themselves. T h e t o t e m is t h e i r r a l l y -
i n g sign. F o r this reason, as w e have seen, t h e y d r a w i t o n t h e i r bodies, a n d
t h e y t r y t o emulate i t b y t h e i r gestures, cries, a n d carriage. Since t h e y are
emus o r kangaroos, t h e y w i l l behave l i k e t h e animals o f t h e same name. B y
this means, t h e y witness t o o n e a n o t h e r that t h e y are m e m b e r s o f t h e same
m o r a l c o m m u n i t y , a n d t h e y take cognizance o f t h e k i n s h i p that unites t h e m .
T h e r i t e n o t o n l y expresses this k i n s h i p b u t also makes o r remakes i t , f o r this
k i n s h i p exists o n l y insofar as i t is b e l i e v e d , a n d t h e effect o f all these c o l l e c -
tive d e m o n s t r a t i o n s is t o keep alive t h e beliefs o n w h i c h i t rests. So a l t h o u g h
these j u m p s , cries, a n d m o v e m e n t s o f all k i n d s are b i z a r r e a n d grotesque i n
appearance, i n reality t h e y have a m e a n i n g that is h u m a n a n d p r o f o u n d . T h e
A u s t r a l i a n seeks t o resemble his t o t e m j u s t as t h e adherent o f m o r e advanced
r e l i g i o n s seeks t o resemble his G o d . F o r b o t h , this is a means o f c o m m u n i n g
w i t h t h e sacred, that is, w i t h t h e c o l l e c t i v e i d e a l that t h e sacred symbolizes.
I t is an early f o r m o f t h e 6u,oLCuat<; TO> 9ew. *
S t i l l , this first cause applies t o w h a t is m o s t specific t o t h e t o t e m i c beliefs,
a n d i f i t was t h e o n l y cause, t h e p r i n c i p l e o f l i k e produces l i k e w o u l d n o t
have l i v e d b e y o n d t o t e m i s m . Since there is perhaps n o r e l i g i o n i n w h i c h rites
d e r i v e d f r o m i t are n o t t o be f o u n d , a n o t h e r cause m u s t have c o m b i n e d w i t h
that one.
I n fact, t h e v e r y general p u r p o s e o f t h e ceremonies i n w h i c h w e have
seen i t a p p l i e d is n o t o n l y t h e o n e I have j u s t m e n t i o n e d , f u n d a m e n t a l
t h o u g h i t is, f o r t h e y also have a m o r e i m m e d i a t e a n d conscious purpose: t o
b r i n g a b o u t t h e r e p r o d u c t i o n o f t h e t o t e m i c species. T h e idea o f this neces-

* Imitation of God.
The Positive Cult (Continued) 363

sary r e p r o d u c t i o n haunts the m i n d s o f t h e faithful; t h e y concentrate the force

o f t h e i r a t t e n t i o n a n d w i l l o n this goal. N o w a single c o n c e r n c a n n o t h a u n t
an entire g r o u p o f m e n t o that e x t e n t a n d n o t b e c o m e e x t e r n a l i z e d i n t a n g i -
ble f o r m . Since all are t h i n k i n g o f an a n i m a l o r p l a n t t o w h o s e destinies the
clan is allied, this t h i n k i n g i n c o m m o n is i n e v i t a b l y manifested o u t w a r d l y b y
m o v e m e n t s , a n d the ones m o s t singled o u t f o r this role are those that repre-
sent the a n i m a l o r p l a n t i n o n e o f its m o s t characteristic f o r m s . T h e r e are n o
m o v e m e n t s that as closely resemble t h e idea that fills consciousnesses at that
m o m e n t , since t h e y are its d i r e c t a n d almost a u t o m a t i c translation. T h e p e o -
ple d o t h e i r best t o i m i t a t e t h e a n i m a l ; t h e y c r y o u t l i k e i t ; they j u m p l i k e
it; t h e y m i m i c the settings i n w h i c h the p l a n t is dady used. A l l o f these
processes o f representation are so m a n y ways o f o u t w a r d l y m a r k i n g the goal
to w h i c h everyone aspires a n d o f saying, c a l l i n g o n , a n d i m a g i n i n g the t h i n g
2 3
they w a n t t o b r i n g a b o u t . N o r is this t h e n e e d o f any o n e era o r caused b y
the beliefs o f any o n e r e l i g i o n . I t is quintessentialfy h u m a n . T h i s is w h y , even
i n r e l i g i o n s v e r y different from the o n e w e are s t u d y i n g , once, the faithful are
gathered t o g e t h e r t o ask t h e i r gods f o r an o u t c o m e that t h e y f e r v e n t l y desire,
they are v i r t u a l l y c o m p e l l e d t o d e p i c t i t . T o be sure, speech is o n e means o f
expressing i t , b u t m o v e m e n t is n o less n a t u r a l . S p r i n g i n g from t h e b o d y j u s t
as spontaneously, i t comes even before speech or, i n any case, at the same
time.
B u t even i f w e can thus u n d e r s t a n d h o w these m o v e m e n t s f o u n d t h e i r
w a y i n t o t h e ceremony, w e m u s t still e x p l a i n the p o w e r that is ascribed t o
t h e m . I f the A u s t r a l i a n repeats t h e m r e g u l a r l y at each n e w season, i t is b e -
cause he t h i n k s t h e y are r e q u i r e d f o r t h e success o f the r i t e . W h e r e c o u l d he
have g o t t e n the idea that i m i t a t i n g an a n i m a l makes i t reproduce?
S u c h an o b v i o u s e r r o r seems barely i n t e l l i g i b l e so l o n g as w e see i n the
r i t e o n l y t h e physical p u r p o s e i t apparendy has. B u t w e k n o w that apart from
its p r e s u m e d effect o n the t o t e m i c species, i t has a p r o f o u n d i n f l u e n c e o n t h e
souls o f t h e faithful w h o take part. T h e faithful c o m e away from i t w i t h an
impression o f w e l l - b e i n g w h o s e causes t h e y d o n o t see clearly b u t that is w e l l
f o u n d e d . T h e y feel that t h e c e r e m o n y is g o o d f o r t h e m ; a n d i n i t t h e y d o i n -
deed remake t h e i r m o r a l b e i n g . H o w w o u l d this k i n d o f e u p h o r i a n o t m a k e
t h e m feel that the r i t e has succeeded, t h a t i t actually was w h a t i t set o u t t o
be, that i t achieved its i n t e n d e d goal? A n d since t h e r e p r o d u c t i o n o f the
t o t e m i c species is t h e o n l y g o a l that is consciously p u r s u e d , i t seems t o be
achieved b y the m e t h o d s used, t h e efficacy o f w h i c h stands thereby d e m o n -
strated. I n this way, m e n came t o ascribe creative v i r t u e s t o m o v e m e n t s that

"On the causes of this outward manifestation, see above, pp. 23Iff.
364 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

are e m p t y i n themselves. T h e p o w e r o f the r i t e over m i n d s , * w h i c h is real,

m a d e t h e m believe i n its p o w e r over things, w h i c h is i m a g i n a r y ; the efficacy
o f the w h o l e l e d m e n t o believe i n that o f each part, taken separately. T h e
g e n u i n e l y useful effects b r o u g h t a b o u t b y the c e r e m o n y as a w h o l e are t a n -
t a m o u n t t o an e x p e r i m e n t a l j u s t i f i c a t i o n o f the e l e m e n t a r y practices that
c o m p r i s e i t , t h o u g h i n reality all these practices are i n n o w a y indispensable
t o its success. M o r e o v e r , the fact that t h e y can be replaced b y others o f a v e r y
different nature, w i t h o u t change i n the final result, proves that they d o n o t
act b y themselves. I n d e e d , i t seems there are I n t i c h i u m a s m a d e u p o f offer-
ings o n l y a n d w i t h o u t m i m e t i c rites; others are p u r e l y m i m e t i c and w i t h o u t
offerings. Nevertheless, b o t h are t h o u g h t t o be equally efficacious. T h u s i f
value is attached t o these various m a n i p u l a t i o n s , i t is n o t because o f value i n -
trinsic t o t h e m b u t because t h e y are p a r t o f a c o m p l e x r i t e w h o s e overall u t i l -
i t y is felt.
W e can u n d e r s t a n d that w a y o f t h i n k i n g all the m o r e easily since w e can
observe i t i n o u r m i d s t . Especially a m o n g the m o s t c u l t i v a t e d peoples and
m i l i e u x , w e o f t e n c o m e u p o n believers ^ [croyants] w h o , w h i l e h a v i n g doubts
a b o u t t h e specific p o w e r ascribed b y d o g m a t o each r i t e t a k e n separately,
nonetheless persist i n t h e i r religious practice. T h e y are n o t c e r t a i n t h a t the
details o f t h e p r e s c r i b e d observances can b e r a t i o n a l l y j u s t i f i e d , b u t t h e y feel
that i t w o u l d be impossible t o emancipate themselves from those w i t h o u t
f a l l i n g i n t o m o r a l disarray, from w h i c h t h e y r e c o i l . T h u s t h e v e r y fact that
f a i t h has lost its i n t e l l e c t u a l roots a m o n g t h e m reveals t h e p r o f o u n d causes
that u n d e r l i e i t . T h i s is w h y the faithful [fidèles] are i n general left i n d i f f e r e n t
b y the facile c r i t i c i s m s that a simplistic r a t i o n a l i s m has sometimes leveled
against r i t u a l p r e s c r i p t i o n s . T h e t r u e j u s t i f i c a t i o n o f r e l i g i o u s practices is n o t
i n the apparent ends t h e y pursue b u t i n t h e i r invisible i n f l u e n c e over c o n -
sciousnesses a n d i n t h e i r m a n n e r o f affecting o u r states o f m i n d . Sirnilarly,
w h e n preachers u n d e r t a k e t o m a k e a c o n v e r t , t h e y focus less u p o n d i r e c t l y
establishing, w i t h systematic evidence, the t r u t h o f some p a r t i c u l a r p r o p o s i -
tion o r the usefulness o f such a n d such observance, t h a n u p o n a w a k e n i n g o r
r e a w a k e n i n g the sense o f m o r a l s u p p o r t that regular c e l e b r a t i o n o f the c u l t
provides. I n this way, t h e y create a p r e d i s p o s i t i o n t o w a r d b e l i e v i n g that goes
i n advance o f p r o o f , influences the i n t e l l e c t t o pass over the inadequacy o f

* L'efficacité morale du rite, qui est réelle, a fait croire à son efficacité physique, qui est imaginaire. . . . Here the
term "moral" refers to mind as opposed to matter.
tDurkheim here uses the term croyants in contrast with fidèles, used twice as often. Professor Douglas
Kibbee was kind enough to give me an exact count, plus the exact contexts, using his database searcher.
Personal communication, 4 May 1992.
The Positive Cult (Continued) 365

the l o g i c a l arguments, a n d leads i t t o go, as i f o n its o w n , b e y o n d t h e p r o p o -

sitions the preachers w a n t t o get i t t o accept. T h i s favorable prejudice, this
leap t o w a r d b e l i e v i n g , is precisely w h a t f a i t h is m a d e of; and i t is f a i t h that
gives the rites a u t h o r i t y i n t h e eyes o f the b e l i e v e r — n o m a t t e r w h o he is, the
C h r i s t i a n o r the A u s t r a l i a n . T h e C h r i s t i a n is s u p e r i o r o n l y i n his greater
awareness o f the psychic process from w h i c h b e l i e f results. H e k n o w s that sal-
v a t i o n comes " b y f a i t h alone."
Because such is the o r i g i n o f f a i t h , i t is i n a sense " i m p e r v i o u s t o e x p e r i -
24
ence." I f the p e r i o d i c failures o f the I n t i c h i u m a d o n o t shake t h e confidence
the A u s t r a l i a n has i n his r i t e , i t is because he holds w i t h all the strength o f his
soul t o those practices he comes t o f o r the p u r p o s e o f r e n e w i n g h i m s e l f p e -
riodically. H e c o u l d n o t possibly d e n y t h e m i n p r i n c i p l e w i t h o u t causing a
real upheaval o f his entire b e i n g , w h i c h resists. B u t h o w e v e r great that resis-
tance m i g h t be, i t does n o t radically distinguish the religious m e n t a l i t y from
the o t h e r f o r m s o f h u m a n mentality, even f r o m those o t h e r f o r m s that w e are
most i n t h e h a b i t o f o p p o s i n g t o i t . I n this regard, the m e n t a l i t y o f the savant
differs o n l y i n degree from the f o r e g o i n g . W h e n a scientific l a w has the a u -
t h o r i t y o f n u m e r o u s a n d v a r i e d e x p e r i m e n t s , t o reject i t t o o easdy u p o n d i s -
covery o f one single fact that seems t o c o n t r a d i c t i t is c o n t r a r y t o all m e t h o d .
I t is still necessary t o ensure that this fact has o n l y one i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a n d c a n -
n o t be a c c o u n t e d f o r w i t h o u t a b a n d o n i n g the p r o p o s i t i o n that seems dis-
credited. T h e A u s t r a l i a n does n o differendy w h e n he puts d o w n the failure o f
an I n t i c h i u m a t o e v i l d o i n g s o m e w h e r e , o r the abundance o f a harvest that
comes t o o s o o n t o some mystic I n t i c h i u m a celebrated i n t h e b e y o n d .
H e has even less g r o u n d s f o r d o u b t i n g his r i t e o n the strength o f a c o n -
trary fact, since its value is, o r seems t o be, established b y a larger n u m b e r o f
facts that a c c o r d w i t h i t . T o b e g i n w i t h , t h e m o r a l efficacy o f the c e r e m o n y
is real a n d d i r e c t l y felt b y all w h o take part; t h e r e i n is a constantly repeated
e x p e r i e n c e w h o s e i m p o r t n o c o n t r a d i c t o r y e x p e r i e n c e can w e a k e n . W h a t is
m o r e , physical efficacy itself finds at least apparent c o n f i r m a t i o n i n t h e results
o f objective o b s e r v a t i o n . I t is i n fact n o r m a l f o r the t o t e m i c species t o r e p r o -
duce itself regularly. T h u s , i n the great m a j o r i t y o f cases, e v e r y t h i n g happens
as i f the r i t u a l m o v e m e n t s t r u l y have b r o u g h t a b o u t t h e h o p e d - f o r results.
Failures are n o t the r u l e . N o t surprisingly, since the rites, especially the p e r i -
o d i c ones, d e m a n d o n l y that nature take its regular course, i t seems m o s t o f -
t e n t o o b e y t h e m . I n this way, i f the believer happens t o seem resistant t o
certain lessons from experience, he does so b y r e l y i n g o n o t h e r experiences

24
[Lucien] Lévy-Bruhl, Les Fonctions mentales dans les sociétés inférieures [Paris, F. Alcan, 1910],
pp. 61-68.
366 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

that seem t o h i m m o r e conclusive. T h e researcher does this m o r e m e t h o d i -

cally b u t acts n o differently.
2 5
T h u s m a g i c is n o t , as Frazer h e l d , a p r i m a r y d a t u m and religion only
its derivative. Q u i t e the contrary, t h e precepts o n w h i c h the magician's art
rests w e r e f o r m e d u n d e r t h e i n f l u e n c e o f religious ideas, a n d o n l y b y a sec-
o n d a r y e x t e n s i o n w e r e t h e y t u r n e d t o p u r e l y secular applications. Because all
the forces o f the universe w e r e c o n c e i v e d o n t h e m o d e l o f sacred forces, the
contagiousness i n h e r e n t i n t h e sacred forces was e x t e n d e d t o t h e m a l l , and i t
was believed that, u n d e r c e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s , all t h e properties o f bodies c o u l d
t r a n s m i t themselves contagiously. Similarly, o n c e the p r i n c i p l e that l i k e p r o -
duces l i k e t o o k f o r m t o satisfy d e f i n i t e r e l i g i o u s needs, i t became detached
from its r i t u a l o r i g i n s and, t h r o u g h a k i n d o f spontaneous generalization, b e -
26
came a l a w o f n a t u r e . T o c o m p r e h e n d these f u n d a m e n t a l a x i o m s o f magic,
w e m u s t resituate t h e m i n the r e l i g i o u s m i l i e u x i n w h i c h t h e y w e r e b o r n and
w h i c h alone p e r m i t s us t o a c c o u n t f o r t h e m . W h e n w e see those axioms as
t h e w o r k o f isolated i n d i v i d u a l s , l o n e magicians, w e w o n d e r h o w h u m a n
m i n d s i m a g i n e d t h e m , since n o t h i n g i n e x p e r i e n c e c o u l d have suggested or
v e r i f i e d t h e m . I n particular, w e c a n n o t u n d e r s t a n d h o w such a deceptive
craft c o u l d have abused men's trust f o r so l o n g . T h e p r o b l e m disappears i f the
faith m e n have i n m a g i c is o n l y a special case o f r e l i g i o u s f a i t h i n general, i f
i t is itself the p r o d u c t , o r at least t h e i n d i r e c t p r o d u c t , o f a collective effer-
vescence. I n o t h e r w o r d s , u s i n g the phrase " s y m p a t h e t i c m a g i c " t o denote
the c o l l e c t i o n o f practices j u s t discussed is n o t altogether i m p r o p e r . A l t h o u g h
there are sympathetic rites, t h e y are n o t p e c u l i a r t o m a g i c . N o t o n l y are they
f o u n d i n r e l i g i o n as w e l l , b u t i t is f r o m r e l i g i o n that m a g i c received t h e m .
T h u s , all w e d o is c o u r t c o n f u s i o n i f , b y the n a m e w e give those rites, w e
seem t o m a k e t h e m o u t t o be s o m e t h i n g specifically m a g i c a l .
H e n c e t h e results o f m y analysis strongly resemble those H u b e r t and
27
Mauss o b t a i n e d w h e n t h e y studied m a g i c d i r e c t l y . T h e y s h o w e d magic
t o be s o m e t h i n g altogether different from c r u d e i n d u s t r y , based o n crude
science. T h e y have b r o u g h t t o l i g h t a w h o l e b a c k g r o u n d o f religious c o n -
ceptions that l i e b e h i n d t h e apparently secular mechanisms used b y t h e m a -

25
[James George Frazer], Golden Bough, 2d. ed. vol. I [London, Macmillan, 1894], pp. 69—75.
26
I do not mean to say that there was a time when religion existed without magic. Probably, as reli-
gion was formed, certain of its principles were extended to nonreligious relations, and in this way, a more
or less developed magic came to complement it. Even if these two systems of ideas and practices do not
correspond to distinct historical phases, nevertheless there is a definite relationship of derivation between
them. This is all I have set out to establish.
27
[Mauss and Hubert, Théorie générale de la magie], pp. 108ff. [Actually, pp. 131—187. Trans.]
The Positive Cult (Continued) 367

gician, a w h o l e w o r l d o f forces the idea o f w h i c h m a g i c t o o k f r o m r e l i g i o n .

W e can n o w see w h y m a g i c is so f u l l o f r e l i g i o u s elements: I t was b o r n o u t
o f religion.

Ill
T h e p r i n c i p l e j u s t e x p l a i n e d does n o t have a m e r e l y r i t u a l f u n c t i o n ; i t is o f
direct interest t o the t h e o r y o f k n o w l e d g e . I n effect, i t is a concrete statement
o f the l a w o f causality and, i n all l i k e l i h o o d , o n e o f the earliest statements o f
i t ever t o have existed. A f u l l - f l e d g e d n o t i o n o f the causal r e l a t i o n is i m p l i e d
i n the p o w e r thus a t t r i b u t e d t o " l i k e produces l i k e . " A n d because i t serves as
the basis o f c u l t practices as w e l l as the magician's t e c h n i q u e , this c o n c e p t i o n
bestrides p r i m i t i v e t h o u g h t . T h u s , the o r i g i n s o f the precept on which
m i m e t i c rites rest can e x p l a i n h o w the p r i n c i p l e o f causality o r i g i n a t e d . T h e
one s h o u l d h e l p us understand t h e other. I have j u s t s h o w n that the first arises
f r o m social causes. I t has b e e n fashioned b y groups w i t h collective ends i n
view, a n d c o l l e c t i v e feelings express i t . T h u s w e m a y presume that the same
is t r u e o f the second.
T o v e r i f y w h e t h e r this is i n d e e d the o r i g i n o f the elements f r o m w h i c h
the p r i n c i p l e o f causality is made, i t is e n o u g h t o analyze t h e p r i n c i p l e itself.
First a n d foremost, t h e idea o f causal r e l a t i o n i m p l i e s efficacy, effective
p o w e r , o r active force. W e usually understand "cause" t o m e a n " t h a t w h i c h
is able t o p r o d u c e a d e f i n i t e change." Cause is force before i t has manifested
the p o w e r that is i n i t . Effect is the same p o w e r , b u t actualized. H u m a n i t y has
always i m a g i n e d causality i n d y n a m i c t e r m s . T o be sure, some philosophers
deny this c o n c e p t i o n any objective basis; they see i t o n l y as an a r b i t r a r y c o n -
struct o f i m a g i n a t i o n that relates t o n o t h i n g i n things. F o r the m o m e n t , h o w -
ever, w e d o n o t have t o ask ourselves w h e t h e r i t has a basis i n reality; n o t i c i n g
that i t exists a n d that i t constitutes, a n d has always c o n s t i t u t e d , an e l e m e n t o f
o r d i n a r y t h o u g h t (as is a c k n o w l e d g e d even b y those w h o c r i t i c i z e i t ) is
e n o u g h . O u r i m m e d i a t e p u r p o s e is t o f i n d o u t n o t w h a t causality a m o u n t s
t o l o g i c a l l y b u t w h a t accounts f o r i t .
I t has social causes. T h e analysis o f the evidence has already p e r m i t t e d us
t o s h o w that, i n p r o t o t y p e , the idea o f force was mana, w a k a n , the t o t e m i c
p r i n c i p l e — v a r i o u s names g i v e n t o collective force o b j e c t i f i e d a n d p r o j e c t e d
28
into things. So the first p o w e r that m e n i m a g i n e d as such does i n d e e d ap-
pear t o have b e e n that w h i c h society exerts u p o n its m e m b e r s . Analysis later
c o n f i r m s this result o f observation. I n d e e d , i t is possible t o establish w h y this

28
See above, p. 205ff.
368 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

idea o f p o w e r , o f efficacy a n d o f active force, c o u l d n o t have c o m e t o us f r o m

a n y w h e r e else.
I t is o b v i o u s at first glance, a n d r e c o g n i z e d b y a l l , t h a t e x t e r n a l e x p e r i -
ence c a n n o t possibly g i v e us this idea. T h e senses s h o w us o n l y p h e n o m e n a
that coexist w i t h o r f o l l o w o n e another, b u t n o t h i n g t h e y perceive can give
us the idea o f that c o n s t r a i n i n g a n d d e t e r m i n a t i v e i n f l u e n c e that is character-
istic o f w h a t w e call a p o w e r o r a force. T h e senses take i n o n l y states that are
realized, achieved, a n d e x t e r n a l t o o n e another, w h i l e the i n t e r n a l process
that binds these states t o g e t h e r eludes the senses. N o t h i n g t h e y teach us can
possibly suggest t o us t h e idea o f s o m e t h i n g that is an i n f l u e n c e o r an efficacy
For j u s t this reason, t h e p h i l o s o p h e r s o f e m p i r i c i s m have seen these different
ideas as so m a n y m y t h o l o g i c a l aberrations. B u t even supposing that there was
n o t h i n g b u t h a l l u c i n a t i o n s i n all these, i t w o u l d still b e h o o v e us t o say h o w
they came t o be.
I f e x t e r n a l e x p e r i e n c e has n o p a r t i n the o r i g i n o f these ideas a n d i f , o n
the o t h e r h a n d , i t is inadmissible that t h e y s h o u l d have b e e n g i v e n us ready-
made, w e must assume that t h e y c o m e t o us f r o m i n t e r n a l experience. I n
fact, the idea o f force is o b v i o u s l y f u l l o f s p i r i t u a l elements that c o u l d o n l y
have b e e n b o r r o w e d f r o m o u r psychic life.
I t has o f t e n b e e n t h o u g h t that t h e act b y w h i c h o u r w i l l comes t o a de-
cision, holds o u r desires i n check, a n d rules o u r bodies c o u l d have served as
the m o d e l f o r this c o n s t r u c t i o n . I n an act o f w i l l , i t is said, w e d i r e c d y p e r -
ceive ourselves as a p o w e r i n a c t i o n . Seemingly, therefore, o n c e m a n came
u p o n that idea, e x t e n d i n g i t t o things was all i t t o o k f o r the c o n c e p t o f force
to c o m e i n t o b e i n g .
As l o n g as the a n i m i s t t h e o r y passed f o r d e m o n s t r a t e d t r u t h , that e x p l a -
n a t i o n c o u l d seem c o n f i r m e d b y history. I f t h e forces w i t h w h i c h h u m a n
t h o u g h t at first p o p u l a t e d the w o r l d really h a d b e e n s p i r i t s — t h a t is, personal
and conscious beings m o r e o r less l i k e m a n — w e m i g h t believe t h a t o u r i n d i -
v i d u a l e x p e r i e n c e was e n o u g h t o f u r n i s h us w i t h t h e elements f r o m w h i c h
the idea o f force is made. Instead, w e k n o w t h a t t h e first forces m e n i m a g -
i n e d are a n o n y m o u s , vague, diffuse forces, t h e i m p e r s o n a l i t y o f w h i c h re-
sembles cosmic forces, a n d w h i c h therefore stand i n the strongest contrast
w i t h t h e e m i n e n d y personal p o w e r that is t h e h u m a n w i l l . H e n c e t h e y c o u l d
n o t have b e e n c o n c e i v e d i n the i m a g e o f the w i l l .
M o r e o v e r , there is a f u n d a m e n t a l characteristic o f i m p e r s o n a l forces that
w o u l d be i n e x p l i c a b l e o n that hypothesis: t h e i r c o m m u n i c a b i l i t y . T h e forces
o f nature have always b e e n c o n c e i v e d o f as b e i n g able t o pass f r o m o n e o b -
j e c t i n t o another, t o m i n g l e a n d c o m b i n e w i t h o n e another, a n d t o change
i n t o o n e another. I n d e e d , that p r o p e r t y is w h a t gives t h e m e x p l a n a t o r y
The Positive Cult (Continued) 369

value. B y v i r t u e o f that p r o p e r t y , the effects can be j o i n e d t o t h e i r causes

w i t h o u t d i s c o n t i n u i t y . N o w , the " I " is exactly opposite i n character; i t is i n -
c o m m u n i c a b l e . I t c a n n o t change bases o r spread f r o m o n e t o another. I t
spreads i n o n l y a m e t a p h o r i c a l sense. T h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h i t arrives at a n d
carries o u t its decisions c a n n o t possibly suggest t o us the idea o f an energy
that is c o m m u n i c a t e d , that can even assimilate i n t o others and, t h r o u g h those
c o m b i n a t i o n s a n d m i x t u r e s , give b i r t h t o n e w effects.
T h u s , as i m p l i e d i n the causal r e l a t i o n , the idea o f force m u s t have a
t w o f o l d character. First, i t can c o m e t o us o n l y f r o m o u r i n w a r d experience;
the o n l y forces w e can t o u c h d i r e c t l y are o f necessity m o r a l forces. A t the
same t i m e , h o w e v e r , t h e y m u s t also be i m p e r s o n a l , since the idea o f i m -
personal p o w e r was c o n s t i t u t e d first. N o w , t h e o n l y forces that satisfy this
t w o f o l d c o n d i t i o n are those that arise from life i n c o m m o n : collective forces.
I n actuality, t h e y are o n the o n e h a n d w h o l l y psychic, m a d e exclusively o f
objectified ideas a n d feelings, a n d o n the o t h e r h a n d , t h e y are b y d e f i n i t i o n
i m p e r s o n a l , since t h e y are t h e p r o d u c t o f c o o p e r a t i o n . B e i n g the w o r k o f all,
they are the p r o p e r t y o f n o o n e i n particular. So l i t d e d o they b e l o n g t o the
personalities o f the subjects i n w h i c h t h e y reside that t h e y are never f i x e d
there. Just as they enter subjects from outside, so are t h e y always ready t o d e -
tach themselves from those subjects. T h e y have a spontaneous t e n d e n c y t o
spread f u r t h e r a n d invade n e w d o m a i n s . As w e k n o w , n o n e are m o r e c o n t a -
gious a n d hence m o r e c o m m u n i c a b l e .
G r a n t e d , physical forces have t h e same p r o p e r t y , b u t w e c a n n o t have d i -
rect consciousness o f t h e m . Because t h e y are e x t e r n a l t o us, w e c a n n o t even
apprehend t h e m as such. W h e n I r u n against an obstacle, I have a sensation
o f c o n f i n e m e n t a n d d i s c o m f o r t ; however, the force causing that sensation is
n o t i n m e b u t i n the obstacle a n d thus b e y o n d t h e range o f m y p e r c e p t i o n .
W e perceive its effects b u t n o t the force itself. T h i s is n o t the case w i t h social
forces. Since t h e y are part o f o u r i n t e r i o r life, w e n o t o n l y k n o w the results
o f t h e i r a c t i o n b u t see t h e m i n a c t i o n . T h e force t h a t isolates t h e sacred b e -
i n g a n d holds the profane ones at a distance is, i n reality, n o t i n that b e i n g ; i t
lives i n the consciousness o f t h e faithful. T h u s the faithful feel i t at t h e v e r y
m o m e n t that i t acts o n t h e i r w i l l s t o p r o h i b i t c e r t a i n actions a n d prescribe
others. Because this happens e n t i r e l y w i t h i n us, w e capture i n a c t i o n the
c o n s t r a i n i n g a n d necessitating i n f l u e n c e that escapes us w h e n i t comes from
an e x t e r n a l t h i n g . O f course, w e d o n o t always i n t e r p r e t t h a t i n f l u e n c e ade-
quately, b u t w e c a n n o t fail t o be conscious o f i t .
F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e idea o f force bears the m a r k o f its o r i g i n overtly. I t i n
fact entails an idea o f p o w e r that does n o t g o w i t h o u t those o f ascendancy,
mastery, d o m i n a t i o n — a n d , c o r r e s p o n d i n g l y , o f d e p e n d e n c e a n d s u b o r d i n a -
370 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

tion. T h e relations that all these ideas express are e m i n e n t l y social. I t is soci-
ety that has classified beings as s u p e r i o r a n d subordinate, as masters w h o
c o m m a n d a n d subjects w h o obey; i t is society that has c o n f e r r e d o n the first
that singular p r o p e r t y that makes c o m m a n d efficacious a n d that constitutes
power. So e v e r y t h i n g tends t o s h o w that the first p o w e r s t h e h u m a n m i n d
c o n c e i v e d are those that societies i n s t i t u t e d as t h e y became organized. I t is i n
t h e i r i m a g e that the powers o f the physical w o r l d w e r e c o n c e i v e d . T h u s man
c o u l d n o t have a r r i v e d at the idea o f h i m s e l f as a force i n charge o f the b o d y
i n w h i c h i t resides w i t h o u t i n t r o d u c i n g concepts b o r r o w e d f r o m social life
i n t o t h e idea he h a d o f himself. I n fact, he h a d t o differentiate h i m s e l f from
his physical d o u b l e a n d i m p u t e a h i g h e r sort o f d i g n i t y t o h i m s e l f t h a n t o this
d o u b l e — i n a w o r d , h e h a d t o t h i n k o f h i m s e l f as a soul. I n fact, i t is i n the
f o r m o f t h e soul that h e has always i m a g i n e d t h e force that he believes he is.
B u t w e k n o w that the soul is s o m e t h i n g altogether different f r o m a name
g i v e n t o the abstract faculty t o m o v e , t h i n k , o r feel. A b o v e a l l , i t is a religious
p r i n c i p l e , a p a r t i c u l a r aspect o f t h e c o l l e c t i v e force. I n s u m , m a n feels he is a
soul, a n d thus a force, because he is a social b e i n g . A l t h o u g h an a n i m a l moves
its legs j u s t as w e d o a n d has the same c o n t r o l over his muscles as w e , n o t h -
i n g warrants o u r supposing that he has consciousness o f h i m s e l f as o f an ac-
tive a n d efficient cause. T h i s is because i t has n o s o u l — o r , m o r e precisely, i t
does n o t i m p u t e a s o u l t o itself. B u t i f i t does n o t i m p u t e a s o u l t o itself, this
is because i t does n o t p a r t i c i p a t e i n a social life comparable t o that o f m e n .
29
A m o n g animals, n o t h i n g r e s e m b l i n g a c i v i l i z a t i o n exists.
T h e idea o f force is n o t all there is t o the p r i n c i p l e o f causality. T h i s p r i n -
ciple consists i n a j u d g m e n t stating that a force develops i n a d e f i n i t e manner
and that its state at each m o m e n t o f its e v o l u t i o n p r e d e t e r m i n e s the succeed-
i n g state. T h e first is called cause; t h e second, effect; a n d t h e causal j u d g m e n t
affirms the existence o f a necessary c o n j u n c t i o n b e t w e e n these t w o m o m e n t s
o f any force. R u l e d b y a sort o f constraint from w h i c h i t c a n n o t free itself,
the m i n d sets u p this r e l a t i o n i n advance o f any p r o o f . I t postulates this rela-
t i o n s h i p , as p e o p l e say, a priori.
E m p i r i c i s m has never succeeded i n g i v i n g an a c c o u n t o f that a p r i o r i s m
a n d that necessity. N e v e r have t h e p h i l o s o p h e r s o f that s c h o o l b e e n able to
e x p l a i n h o w an association o f ideas r e i n f o r c e d b y h a b i t c o u l d p r o d u c e any-
t h i n g o t h e r t h a n a state o f expectancy, a m o r e o r less s t r o n g p r e d i s p o s i t i o n o n
the p a r t o f ideas t o call themselves t o m i n d i n a d e f i n i t e order. N o w , the

w
O f course, there are animal societies. Even so, the meaning of the word is by no means the same
when applied to men and animals. The institution is the characteristic phenomenon of human societies;
there are no institutions in animal societies.
The Positive Cult (Continued) 371

p r i n c i p l e o f causality has an e n t i r e l y different character. I t is n o t s i m p l y an i n -

herent t e n d e n c y f o r o u r t h o u g h t t o u n f o l d i n a c e r t a i n w a y ; i t is a n o r m e x -
ternal a n d s u p e r i o r t o the flow o f o u r representations, w h i c h i t rules a n d
regulates absolutely. I t is e n d o w e d w i t h an a u t h o r i t y that binds the i n t e l l e c t
and goes b e y o n d the i n t e l l e c t ; i n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e i n t e l l e c t is n o t its creator.
I n this regard, i t does n o g o o d t o substitute h e r e d i t a r y f o r i n d i v i d u a l habit.
T h e nature o f habit does n o t change because i t lasts l o n g e r t h a n a man's life;
it is o n l y stronger. A n i n s t i n c t is n o t a r u l e .
T h e rites j u s t studied enable us t o discern a source o f that a u t h o r i t y that
u n t i l n o w has b e e n l i t t l e suspected. L e t us recall h o w the causal l a w that the
m i m e t i c rites p u t i n t o practice was b o r n . T h e g r o u p comes together, d o m i -
nated b y one c o n c e r n : I f the species w h o s e name i t bears does n o t reproduce,
the clan is d o o m e d . I n this way, the c o m m o n feeling that animates all its
members is expressed o u t w a r d l y i n the f o r m o f d e f i n i t e m o v e m e n t s that a l -
ways recur i n the same w a y i n the same circumstances. A n d for the reasons set
f o r t h , i t t u r n s o u t that the desired result seems t o be o b t a i n e d w h e n the cer-
e m o n y has b e e n c o n d u c t e d . A n association is thereby f o r m e d b e t w e e n the
idea o f this result a n d that o f the actions p r e c e d i n g i t . T h i s association does
n o t v a r y from o n e subject t o the other. Because i t is the p r o d u c t o f a c o l l e c -
tive experience, i t is the same f o r all w h o take p a r t i n the r i t e . Nonetheless, i f
n o o t h e r factor i n t e r v e n e d , o n l y a collective state o f w a i t i n g w o u l d result.
H a v i n g c o m p l e t e d the i m i t a t i v e m o v e m e n t s , everyone w o u l d w a i t , m o r e o r
less c o n f i d e n t l y , t o see the i m m i n e n t approach o f the h o p e d - f o r event. E v e n
so, an i m p e r a t i v e r u l e o f t h o u g h t w o u l d n o t c o m e i n t o b e i n g .
Because a social interest o f p r e m i e r i m p o r t a n c e is at stake, society c a n n o t
let things take t h e i r course, at t h e m e r c y o f circumstances; hence i t intervenes
t o regulate t h e i r course t o suit its needs. Society requires this ceremony,
w h i c h i t c a n n o t d o w i t h o u t , t o be repeated w h e n e v e r necessary and, hence,
the actions that are the c o n d i t i o n o f success t o be r e g u l a r l y done. I t imposes
t h e m as an o b l i g a t i o n . T h o s e actions i m p l y a d e f i n i t e attitude o f m i n d that,
i n response, shares the same q u a l i t y o f o b l i g a t i o n . T o prescribe that t h e a n i -
m a l o r p l a n t m u s t be i m i t a t e d t o m a k e t h e m c o m e t o life again is t o m a k e
" l i k e produces l i k e " i n t o an a x i o m that m u s t n o t be d o u b t e d . O p i n i o n c a n -
n o t p e r m i t i n d i v i d u a l s t o d e n y this p r i n c i p l e i n t h e o r y , w i t h o u t at the same
t i m e p e r m i t t i n g t h e m t o v i o l a t e i t i n t h e i r c o n d u c t . I t therefore imposes the
p r i n c i p l e , as i t does the practices that d e r i v e f r o m i t , a n d i n this w a y the
r i t u a l precept is r e i n f o r c e d b y a l o g i c a l p r i n c i p l e that is n o n e o t h e r t h a n
the i n t e l l e c t u a l aspect o f the r i t u a l one. T h e a u t h o r i t y o f b o t h derives f r o m
the same source: society. T h e respect e v o k e d b y society passes i n t o those
ways o f t h i n k i n g a n d a c t i n g t o w h i c h i t attaches value. O n e c a n n o t stand
372 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

aside f r o m e i t h e r w i t h o u t m e e t i n g resistance f r o m p r e v a i l i n g o p i n i o n . T h i s is
w h y the ways o f t h i n k i n g r e q u i r e the adherence o f the i n t e l l e c t i n advance o f
all e x a m i n a t i o n , j u s t as t h e ways o f a c t i n g d i r e c t l y b r i n g a b o u t t h e submission
o f the w i l l .
U s i n g this example, w e can test o n c e again h o w a s o c i o l o g i c a l t h e o r y o f
the idea o f causality, a n d t h e categories m o r e generally, b o t h diverges f r o m
t h e classical d o c t r i n e s o n this q u e s t i o n a n d accords w i t h t h e m . H e r e , as i n
a p r i o r i s m , causality retains the a priori a n d necessary character o f the causal
r e l a t i o n . T h e s o c i o l o g i c a l t h e o r y does n o t s i m p l y a f f i r m i t b u t also accounts
for i t a n d yet does n o t , as i n e m p i r i c i s m , m a k e i t disappear w h d e ostensibly
a c c o u n t i n g f o r i t . Besides, there can be n o q u e s t i o n o f d e n y i n g the p a r t that
belongs t o i n d i v i d u a l experience. T h a t the i n d i v i d u a l b y h i m s e l f notes r e g u -
lar sequences o f p h e n o m e n a , a n d i n so d o i n g acquires a c e r t a i n sensation o f
regularity, is n o t t o be d o u b t e d . B u t this sensation is n o t t h e category o f causal-
ity. T h e first is i n d i v i d u a l , subjective, a n d i n c o m m u n i c a b l e ; w e make i t o u r -
selves from o u r personal observations. T h e second is t h e w o r k o f the
collectivity, w h i c h gives i t t o us ready-made. I t is a framework i n w h i c h o u r
e m p i r i c a l observations arrange themselves a n d w h i c h enables us t o t h i n k
a b o u t t h e m — t h a t is, t o see t h e m from an angle that enables us t o understand
o n e a n o t h e r o n the subject o f those observations. T o be sure, i f the frame-
w o r k can be a p p l i e d t o the c o n t e n t , that is because i t is n o t w i t h o u t rela-
t i o n s h i p t o that c o n t e n t , b u t the f r a m e w o r k does n o t m e r g e w i t h w h a t i t
contains. I t transcends a n d d o m i n a t e s t h e c o n t e n t because i t has a different
o r i g i n . I t is n o t s i m p l y a c o l l e c t i o n o f i n d i v i d u a l m e m o r i e s ; i t is made, first
a n d foremost, t o satisfy the needs o f life i n c o m m o n .
I n s u m , the mistake o f e m p i r i c i s m has b e e n t o see the causal tie as o n l y a
l e a r n e d c o n s t r u c t o f speculative t h i n k i n g a n d the p r o d u c t o f a m o r e o r less
systematic generalization. Pure speculation can give b i r t h o n l y t o v i e w s that
are p r o v i s i o n a l , h y p o t h e t i c a l , a n d m o r e o r less plausible, b u t v i e w s that must
always be regarded as suspect. W e d o n o t k n o w w h e t h e r some n e w observa-
t i o n w i l l invalidate t h e m i n t h e near future. T h e r e f o r e an a x i o m that t h e m i n d
does and m u s t accept, w i t h o u t testing a n d w i t h o u t q u a l i f i c a t i o n , cannot
c o m e t o us f r o m that source. T h e demands o f a c t i o n , especially o f collective
a c t i o n , can and m u s t express themselves i n categorical formulas that are
p e r e m p t o r y a n d sharp a n d that b r o o k n o c o n t r a d i c t i o n , f o r collective m o v e -
ments are possible o n l y i f t h e y are c o n c e r t e d , a n d thus regulated and w e l l de-
fined. T h e y preclude b l i n d g r o p i n g , w h i c h is the source o f anarchy. T h e y
t e n d b y themselves t o w a r d an o r g a n i z a t i o n that, o n c e established, imposes i t -
self u p o n i n d i v i d u a l s . A n d since a c t i o n c a n n o t d o w i t h o u t t h e i n t e l l e c t , the
i n t e l l e c t is eventually p u l l e d a l o n g i n the same way, a d o p t i n g w i t h o u t a r g u -
The Positive Cult (Continued) 373

m e n t the theoretical postulates that practice requires. T h e imperatives o f

t h o u g h t a n d those o f the w i l l are p r o b a b l y t w o sides o f the same c o i n .
I t is far from m y i n t e n t i o n , h o w e v e r , t o offer these observations as a
c o m p l e t e t h e o r y o f the c o n c e p t o f causality. T h a t issue is t o o c o m p l e x t o be
resolved i n this way. T h e p r i n c i p l e o f cause has b e e n u n d e r s t o o d differendy
i n different times a n d places; i n a single society i t varies w i t h social m i l i e u x ,
30
and w i t h t h e realms o f nature t o w h i c h i t is a p p l i e d . Therefore, one cannot
possibly d e t e r m i n e w h a t causes a n d c o n d i t i o n s he b e h i n d i t after c o n s i d e r i n g
o n l y o n e o f t h e f o r m s i t has taken historically. T h e v i e w s that have j u s t b e e n
set f o r t h m u s t be regarded o n l y as i n d i c a t i v e ; t h e y w i l l have t o be tested and
fleshed o u t . Nonetheless, since t h e causal l a w j u s t considered is surely o n e o f
the m o s t p r i m i t i v e i n existence a n d since i t has played an i m p o r t a n t role i n
the d e v e l o p m e n t o f h u m a n t h o u g h t a n d industry, i t constitutes a c h o i c e e x -
p e r i m e n t , a n d so i t can be p r e s u m e d that the observations i t has a l l o w e d us
to m a k e are i n s o m e measure generalizable.

30
The idea of cause is not the same for a scientist as for a man who is scientifically uneducated. Be-
sides, many of our contemporaries understand the principle of causality differendy depending on the phe-
nomena to which it is applied—social or physicochemical. In the social realm, there is an idea of causality
that is extraordinarily reminiscent of the one on which magic was based for so long. We might well ask
ourselves whether a physicist and a biologist imagine the causal relation in the same fashion.
 CHAPTER FOUR

THE POSITIVE CULT

(CONTINUED)
Representative or Commemorative Rites

I n the t w o p r e c e d i n g chapters, the e x p l a n a t i o n o f the positive rites that I

offered ascribes t o t h e m m o r a l a n d social m e a n i n g , first a n d foremost. T h e
physical efficacy ascribed t o t h e m b y t h e f a i t h f u l is an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n that
hides t h e i r f u n d a m e n t a l reason f o r b e i n g : T h e y are d e e m e d t o have an effect
o n things because t h e y serve t o r e m a k e i n d i v i d u a l s a n d groups m o r a l l y . T h i s
hypothesis enabled m e t o a c c o u n t f o r t h e facts, b u t i t c a n n o t be said t o have
b e e n p r o v e d directly. I n d e e d , i t seems at first glance t o j i b e rather p o o r l y w i t h
t h e nature o f the r i t u a l mechanisms I have analyzed. W h e t h e r these m e c h a -
nisms be offerings o r m i m e t i c practices, the actions that c o n s t i t u t e t h e m have
p u r e l y physical ends i n v i e w . T h e i r sole p u r p o s e is o r seems t o be t o i n d u c e
the r e b i r t h o f t h e t o t e m i c species. I n that case, is i t n o t s u r p r i s i n g that t h e i r
real f u n c t i o n s h o u l d be t o serve m o r a l ends?
I t is t r u e that t h e i r physical f u n c t i o n m a y v e r y w e l l have b e e n exagger-
ated b y Spencer a n d G i l l e n , even i n t h e cases w h e r e i t is m o s t clearly i n c o n -
testable. I n the v i e w o f those authors, each clan celebrates its I n t i c h i u m a i n
o r d e r t o p r o v i d e a useful f o o d s t u f f t o the o t h e r clans. T h e w h o l e c u l t sup-
posedly involves a k i n d o f e c o n o m i c c o o p e r a t i o n a m o n g different t o t e m i c
groups, each supposedly w o r k i n g f o r all the rest. B u t , a c c o r d i n g t o Strehlow,
this n o t i o n o f A u s t r a l i a n t o t e m i s m is u t t e r l y f o r e i g n t o the native m e n t a l i t y .
H e says: " I f , w h d e d o i n g t h e i r u t m o s t t o m u l t i p l y t h e animals o r plants o f the
consecrated species, t h e m e m b e r s o f a t o t e m i c g r o u p seem t o be w o r k i n g f o r
t h e i r f e l l o w m e n o f o t h e r totems, w e m u s t refrain f r o m seeing this c o l l a b o r a -
tion as the f u n d a m e n t a l p r i n c i p l e o f A r u n t a o r L o r i t j a t o t e m i s m . N e v e r have
the black m e n themselves t o l d m e that t h e p o i n t o f t h e i r ceremonies was any
such t h i n g . O f course, w h e n I suggested this idea t o t h e m a n d e x p l a i n e d i t ,
they u n d e r s t o o d a n d w e n t a l o n g . B u t n o o n e w i l l b l a m e m e i f I have a cer-

374
The Positive Cult (Continued) 375

t a i n m i s t r u s t f o r responses o b t a i n e d u n d e r these c o n d i t i o n s . " S t r e h l o w o b -

serves, f u r t h e r m o r e , that this w a y o f i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e r i t e is c o n t r a d i c t e d b y
the fact that t h e t o t e m i c animals o r plants are n o t all edible o r useful; some
have n o use, a n d i n d e e d some are dangerous. T h u s t h e ceremonies that c o n -
1
c e r n t h e m c a n n o t have n u t r i t i o n a l ends i n v i e w .
O u r a u t h o r concludes: " W h e n the natives are asked the decisive reason
for these ceremonies, t h e y r e p l y u n a n i m o u s l y : I t is because t h e ancestors
have so i n s t i t u t e d t h i n g s . T h a t is w h y w e act i n this w a y a n d n o t some
2
o t h e r . " B u t t o say that t h e r i t e is observed because i t comes from the ances-
tors is t o a c k n o w l e d g e that its a u t h o r i t y is o n e a n d the same as the a u t h o r i t y
o f t r a d i t i o n , w h i c h is e m i n e n d y a social t h i n g . I t is celebrated t o keep f a i t h
w i t h t h e past a n d preserve the group's m o r a l * i d e n t i t y , n o t because o f the
physical effects i t can b r i n g about. T h u s , its p r o f o u n d causes can b e g l i m p s e d
t h r o u g h the v e r y m a n n e r i n w h i c h t h e f a i t h f u l e x p l a i n i t .
T h e r e are cases i n w h i c h this aspect o f t h e ceremonies is i m m e d i a t e l y
obvious.

I
3
T h i s aspect o f t h e ceremonies is best observed a m o n g the W a r r a m u n g a .
A m o n g this people, each clan is h e l d t o b e descended from a single ancestor
w h o , a l t h o u g h b o r n i n a d e f i n i t e place, spent his life o n earth t r a v e l i n g the
c o u n t r y i n all d i r e c t i o n s . H e i t is w h o gave the l a n d its present f o r m d u r i n g
those travels, t h e y say, and he w h o made the m o u n t a i n s and the plains, the
w a t e r holes a n d the streams, a n d so f o r t h . A t the same t i m e , a l o n g his r o u t e
he s o w e d t h e seeds o f life that came f o r t h from his b o d y and, t h r o u g h
successive reincarnations, became t h e present-day m e m b e r s o f the clan. T h e

"•Note the term "moral," here used in the sense that encompasses conscience collective in its cognitive and
normative meanings.
'Of course, these ceremonies are not followed by alimentary communion. According to Strehlow,
they have a distinct generic name, at least when they involve inedible plants: They are called knujilelama,
not mbatjalkatiuma. ([Carl Strehlow, Die Aranda- und Loritja-Stamme in Zentral-Australien] vol. Ill [Frank-
furt,.!. Baer, 1907], p. 96).
2
Ibid., p. 8.
3
The Warramunga are not the only people among whom the Intichiuma takes the form I will de-
scribe. It is also found among the Tjingilli, the Umbaia, the Wulmala, the Walpari, and even the Kaitish,
although the Kaitish ritual is in some ways reminiscent of the Arunta one ([Sir Baldwin] Spencer and
[Francis James] Gillen, Northern Tribes [of Central Australia, London, Macmillan, 1904], pp. 291, 309, 311,
317). I adopt the Warramunga as the type case because they have been very well studied by Spencer and
Gillen.
376 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

p u r p o s e o f the W a r r a m u n g a ceremony, w h i c h corresponds exactly t o the I n -

t i c h i u m a o f t h e A r u n t a , is t o d e p i c t a n d c o m m e m o r a t e the m y t h i c a l h i s t o r y
o f the ancestor. I t involves n e i t h e r sacrifice n o r , w i t h o n l y a single excep-
4
t i o n , m i m e t i c practices. T h e r i t e involves r e m e m b e r i n g t h e past and m a k i n g
i t present, so t o speak, b y means o f a t r u e dramatic p e r f o r m a n c e [représenta-
tion]. T h i s t e r m is a l l the m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e i n the present case, since t h e c e l -
ebrant is b y n o means v i e w e d as an i n c a r n a t i o n o f the ancestor he represents.
H e is an actor p l a y i n g a role.
H e r e , as an example, is w h a t the I n t i c h i u m a o f t h e B l a c k Snake consists
5
of, as observed b y Spencer a n d G i l l e n .
T h e i n i t i a l c e r e m o n y does n o t seem t o refer t o the past; at least, t h e d e -
s c r i p t i o n g i v e n us does n o t j u s t i f y such an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . I t consists o f r u n -
6
n i n g and j u m p i n g b y t w o celebrants a d o r n e d w i t h figures that represent the
black snake. W h e n b o t h at last fall exhausted t o t h e g r o u n d , those i n a t t e n -
dance r u n t h e i r hands g e n d y over the e m b l e m a t i c designs that cover the
backs o f t h e t w o actors. T h i s gesture is said t o please the b l a c k snake. O n l y
after that does the series o f c o m m e m o r a t i v e rites b e g i n .
T h e y act o u t the m y t h i c a l h i s t o r y o f the ancestor, Thalaualla, from the
m o m e n t he came o u t o f the g r o u n d t o t h e m o m e n t he finally disappeared
i n t o i t again. T h e y f o l l o w h i m t h r o u g h all his travels. A c c o r d i n g t o the m y t h ,
he c o n d u c t e d t o t e m i c ceremonies i n each o f t h e localities w h e r e he so-
j o u r n e d . These are repeated i n the same o r d e r i n w h i c h t h e y are said t o have
taken place at the b e g i n n i n g . T h e m o v e m e n t that recurs m o s t frequently is a
sort o f r h y t h m i c a n d v i o l e n t t r e m b l i n g o f t h e e n t i r e b o d y because, i n m y t h -
ical times, t h e ancestor s h o o k h i m s e l f i n this w a y t o b r i n g o u t t h e seeds o f life
w i t h i n h i m . T h e actors have t h e i r s k i n covered w i t h d o w n that comes o f f a n d
flies away as a result o f this shaking. T h i s is a means o f d e p i c t i n g the flight o f
the m y s t i c a l seeds a n d t h e i r dispersion i n t h e air.
W e recall that a m o n g the A r u n t a , the place w h e r e t h e c e r e m o n y occurs
is r i t u a l l y d e t e r m i n e d . I t is t h e site o f the sacred rocks, trees, a n d w a t e r holes,
a n d the faithful m u s t g o there t o celebrate t h e c u l t . A m o n g t h e W a r r a m u n g a ,
t h o u g h , the c h o i c e o f site is a r b i t r a r y a n d a m a t t e r o f convenience. T h e i r s is
a c o n v e n t i o n a l stage. T h e actual place w h e r e t h e events that are the t h e m e o f
the r i t e o c c u r r e d is represented b y d r a w i n g s . S o m e t i m e s these drawings are

This is true for the Intichiuma of the white cockatoo; see p. 357 above.
5
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 300fF.
6
One of the two actors does not belong to the Black Snake clan but to the Crow. This is because the
Crow is considered an associate of the Black Snake—in other words, its subtotem.
The Positive Cult (Continued) 377

made o n the bodies o f t h e actors themselves. F o r example, a small circle c o l -

o r e d i n w i t h r e d a n d p a i n t e d o n the b a c k a n d s t o m a c h represents a w a t e r
7
h o l e . I n o t h e r examples, t h e i m a g e is traced i n t h e d i r t . O n g r o u n d p r e v i -
ously d a m p e n e d a n d covered w i t h r e d ochre, t h e y m a k e c u r v e d lines f r o m a
series o f w h i t e p o i n t s , s y m b o l i z i n g a stream o r a m o u n t a i n . T h i s is a r u d i -
m e n t a r y t h e a t r i c a l set.
I n a d d i t i o n t o the s t r i c t l y r e l i g i o u s ceremonies that the ancestor is said to
have c o n d u c t e d i n the past, s i m p l e epic o r c o m i c episodes o f Thalaualla's
earthly career are presented. T h u s , at a c e r t a i n m o m e n t , w h i l e three actors
are busy o n stage w i t h an i m p o r t a n t r i t e , a n o t h e r hides b e h i n d a c l u m p o f
trees some distance away. H u n g a r o u n d his n e c k is a packet o f d o w n r e p r e -
senting a wallaby. As s o o n as the m a i n c e r e m o n y has ended, an o l d m a n traces
o n t h e g r o u n d a l i n e that leads t o t h e place w h e r e a f o u r t h actor is h i d i n g .
T h e others w a l k b e h i n d , w i t h t h e i r eyes l o w e r e d a n d f i x e d u p o n this l i n e as
i f t h e y are f o l l o w i n g a p a t h . W h e n t h e y discover t h e m a n , they act surprised,
a n d o n e o f t h e m beats h i m w i t h a stick. T h i s e n t i r e m i m i c r y portrays an i n -
c i d e n t i n the life o f the great b l a c k snake. O n e day, his son w e n t o f f t o h u n t
alone, bagged a wallaby, a n d ate i t w i t h o u t g i v i n g any t o his father. T h e fa-
t h e r f o l l o w e d his tracks, surprised h i m , a n d f o r c e d h i m t o v o m i t . T h i s i n c i -
8
d e n t is a l l u d e d t o i n t h e b e a t i n g that ends t h e p e r f o r m a n c e .
I w i l l n o t state here all the m y t h i c a l events that are presented o n e after
the other. T h e f o r e g o i n g examples are e n o u g h t o s h o w t h e character o f these
ceremonies. T h e y are plays, b u t plays o f a v e r y p a r t i c u l a r k i n d . T h e y act, o r
at least are t h o u g h t t o act, u p o n the course o f nature. W h e n the c o m m e m o -
r a t i o n o f Thalaualla is over, the W a r r a m u n g a are c o n v i n c e d that b l a c k snakes
c a n n o t fad t o increase a n d m u l t i p l y . T h u s these dramas are rites, a n d i n fact
rites that, b y the w a y t h e y w o r k , are comparable i n every respect t o those that
m a k e u p the A r u n t a I n t i c h i u m a .
C o n s e q u e n d y , the t w o sets o f rites can shed l i g h t u p o n one another. I n -
deed, c o m p a r i n g t h e m is all the m o r e l e g i t i m a t e because there is n o radical
d i s c o n t i n u i t y b e t w e e n t h e m . N o t o n l y is the same g o a l p u r s u e d i n b o t h
cases, b u t w h a t is m o s t characteristic o f the W a r r a m u n g a r i t u a l is t o be f o u n d
i n e m b r y o n i c f o r m i n t h e other. A s the A r u n t a generally practice i t , the I n -
t i c h i u m a contains w h a t a m o u n t s t o a k i n d o f i m p l i c i t c o m m e m o r a t i o n . T h e
places w h e r e i t is celebrated are, o b l i g a t o r i l y , those that the ancestors made
i l l u s t r i o u s . T h e paths t h e f a i t h f u l take i n t h e i r p i o u s p i l g r i m a g e s are those

'Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 302.

8
Ibid., p. 305.
378 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

traveled b y the A l c h e r i n g a heroes; the places w h e r e t h e y stop t o c o n d u c t

rites are those w h e r e t h e ancestors themselves s o j o u r n e d , w h e r e t h e y v a n -
ished i n t o t h e g r o u n d , a n d so f o r t h . T h u s e v e r y t h i n g calls t h e i r m e m o r y back
i n t o the m i n d s o f those i n attendance. M o r e o v e r , t h e y q u i t e often supple-
9
m e n t the physical r i t e s * w i t h h y m n s r e c o u n t i n g t h e ancestors' e x p l o i t s . L e t
those stories be acted o u t rather t h a n t o l d , a n d let t h e m develop i n this n e w
f o r m so as t o b e c o m e t h e essence o f the ceremony, a n d w e w i l l have t h e W a r -
r a m u n g a ceremony. M o r e t h a n that: F r o m o n e s t a n d p o i n t , the A r u n t a I n -
t i c h i u m a is already a sort o f play. T h e celebrant, i n fact, is o n e and the same
10
as the ancestor from w h o m he descends a n d w h o m he reincarnates. The
m o v e m e n t s he makes are those the ancestor made i n t h e same circumstances.
T o speak precisely, o f course, he is n o t p l a y i n g the ancestral personage as an
actor m i g h t d o ; he is that v e r y personage. I n a sense, i t is still t h e hero w h o
is o n the stage. T o accentuate the representative character o f that r i t e , all i t
takes is t o accentuate the d u a l i t y o f t h e ancestor a n d t h e celebrant. T h i s is
11
precisely w h a t happens a m o n g the W a r r a m u n g a . I n d e e d , there is m e n t i o n
o f at least o n e I n t i c h i u m a a m o n g the A r u n t a , i n w h i c h c e r t a i n people are r e -
sponsible f o r p o r t r a y i n g ancestors w i t h w h o m t h e y have n o m y t h i c a l r e l a t i o n
o f descent a n d thus i n w h i c h there are d r a m a t i c performances i n t h e f u l l
1 2
sense. T h i s is the I n t i c h i u m a o f the E m u . I n this case, t o o , c o n t r a r y t o w h a t
usually happens a m o n g this p e o p l e , i t does seem that t h e theater o f t h e cer-
1 3
e m o n y is artificially set u p .

* Rites manuels. These stand in contrast to rites oraux, "oral rites."

9
See Spencer and Gillen, NatiueTribes [of Central Australia, London, Macmillan, 1889], p. 188; Streh-
low, Aranda, vol. Ill, p. 5.

'"Strehlow himself recognizes this: "The totemic ancestor and his descendant, that is to say the one
who depicts him (der Darsteller), are presented in these sacred songs as one and the same" ([Aranda ], vol.
Ill, p. 6). Since this incontestable fact contradicts the thesis that ancestral souls are not reincarnated,
Strehlow adds in a note, "During the ceremony, there is, properly speaking, no incarnation of the ances-
tor in the person who depicts him." If Strehlow means that incarnation does not occur during the cere-
mony, nothing is more certain.- But if he means that there is no incarnation at all, I do not understand how
the celebrant and the ancestor can merge.
"Perhaps this difference arises in partfromthe fact that, among the Warramunga, each clan is thought
to descend from a single ancestor around whom the mythical history of the clan has gradually condensed.
This is the ancestor commemorated in the rite; however, the celebrant is not necessarily descended from
him. Indeed, we might ask whether these mythical chiefs, demigods of a sort, undergo reincarnation.
12
In that Intichiuma, three participants depict ancestors "of considerable antiquity"; they actually play
a role (Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 181—182). Spencer and Gillen add, it is true, that those are an-
cestors who came after the Alcheringa period. But they are nonetheless mythical personages, and they are
portrayed during a rite.
13
Indeed, we are not told of sacred rocks and water holes. The center of the ceremony is an image of
an emu that is drawn on the ground and can be drawn anywhere.
The Positive Cult (Continued) 379

T h a t these t w o k i n d s o f ceremonies have a certain air o f kinship, despite

the differences b e t w e e n t h e m , does n o t m e a n that there is a definite r e l a t i o n -
ship o f succession b e t w e e n t h e m , a n d that o n e is a t r a n s f o r m a t i o n o f the other.
T h e resemblances observed m a y actually arise from t h e i r h a v i n g the same o r i -
g i n — t h a t is, from t h e i r b e i n g divergent f o r m s o f the same o r i g i n a l ceremony.
We w i l l see, i n fact, that this hypothesis is the m o s t probable. B u t there is n o
need t o take a p o s i t i o n o n that question, a n d the p r e c e d i n g is e n o u g h t o es-
tablish that these are rites o f the same k i n d . T h u s w e have a basis f o r c o m p a r -
i n g t h e m a n d f o r u s i n g the o n e t o help us understand the other better.
W h a t is p e c u l i a r t o those W a r r a m u n g a ceremonies that I have j u s t d i s -
cussed is that n o t o n e m o v e m e n t is m a d e f o r the p u r p o s e o f h e l p i n g o r
1 4
directly causing t h e t o t e m i c species t o be r e b o r n . I f w e analyze t h e m o v e -
ments made t o g e t h e r w i t h the w o r d s said, w e f i n d n o t h i n g that reveals any
i n t e n t i o n o f this k i n d . E v e r y t h i n g takes place i n dramatic p e r f o r m a n c e s * that
have n o p u r p o s e o t h e r t h a n t o m a k e t h e clan's m y t h i c a l past present i n p e o -
ple's m i n d s . B u t t h e m y t h o l o g y o f a g r o u p is the c o l l e c t i o n o f beliefs c o m -
m o n t o the g r o u p . H o w the society i m a g i n e s m a n a n d the w o r l d is expressed
i n the t r a d i t i o n s w h o s e m e m o r y t h e m y t h o l o g y perpetuates; i t is a m o r a l i t y
and a c o s m o l o g y at the same time as i t is a history. T h e r e f o r e t h e r i t e serves
and can o n l y serve t o m a i n t a i n t h e v i t a l i t y o f those beliefs and t o prevent
t h e i r m e m o r y from b e i n g o b l i t e r a t e d — i n o t h e r w o r d s , t o revitalize t h e m o s t
essential elements o f the c o l l e c t i v e consciousness a n d conscience. T h r o u g h
this r i t e , t h e g r o u p p e r i o d i c a l l y revitalizes the sense i t has o f i t s e l f a n d its
u n i t y ; t h e nature o f the i n d i v i d u a l s as social beings is strengthened at the
same t i m e . T h e g l o r i o u s m e m o r i e s that are made t o live again before t h e i r
eyes, a n d w i t h w h i c h t h e y feel i n accord, b r i n g a b o u t a feeling o f strength
and c o n f i d e n c e . O n e is m o r e sure i n one's f a i t h w h e n o n e sees h o w far i n t o
the past i t goes a n d w h a t great things i t has i n s p i r e d . T h i s is the feature o f the
c e r e m o n y that makes i t i n s t r u c t i v e . T h e t e n d e n c y o f the w h o l e c e r e m o n y is
to act o n m i n d s , a n d o n m i n d s alone. B u t i f i t is b e l i e v e d t o act o n things at
the same t i m e , a n d t o b r i n g a b o u t t h e p r o s p e r i t y o f the species, this can o n l y
be as a c o u n t e r p a r t o f t h e m o r a l i n f l u e n c e i t exercises—and that m o r a l i n f l u -
ence o b v i o u s l y is the o n l y o n e that is real. T h e r e f o r e , the hypothesis I have
p r o p o s e d is v e r i f i e d b y a r e v e l a t o r y e x p e r i m e n t a n d is the m o r e c o m p e l l i n g

* Tout se passe en représentations qui ne peuvent être destinées qu'à rendre présent aux esprits le passé mythique
du clan. The word représentation neady joins two meanings: "dramatic performance" and "idea."
14
I do not mean to say, however, that all the ceremonies of the Warramunga are of this type. The ex-
ample of the white cockatoo, discussed above, proves that there are exceptions.
380 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

because, as I have j u s t established, the r i t u a l systems o f the W a r r a m u n g a and

the A r u n t a d o n o t differ fundamentally. T h e o n e s i m p l y b r i n g s o u t w i t h
greater c l a r i t y w h a t w e h a d already guessed a b o u t the other.

II
T h e r e are ceremonies i n w h i c h this representative a n d ideal feature is even
m o r e p r o n o u n c e d . I n the ceremonies j u s t discussed, dramatic representation
was n o t an e n d i n itself; i t was o n l y a means t o a c o m p l e t e l y m u n d a n e e n d ,
the r e p r o d u c t i o n o f the t o t e m i c species. B u t there are others t h a t are n o t par-
t i c u l a r l y different f r o m the p r e c e d i n g a n d yet f r o m w h i c h interests o f that
sort are e n t i r e l y absent. I n those, t h e past is represented f o r the sole p u r p o s e
o f representing i t a n d impressing i t m o r e deeply u p o n m i n d s , w i t h n o e x -
p e c t a t i o n that the r i t e s h o u l d have any p a r t i c u l a r i n f l u e n c e u p o n nature. A t
the v e r y least, t h e physical effects that are sometimes i m p u t e d t o the r i t e are
e n t i r e l y secondary and u n r e l a t e d t o t h e l i t u r g i c a l i m p o r t a n c e i t is g i v e n . T h i s
is n o t a b l y t h e case o f t h e feasts the W a r r a m u n g a celebrate i n h o n o r o f t h e
1 5
snake W o l l u n q u a .
As I have already said, W o l l u n q u a is a t o t e m o f a v e r y special k i n d . I t is
n o t an a n i m a l o r p l a n t species b u t a u n i q u e b e i n g ; o n l y o n e W o l l u n q u a e x -
ists. F u r t h e r m o r e , he is a p u r e l y m y t h i c a l b e i n g . T h e natives i m a g i n e h i m as
a sort o f colossal snake, so tall that his head is lost i n the clouds w h e n he
stands o n his tail. H e is b e l i e v e d t o live i n a w a t e r h o l e , called T h a p a u e r l u ,
w h i c h is h i d d e n deep i n a l o n e l y valley. B u t a l t h o u g h W o l l u n q u a differs i n
some respects from o r d i n a r y t o t e m s , still he has all t h e d i s t i n g u i s h i n g features
o f one. H e serves as a collective n a m e a n d e m b l e m f o r a w h o l e g r o u p o f
i n d i v i d u a l s w h o see h i m as t h e i r c o m m o n ancestor. A n d t h e relations t h e y
have w i t h this m y t h i c a l beast are i d e n t i c a l t o those that the m e m b e r s o f o t h e r
clans believe t h e y have w i t h t h e founders o f t h e i r o w n respective clans. I n
16
Alcheringa times, W o l l u n q u a traveled t h e c o u n t r y i n every d i r e c t i o n . I n
the various localities w h e r e he stopped, he s o w e d s p i r i t - c h i l d r e n , spirit p r i n -
ciples that c o n t i n u e t o serve today as souls f o r l i v i n g beings. W o l l u n q u a is

15
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 226ff. Cf. on the same subject certain passages of Eylmann
that apparendy refer to the same mythical being ([Richard] Eylmann, Die Eingeborenen [der Kolonie Sud
Australien, Berlin, D. Reumer, 1908], p. 185). Strehlow also mentions a mythical snake among the Arunta
(Kulaia, water snake), which may well be the same as Wollunqua (Strehlow, Aranda, vol. I, p. 78; cf. vol.
II, p. 71, where Kulaiafigureson the list of totems).
16
So as not to complicate the terminology, I use the Arunta term. Among the Warramunga, this myth-
ical time is called Wingara.
The Positive Cult (Continued) 381

even regarded as a k i n d o f p r e e m i n e n t t o t e m . T h e W a r r a m u n g a are d i v i d e d

i n t o t w o phratries, o n e called U l u u r u a n d t h e o t h e r K i n g i l l i . A l m o s t all the
totems o f t h e first are various species o f snake. T h e y are all considered t o be
17
descendants o f W o l l u n q u a ; he is said t o b e t h e i r g r a n d f a t h e r . F r o m this o n e
can guess h o w , i n all l i k e l i h o o d , t h e W o l l u n q u a m y t h was b o r n . T o e x p l a i n
the presence o f so m a n y s i m i l a r t o t e m s i n o n e phratry, t h e y w e r e all i m a g i n e d
t o be d e r i v e d from o n e a n d t h e same t o t e m ; b u t o f necessity, he h a d t o be
g i v e n g i g a n t i c f o r m , so that, b y his v e r y appearance, he w o u l d fit the i m p o r -
tant role assigned t o h i m i n the h i s t o r y o f the t r i b e .
W o l l u n q u a is t h e object o f ceremonies n o different i n nature from those
w e s t u d i e d previously. T h e s e are performances i n w h i c h t h e p r i n c i p a l events
o f his m y t h i c a l life are d e p i c t e d ; he is s h o w n c o m i n g o u t o f the g r o u n d and
m o v i n g from o n e l o c a l i t y t o t h e o t h e r ; the various episodes o f his life a n d his
travels are acted o u t ; a n d so f o r t h . Spencer a n d G i l l e n w e r e present at fifteen
ceremonies o f this k i n d , w h i c h o c c u r r e d o n e after t h e o t h e r b e t w e e n 27 J u l y
a n d 2 3 A u g u s t , f o l l o w i n g a p r e s c r i b e d o r d e r i n such a w a y as t o f o r m a t r u e
18
cycle. T h u s , the detads o f t h e rites t h a t m a k e u p this feast d o n o t distinguish
i t f r o m an o r d i n a r y I n t i c h i u m a a m o n g t h e W a r r a m u n g a ; that m u c h is r e c o g -
19
n i z e d b y t h e authors w h o have described i t f o r u s . B u t o n the o t h e r hand,
i t is an I n t i c h i u m a that c a n n o t possibly have the a i m o f e n s u r i n g the f e c u n -
d i t y o f an a n i m a l o r p l a n t species; W o l l u n q u a is a species i n h i m s e l f and does
n o t reproduce. H e is; a n d t h e natives apparendy d o n o t feel that he requires
a c u l t i n o r d e r t o g o o n b e i n g . N o t o n l y d o these ceremonies n o t have the
efficacy o f the classic I n t i c h i u m a , b u t t h e y d o n o t seem t o have m a t e r i a l ef-
ficacy o f any k i n d . W o l l u n q u a is n o t a d e i t y set over a d e f i n i t e range o f n a t -
u r a l p h e n o m e n a , a n d thus n o d e f i n i t e service is e x p e c t e d o f h i m i n exchange
for worship.
T r u e , i t is said that i f the r i t u a l prescriptions are i m p r o p e r l y observed,
W o l l u n q u a b e c o m e s angry, leaves his retreat, a n d avenges h i m s e l f u p o n the
faithful f o r t h e i r negligence. A n d w h e n e v e r y t h i n g has b e e n p r o p e r l y done,
t h e y t e n d t o believe that all w i l l be w e l l a n d that some happy event w i l l o c -
cur. B u t the idea o f these possible sanctions was apparently b o r n o n l y after

17
"It is not easy," say Spencer and Gillen, "to express in words that which is a rather vague feeling
among the natives. But after having carefully observed the different ceremonies, we gained the quite dis-
tinct impression that, in the minds of the natives, Wollunqua corresponded to the idea of a dominant
totem." (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 248.)
18
Among the most solemn of these ceremonies is the one I had occasion to describe above
(pp. 219—220), during which an image of Wollunqua is drawn on a sort of mound that is later broken into
pieces amid a general effervescence.
19
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 227, 248.
382 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

the fact, so as t o a c c o u n t f o r t h e r i t e . I t seemed n a t u r a l that, o n c e b o r n , the

c e r e m o n y s h o u l d have some purpose, a n d hence that t o o m i t prescribed o b -
servances was s o m e h o w dangerous. B u t t h e r i t e was n o t i n s t i t u t e d t o prevent
these m y t h i c a l dangers o r t o b r i n g a b o u t p a r t i c u l a r advantages. Incidentally,
these dangers are c o n c e i v e d i n t h e vaguest o f t e r m s . F o r example, w h e n
e v e r y t h i n g is d o n e w i t h , the elders a n n o u n c e that W o l l u n q u a w i l l send r a i n
i f he is satisfied. B u t t h e y d o n o t celebrate the feast f o r the p u r p o s e o f h a v i n g
2 0
rain. T h e y celebrate i t because t h e ancestors d i d , because t h e y are attached
t o i t as a v e r y respected t r a d i t i o n , a n d because t h e y c o m e o u t o f i t w i t h a
sense o f m o r a l w e l l - b e i n g . O t h e r considerations play o n l y a s u p p l e m e n t a r y
role; t h e y can serve t o strengthen the faithful i n the c o n d u c t that the r i t e i m -
poses, b u t they are n o t the raison d'etre o f that c o n d u c t .
H e r e , t h e n , is a w h o l e c o l l e c t i o n o f ceremonies w h o s e sole purpose is t o
arouse c e r t a i n ideas a n d feelings, t o j o i n t h e present t o t h e past and the i n d i -
v i d u a l t o t h e c o l l e c t i v i t y . I n fact, n o t o n l y are these ceremonies incapable o f
s e r v i n g o t h e r ends, b u t t h e faithful themselves seek n o t h i n g m o r e f r o m t h e m .
T h i s is a d d i t i o n a l evidence t h a t t h e psychic state i n w h i c h the assembled
g r o u p finds itself does i n d e e d c o n s t i t u t e t h e o n l y s o l i d a n d stable basis o f
w h a t m i g h t be called t h e r i t u a l m e n t a l i t y . So far as beliefs ascribing this o r

20
Here is how the terms used by Spencer and Gillen describe the proceedings in their only passage
about a possible relationship between the Wollunqua and the phenomenon of rain. Some days after the
rite that is celebrated at the mound, "the elders declare that they have heard Wollunqua speak, that he was
satisfied with what happened, and that he would send rain. The reason for this prophecy is that they had
heard, as we had, the thunder resounding some distance away." Rainmaking is so farfrombeing the im-
mediate aim of the ceremony that it was not imputed to Wollunqua until several days after the rite had
been celebrated, and following accidental circumstances. Another fact shows how vague the ideas of the
natives are on this point. Several lines further on, the thunder is presented as a sign, not of Wollunqua s
satisfaction but of his annoyance. Despite the prognostications, continue our authors, "the rain did not
fall. But some days later, thunder was again heard rumbling far away. The elders said that Wollunqua was
rumbling because he was angry" about the way in which the rite had been conducted. Thus, the same
phenomenon, the sound of thunder, is interpreted sometimes as a sign of favorable intentions and at oth-
ers, of evil ones.
There is, however, a detail of the ritual that would have direct efficacy, if one accepted the explana-
tion of it that Spencer and Gillen suggest. According to them, the mound is destroyed in order to frighten
Wollunqua and, by magical means, prevent himfromleaving his retreat. To me, this interpretation appears
very suspect. As a matter of fact, in the circumstances just described in which it was announced that Wol-
lunqua was angry, this anger was attributed to the fact that they had neglected to clean up the debris from
the mound. Hence, this cleanup is farfrombeing aimed at intimidating and coercing Wollunqua; Wol-
lunqua himself demands it. This is probably no more than a special case of a more general rule in effect
among the Warramunga: The cult instruments must be destroyed after each ceremony. Thus, when the
rite has been completed, the ritual ornaments in which the celebrants are dressed are torn off forcefully.
(Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 205.)
The Positive Cult (Continued) 383

that physical efficacy t o t h e rites are c o n c e r n e d , those are accessory a n d c o n -

t i n g e n t matters, since t h e y can be absent w i t h o u t change t o the essence o f
the r i t e . T h u s , even m o r e m a r k e d l y t h a n the p r e c e d i n g , t h e W o l l u n q u a cer-
emonies i n a sense lay bare the positive c u l t .
I f I have g i v e n special emphasis t o those ceremonies, i t is because o f t h e i r
unusual i m p o r t a n c e , b u t others are o f the same character. T h u s , the W a r -
r a m u n g a have a " L a u g h i n g B o y " t o t e m . Spencer a n d G i l l e n say that the
clan o f this n a m e has the same o r g a n i z a t i o n as t h e o t h e r t o t e m i c groups. L i k e
t h e m , i t has its sacred places (mungai) w h e r e t h e f o u n d i n g ancestor c o n d u c t e d
ceremonies i n m y t h i c a l times a n d w h e r e he left b e h i n d s p i r i t - c h i l d r e n
w h o became the m e n o f the clan. T h e rites c o n n e c t e d w i t h this t o t e m are
21
indistinguishable from those related t o a n i m a l o r p l a n t t o t e m s . I t is o b v i o u s ,
however, that the rites c a n n o t possibly have physical efficacy. T h e y are a
series o f f o u r m o r e o r less r e p e t i t i o u s ceremonies, t h e i r sole p u r p o s e b e i n g
t o amuse, t o p r o v o k e l a u g h t e r b y l a u g h t e r — t h a t is, t o cultivate gaiety
and g o o d h u m o r w i t h i n t h e g r o u p that m o r e o r less specializes i n those
22
traits.
W e find a m o n g the A r u n t a themselves m o r e t h a n o n e t o t e m that has n o
o t h e r I n t i c h i u m a . I n fact, a m o n g this people, the folds o r depressions i n the
l a n d that m a r k t h e place w h e r e some ancestor s o j o u r n e d are sometimes used
23
as t o t e m s . T o such t o t e m s are attached ceremonies t h a t o b v i o u s l y cannot
have physical effects o f any k i n d . T h e y can o n l y be made u p o f performances
w h o s e p u r p o s e is t o c o m m e m o r a t e t h e past, a n d t h e y can have n o goal o t h e r
2 4
t h a n that c o m m e m o r a t i o n .
W h d e these r i t u a l performances h e l p us u n d e r s t a n d the nature o f the
c u l t better, t h e y also b r i n g o u t an i m p o r t a n t e l e m e n t o f r e l i g i o n : its recre-
ational a n d aesthetic e l e m e n t .
I have already s h o w n that t h e y are closely a k i n t o dramatic p e r f o r -
25
mances. T h i s k i n s h i p stands o u t even m o r e clearly i n the ceremonies j u s t
described. N o t o n l y d o t h e y use the same techniques as drama, b u t t h e y have

21
Ibid., pp. 207-208.
22
Ibid., p. 210.
"See numbers 432—442, in the list of totems compiled by Strehlow ([Aranda ], vol. II, p. 72).
24
See ibid., vol. Ill, p. 8. Also among the Arunta, there is a Worra totem that gready resembles the
Warramungas' "Laughing Boy" totem (ibid, and vol. Ill, p. 124). Worra means "young men." The object
of the ceremony is to make the young men take more pleasure in the game of labara (on this game, see
ibid., vol. I, p. 55, n. 1).
"See above, p. 376.
384 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

the same sort o f goal. Since u t i l i t a r i a n purposes are i n general alien t o t h e m ,

t h e y m a k e m e n forget the real w o r l d so as t o t r a n s p o r t t h e m i n t o a n o t h e r
w h e r e t h e i r i m a g i n a t i o n is m o r e at h o m e ; t h e y e n t e r t a i n . Sometimes t h e y
even g o as far as h a v i n g t h e o u t w a r d appearance o f recreation. W e see those
2 6
present l a u g h i n g a n d o p e n l y h a v i n g f u n .
T h e representative rites a n d t h e c o l l e c t i v e recreations are so close t o o n e
a n o t h e r that p e o p l e m o v e from o n e genre t o t h e o t h e r w i t h o u t any sense o f
d i s c o n t i n u i t y . T h e trait o f the specifically r e l i g i o u s ceremonies is that they
m u s t be p e r f o r m e d o n consecrated g r o u n d , from w h i c h w o m e n a n d t h e
27
u n i n i t i a t e d are e x c l u d e d . I n others, this r e l i g i o u s feature is s o m e w h a t o b -
scured, a l t h o u g h n o t g o n e c o m p l e t e l y . T h e y o c c u r away from the c e r e m o -
n i a l g r o u n d , w h i c h shows that t o some e x t e n t t h e y are already secular; even
so, t h e profane ( w o m e n a n d c h i l d r e n ) are n o t a d m i t t e d . H e n c e they straddle
the b o u n d a r y b e t w e e n t w o d o m a i n s . I n general, t h e y relate t o m y t h i c a l p e r -
sonages that d o n o t f i t n e a d y i n t o t h e scheme o f t o t e m i c r e l i g i o n . T h e p e r -
sonages are spirits, m o s t o f t e n e v i l ones, that are m o r e c o n n e c t e d w i t h t h e
magicians t h a n w i t h t h e o r d i n a r y f a i t h f u l , a n d sorts o f b o g e y m e n i n w h i c h
m e n d o n o t believe w i t h t h e same degree o f seriousness a n d firm c o n v i c t i o n
28
as t h e y a c c o r d t o p r o p e r l y t o t e m i c beings a n d t h i n g s . I n step w i t h the
w e a k e n i n g o f the tie that binds events a n d personages t o t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e
t r i b e , b o t h take o n a m o r e u n r e a l appearance, a n d the nature o f the c o r r e -
s p o n d i n g ceremonies changes. I n this way, w e g r a d u a l l y enter i n t o t h e d o -
m a i n o f p u r e fantasy a n d pass from the c o m m e m o r a t i v e r i t e t o the o r d i n a r y
c o r r o b o r é e , m e r e p u b l i c r e j o i c i n g that is n o l o n g e r r e l i g i o u s i n any w a y a n d
i n w h i c h everyone, w i t h o u t d i s t i n c t i o n , m a y take p a r t . I n d e e d , perhaps cer-
t a i n o f these performances that t o d a y are o n l y f o r e n t e r t a i n m e n t are ancient
rites w h o s e f u n c t i o n has changed. I n fact, the b o u n d a r i e s b e t w e e n these t w o
kinds o f ceremonies are so f l u i d that i t is h a r d t o say precisely t o w h i c h g r o u p
2 9
they b e l o n g .

26
An example of this kind is to be found in Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 204.
27
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 118 n. 2, 618ff.; Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 716ff.
However, there are sacred ceremoniesfromwhich women are not totally excluded (see, for example,
ibid., pp. 375ff.); but that is the exception.
^See Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 329ff.; Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 210ff.
29
This is the case, for example, of the Molonga corroborée, among the Pitta-Pitta of Queensland and
neighboring tribes (see [Walter Edmund] Roth, Ethnological Studies among the North West Central Queens-
land Aborigines [Brisbane, E. Gregory, 1897], pp. 120ff.). Information on these ordinary corroborées is to
be found in Stirling [Sir Baldwin] Spencer, Report [on the Work] of the Horn [Scientific] Expedition to Central
Australia [London, Dulau, 1896], Part IV, p. 72, and in Roth, Queensland Aborigines, pp. 117ff.
The Positive Cult (Continued) 385

I t is w e l l k n o w n t h a t games a n d the p r i n c i p a l forms o f art seem t o have

been b o r n i n r e l i g i o n a n d that t h e y l o n g m a i n t a i n e d t h e i r religious charac-
30
ter. W e can see w h y : w h i l e p u r s u i n g o t h e r goals direcdy, the c u l t has at the
same t i m e b e e n a f o r m o f recreation. R e l i g i o n has n o t played this role b y
chance o r a h a p p y c o i n c i d e n c e b u t as a result o f its i n h e r e n t logic. I n d e e d , as
I have s h o w n , a l t h o u g h r e l i g i o u s t h o u g h t is s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n a system o f
fictions, t h e realities t o w h i c h i t corresponds can g a i n religious expression
o n l y i f i m a g i n a t i o n transfigures t h e m . Great is the distance b e t w e e n society,
as i t is objectively, a n d t h e sacred t h i n g s that represent i t symbolically. T h e
impressions really felt b y m e n — t h e r a w m a t e r i a l f o r this c o n s t r u c t i o n — h a d
t o be i n t e r p r e t e d , elaborated, a n d t r a n s f o r m e d t o the p o i n t o f b e c o m i n g u n -
recognizable. So t h e w o r l d o f r e l i g i o u s things is p a r d y an i m a g i n a r y w o r l d
(albeit o n l y i n its o u t w a r d f o r m ) and, f o r this reason, o n e that lends itself
m o r e readdy t o t h e free creations o f t h e m i n d . M o r e o v e r , because the i n -
tellectual forces that serve i n m a k i n g i t are intense a n d t u m u l t u o u s , the
m e r e task o f expressing t h e real w i t h the h e l p o f p r o p e r symbols is i n s u f f i -
c i e n t t o o c c u p y t h e m . A surplus remains generally available that seeks t o busy
itself w i t h s u p p l e m e n t a r y a n d superfluous w o r k s o f l u x u r y — t h a t is, w i t h
w o r k s o f art.
W h a t is t r u e o f practices is t r u e o f beliefs. T h e state o f effervescence i n
w h i c h t h e assembled f a i t h f u l f i n d themselves is translated o u t w a r d l y b y e x u -
berant m o t i o n s that are n o t easily s u b o r d i n a t e d t o ends that are d e f i n e d
t o o stricdy. T h e y escape, p a r t l y w i t h o u t d e s t i n a t i o n , displaying themselves
m e r e l y f o r t h e sake o f displaying themselves, a n d t a k i n g pleasure i n w h a t
a m o u n t t o games. Besides, t o the e x t e n t that t h e beings t o w h i c h t h e c u l t is
addressed are i m a g i n a r y , t h e y are i n n o p o s i t i o n t o c o n t a i n a n d regulate this
exuberance; t h e w e i g h t o f t a n g i b l e a n d durable realities is needed t o press ac-
t i v i t y i n t o exact a n d h a r m o n i o u s adaptations. T h e r e f o r e , w e r i s k m i s u n d e r -
standings w h e n , t o e x p l a i n rites, w e believe an exact p u r p o s e a n d raison d'être
m u s t be assigned t o each m o v e m e n t . S o m e serve n o purpose; t h e y m e r e l y
satisfy the w o r s h i p p e r s ' n e e d t o act, m o v e , a n d gesticulate. T h e w o r s h i p p e r s
are seen j u m p i n g , w h i r l i n g , d a n c i n g , s h o u t i n g , a n d s i n g i n g , and t h e y are n o t
always able t o assign a m e a n i n g t o this t u r b u l e n c e .
T h u s , r e l i g i o n w o u l d n o t be r e l i g i o n i f there was n o place i n i t f o r free
c o m b i n a t i o n s o f t h o u g h t a n d a c t i o n , f o r games, f o r art, f o r all that refreshes
a s p i r i t w o r n d o w n b y all that is o v e r b u r d e n i n g i n d a y - t o - d a y labor. T h a t

'"On that question, see especially the excellent work of [Stewart] Culin, "Games of the North Amer-
ican Indians," Twenty-Sixth Report, BAE, [Washington, Government Printing Office, 1907].
386 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

w h i c h made art exist makes i t a necessity. I t is n o t m e r e l y an o u t w a r d a d o r n -

m e n t that t h e c u l t can be t h o u g h t o f as dressing u p i n , i n o r d e r t o h i d e w h a t
m a y be t o o austere a n d harsh a b o u t i t ; t h e c u l t i n itself is aesthetic i n some
way. Because o f t h e w e l l - k n o w n c o n n e c t i o n s m y t h o l o g y has w i t h poetry,
3 1
scholars have sometimes w a n t e d t o situate m y t h o l o g y outside r e l i g i o n . The
t r u t h is that there is a p o e t r y i n h e r e n t i n all r e l i g i o n . T h e representative cer-
emonies j u s t s t u d i e d m a k e this aspect o f r e l i g i o u s life o b v i o u s , b u t there are
v i r t u a l l y n o rites that d o n o t manifest i t i n some degree.
O b v i o u s l y , i t w o u l d be a grave e r r o r t o see o n l y this aspect o f r e l i g i o n o r
t o overstate its i m p o r t a n c e . W h e n a r i t e serves o n l y as e n t e r t a i n m e n t , i t is n o
l o n g e r a r i t e . T h e m o r a l forces that r e l i g i o u s symbols express are real forces
that w e m u s t r e c k o n w i t h a n d that w e m a y n o t d o w i t h as w e please. E v e n i f
the p u r p o s e o f the c u l t is n o t t o achieve physical effects, b u t deliberately stops
at a c t i n g u p o n m i n d s , i t exerts its i n f l u e n c e i n a different d i r e c t i o n t h a n does
a p u r e w o r k o f art. T h e representations i t w o r k s t o arouse a n d m a i n t a i n are
n o t e m p t y images that c o r r e s p o n d t o n o t h i n g i n reality a n d that w e call u p
f o r n o purpose, m e r e l y f o r t h e pleasure o f w a t c h i n g t h e m appear and c o m -
b i n e w i t h o n e a n o t h e r before o u r eyes. T h e y are as necessary t o the g o o d o r -
der o f o u r m o r a l life as f o o d is t o the n u r t u r e o f o u r physical life. I t is t h r o u g h
t h e m that t h e g r o u p affirms a n d maintains itself, a n d w e k n o w h o w i n d i s -
pensable the g r o u p is t o the i n d i v i d u a l . T h u s a r i t e is s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n a
game; i t belongs t o t h e serious side o f life.
B u t w h i l e the u n r e a l a n d i m a g i n a r y e l e m e n t is n o t the essence, i t still
plays a role that is far from n e g l i g i b l e . T h a t e l e m e n t enters i n t o t h e feeling o f
c o m f o r t that the faithful d r a w f r o m the a c c o m p l i s h e d r i t e . R e c r e a t i o n is o n e
f o r m o f the m o r a l r e m a k i n g t h a t is the p r i m a r y o b j e c t o f the positive c u l t .
O n c e w e have f u l f i l l e d o u r r i t u a l duties, w e r e t u r n t o profane life w i t h m o r e
energy a n d enthusiasm, n o t o n l y because w e have placed ourselves i n contact
w i t h a h i g h e r source o f energy b u t also because o u r o w n capacities have been
replenished t h r o u g h l i v i n g , f o r a f e w m o m e n t s , a life that is less tense, m o r e
at ease, a n d freer. R e l i g i o n gains t h e r e b y an appeal that is n o t t h e least o f its
attractions.
F o r this reason, the idea o f a r e l i g i o u s c e r e m o n y o f any i m p o r t a n c e n a t -
urally elicits t h e idea o f a festival. Inversely, every festival has c e r t a i n charac-
teristics o f a r e l i g i o u s ceremony, even i f i t is o f p u r e l y secular o r i g i n . I n every
case, its effect is t o b r i n g i n d i v i d u a l s together, t o p u t t h e masses i n t o m o t i o n ,
a n d thus i n d u c e a state o f effervescence—sometimes even d e l i r i u m — w h i c h

31
See above, p. 79.
The Positive Cult (Continued) 387

is n o t w i t h o u t k i n s h i p t o the r e l i g i o u s state. M a n is c a r r i e d outside h i m -

self, p u l l e d away f r o m his o r d i n a r y occupations and preoccupations. W e
observe t h e same manifestations i n b o t h cases: cries, songs, music, v i o l e n t
m o v e m e n t s , dances, the search f o r stimulants that increase vitality, and o t h -
ers. I t has o f t e n b e e n observed that p o p u l a r festivals lead t o excesses, causing
3 2
people t o lose sight o f t h e b o u n d a r y b e t w e e n the l i c i t a n d the i l l i c i t ; there
are also r e l i g i o u s ceremonies that b r i n g a b o u t a k i n d o f thirst f o r v i o l a t i n g
33
those rules that o r d i n a r i l y are w i d e l y o b e y e d . T o be sure, this is n o t because
there is n o basis f o r d i s t i n g u i s h i n g b e t w e e n the t w o f o r m s o f p u b l i c activity.
S i m p l e r e j o i c i n g , t h e profane c o r r o b o r é e , has n o serious purpose, b u t w h e n
taken as a w h o l e , a r i t u a l c e r e m o n y always has a serious purpose. O n c e again,
w e m u s t n o t i c e that there is n o r e j o i c i n g i n w h i c h the seriousness o f life has
n o echo at all. Instead, the basic difference lies i n t h e different p r o p o r t i o n s i n
w h i c h the t w o elements are c o m b i n e d .

Ill
As i t happens, a m o r e general fact c o n f i r m s t h e p r e c e d i n g v i e w s . I n t h e i r first
w o r k , Spencer a n d G i l l e n presented the I n t i c h i u m a as a perfectly c i r c u m -
scribed r i t u a l entity. T h e y spoke o f i t as i f i t was a process d e v o t e d exclusively
t o e n s u r i n g the r e p r o d u c t i o n o f t h e t o t e m i c species; a n d i t seemed that the
I n t i c h i u m a m u s t necessarily lose any sort o f m e a n i n g b e y o n d this single f u n c -
t i o n . B u t i n t h e i r Northern Tribes of Central Australia, t h e same authors use d i f -
ferent language, perhaps w i t h o u t b e i n g aware o f i t . T h e y recognize that these
same ceremonies can j u s t as w e l l take place i n the I n t i c h i u m a s p r o p e r as i n
34
the i n i t i a t i o n r i t e s . T h e y serve j u s t as w e l l e i t h e r t o m a k e animals a n d plants
o f the t o t e m i c species o r t o confer u p o n the neophytes the qualities i t takes

32
Notably, in sexual matters. Sexual license is common in the ordinary corroborées (see Spencer and
Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 96—97, and Northern Tribes, pp. 136—137). On sexual license in popular feasts gen-
erally, see [Alfred] Hagelstange, Süddeutsches Bauernleben im Mittelalter [Leipzig, Duncker & Humbolt,
1898], pp. 221ff.
33
Thus, the rules of exogamy are obligatorily violated during certain religious ceremonies (see above,
p. 218, n. 27). We probably should not seek precise ritual meaning in this license. It simply arises me-
chanically from the state of overexcitement provoked by the ceremony. It is an example of those rites that
have no definite object in themselves but are merely discharges of activity (see above, p. 385). The native
himself does not assign it a definite purpose; he says only that if this license is not committed, the rite will
not produce its effects; the ceremony will be botched.
34
These are the very words Spencer and Gillen use; "They (the ceremonies connected to the totems)
are often, but not always, associated with those that concern the initiation of young men, or else they are
part of the Intichiumas" (Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 178).
388 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

3 5
t o b e c o m e f u l l m e m b e r s o f the society o f m e n . F r o m this p o i n t o f v i e w , the
I n t i c h i u m a appears i n a n e w l i g h t . N o l o n g e r is i t a d i s t i n c t r i t u a l m e c h a n i s m
based o n p r i n c i p l e s that are p e c u l i a r t o i t b u t instead a p a r t i c u l a r a p p l i c a t i o n
o f m o r e general ceremonies that can serve q u i t e different purposes. T h i s is
why, before speaking o f t h e I n t i c h i u m a a n d o f i n i t i a t i o n , t h e y devote a spe-
cial chapter o f t h e i r n e w w o r k t o t o t e m i c ceremonies i n general, apart from
36
the various f o r m s t h e y m a y take d e p e n d i n g o n the purposes t h e y serve.
T h i s i n h e r e n t i n d e t e r m i n a c y o f the t o t e m i c ceremonies was only
p o i n t e d t o b y Spencer a n d G i l l e n , a n d i n d e e d rather i n d i r e c d y , b u t i t has
b e e n c o n f i r m e d b y S t r e h l o w i n the m o s t e x p l i c i t t e r m s . H e says, " W h e n the
y o u n g novices are passed t h r o u g h t h e various i n i t i a t i o n celebrations, rites are
p e r f o r m e d o n e after a n o t h e r f o r t h e m . Nevertheless, a l t h o u g h these rites r e -
p r o d u c e those o f the c u l t proper, d o w n t o t h e m o s t characteristic details
(Read: the rites that Spencer and Gillen term Intichiuma), t h e i r p u r p o s e is n o t t o
37
m u l t i p l y the c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o t e m a n d m a k e i t prosper." So t h e same cere-
m o n y is used i n b o t h cases; o n l y the n a m e is changed. W h e n its p u r p o s e is
s t r i c t l y the r e p r o d u c t i o n o f the species, i t is called M b a t j a l k a t i u m a , a n d w h e n
3 8
i t is a p r o c e d u r e o f i n i t i a t i o n i t is g i v e n the n a m e I n t i c h i u m a .
I n a d d i t i o n , a m o n g the A r u n t a , c e r t a i n secondary characteristics d i s t i n -
guish these t w o k i n d s o f ceremonies from o n e another. A l t h o u g h the struc-
t u r e o f t h e rites is the same i n b o t h cases, the s h e d d i n g o f b l o o d and, m o r e
generally, the offerings characteristic o f the A r u n t a I n t i c h i u m a are l a c k i n g i n
t h e i r i n i t i a t i o n ceremonies. F u r t h e r m o r e , whereas t h e A r u n t a I n t i c h i u m a is
h e l d at a place a u t h o r i t a t i v e l y set b y t r a d i t i o n and t o w h i c h people m u s t
p i l g r i m a g e , the stage o n w h i c h t h e i n i t i a t i o n ceremonies are h e l d is p u r e l y
39
conventional. B u t w h e n the I n t i c h i u m a consists m e r e l y o f a dramatic p e r -
f o r m a n c e , as is t h e case a m o n g t h e W a r r a m u n g a , t h e lack o f d i s t i n c t i o n b e -

35
I leave aside the question of what this trait consists in. That question would lead into a development
that would be very long and very technical and, for this reason, would have to be handled separately. The
question does not, however, affect the propositions that are established in the course of the present work.
•'"This is Chapter VI, tided "Ceremonies Connected with the Totems."
37
Strehlow, Aranda, vol. Ill, pp. 1-2.
38
The error with which Strehlow taxes Spencer and Gillen is explained in this way: They applied to
one form of the rite the term that more especially suits the other. But in this instance, the error does not
seem as grave as Strehlow makes it out to be.
39
Indeed, it cannot have any other character. In fact, since initiation is a tribal feast, the novices of dif-
ferent totems are initiated at the sametime.The ceremonies that occur one after the other in this way, at
the same place, always refer to several totems, and consequendy, they must take place outside the locali-
ties to which myth attaches them.
The Positive Cult (Continued) 389

t w e e n the t w o rites is t o t a l . T h e past is c o m m e m o r a t e d i n b o t h ; the m y t h is

p u t i n t o a c t i o n — p e r f o r m e d — a n d c a n n o t be p e r f o r m e d i n t w o m a r k e d l y
different ways. T h u s , d e p e n d i n g o n t h e circumstances, o n e and the same cer-
40
e m o n y fulfills t w o d i s t i n c t f u n c t i o n s .
I n d e e d , i t can l e n d itself t o a g o o d m a n y o t h e r uses. A s w e k n o w , since
b l o o d is a sacred t h i n g , w o m e n m u s t n o t see i t flowing. Nevertheless, a q u a r -
rel m a y o n occasion break o u t i n t h e i r presence a n d e n d i n b l o o d s h e d . A r i t -
ual i n f r a c t i o n is t h e r e b y c o m m i t t e d . A m o n g the A r u n t a , i n order t o atone for
this lapse, t h e m a n w h o s e b l o o d has flowed first m u s t " c o n d u c t a c e r e m o n y
4 1
that refers e i t h e r t o his father's o r his m o t h e r ' s t o t e m . " T h a t c e r e m o n y bears
a special name, Alua uparilima, w h i c h means "erasing o f t h e b l o o d . " B u t , i n
and o f itself, i t is n o different from those c o n d u c t e d d u r i n g i n i t i a t i o n o r at
the I n t i c h i u m a s ; i t portrays an event o f the ancestors' history. T h u s i t can
serve equally w e l l t o i n i t i a t e , t o act u p o n the a n i m a l species, o r t o expiate a
sacrilege. W e w i l l see b e l o w that a t o t e m i c c e r e m o n y can take the place o f a
4 2
funeral r i t e .
H u b e r t a n d Mauss have already d r a w n a t t e n t i o n t o a f u n c t i o n a l a m b i g u -
i t y o f the same sort i n t h e case o f sacrifice and, m o r e specifically, H i n d u sac-
4 3
rifice. T h e y have s h o w n that t h e sacrifices o f c o m m u n i o n , e x p i a t i o n , oaths,
and contracts w e r e b u t variants o f t h e same m e c h a n i s m . A s w e n o w see, this
p h e n o m e n o n is far m o r e p r i m i t i v e a n d b y n o means c o n f i n e d t o the i n s t i t u -
t i o n o f sacrifice. T h e r e is perhaps n o r i t e that does n o t display similar i n d e -
t e r m i n a c y . T h e mass is used f o r marriages as w e l l as f o r burials; i t redeems the
sins o f the dead, ensures d i v i n e favor t o the l i v i n g , a n d so o n . Fasting is an
e x p i a t i o n a n d a penance, b u t i t is also a p r e p a r a t i o n f o r c o m m u n i o n ; i t even

""How it happens that I have nowhere studied rites of initiation in and of themselves will now be un-
derstood. They do not constitute a ritual entity but are a composite made from various sorts of rites. For
example, there are prohibitions, ascetic rites, and representative ceremonies that are indistinguishable from
those conducted during the Intichiuma. Thus I have had to take this composite system apart and sepa-
rately treat each of the elementary rites that comprise it, classifying them with those similar rites with
which they must be compared. In addition, we have seen (pp. 288—289) that initiation has served as the
point of departure for a new religion that tends to move beyond totemism. But it was enough to show
that totemism contained the seed of that religion; I did not have to pursue its development. Since the ob-
ject of this book is to study the elementary beliefs and practices, I must stop at the moment they give birth
to more complex forms.
41
Spencer and Gillen, NativeTribes, p. 463. If the individual can, as he chooses, conduct a ceremony of
either his father's or his mother's totem, that is because, for the reasons set forth above (p. 185), he belongs
to both.
42
See below, Bk. 3, chap. 5, p. 399.
43
See [Henri Hubert and Marcel Mauss], "Essai sur [la nature et fonction du] sacrifice," in Melanges
d'histoire des religions [Paris, F. Alcan, 1909], p. 83.
390 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

conveys positive v i r t u e s . T h i s a m b i g u i t y shows that the real f u n c t i o n o f a r i t e

is n o t the specific, w e l l - d e f i n e d results i t seems i n t e n d e d t o reap and b y
w h i c h i t is usually characterized. Instead, its real f u n c t i o n is a general result,
w h i c h can take different f o r m s i n different circumstances a n d yet r e m a i n a l -
ways a n d e v e r y w h e r e the same.
T h e t h e o r y I have p u t f o r w a r d presupposes exacdy this. I f the t r u e f u n c -
t i o n o f the c u l t is t o arouse i n the faithful a c e r t a i n state o f soul, are o f m o r a l
strength a n d c o n f i d e n c e , a n d i f the various effects i m p u t e d t o the rites are
o n l y d u e t o secondary a n d variable causes o f this f u n d a m e n t a l state, t h e n i t is
not s u r p r i s i n g that t h e same r i t e s h o u l d seem t o p r o d u c e m u l t i p l e effects
w h i l e k e e p i n g the same c o m p o n e n t s a n d structure. I n every case, those m e n -
tal dispositions that its p e r m a n e n t f u n c t i o n is t o b r i n g a b o u t r e m a i n the same;
t h e y d e p e n d o n the fact that t h e g r o u p is assembled, n o t o n t h e p a r t i c u l a r
reasons w h y the g r o u p is assembled. O n t h e o t h e r h a n d , however, t h e y are
i n t e r p r e t e d d i f f e r e n d y t o fit the circumstances t o w h i c h t h e y apply. Is i t a
physical effect that o n e wants t o obtain? T h e c o n f i d e n c e felt w i l l lead t o b e -
l i e v i n g that this result has b e e n o r w i l l be o b t a i n e d b y the means used. Has
o n e c o m m i t t e d some lapse t h a t o n e wants t o erase? T h e same state o f m o r a l
assurance w i l l cause the same r i t u a l m o v e m e n t s t o take o n e x p i a t o r y v i r t u e s .
I n this way, the apparent efficacy w i l l seem t o change, even t h o u g h t h e real
efficacy remains u n c h a n g i n g ; a n d the r i t e w i l l seem t o f u l f i l l disparate f u n c -
tions even t h o u g h i n fact i t has o n l y one, w h i c h is always t h e same.
Conversely, j u s t as a single r i t e can serve several ends, several rites can
b e used interchangeably t o b r i n g a b o u t t h e same e n d . T o ensure the r e p r o -
d u c t i o n o f the t o t e m i c species, sacrifices, m i m e t i c practices, o r c o m m e m o -
rative performances can be used equally w e l l . T h i s i n t e r c h a n g e a b i l i t y o f rites
demonstrates o n c e again—just as t h e i r plasticity demonstrates—the e x t r e m e
generality o f the useful i n f l u e n c e t h e y exercise. W h a t matters m o s t is that i n -
dividuals are assembled a n d t h a t feelings i n c o m m o n are expressed t h r o u g h
actions i n c o m m o n . B u t as t o the specific nature o f these feelings and actions,
that is a relatively secondary a n d c o n t i n g e n t matter. T o b e c o m e conscious o f
itself, the g r o u p n e e d n o t p e r f o r m s o m e acts rather t h a n others. A l t h o u g h i t
m u s t c o m m u n e i n the same t h o u g h t a n d t h e same a c t i o n , the visible f o r m s
i n w h i c h this c o m m u n i o n occurs h a r d l y matter. T h e e x t e r n a l f o r m s p r o b a -
b l y d o n o t c o m e a b o u t b y chance. T h e y have t h e i r causes, b u t these causes
d o n o t g o t o the essence o f t h e c u l t .
E v e r y t h i n g b r i n g s us back, t h e n , t o the same idea. First a n d foremost, t h e
rites are means b y w h i c h the social g r o u p reaffirms itself periodically. A n d
perhaps, b e g i n n i n g there, w e can achieve a h y p o t h e t i c a l r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f the
m a n n e r i n w h i c h the first t o t e m i c c u l t m u s t have b e e n b o r n . M e n w h o feel
The Positive Cult (Continued) 391

u n i t e d — i n p a r t b y ties o f b l o o d b u t even m o r e b y c o m m o n interests and t r a -

ditions—assemble a n d b e c o m e conscious o f t h e i r m o r a l unity. For the reasons
I have set f o r t h , t h e y are l e d t o conceive this u n i t y as a v e r y special k i n d o f
consubstantiality. T h e y regard themselves as all p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the nature o f a
certain a n i m a l . U n d e r those c o n d i t i o n s , there w i l l be o n l y one w a y f o r t h e m
to a f f i r m t h e i r collective existence: t o a f f i r m themselves as animals o f that
same species—and this n o t o n l y i n the silence o f consciousness b u t b y p h y s i -
cal d o i n g . I t is this d o i n g that w i l l f o r m the cult, a n d o b v i o u s l y i t can o n l y be
m o v e m e n t s b y w h i c h t h e m a n imitates the a n i m a l w i t h w h i c h he identifies
himself. T h u s u n d e r s t o o d , the m i m e t i c rites c o m e i n t o v i e w as the p r i m i t i v e
f o r m o f the c u l t . S o m e w i l l find that this is t o a t t r i b u t e a rather large h i s t o r i -
cal role t o practices that at first glance resemble c h i l d i s h games. B u t , as I have
s h o w n , these naive a n d gauche gestures, these c r u d e modes o f representation,
express a n d n u r t u r e a feeling o f p r i d e , c o n f i d e n c e , a n d reverence that is e n -
tirely comparable t o the feeling expressed b y the faithful o f the m o s t idealist
religions w h e n , gathered together, t h e y p r o c l a i m themselves t o be the c h i l -
d r e n o f the a l l - p o w e r f u l G o d . I n b o t h cases, this feeling stems from the same
impressions o f security a n d respect that are aroused i n i n d i v i d u a l conscious-
nesses b y t h e great m o r a l force that d o m i n a t e s t h e m : the collective force.
I n all l i k e l i h o o d , t h e o t h e r rites w e have studied are n o m o r e t h a n v a r i a -
tions o n this f u n d a m e n t a l r i t e . O n c e t h e close u n i o n b e t w e e n a n i m a l and
man was accepted, m a n s t r o n g l y felt t h e n e e d t o ensure the regular r e p r o -
d u c t i o n o f the t o t e m i c species, a n d that r e p r o d u c t i o n was made the p r i n c i p a l
object o f t h e c u l t . I n this way, those m i m e t i c practices that p r o b a b l y h a d o n l y
a m o r a l a i m at the b e g i n n i n g f o u n d themselves s u b o r d i n a t e d t o a u t i l i t a r i a n ,
m a t e r i a l one, a n d h e c o n c e i v e d o f t h e m as means o f p r o d u c i n g the desired
result. B u t w i t h f u r t h e r e v o l u t i o n i n t h e m y t h o l o g y that at first i d e n t i f i e d t h e
ancestor hero w i t h the t o t e m i c a n i m a l , the ancestor figure became m o r e dis-
t i n c t a n d personal, i m i t a t i o n o f the ancestor replaced i m i t a t i o n o f the a n i m a l ,
and the representative rites replaced o r s u p p l e m e n t e d the m i m e t i c ones. F i -
nally, t o b e c o m e m o r e c e r t a i n o f a t t a i n i n g the g o a l h e was s t r i v i n g t o w a r d ,
man felt the n e e d t o b r i n g i n t o play all t h e means available t o h i m . H a v i n g i n
h a n d reserves o f life-forces a c c u m u l a t e d i n t h e sacred rocks, he used those;
since the man's b l o o d was o f t h e same nature as t h e animal's, h e used i t f o r
the same purpose, a n d he shed i t . Inversely, because o f that same k i n s h i p , t h e
man used t h e animal's flesh f o r the p u r p o s e o f r e m a k i n g his o w n substance.
T h e n c e came the rites o f sacrifice a n d c o m m u n i o n . I n the e n d , however, all
these v a r i e d practices are variations o n the same t h e m e : F u n d a m e n t a l l y , w e
e n c o u n t e r e v e r y w h e r e the same state o f soul, differendy i n t e r p r e t e d a c c o r d -
i n g t o the circumstances, h i s t o r i c a l m o m e n t s , a n d i n c l i n a t i o n s o f the faithful.
 CHAPTER FIVE

THE PIACULAR RITES* AND

THE AMBIGUITY OF THE
NOTION OF THE SACRED

N o m a t t e r h o w greatly the actions they i n v o l v e m a y differ

another, the various positive rites j u s t r e v i e w e d have o n e feature i n
c o m m o n : T h e y are all c a r r i e d o u t w i t h c o n f i d e n c e , j o y , a n d
from one

enthusiasm.
A l t h o u g h t h e w a i t f o r a future a n d c o n t i n g e n t event is never without
u n c e r t a i n t y , usually the r a i n falls w h e n t h e season comes, a n d the a n i m a l
a n d p l a n t species r e p r o d u c e o n schedule. R e p e a t e d e x p e r i e n c e has s h o w n
t h a t t h e rites generally b r i n g a b o u t the h o p e d - f o r effect that is t h e i r raison
d'être. T h e y are celebrated w i t h assurance, a n d w i t h r e j o i c i n g i n advance
o f the happy event t h e y i n d u c e a n d a n n o u n c e . T h e actions c o n t r i b u t e t o
that state o f m i n d . T o b e sure, the seriousness that always attends a r e l i g i o u s
c e r e m o n y marks t h e m , b u t that seriousness precludes n e i t h e r h i g h spirits
n o r joy.
T h o s e ceremonies are j o y f u l . B u t there are sad ceremonies as w e l l , w h o s e
p u r p o s e is t o m e e t a c a l a m i t y o r t o r e m e m b e r a n d m o u r n o n e . These rites
take o n a d i s t i n c t i v e f o r m that I w i l l characterize a n d e x p l a i n . Since t h e y r e -
veal a n e w aspect o f r e l i g i o u s life, i t is all the m o r e necessary t o e x a m i n e
t h e m separately.
I propose t o call ceremonies o f this t y p e "piacular." T h e advantage o f the
t e r m " p i a c u l u m " is that w h i l e suggesting the idea o f e x p i a t i o n , i t n e v e r t h e -
less has a m u c h broader m e a n i n g . A n y m i s f o r t u n e , a n y t h i n g that is o m i n o u s ,
a n d a n y t h i n g that motivates feelings o f disquiet o r fear requires a p i a c u l u m

'Dürkheim formulated this concept of rites conducted on the occasion of death, misfortune, or col-
lective crisis that are not expressions of individual feeling. He introduced the term into the study of reli-
gion and ritual. See the Maemillan Dictionary of Anthropology, London, 1986.

392
The Piacular Rites and the Ambiguity of the Notion of the Sacred 393

1
and is therefore called piacular. T h i s w o r d seems w e l l suited t o designating
rites that are c o n d u c t e d u n d e r c o n d i t i o n s o f u n c e r t a i n t y o r sadness.

I
M o u r n i n g offers us an i n i t i a l , a n d i m p o r t a n t , e x a m p l e o f piacular rites.
T h e v a r i o u s rites used f o r m o u r n i n g m u s t be distinguished. S o m e c o n -
sist o n l y o f p r o h i b i t i o n s : I t is f o r b i d d e n t o p r o n o u n c e the n a m e o f t h e d e -
2 3
ceased o r t o r e m a i n at the place w h e r e the death o c c u r r e d ; the relatives,
especially the female ones, m u s t abstain f r o m all c o m m u n i c a t i o n w i t h o u t -
4
siders; the o r d i n a r y occupations o f life are suspended, j u s t as they are d u r i n g
5
feasts; a n d so o n . Since all these practices b e l o n g t o the negative c u l t a n d are
e x p l a i n e d as rites o f that sort, t h e y n e e d n o t c o n c e r n us here. T h e y arise from
the fact that t h e deceased is a sacred b e i n g . A s a result o f c o n t a g i o n , e v e r y -
t h i n g that is o r was i n c o n t a c t w i t h h i m is i n a r e l i g i o u s state that precludes
all c o n t a c t w i t h t h e things o f profane life.
B u t m o u r n i n g consists o f m o r e t h a n p r o h i b i t i o n s t o be respected. P o s i -
tive acts are r e q u i r e d , a n d k i n are b o t h the agents a n d the objects o f t h e m .
T h e s e rites q u i t e c o m m o n l y b e g i n as s o o n as death seems i m m i n e n t .
H e r e is a scene that Spencer a n d G i l l e n witnessed a m o n g the W a r r a m u n g a .
A t o t e m i c r i t e h a d j u s t b e e n celebrated, a n d the actors a n d spectators w e r e
l e a v i n g the sacred g r o u n d w h e n suddenly a p i e r c i n g scream arose from the

1
"Piacularia auspicia appellabant quae sacrificantibus tristiaportendebant" (Paul ex. Fest., p. 244, ed. Muller).
[They used to call the auspices piacularia auspices, which portended sad things to the people sacrificing.
Trans.] The word piaculum is even used as a synonym of misfortune. "Vettonica herba," says Pliny [The El-
der, Natural History], "tantumquegloriae habet ut domus in qua sata sit tuta existimetur a piaculis omnibus" (XX
8, 46). [The vetonica herb is so renowned that the house in which it is planted is considered safefromall
piacula. I am indebted to Kathryn Argetsinger for these Latin translations.]
2
[Sir Baldwin] Spencer and [Francis James] Gillen, Northern Tribes [of Central Australia, London,
Macmillan, 1904], p. 526; [Richard] Eylmann, [Die Eingeborenen der Kolonie Sud Australien, Berlin, D.
Reumer, 1908], p. 239. Cf. above, p. 310.
'[Robert] Brough Smyth [The Aborigines of Victoria], vol. I [Melbourne: J. Ferres, 1878], p. 106;
[James] Dawson, [Australian Aborigines; The Languages and Customs of Several Tribes of Aborigines in the
Western District of Victoria, Australia, Melbourne, G. Robertson, 1881], p. 64; Eylmann, Die Eingeborenen,
p. 239.
4
Dawson, Australian Aborigines, p. 66; Eylmann, Die Eingeborenen, p. 241.
5
[Sir Baldwin] Spencer and [Francis James] Gillen, NativeTribes [of Central Australia, London, Macmil-
lan, 1899], p. 502; Dawson, Australian Aborigines, p. 67.
394 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

e n c a m p m e n t . A m a n was d y i n g there. I m m e d i a t e l y , the w h o l e c o m p a n y b e -

gan t o r u n as fast as possible, a n d m o s t o f t h e m began t o scream even as they
ran. " B e t w e e n us a n d t h e camp," say these observers, "there was a deep
stream o n w h o s e banks sat several m e n ; scattered here a n d there, heads d o w n
b e t w e e n t h e i r knees, they c r i e d a n d l a m e n t e d . "

As we crossed the stream, we found the camp broken up, as required by

custom. Some of the women, who had come from all directions, lay upon
the body of the dying man; others stood or knelt all around it, pushing the
points of their digging sticks into the tops of their heads, thereby causing
wounds from which the blood ran down over their faces. They kept up a
continuous wailing all the while.
At this juncture, some men run up to the body, throwing themselves
down upon it as the women get up; after a few moments, nothing is visible
but a writhing mass of interlaced bodies. To one side, seated with their
backs to the dying man, and still dressed in their ceremonial decorations,
three men of the Thapungarti class let out piercing cries. After a minute or
two, another man of the same class rushes onto the scene, screaming with
pain and brandishing a stone knife. As soon as he reaches the camp, he
makes such deep incisions across his thighs, into the muscles, that, unable
to hold himself up, he finally falls on the ground in the midst of a group;
two or three of his female relatives pull him away and apply their lips to his
gaping wounds while he lies senseless.

T h e sick m a n d i d n o t die u n t i l late t h a t e v e n i n g . As s o o n as h e had d r a w n his

last breath, t h e same scene began again. T h i s t i m e , t h e moans were even
m o r e p e n e t r a t i n g . C a u g h t u p i n the same frenzy, m e n a n d w o m e n r a n back
a n d f o r t h , c u t t i n g themselves w i t h knives a n d p o i n t e d sticks; t h e w o m e n h i t
each other, w i t h n o o n e t r y i n g t o f e n d o f f the b l o w s . Finally, after an h o u r , a
t o r c h l i g h t procession m o v e d across the p l a i n t o the tree i n w h o s e branches
6
the b o d y h a d b e e n p l a c e d .
W h a t e v e r t h e i r v i o l e n c e , these displays are t i g h t l y c o n t r o l l e d b y e t i -
quette. C u s t o m designates t h e i n d i v i d u a l s w h o m a k e b l o o d y gashes o n t h e m -
selves; t h e y m u s t have specified k i n s h i p relations w i t h the deceased. I n the
case Spencer a n d G i l l e n observed a m o n g the W a r r a m u n g a , those w h o
slashed t h e i r thighs w e r e t h e m a t e r n a l grandfather, m a t e r n a l u n c l e , and wife's
7
b r o t h e r o f the deceased. O t h e r s are r e q u i r e d t o c u t t h e i r whiskers a n d hair

6
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 516—517.
'Ibid., pp. 520—521. The authors do not tell us whether these are tribal or blood relatives. The first
hypothesis is the more likely.
The Piacular Rites and the Ambiguity of the Notion of the Sacred 395

and t h e n cover t h e i r scalps w i t h p i p e clay. T h e w o m e n have especially r i g o r -

ous o b l i g a t i o n s . T h e y m u s t c u t t h e i r hair a n d cover t h e i r entire b o d y w i t h
p i p e clay; f u r t h e r m o r e , t o t a l silence is i m p o s e d o n t h e m f o r the p e r i o d o f
m o u r n i n g , w h i c h can last u p t o t w o years. As a result o f this p r o h i b i t i o n , i t
is n o t u n c o m m o n a m o n g t h e W a r r a m u n g a f o r all t h e w o m e n o f a c a m p t o
be c o n d e m n e d t o absolute silence. T h e y b e c o m e so accustomed t o i t that,
even after t h e p e r i o d o f m o u r n i n g expires, t h e y v o l u n t a r i l y give u p spoken
language a n d prefer sign language ( w h i c h t h e y use w i t h remarkable skill).
Spencer a n d G i l l e n k n e w an o l d w o m a n w h o h a d n o t spoken f o r m o r e t h a n
8
t w e n t y - f o u r years.
T h e c e r e m o n y I have described opens a l o n g sequence o f rites that o c -
c u r o n e after the o t h e r f o r weeks a n d even m o n t h s . I t is repeated i n various
f o r m s over t h e days that f o l l o w . G r o u p s o f m e n a n d w o m e n sit o n the
g r o u n d , c r y i n g , l a m e n t i n g , a n d e m b r a c i n g o n e a n o t h e r at p a r t i c u l a r times.
T h e s e r i t u a l embraces are repeated o f t e n over the p e r i o d o f m o u r n i n g . T h e
i n d i v i d u a l s feel t h e n e e d t o c o m e close t o o n e another, i t seems, and t o c o m -
m u n e i n t i m a t e l y . T h e y can be seen pressed t o g e t h e r a n d e n t w i n e d t o t h e
9
p o i n t o f f o r m i n g a single mass t h a t emits l o u d m o a n s . M e a n w h i l e , the
w o m e n g o b a c k t o lacerating t h e i r heads, a n d t h e y g o t o t h e e x t r e m e o f ap-
p l y i n g t h e ends o f r e d - h o t sticks t o t h e w o u n d s t h e y make, i n o r d e r t o ag-
1 0
gravate t h e m .
Practices o f this sort are c o m m o n t h r o u g h o u t A u s t r a l i a . F u n e r a l r i t e s —
that is, t h e r i t u a l a t t e n t i o n g i v e n t h e corpse, t h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h i t is b u r i e d ,
1 1
a n d so f o r t h — v a r y f r o m t r i b e t o t r i b e and, w i t h i n a single t r i b e , a c c o r d i n g
12
t o the age, sex, a n d social r a n k o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l s . B u t the ceremonies o f

'Ibid., pp. 525—526. Although only an abstinence, this prohibition against speaking, specifically
women's, has all the signs of a piacular rite, for it is a way of inconveniencing oneself. This is why I men-
tion it here. Fasting also can be either a piacular or an ascetic rite, depending on the circumstances. It de-
pends on the conditions in which the fasting occurs and the aim sought (see below, p. 400, on the
difference between these two sorts of rites).
9
A plate in Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 525, illustrates this rite quite vividly.
,0
lbid., p. 522.
"On the principal kinds of funeral rites, see [Alfred William] Howitt, NativeTribes [of South-East Aus-
tralia, New York, Macmillan, 1904], pp. 446-508, for the tribes of the southeast; Spencer and Gillen,
Northern Tribes, p. 505, and Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 497ff., for the tribes of the center; [Wal-
ter Edmund] Roth, North Queensland Ethnography, Bull. 9, in RAM, VI, part 5, 1907, pp. 365ff. ("Burial
Ceremonies and Disposal of the Dead").
12
See, for example, Roth, "Burial Ceremonies," p. 368; [Edward John] Eyre, Journals of Expeditions [of
Discovery] into Central Australia [London, T. and W. Boone, 1845], vol. II, pp. 344—345, 347.
396 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

m o u r n i n g itself v a r y o n l y i n detail, repeating t h e same t h e m e everywhere.

1 3
E v e r y w h e r e , there is the same silence p u n c t u a t e d b y w a i l i n g , the same
14
o b l i g a t i o n t o c u t the hair o r b e a r d a n d cover the head w i t h p i p e clay, ashes,
15
o r even e x c r e m e n t ; e v e r y w h e r e , finally, there is the same frenzy o f beating,
lacerating, a n d b u r n i n g oneself. I n the center o f V i c t o r i a , " w h e n there is a
death, the w o m e n cry, l a m e n t , a n d tear t h e s k i n o f t h e i r temples w i t h their
fingernads. T h e relatives o f the deceased lacerate themselves furiously, espe-
cially i f t h e y have lost a son. T h e father hits his head w i t h a t o m a h a w k and
sobs bitterly. T h e m o t h e r , seated near t h e fire, b u r n s her breast and a b d o m e n
w i t h a stick r e d d e n e d i n the fire. . . . S o m e t i m e s , these b u r n s are so c r u e l that
16
death results."
A c c o r d i n g t o an a c c o u n t b y B r o u g h S m y t h , here is w h a t occurs i n the
s o u t h e r n tribes o f the same state. O n c e the b o d y is l o w e r e d i n t o the grave,

the w i d o w begins her funeral observances. She shears off the hair above her
forehead, and, reaching outright frenzy, takes h o l d o f red-hot sticks and ap-
plies them to her chest, arms, legs, and thighs. She seems to enjoy the t o r -
tures she inflicts o n herself. I t w o u l d be rash and, besides, useless to t r y to
stop her. W h e n she is so exhausted that she can no longer walk, she goes
o n trying to kick the ashes o f the fire and throw them i n all directions. H a v -
i n g fallen o n the ground, she takes ashes into her hands and rubs her
wounds w i t h them; then she scratches her face (the only part o f her body
that the sticks passed through the fire have not touched). T h e blood that
flows mingles w i t h the ashes that cover her wounds and, still scraping her-
17
self, she laments and cries o u t .

T h e d e s c r i p t i o n o f m o u r n i n g rites a m o n g the K u r n a i that H o w i t t gives

us is r e m a r k a b l y s i m i l a r t o t h e p r e c e d i n g . O n c e the b o d y has b e e n w r a p p e d
i n o p o s s u m s k i n a n d enclosed i n a b a r k s h r o u d , a h u t is b u d t , and i n i t the
relatives gather. " T h e r e , l y i n g o n t h e g r o u n d , t h e y l a m e n t t h e i r fate, saying
for e x a m p l e : ' W h y have y o u left us?' F r o m time t o t i m e , t h e i r g r i e f is i n t e n -

13
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 500; Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 507, 508; Eylmann
[Die Eingeborenen], p. 241; Mrs. Langloh Parker [Catherine Sommerville Field Parker], The EuahlayiTribe
[London: A. Constable, 1905], pp. 83£F.; Brough Smyth, Aborigines of Victoria, vol. I, p. 118.
14
Dawson, Australian Aborigines, p. 66; Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 466; Eylmann, Die Eingeborenen,
pp. 239-240.
15
Brough Smyth, Aborigines of Victoria, vol. I, p. 113.
16
W. E. Stanbridge, Transactions of the Ethnological Society of London, n.s., vol. I, p. 286.

"Brough Smyth, Aborigines of Victoria, vol. I, p. 104.

The Piacular Rites and the Ambiguity of the Notion of the Sacred 397

sified b y p e n e t r a t i n g moans f r o m o n e o f t h e m : T h e w i f e o f the deceased

cries, ' M y h u s b a n d is dead,' o r the m o t h e r , ' M y c h i l d is dead.' E a c h o f those
present repeats t h e same c r y : O n l y the w o r d s change, d e p e n d i n g u p o n the
tie o f k i n s h i p each has w i t h the deceased. U s i n g sharpened stones o r t o m a -
hawks, t h e y beat and tear themselves u n t i l t h e i r heads a n d bodies stream w i t h
1 8
b l o o d . T h e cries a n d moans c o n t i n u e t h r o u g h the n i g h t . "
Sadness is n o t the o n l y f e e l i n g expressed d u r i n g these ceremonies. A
k i n d o f anger is usually m i n g l e d w i t h i t . T h e relatives apparently n e e d s o m e -
h o w t o avenge t h e death suffered. T h e y are seen t h r o w i n g themselves u p o n
a n d t r y i n g t o w o u n d each o t h e r . T h e attack is sometimes real a n d sometimes
19
pretended. T h e r e are even cases i n w h i c h a k i n d o f d u e l i n g is organized.
A m o n g t h e K a i t i s h , the h a i r o f t h e deceased goes b y r i g h t t o his s o n - i n - l a w .
I n t u r n , the s o n - i n - l a w m u s t go, t o g e t h e r w i t h a c o m p a n y o f relatives and
friends, t o challenge o n e o f his t r i b a l b r o t h e r s (that is, a m a n w h o belongs t o
the same m a r r i a g e class as he a n d w h o , as such, c o u l d also have m a r r i e d the
d a u g h t e r o f the deceased). T h e challenge m a y n o t be refused, a n d the t w o
combatants i n f l i c t serious injuries u p o n o n e another's shoulders a n d thighs.
W h e n the d u e l is over, the challenger gives his adversary the hair he h a d c o n -
d i t i o n a l l y i n h e r i t e d . T h e adversary leaves, i n his o w n t u r n , t o challenge and
f i g h t a n o t h e r o f his t r i b a l b r o t h e r s t o w h o m t h e precious relic is t h e n trans-
m i t t e d , b u t always c o n d i t i o n a l l y ; i n this w a y i t passes from h a n d t o h a n d a n d
2 0
circulates from g r o u p t o g r o u p . M o r e o v e r , some part o f these same feelings
enters i n t o t h e sort o f rage w i t h w h i c h each relative beats, b u r n s , o r slashes
himself. A p a i n that reaches such great i n t e n s i t y does n o t g o w i t h o u t anger.
O n e c a n n o t b u t be s t r u c k b y t h e similarities o f these customs t o those o f the
vendetta. B o t h arise from t h e same p r i n c i p l e : t h a t death calls f o r the s h e d d i n g
o f b l o o d . T h e o n l y difference is that the v i c t i m s are relatives i n o n e case and
strangers i n t h e o t h e r . A l t h o u g h w e n e e d n o t specifically discuss t h e vendetta,
w h i c h falls u n d e r the d o m a i n o f legal i n s t i t u t i o n s , i t is appropriate t o s h o w
21
h o w i t is c o n n e c t e d t o t h e m o u r n i n g rites, w h o s e e n d i t a n n o u n c e s .
I n some societies, m o u r n i n g concludes w i t h a c e r e m o n y w h o s e efferves-
cence matches o r even surpasses that p r o d u c e d d u r i n g the o p e n i n g cere-
m o n i e s . A m o n g t h e A r u n t a , this r i t e o f c l o t u r e is called U r p m i l c h i m a .

18
Howitt, Native Tribes, p. 459. Similar scenes will be found in Eyre, Journals of Expedition, vol. II,
pp. 255 n, 347; Roth, "Burial Ceremonies," especially pp. 394, 395; [George] Grey, [Journal of the Two
Expeditions in North Western and Western Australia, London, T. and W. Boone, 1841], vol. II, pp. 320ff.
19
Brough Smyth, Aborigines ofVictoria, vol. I, pp. 104, 112; Roth, "Burial Ceremonies," p. 382.
20
Spencerand Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 511-512.
21
Dawson, Australian Aborigines, p. 67; Roth, "Burial Ceremonies," pp. 366—367.
398 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

Spencer and G i l l e n w e r e present at t w o o f these. O n e was c o n d u c t e d i n

h o n o r o f a m a n , t h e o t h e r o f a w o m a n . H e r e is the d e s c r i p t i o n they give o f
22
the w o m a n ' s .
T h e y b e g i n b y m a k i n g o r n a m e n t s o f a v e r y special type, w h i c h are called
C h i m u r i l i a b y the m e n and A r a m u r i l i a b y t h e w o m e n . U s i n g a sort o f resin,
t h e y glue small a n i m a l bones ( w h i c h have p r e v i o u s l y b e e n c o l l e c t e d and
stored) t o locks o f hair f u r n i s h e d b y relatives o f the dead w o m a n . T h e y attach
these pendants t o o n e o f those headbands o f t h e k i n d that w o m e n often
wear, a d d i n g w h i t e c o c k a t o o a n d parakeet feathers t o i t . W h e n these prepa-
rations are c o m p l e t e , t h e w o m e n gather i n t h e i r camp. T h e y p a i n t t h e i r b o d -
ies w i t h different colors, a c c o r d i n g t o the degree o f t h e i r k i n s h i p w i t h the
deceased. A f t e r h a v i n g h e l d themselves i n a m u t u a l embrace f o r a b o u t ten
m i n u t e s , w a i l i n g all t h e w h i l e , t h e y b e g i n t o w a l k t o w a r d the t o m b . A t a cer-
t a i n distance a l o n g the way, t h e y m e e t a b l o o d b r o t h e r o f t h e deceased, w h o
is a c c o m p a n i e d b y some o f h e r t r i b a l brothers. T h e y all sit o n the g r o u n d ,
2 3
a n d the w a i l i n g begins again. T h e n , a p i t c h i c o n t a i n i n g the C h i m u r i l i a s is
presented t o the o l d e r b r o t h e r , w h o presses i t against his stomach; this is said
t o be a means o f lessening his p a i n . T h e y b r i n g o u t o n e o f these C h i m u r i l -
ias, a n d the m o t h e r o f t h e dead w o m a n puts i t o n her head f o r a f e w m o -
ments. T h e n i t is p u t back i n t o the p i t c h i , w h i c h the o t h e r m e n take turns
pressing against t h e i r breasts. Finally, the b r o t h e r places t h e C h i m u r i l i a s o n
the heads o f the t w o o l d e r sisters, a n d t h e y set o u t again f o r the t o m b . E n
r o u t e , the m o t h e r t h r o w s h e r s e l f o n t h e g r o u n d several times, t r y i n g t o slash
her head w i t h a p o i n t e d stick. E a c h t i m e , t h e o t h e r w o m e n l i f t her u p again
a n d seem absorbed i n p r e v e n t i n g h e r from h u r t i n g herself. O n c e at the t o m b ,
she t h r o w s herself o n t h e m o u n d a n d tries t o destroy i t w i t h h e r hands, w h i l e
the o t h e r w o m e n l i t e r a l l y dance o n t o p o f her. T h e t r i b a l m o t h e r s a n d aunts
(father's sisters o f the dead w o m a n ) f o l l o w her example. T h e y , t o o , t h r o w
themselves o n t h e g r o u n d , b e a t i n g a n d t e a r i n g at one another. I n the end,
b l o o d streams over t h e i r entire bodies. A f t e r a t i m e , t h e y are p u l l e d away. T h e
o l d e r sisters t h e n m a k e a h o l e i n t h e earth o f t h e t o m b , i n t o w h i c h t h e y place
the C h i m u r i l i a s , w h i c h have p r e v i o u s l y b e e n b r o k e n i n t o pieces. O n c e
again, the t r i b a l m o t h e r s t h r o w themselves o n t h e g r o u n d and slash each
other's heads. A t this m o m e n t , " t h e c r y i n g a n d w a i l i n g o f t h e w o m e n w h o
have r e m a i n e d all a r o u n d seemed t o rouse t h e m t o the u l t i m a t e degree o f e x -
c i t e m e n t . T h e b l o o d that flowed t h e l e n g t h o f t h e i r bodies, over the p i p e clay

22
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 508-510.
23
The small wooden vessel already described, above p. 338.
The Piacular PJtes and the Ambiguity of the Notion of the Sacred 399

w i t h w h i c h t h e y w e r e covered, gave t h e m the appearance o f ghosts. A t the

end, the o l d m o t h e r r e m a i n e d alone l y i n g o n t h e t o m b , c o m p l e t e l y e x -
hausted a n d g r o a n i n g feebly." T h e others t h e n l i f t e d her u p again, a n d r e -
m o v e d t h e p i p e clay i n w h i c h she h a d b e e n covered. T h i s was t h e e n d o f the
2 4
c e r e m o n y a n d o f the m o u r n i n g .
A m o n g t h e W a r r a m u n g a , t h e f i n a l r i t e has rather special features. A l -
t h o u g h the s h e d d i n g o f b l o o d seems t o have n o place i n i t , the collective ef-
fervescence is expressed differently. A m o n g this p e o p l e , before the b o d y is
f i n a l l y b u r i e d , i t is l a i d o u t o n a sort o f p l a t f o r m i n the branches o f a tree a n d
left there s l o w l y t o d e c o m p o s e u n t i l o n l y t h e bones r e m a i n . T h e bones are
t h e n c o l l e c t e d and, w i t h the e x c e p t i o n o f o n e h u m e r u s , placed inside an
a n t h i l l . T h e h u m e r u s is w r a p p e d i n a b a r k sheath that is decorated i n various
ways. T h e sheath is c a r r i e d t o the c a m p a m i d the shrieks a n d moans o f
w o m e n . I n the days that f o l l o w , the W a r r a m u n g a c o n d u c t a series o f t o t e m i c
ceremonies, w h i c h refer t o t h e t o t e m o f the deceased a n d t o the m y t h i c a l
h i s t o r y o f t h e ancestors f r o m w h o m the clan is descended. W h e n all these
ceremonies are over, t h e y m o v e o n t o the r i t e o f c l o t u r e .
A t r e n c h o n e f o o t deep a n d fifteen feet l o n g is m a d e o n the c e r e m o n i a l
g r o u n d . A t o t e m i c design has p r e v i o u s l y b e e n d r a w n o n the g r o u n d at a dis-
tance f r o m i t , the design representing the t o t e m o f the deceased and c e r t a i n
places w h e r e the ancestor s o j o u r n e d . A small t r e n c h has b e e n d u g i n the
g r o u n d v e r y near this design. T e n d e c o r a t e d m e n t h e n advance, o n e after the
other. W i t h t h e i r hands crossed b e h i n d t h e i r heads a n d t h e i r legs apart, they
stand astride t h e t r e n c h . W h e n t h e signal is g i v e n , t h e w o m e n r u s h f r o m t h e
camp, i n the deepest sdence. W h e n t h e y are near, t h e y get i n t o single file, t h e
last h o l d i n g i n her hands the sheath c o n t a i n i n g the h u m e r u s . T h e n t h e y all
t h r o w themselves o n t h e g r o u n d and, m o v i n g o n t h e i r hands a n d knees b e -
t w e e n the spread legs o f the m e n , c r a w l t h e f u l l l e n g t h o f the t r e n c h . T h i s
scene marks a state o f great sexual e x c i t e m e n t . A s s o o n as the last w o m a n has
passed, the sheath is taken away f r o m her a n d c a r r i e d t o w a r d t h e h o l e , near
w h i c h stands an o l d m a n ; he breaks t h e b o n e i n o n e stroke, a n d the pieces are
speedily b u r i e d . D u r i n g this t i m e , the w o m e n have r e m a i n e d farther away
w i t h t h e i r backs t o t h e scene, w h i c h t h e y are f o r b i d d e n t o w a t c h . B u t w h e n
t h e y hear t h e b l o w o f t h e axe, t h e y flee, s h r i e k i n g a n d m o a n i n g . T h e r i t e is
2 5
over; the m o u r n i n g d o n e .

2 4
s encer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 508—510. The other last rite that Spencer and Gillen attended
P

is described on pp. 503-508 of the same work. It does not differ fundamentally from the one I have just
analyzed.
25
Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, pp. 531—540.
400 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

II
These rites b e l o n g t o a category v e r y different f r o m those I have c o n s t r u c t e d
thus far. T h i s is n o t t o say that i m p o r t a n t resemblances b e t w e e n t h e m cannot
be f o u n d , a n d there w i l l be occasion t o n o t e those; b u t t h e differences are
perhaps m o r e o b v i o u s . Instead o f j o y f u l dances, songs, a n d dramatic p e r f o r -
mances, w h i c h e n t e r t a i n a n d relax t h e s p i r i t , there are tears a n d l a m e n t s — i n
short, t h e m o s t v a r i e d displays o f anguished s o r r o w a n d a k i n d o f m u t u a l
p i t y that takes u p the e n t i r e scene. A l t h o u g h there c e r t a i n l y is shedding o f
b l o o d i n t h e course o f the I n t i c h i u m a , that is an o f f e r i n g made o u t o f pious
enthusiasm. So a l t h o u g h t h e actions resemble o n e another, the feelings
they express are different a n d even opposite. Sinularly, ascetic rites d o i n -
deed i n v o l v e abstinences, p r o h i b i t i o n s , a n d m u t i l a t i o n s that m u s t b e b o r n e
w i t h impassive firmness a n d a k i n d o f serenity. B u t here, despondency, cries,
a n d tears are the r u l e . T h e ascetic t o r t u r e s h i m s e l f i n o r d e r t o p r o v e — i n
the eyes o f his n e i g h b o r as w e l l as his o w n — t h a t h e is above suffering. I n
m o u r n i n g , p e o p l e h u r t themselves i n o r d e r t o p r o v e that t h e y are i n the
g r i p o f suffering. A l l these signs are recognizable as characteristic traits o f
piacular rites.
H o w m a y these rites be explained?
O n e i n i t i a l fact remains constant: M o u r n i n g is n o t t h e spontaneous e x -
2 6
pression o f i n d i v i d u a l e m o t i o n s . I f t h e relatives cry, l a m e n t , a n d beat t h e m -
selves b l a c k a n d b l u e , the reason is n o t that t h e y feel personally affected b y
t h e death o f t h e i r k i n s m a n . I n p a r t i c u l a r cases, t o be sure, t h e sadness e x -
27
pressed m a y h a p p e n t o be t r u l y f e l t . B u t generally there is n o relationship
b e t w e e n t h e feelings felt a n d the actions d o n e b y those w h o take part i n the
2 8
rite: I f , at t h e v e r y m o m e n t w h e n t h e m o u r n e r s seem m o s t o v e r c o m e b y
t h e p a i n , s o m e o n e t u r n s t o t h e m t o talk a b o u t some secular interest, t h e i r
faces a n d t o n e o f t e n change instantly, t a k i n g o n a c h e e r f u l air, a n d t h e y speak
2 9
w i t h all the gaiety i n the w o r l d . M o u r n i n g is n o t t h e n a t u r a l response o f a
private sensibility h u r t b y a c r u e l loss. I t is an o b l i g a t i o n i m p o s e d b y the
g r o u p . O n e laments n o t s i m p l y because o n e is sad b u t because o n e is o b l i -

26
Contrary to what [Frank Byron] Jevons says, Introduction to the History of Religions [London,
Methuen, 1896], pp. 46fF.
27
This is what leads Dawson to say that people mourn sincerely (Australian Aborigines, p. 66). But Eyl-
mann declares that he has known only one case of wounding for sadness really felt (Die Eingeborenen,
p. 113).
28
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 510.
29
Eylmann, Die Eingeborenen, pp. 238—239.
The Piacular Rites and the Ambiguity of the Notion of the Sacred 401

gated t o l a m e n t . I t is a r i t u a l facade that m u s t be a d o p t e d o u t o f respect f o r

c u s t o m , b u t o n e that is largely i n d e p e n d e n t o f the i n d i v i d u a l s ' e m o t i o n a l
states. M o r e o v e r , this o b l i g a t i o n is sanctioned b y m y t h i c o r social penalties. I t
is believed, f o r example, that w h e n a relative does n o t p r o p e r l y c a r r y o u t
3 0
m o u r n i n g , the soul o f t h e deceased dogs his steps a n d kills h i m . I n other
cases, society does n o t leave t h e p u n i s h m e n t o f the neglectful t o religious
forces b u t steps i n t o p u n i s h r i t u a l lapses. I f a b r o t h e r - i n - l a w does n o t c a r r y
o u t the funeral obligations he owes t o his f a t h e r - i n - l a w , i f he does n o t make
the m a n d a t o r y incisions o n himself, his t r i b a l f a t h e r s - i n - l a w take his w i f e
31
back a n d give her t o s o m e o n e else. I n order to do r i g h t by custom, there-
32
fore, sometimes t h e y force tears a r t i f i c i a l l y .
W h e r e does this o b l i g a t i o n c o m e from?
E t h n o g r a p h e r s a n d sociologists have generally b e e n satisfied w i t h the n a -
tives' o w n answer t o this q u e s t i o n . T h e natives say that t h e dead m a n wants
t o be m o u r n e d , that he is offended i f d e n i e d his r i g h t f u l t r i b u t e o f sorrow,
33
and that the o n l y w a y t o prevent his anger is t o c o n f o r m t o his w i s h e s .
B u t this m y t h o l o g i c a l e x p l a n a t i o n m e r e l y changes the terms o f the p r o b -
l e m a n d does n o t solve i t ; w e still n e e d t o k n o w w h y t h e dead m a n i m p e r a -
t i v e l y demands m o u r n i n g . I t w i l l be said that i t is i n t h e nature o f m a n t o
w a n t t o be m o u r n e d a n d missed: B u t t o use this f e e l i n g t o e x p l a i n the c o m -
p l e x apparatus o f rites that constitute m o u r n i n g is t o ascribe affective needs
t o the A u s t r a l i a n that even the c i v i l i z e d m a n does n o t display. L e t us grant
s o m e t h i n g that is n o t self-evident a priori: that t h e idea o f n o t b e i n g t o o
q u i c k l y f o r g o t t e n is n a t u r a l l y pleasing t o the m a n w h o t h i n k s o f the future.
E v e n i f that was t r u e , w e w o u l d still n e e d t o establish that i t has always h a d
so large a place i n t h e hearts o f the l i v i n g that an a t t i t u d e based almost e n -
t i r e l y o n such a c o n c e r n c o u l d reasonably have b e e n ascribed t o t h e dead. I t
seems especially i m p r o b a b l e that such a f e e l i n g c o u l d have managed so c o m -
p l e t e l y t o p r e o c c u p y a n d impassion m e n w h o j u s t barely have the h a b i t o f
t h i n k i n g b e y o n d the present. I t is far f r o m t r u e that t h e desire t o live o n i n
the m e m o r y o f t h e survivors m u s t be regarded as the r o o t o f m o u r n i n g .
R a t h e r , o n e begins t o ask oneself w h e t h e r i t is n o t m o u r n i n g itself, o n c e i n -
stituted, that awakened t h e n o t i o n o f a n d taste f o r p o s t h u m o u s l a m e n t a t i o n .
I f w e k n o w w h a t p r i m i t i v e m o u r n i n g is, the standard i n t e r p r e t a t i o n
seems all t h e m o r e untenable. I t consists n o t m e r e l y o f p i o u s regrets accorded

•"'Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 507; Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 498.
3!
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 500; Eylmann, Die Eingeborenen, p. 227.
32
Brough Smyth, Aborigines of Victoria, vol. I, p. 114.
33
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 510.
402 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

t o the o n e w h o is n o m o r e b u t also o f harsh abstinences a n d c r u e l sacrifices.

T h e r i t e n o t o n l y demands that o n e t h i n k o f the deceased i n a m e l a n c h o l y
w a y b u t that o n e beat, bruise, lacerate, a n d b u r n oneself. W e have even seen
that people i n m o u r n i n g are so c a r r i e d away i n t o r t u r i n g themselves that
t h e y sometimes d o n o t survive t h e i r w o u n d s . W h a t w o u l d be the dead man's
reason f o r i m p o s i n g such tortures u p o n them? S u c h c r u e l t y o n his part i n d i -
cates s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n a desire n o t t o be f o r g o t t e n . F o r the deceased t o
find pleasure i n seeing his o w n suffer, h e w o u l d have t o hate t h e m a n d thirst
f o r t h e i r b l o o d . T h i s f e r o c i t y w i l l n o d o u b t seem n a t u r a l t o those f o r w h o m
every s p i r i t is necessarily an e v i l a n d dreaded p o w e r . B u t w e k n o w that there
are all k i n d s o f spirits. H o w does i t h a p p e n that the soul o f the deceased
s h o u l d necessarily be an e v i l spirit? As l o n g as the m a n is alive, he loves his
k i n a n d trades favors w i t h t h e m . Is i t n o t strange that his soul s h o u l d s l o u g h
o f f his earlier feelings t h e instant i t is freed f r o m the b o d y , so as t o b e c o m e a
m e a n a n d t o r m e n t i n g genie? Yet generally, t h e dead m a n retains the p e r s o n -
ality o f the o n e w h o l i v e d ; he has t h e same character, t h e same hatreds, and
the same affections. So the m e t a m o r p h o s i s is far from b e i n g self-evident a n d
c o m p r e h e n s i b l e . T r u e , t h e natives i m p l i c i t l y c o n c e d e that p o i n t w h e n t h e y
e x p l a i n the r i t e b y the demands o f the deceased; b u t the q u e s t i o n precisely is
t o k n o w from w h e n c e that idea came t o t h e m . Far from o u r b e i n g able t o r e -
gard that m e t a m o r p h o s i s as a t r u i s m , i t is as obscure as t h e r i t e itself and,
hence, inadequate t o a c c o u n t f o r t h e r i t e .
Finally, a l t h o u g h o n e m a y have f o u n d the reasons f o r this s t u n n i n g trans-
f o r m a t i o n , o n e w o u l d still have t o e x p l a i n w h y i t is o n l y t e m p o r a r y , f o r i t
does n o t last b e y o n d m o u r n i n g . O n c e t h e rites have b e e n done, the deceased
o n c e again becomes w h a t he was i n life: an affectionate a n d d e v o t e d relative.
H e places the n e w capacities he gains from his n e w c o n d i t i o n at the disposal
3 4
o f his o w n . F r o m t h e n o n , he is seen as a g o o d genie, always ready t o help
those he o n c e t o r m e n t e d . F r o m w h e n c e c o u l d these successive reversals have
arisen? I f the b a d feelings ascribed t o the soul arise o n l y from t h e fact that i t
is n o l o n g e r alive, t h e n t h e y o u g h t t o r e m a i n i n v a r i a n t . A n d i f m o u r n i n g d e -
rives f r o m such feelings, t h e n i t o u g h t t o be w i t h o u t e n d .
These m y t h i c a l explanations d o n o t translate the r i t e itself b u t the idea
the i n d i v i d u a l has o f i t . I n o r d e r t o c o n f r o n t the reality t h e y d o translate b u t
distort, w e can p u t t h e m aside. W h d e m o u r n i n g differs f r o m o t h e r f o r m s o f
the positive c u l t , i t resembles t h e m i n o n e respect: I t t o o is made o f c o l l e c -

34
Several examples of this belief are to be found in Howitt, NativeTribes, p. 435. Cf. Strehlow, Aranda,
vol. I, pp. 15—16 and vol. II, p. 7.
The Piacular Rites and the Ambiguity of the Notion of the Sacred 403

tive rites that b r i n g a b o u t a state o f effervescence i n those w h o take part.

T h e intense feelings are different; the w i l d i n t e n s i t y is the same. Presumably,
therefore, t h e e x p l a n a t i o n o f the j o y f u l rites is applicable t o t h e sad rites, p r o -
v i d e d t h e i r terms are transposed.
W h e n an i n d i v i d u a l dies, the f a m i l y g r o u p t o w h i c h he belongs feels
d i m i n i s h e d , a n d i t comes t o g e t h e r t o react t o this d i m i n i s h m e n t . A shared
m i s f o r t u n e has the same effect as the approach o f a happy event. I t enlivens
collective feelings, w h i c h lead i n d i v i d u a l s t o seek o n e a n o t h e r o u t and c o m e
together. I n fact, w e have seen this n e e d a f f i r m itself sometimes w i t h special
e n e r g y — p e o p l e kissing a n d p u t t i n g t h e i r arms a r o u n d o n e another, pressing
as close t o g e t h e r as possible. B u t the e m o t i o n a l state i n w h i c h the g r o u p finds
itself reflects t h e circumstances i t is t h e n g o i n g t h r o u g h . N o t o n l y d o the k i n
m o s t i m m e d i a t e l y affected b r i n g t h e i r personal s o r r o w t o the g a t h e r i n g , b u t
the society exerts m o r a l pressure o n its m e m b e r s , a n d they b r i n g t h e i r feel-
ings i n t o h a r m o n y w i t h t h e s i t u a t i o n . I f society p e r m i t t e d t h e m t o r e m a i n
indifferent t o the b l o w that strikes a n d diminishes i t , i t w o u l d be p r o c l a i m i n g
that i t does n o t h o l d its r i g h t f u l place i n t h e i r hearts. I n d e e d , i t w o u l d d e n y
itself. F o r a f a m i l y t o tolerate t h a t o n e o f its m e m b e r s s h o u l d die w i t h o u t b e -
i n g m o u r n e d w o u l d give witness thereby that i t lacks m o r a l u n i t y a n d c o h e -
siveness: I t abdicates; i t renounces its existence.
F o r his part, w h e n the i n d i v i d u a l feels f i r m l y attached t o the society t o
w h i c h h e belongs, h e feels m o r a l l y b o u n d t o share i n its g r i e f a n d its j o y . T o
a b a n d o n i t w o u l d be t o break the ties that b i n d h i m t o the collectivity, t o give
u p w a n t i n g c o l l e c t i v i t y , a n d t o c o n t r a d i c t himself. I f the C h r i s t i a n fasts a n d
m o r t i f i e s h i m s e l f d u r i n g t h e c o m m e m o r a t i v e feasts o f the Passion a n d the
J e w o n t h e anniversary o f Jerusalem's fall, i t is n o t t o give w a y t o sadness
spontaneously felt. I n those circumstances, t h e believer's i n w a r d state is i n
d i s p r o p o r t i o n t o the harsh abstinences t o w h i c h he submits. I f he is sad, i t is
first and foremost because he forces h i m s e l f t o b e a n d disciplines h i m s e l f t o
t o be; a n d he disciplines h i m s e l f t o be i n o r d e r t o a f f i r m his faith. T h e a t t i -
t u d e o f t h e A u s t r a l i a n i n m o u r n i n g is t o b e u n d e r s t o o d i n the same way. I f
he cries a n d moans, i t is n o t o n l y t o express i n d i v i d u a l sadness b u t also t o f u l -
f i l l a d u t y t o the f e e l i n g — a n o b l i g a t o r y feeling o f w h i c h the society a r o u n d
h i m does n o t fad t o r e m i n d h i m o n occasion.
W e k n o w f r o m elsewhere h o w h u m a n feelings intensify w h e n t h e y are
c o l l e c t i v e l y a f f i r m e d . L i k e j o y , sadness is h e i g h t e n e d a n d a m p l i f i e d b y its re-
verberation f r o m one consciousness t o the n e x t , a n d t h e n i t gradually
expresses itself o v e r t l y as unrestrained a n d convulsive m o v e m e n t . T h i s n o
l o n g e r is the j o y f u l a n i m a t i o n that w e observed a w h i l e ago; i t is cries and
shrieks o f p a i n . E v e r y p e r s o n is p u l l e d a l o n g b y every other, and s o m e t h i n g
404 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

l i k e a panic o f sadness occurs. W h e n the p a i n reaches such a p i t c h , i t b e -

comes suffused w i t h a k i n d o f anger and exasperation. O n e feels the need
t o break o r destroy s o m e t h i n g . O n e attacks oneself o r others. O n e strikes,
w o u n d s , o r b u r n s oneself, o r o n e attacks s o m e o n e else, i n o r d e r t o strike,
w o u n d , o r b u r n h i m . T h u s was established the m o u r n i n g c u s t o m o f g i v i n g
oneself over t o veritable orgies o f t o r t u r e . I t seems t o m e probable that the
vendetta a n d head h u n t i n g have n o o t h e r o r i g i n . I f every death is i m p u t e d t o
some m a g i c a l spell a n d i f , f o r that reason, i t is b e l i e v e d that the dead person
m u s t be avenged, the reason is a felt n e e d t o f i n d a v i c t i m at all costs o n
w h o m t h e c o l l e c t i v e s o r r o w a n d anger can be discharged. T h i s v i c t i m w i l l
naturally be sought outside, f o r an outsider is a subject minoris resistentiae*';
since he is n o t p r o t e c t e d b y the f e l l o w - f e e l i n g t h a t attaches t o a relative o r a
n e i g h b o r , n o t h i n g a b o u t h i m b l o c k s a n d neutralizes t h e b a d a n d destructive
feelings aroused b y t h e death. P r o b a b l y f o r the same reason, a w o m a n serves
m o r e o f t e n t h a n a m a n as t h e passive o b j e c t o f t h e m o s t c r u e l m o u r n i n g rites.
Because she has l o w e r social significance, she is m o r e readily singled o u t t o
f i l l the f u n c t i o n o f scapegoat.
W e see that this e x p l a n a t i o n o f m o u r n i n g leaves ideas o f soul o r s p i r i t e n -
t i r e l y o u t o f account. T h e o n l y forces really at w o r k are o f an e n t i r e l y i m p e r -
sonal nature; these forces are t h e e m o t i o n s that t h e death o f a m e m b e r arouses
i n t h e g r o u p . B u t the p r i m i t i v e does n o t k n o w the psychic m e c h a n i s m from
w h i c h all these practices arise. T h u s , w h e n he tries t o a c c o u n t f o r t h e m , he
has t o forge a q u i t e different e x p l a n a t i o n f o r himself. A l l he k n o w s is that he
m u s t p a i n f u l l y m o r t i f y himself. Because every o b l i g a t i o n arouses the idea o f
a w i l l that obligates, he l o o k s a r o u n d h i m f o r t h e source o f the constraint he
feels. N o w there is a m o r a l p o w e r w h o s e reality seems t o h i m c e r t a i n a n d a l -
t o g e t h e r apt f o r this r o l e — a n d that is t h e s o u l set at l i b e r t y b y t h e death. For
w h a t c o u l d be m o r e interested t h a n the s o u l i n the repercussions o f its o w n
demise f o r the living? T h e r e f o r e , w e i m a g i n e that i f the l i v i n g i n f l i c t u n n a t -
u r a l t r e a t m e n t u p o n themselves, i t is t o g i v e i n t o the soul's demands. T h e
idea o f the s o u l must therefore have entered the m y t h o l o g y o f m o u r n i n g af-
ter the fact. M o r e o v e r , since i n h u m a n demands are a t t r i b u t e d t o the soul, w e
m u s t o n those g r o u n d s suppose that i t a b a n d o n e d all h u m a n feeling w h e n i t
left the b o d y i t f o r m e r l y a n i m a t e d . T h u s is e x p l a i n e d the m e t a m o r p h o s i s that

*Less able to resist. This account of scapegoating, as a process by which society reaffirms itself in the
face of loss, is closely analogous to Durkheim's 1899 account of anti-Semitism in France: "When society
undergoes suffering, it feels the need to find someone whom it can holdresponsiblefor its sickness, on
whom it can avenge its misfortunes: and those against whom opinion already discriminates are naturally
desiginated for this role. These are the pariahs who serve as expiatory victims." Quoted in Steven Lukes,
Entile Dürkheim: His Life and Work (London, Allen Lane, 1973), p. 345.
The Macular Rites and the Ambiguity of the Notion of the Sacred 405

makes a dreaded e n e m y o u t o f yesterday's relative. T h i s t r a n s f o r m a t i o n is n o t

the genesis o f m o u r n i n g b u t rather its sequel. I t expresses the change that has
o c c u r r e d i n t h e e m o t i o n a l state o f the g r o u p . T h e dead m a n is n o t m o u r n e d
because h e is feared; he is feared because h e is m o u r n e d .
T h i s change i n e m o t i o n a l state can o n l y be temporary. T h e rites o f
m o u r n i n g b o t h result f r o m a n d c o n c l u d e i t . T h e y gradually neutralize the
v e r y causes that gave t h e m b i r t h . T h e basis o f m o u r n i n g is the impression o f
enfeeblement that is felt b y the g r o u p w h e n i t loses a m e m b e r . B u t this v e r y
impression has the effect o f b r i n g i n g the i n d i v i d u a l s close to one another,
p u t t i n g t h e m i n t o closer t o u c h , a n d i n d u c i n g i n t h e m the same state o f soul.
A n d from all this comes a sensation o f r e n e w e d strength, w h i c h counteracts
the o r i g i n a l enfeeblement. People c r y t o g e t h e r because they c o n t i n u e t o be
precious t o o n e a n o t h e r and because, regardless o f the b l o w that has fallen
u p o n i t , the c o l l e c t i v i t y is n o t breached. T o be sure, i n that case they o n l y
share sad e m o t i o n s i n c o m m o n ; b u t t o c o m m u n e i n sadness is still t o c o m -
m u n e , a n d every c o m m u n i o n o f consciousnesses increases social vitality, i n
w h a t e v e r f o r m i t is d o n e .
T h e e x t r a o r d i n a r y v i o l e n c e o f the displays that necessarily a n d o b l i g a t o -
r i l y express the shared s o r r o w is evidence that, even at this m o m e n t , society
is m o r e alive and active t h a n ever. I n fact, w h e n social f e e l i n g suffers a p a i n f u l
shock, i t reacts w i t h greater force t h a n usual. O n e never holds so t i g h d y to
one's f a m i l y as w h e n i t has j u s t b e e n tested. T h i s excess o f energy all the
m o r e t h o r o u g h l y erases t h e effects o f t h e c r i p p l i n g that o c c u r r e d t o b e g i n
w i t h , a n d i n this w a y t h e sensation o f c o l d that death e v e r y w h e r e b r i n g s w i t h
it is dissipated. T h e g r o u p feels its s t r e n g t h g r a d u a l l y c o m i n g back t o i t ; i t b e -
gins again t o h o p e a n d t o live. O n e comes o u t o f m o u r n i n g , and o n e comes
o u t o f i t thanks t o m o u r n i n g itself. B u t since t h e idea p e o p l e have o f t h e soul
reflects the m o r a l state o f the society, that idea m u s t change w h e n the state
changes. W h i l e t h e p e o p l e w e r e i n the p e r i o d o f d e j e c t i o n and anguish, they
c o n c e i v e d o f the s o u l as h a v i n g the traits o f an e v i l b e i n g , interested o n l y i n
p e r s e c u t i n g m e n . N o w that t h e y again feel c o n f i d e n c e and security, they
m u s t concede that t h e s o u l has recovered its o r i g i n a l nature and its o r i g i n a l
feelings o f tenderness a n d solidarity. T h u s can be e x p l a i n e d the v e r y differ-
35
ent ways i n w h i c h i t is c o n c e i v e d at different p e r i o d s o f its existence.

35
One may ask why repeated ceremonies are necessary to bring about the relief that follows mourn-
ing. First, it is because funerals are often very long, with multiple procedures that spread out over many
months. In this way, they prolong and maintain the moral disturbance caused by the death (cf. [Robert]
Hertz, ["Contribution a une etude sur la] representation collective de la mort," AS, vol. X [1907],
pp. 48ff.). Furthermore, death is a profound change, with wide and lasting repercussions for the group. It
takestimefor those effects to be neutralized.
406 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

N o t o n l y d o m o u r n i n g rites b r i n g i n t o b e i n g certain o f the secondary

characteristics ascribed t o the soul, b u t perhaps, as w e l l , the idea that the soul
outlives the b o d y is n o t alien t o t h e m . T o be i n a p o s i t i o n t o understand the
practices t o w h i c h he subjects h i m s e l f w h e n a relative dies, m a n has n o choice
b u t t o believe that those practices are n o t a matter o f indifference t o the de-
ceased. T h e shedding o f b l o o d that is so w i d e l y practiced i n m o u r n i n g is actu-
3 6
ally a sacrifice t o the dead m a n . I t is d o n e because some part o f the deceased
person lives o n , a n d since w h a t lives o n is n o t the body, w h i c h is o b v i o u s l y n o t
m o v i n g a n d is d e c o m p o s i n g , that part can o n l y be the soul. O f course, i t is i m -
possible t o say f o r certain w h a t role these considerations played i n the o r i g i n o f
the idea o f life after death. B u t p r o b a b l y the i n f l u e n c e o f the c u l t was i n this
case w h a t i t is elsewhere. R i t e s are easier t o e x p l a i n w h e n they are t h o u g h t o f
as b e i n g addressed t o personal beings; i n this way, m e n were p r o m p t e d t o e x -
t e n d the influence o f m y t h i c personalities i n religious life. So that they c o u l d
account f o r m o u r n i n g , they e x t e n d e d the existence o f the soul b e y o n d the
t o m b . H e r e is a f u r t h e r example o f the w a y i n w h i c h rites react u p o n beliefs.

Ill
D e a t h is n o t the o n l y event that can unsettle a c o m m u n i t y . T h e r e are a g o o d
m a n y o t h e r occasions f o r m e n t o be saddened a n d b e c o m e disquieted. A n d
so w e m i g h t anticipate that even the Australians k n o w a n d c o n d u c t piacular
rites o t h e r t h a n those o f m o u r n i n g . I t is n o t e w o r t h y , h o w e v e r , that o n l y a
small n u m b e r o f examples can be f o u n d i n observers' accounts.
O n e r i t e o f this sort v e r y closely resembles those j u s t studied. R e c a l l that,
a m o n g the A r u n t a , each l o c a l g r o u p ascribes e x c e p t i o n a l l y i m p o r t a n t v i r t u e s
t o its c o l l e c t i o n o f churingas. I t is a c o l l e c t i v e p a l l a d i u m , w h o s e fate is l i n k e d
w i t h that o f the c o l l e c t i v i t y . T h u s , w h e n enemies o r w h i t e m e n manage t o
u n c o v e r o n e o f these r e l i g i o u s treasures, the loss is d e e m e d a p u b l i c calamity.
T h i s m i s f o r t u n e is the occasion o f a r i t e that has all the characteristics o f
m o u r n i n g . B o d i e s are covered w i t h w h i t e p i p e clay, a n d at the c a m p t w o
3 7
weeks are spent i n w a n i n g a n d l a m e n t a t i o n . T h i s is f u r t h e r evidence that
m o u r n i n g is caused n o t b y t h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h t h e s o u l o f the dead person

36
In a case reported by Grey, based on an observation by Bussel, the rite is quite like sacrifice, with the
blood being poured onto the corpse itself (Grey, Journal of Two Expeditions, vol. II, p. 330). In other in-
stances, there is a sort of beard offering, in which the men in mourning cut off part of their beards, which
they throw on the corpse (ibid., p. 335).
37
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, pp. 135—136.
The Piacular Rites and the Ambiguity of the Notion of the Sacred 407

is c o n c e i v e d b u t b y i m p e r s o n a l causes, b y the m o r a l state o f the g r o u p . H e r e ,

i n d e e d , is a r i t e w h o s e structure c a n n o t be d i s t i n g u i s h e d f r o m m o u r n i n g
3 8
p r o p e r a n d yet does n o t d e p e n d u p o n any idea o f s p i r i t o r evil d e m o n .
T h e distress i n w h i c h society finds itself w h e n t h e harvests have b e e n i n -
sufficient is a n o t h e r circumstance that gives rise t o ceremonies o f this sort.
" T h e natives w h o live i n t h e environs o f Lake E y r e , " says E y l m a n n , "also t r y
t o c o n j u r e away t h e i n a d e q u a c y o f the f o o d s u p p l y w i t h secret ceremonies.
B u t several o f the r i t u a l practices observed i n this r e g i o n are different f r o m
those p r e v i o u s l y discussed: T h e y seek t o act u p o n the r e l i g i o u s powers o r
forces o f nature n o t w i t h s y m b o l i c dances, m i m e t i c m o v e m e n t s , a n d dazzling
decorations, b u t w i t h sufferings that the i n d i v i d u a l s i n f l i c t u p o n themselves.
I n t h e n o r t h e r n t e r r i t o r i e s , as w e l l , t h e y strive t o appease those powers that
are i l l - d i s p o s e d t o w a r d m e n , b y u s i n g tortures such as p r o l o n g e d fasts, v i g i l s ,
dances c a r r i e d o n u n t i l the dancers are exhausted, a n d physical suffering o f
3 9
all k i n d s . " T h e t o r m e n t s the natives u n d e r g o f o r this p u r p o s e sometimes
40
leave t h e m so w o r n o u t that t h e y are unable t o h u n t f o r m a n y days.
T h e s e practices are used m o s t o f all t o c o m b a t d r o u g h t , since l a c k o f w a -
ter leads t o general f a m i n e . T h e y resort t o v i o l e n t means o f r e m e d y i n g this
e v i l . O n e o f t h e means used is t o o t h e x t r a c t i o n . A m o n g t h e K a i t i s h , f o r e x -
41
a m p l e , an i n c i s o r is e x t r a c t e d from an i n d i v i d u a l a n d h u n g f r o m a t r e e .
A m o n g the D i e r i , the idea o f r a i n is closely associated w i t h that o f b l o o d y i n -
42
cisions made o n the s k i n o f t h e t h o r a x a n d a r m s . A m o n g the same people,
w h e n the d r o u g h t is v e r y severe, t h e g r a n d c o u n c i l meets and s u m m o n s the
w h o l e t r i b e . I t is a g e n u i n e l y t r i b a l event. W o m e n are sent f o r t h i n all d i -
rections t o call the p e o p l e t o g e t h e r at a p r e s c r i b e d place and t i m e . O n c e
gathered, t h e y are heard t o g r o a n , t o scream i n p i e r c i n g voices a b o u t the m i s -
erable state o f the l a n d , a n d t o ask the M u r a - m u r a s ( m y t h i c a l ancestors) t o
4 3
confer o n t h e m t h e p o w e r t o m a k e a b u n d a n t r a i n f a l l . I n cases (very rare,
h o w e v e r ) w h e n there has b e e n t o o m u c h , an analogous c e r e m o n y t o stop the

38
Of course, each churinga is considered to be connected with an ancestor. Sail, lost churingas are not
mourned in order to appease the spirits of the ancestors. I have shown elsewhere (pp. 121-122) that the
idea of the ancestor entered into the idea of the churinga only in a secondary way, and after the fact.
39
Eylmann, Die Eingeborenen, p. 207; cf. p. 116.
4ll
Ibid„ p. 208.
4,
Ibid., p. 211.
42
[Alffed William] Howitt, "The Dieri [and Other Kindred Tribes of Central Australia"], JAI, vol.
XX (1891), p. 93.
43
Howitt, NativeTribes, p. 394.
408 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

44
r a i n takes place. T h e o l d m e n t h e n enter i n t o a state o f o u t - a n d - o u t f r e n z y ,
45
a n d the cries m a d e b y t h e c r o w d are pathetic t o h e a r .
Spencer and G i l l e n r e c o u n t a c e r e m o n y f o r us, u n d e r the name I n t i c h i -
u m a , that m a y w e l l have the same purpose a n d o r i g i n as the preceding. Physi-
cal t o r t u r e is used t o make an a n i m a l species m u l t i p l y . T h e r e is a clan a m o n g
the U r a b u n n a that has a k i n d o f snake called wadnungadni as its t o t e m . T h i s is
h o w the c h i e f goes about " m a k i n g sure that a n i m a l does n o t fail t o reproduce."
A f t e r d e c o r a t i n g himself, he kneels o n the g r o u n d , w i t h his arms fully e x -
tended. A helper pinches the skin o f the r i g h t a r m b e t w e e n his fingers w h i l e
the celebrant forces a p o i n t e d b o n e five inches l o n g t h r o u g h the f o l d thereby
f o r m e d . T h e left a r m is treated i n the same way. T h i s s e l f - m u t i l a t i o n is h e l d t o
46
p r o d u c e the desired r e s u l t . A m o n g the D i e r i , an analogous r i t e is used t o
47
make the w i l d c h i c k e n lay eggs: T h e celebrants pierce t h e i r s c r o t u m s . I n cer-
48
tain o t h e r tribes o f Lake Eyre, the ear is p i e r c e d t o make the yams p r o d u c e .
Partial o r t o t a l famines are n o t the o n l y disasters that can befall a t r i b e .
O t h e r events t h a t threaten o r seem t o threaten t h e group's existence o c c u r
f r o m t i m e t o t i m e . T h i s is the case, f o r example, o f t h e s o u t h e r n lights. T h e
K u r n a i believe that i t is a fire l i t i n the sky b y the h i g h g o d M u n g a n - n g a u a .
T h i s is w h y , w h e n t h e y see t h e lights, t h e y fear that fire w i l l spread t o earth
a n d e n g u l f t h e m . T h e result is a great effervescence i n t h e camp. T h e K u r n a i
shake t h e d r i e d h a n d o f a dead m a n , t o w h i c h t h e y ascribe an assortment o f
v i r t u e s , a n d t h e y g i v e o u t yells such as: " S e n d i t back; d o n o t let us b u r n . " A t
the same t i m e , b y o r d e r o f t h e elders, there are exchanges o f wives, w h i c h a l -
49
ways signals great e x c i t e m e n t . T h e same sexual license is r e p o r t e d a m o n g
the W i i m b a i o w h e n e v e r some c a l a m i t y appears i m m i n e n t , a n d especially i n
5 0
times o f e p i d e m i c .
U n d e r t h e i n f l u e n c e o f these ideas, m u t i l a t i o n a n d t h e s h e d d i n g o f b l o o d
are sometimes regarded as efficacious means o f c u r i n g sicknesses. A m o n g the

44
Ibid., p. 396.
^Communication of [S.] Gason, ["Of the Tribes Dieyerie, Auminie, Yandrawontha, Yarawurka, Pd-
ladapa, Lat. 31°S„ Long. 138° 55'"] JAL, vol. XXIV (1895), p. 175.
^Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 286.
47
[S.] Gason, "The Dieyerie Tribe," in [Edward Micklethwaite] Curr, The Australian Race: Its Origin,
Languages, Customs, Place of Landing in Australia, and the Routes by Which It Spread Itself over That Continent,
vol. II, Melbourne, John Ferres, 1886-1887, p. 68.
48
Ibid.; Eylmann, Die Eingeborenen, p. 208.
49
Howitt, Native Tribe, pp. 277, 430.
50
Ibid., p. 195.
The Piacular Rites and the Ambiguity of the Notion of the Sacred 409

D i e r i , w h e n a c h i l d has an accident, his relatives beat themselves o n the head

w i t h sticks o r b o o m e r a n g s , u n t i l the b l o o d streams d o w n t h e i r faces. T h e y
51
believe t h e y are r e l i e v i n g t h e child's p a i n t h e r e b y . Elsewhere, p e o p l e i m a g -
52
ine t h e y o b t a i n the same result w i t h an a d d i t i o n a l t o t e m i c c e r e m o n y . These
are analogous t o t h e r i t e t o erase the consequences o f a r i t u a l lapse, already
53
considered. T o be sure, a l t h o u g h i n these last cases there are n e i t h e r w o u n d s
n o r b l o w s n o r physical sufferings o f any k i n d , the r i t e does n o t differ i n
essence from t h e p r e c e d i n g ones. T h e p o i n t i n all cases is t o t u r n aside an evil
o r expiate a m i s d e e d w i t h extra r i t u a l proceedings.
S u c h are t h e o n l y piacular rites, o t h e r t h a n rites o f m o u r n i n g , that I have
m a n a g e d t o c o l l e c t f o r Australia. I n all l i k e l i h o o d , some must have escaped
m e , and w e m a y surmise as w e l l that others w e n t u n n o t i c e d by the observers.
S t i l l , i f o n l y a f e w have b e e n discovered u p t o n o w , t h e l i k e l y reason is that
they d o n o t c o u n t f o r m u c h i n t h e c u l t . Since t h e rites that express p a i n f u l
e m o t i o n s are relatively f e w i n p r i m i t i v e r e l i g i o n s , w e see h o w far those r e l i -
gions are from b e i n g daughters o f apprehension a n d fear. N o d o u b t , the rea-
son is that a l t h o u g h the A u s t r a l i a n leads an i m p o v e r i s h e d existence c o m p a r e d
t o that o f m o r e c i v i l i z e d peoples, he b y contrast asks so l i t t l e o f life that he
contents h i m s e l f w i t h l i t t l e . H i s o n l y n e e d is f o r nature t o f o l l o w its n o r m a l
course, f o r the seasons t o m o v e i n regular succession, a n d f o r the r a i n t o fall
at the usual t i m e , a b u n d a n d y b u t n o t excessively. Great disturbances i n the
cosmic o r d e r are always unusual. T h u s i t was n o t e w o r t h y that m o s t o f the
regular piacular rites I r e p o r t e d above w e r e observed i n the tribes o f the c e n -
ter, w h e r e d r o u g h t s are frequent a n d c o n s t i t u t e g e n u i n e p u b l i c disasters. S t i l l ,
i t is s u r p r i s i n g that piacular rites f o r the specific p u r p o s e o f e x p i a t i n g sin ap-
pear t o be almost e n t i r e l y absent. Nonetheless the A u s t r a l i a n , l i k e any m a n ,
m u s t c o m m i t r i t u a l misdeeds that i t w o u l d be i n his interest t o atone for. A n d
so I raise the q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r t h e sdence o f t h e texts o n this p o i n t m a y n o t
be p u t d o w n t o inadequacies o f o b s e r v a t i o n .
A l t h o u g h the substantive evidence I have m a n a g e d t o call u p o n is sparse,
i t is nonetheless i n s t r u c t i v e .
W h e n w e study piacular rites i n the m o r e advanced religions, i n w h i c h
the religious forces are i n d i v i d u a l i z e d , the rites seem t o be closely c o n n e c t e d

5I
Gason, The Dieyerie Tribe, vol. II, p. 69. The same procedure is used to redeem a ridiculous act.
When, through clumsiness or otherwise, a person has made those near him laugh, he asks them to hit him
on the head until the blood flows. Then things are restored and the person others were laughing at joins
in the gaiety of those around him (ibid., p. 70).
52
Eylmann, Die Eingeborenen, pp. 212, 447.
"See above, p. 389.
410 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL CONDUCT

w i t h a n t h r o p o m o r p h i c ideas. I f the faithful i m p o s e privations o n themselves

a n d u n d e r g o tortures, they d o so t o d i s a r m the malevolence that they i m p u t e
t o sacred beings t o w h o m they t h i n k t h e y are subject. T o appease the hate o r
anger o f those beings, the faithful anticipate t h e i r demands, s t r i k i n g t h e m -
selves so as n o t t o be struck b y t h e m . I t seems, t h e n , that these practices c o u l d
o n l y have b e e n b o r n w h e n gods a n d spirits w e r e c o n c e i v e d o f as m o r a l per-
sons susceptible t o passions l i k e those o f humans. F o r this reason, R o b e r t s o n
S m i t h believed he c o u l d assign e x p i a t o r y sacrifices a n d sacrificial offerings t o
a relatively recent date. A c c o r d i n g t o h i m , the shedding o f b l o o d that is char-
acteristic o f these rites was at first m e r e l y a process o f c o m m u n i o n : M a n
spilled his b l o o d o n the altar t o t i g h t e n t h e b o n d s b e t w e e n h i m s e l f a n d his
g o d . T h e r i t e presumably d i d n o t take o n a piacular a n d p u n i t i v e character
u n t i l its o r i g i n a l m e a n i n g h a d b e e n f o r g o t t e n a n d u n t i l the n e w idea people
5 4
had o f the sacred beings enabled t h e m t o ascribe a different f u n c t i o n t o i t .
B u t since piacular rites g o as far b a c k as t h e A u s t r a l i a n societies, they
5 5
c a n n o t be assigned so recent an o r i g i n . M o r e o v e r , w i t h o n e e x c e p t i o n , all
those I have j u s t m e n t i o n e d are i n d e p e n d e n t o f any a n t h r o p o m o r p h i c idea,
f o r t h e y i n v o l v e n e i t h e r gods n o r spirits. Abstinences a n d b l o o d l e t t i n g stop
famines a n d cure sicknesses, a c t i n g o n t h e i r o w n . T h e w o r k o f n o s p i r i t u a l
b e i n g is t h o u g h t t o i n t r u d e b e t w e e n the r i t e a n d t h e effects i t is t h o u g h t t o
b r i n g about. H e n c e i t was o n l y later that m y t h i c personalities came o n t o the
scene. T h e y h e l p e d t o m a k e t h e r i t u a l m e c h a n i s m easier t o i m a g i n e , o n c e i t
was established, b u t t h e y are n o t c o n d i t i o n s o f its existence. T h a t m e c h a n i s m
was i n s t i t u t e d f o r different reasons a n d owes its efficacy t o a different cause.
I t acts t h r o u g h the collective forces t h a t i t sets i n m o t i o n . D o e s a m i s f o r -
t u n e t h r e a t e n i n g t h e c o l l e c t i v i t y seem i m m i n e n t ? T h e c o l l e c t i v i t y comes
together, as i t does i n consequence o f m o u r n i n g , a n d a sense o f disquiet n a t -
u r a l l y dominates the assembled g r o u p . As always, the effect o f m a k i n g these
feelings shared is t o intensify t h e m . T h r o u g h b e i n g a f f i r m e d , these feelings
are e x c i t e d a n d i n f l a m e d , r e a c h i n g an i n t e n s i t y that is expressed i n the e q u i v -
alent i n t e n s i t y o f t h e actions that express t h e m . I n t h e same w a y that people
u t t e r t e r r i b l e cries u p o n t h e death o f a close relative, t h e y are caught u p b y
the i m m i n e n c e o f a collective m i s f o r t u n e a n d feel the n e e d t o tear a n d d e -
stroy. T o satisfy this need, t h e y strike a n d w o u n d themselves a n d m a k e t h e i r
b l o o d flow. B u t w h e n e m o t i o n s are as v i v i d as this, even i f t h e y are p a i n f u l ,

34
[William Robertson Smith, Lectures on] the Religion of the Semites, lect. XI [London, A. and C. Black,
1889].
55
According to Gason, this is true of the Dieri invoking the water Mura-muras in time of drought.
Tiie Piacular Rites and the Ambiguity of the Notion of the Sacred 411

they are i n n o w a y depressing. Q u i t e the contrary, t h e y p o i n t t o a state o f ef-

fervescence that entails the m o b i l i z a t i o n o f all o u r o w n active energy and, i n
a d d i t i o n , a f u r t h e r i n f l u x f r o m outside ourselves.
T h a t this e x c i t a t i o n has arisen from a sad event matters little, f o r i t is n o
less real a n d n o t specifically different f r o m the o n e observed i n j o y f u l feasts.
As a m a t t e r o f fact, i t sometimes manifests itself t h r o u g h m o v e m e n t s o f the
same k i n d . T h e same frenzy takes h o l d o f the f a i t h f u l , a l o n g w i t h the same i n -
c l i n a t i o n t o sexual d e b a u c h e r y — a sure sign o f great nervous o v e r e x c i t e m e n t .
R o b e r t s o n S m i t h h a d already n o t i c e d this c u r i o u s i n f l u e n c e o f the sad rites i n
the S e m i t i c cults. " I n d i f f i c u l t times," he says, " w h e n men's t h o u g h t s w e r e
usually somber, they t u r n e d t o the physical excitements o f r e l i g i o n , j u s t as,
n o w , they take refuge i n w i n e . A m o n g the Semites, as a general r u l e , w h e n
w o r s h i p began w i t h w a i l i n g a n d lamentation—as i n the m o u r n i n g o f A d o n i s
o r i n the great e x p i a t o r y rites that became c o m m o n i n later times—a sudden
r e v o l u t i o n created an e x p l o s i o n o f gaiety a n d r e j o i c i n g t o f o l l o w the g l o o m y
5 6
service w i t h w h i c h the c e r e m o n y h a d b e g u n . " I n short, w h i l e the religious
ceremonies start o u t from a d i s q u i e t i n g o r saddening fact, they retain t h e i r
p o w e r t o e n l i v e n the e m o t i o n a l state o f the g r o u p a n d the individuals.
S i m p l y b y b e i n g collective, religious ceremonies raise the vital tone. W h e n
o n e feels life i n oneself-—in the f o r m o f painful anger o r j o y f u l enthusiasm—
o n e does n o t believe i n death; one is reassured, one takes greater courage, and,
subjectively, e v e r y t h i n g happens as i f the r i t e really had set aside the danger that
was feared. T h i s is h o w curative o r preventive virtues came to be ascribed t o
the m o v e m e n t s that the r i t e is made of: the cries uttered, the b l o o d shed, the
w o u n d s i n f l i c t e d u p o n oneself o r others. A n d since these various t o r m e n t s
necessarily cause suffering, i n the end, suffering i n itself is regarded as the
57
means o f c o n j u r i n g away evil and c u r i n g sickness. Later, w h e n most o f the
religious forces had taken the f o r m o f personified spirits,* the efficacy o f these
practices was explained b y i m a g i n i n g t h e i r purpose t o be p r o p i t i a t i o n o f a
malevolent o r a n g r y g o d . B u t these ideas reflect o n l y the r i t e and the feelings
i t arouses; they are an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f i t , n o t its d e t e r m i n i n g cause.
A r i t u a l lapse w o r k s n o differently. I t , t o o , is a m e n a c e f o r the c o l l e c t i v -
ity. I t strikes at the m o r a l existence o f the c o l l e c t i v i t y because i t strikes at the

* Personnalités spirituelles.
56
Robertson Smith, Religion of the Semites, p. 262.
57
It is possible, by the way, that the belief in the morally uplifting virtues of suffering (see above,
p. 317) played some role in this. Since pain sanctifies and since it raises the religious level of the faithful,
it can also uplift the faithful when they have fallen below the norm.
412 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

beliefs o f the c o l l e c t i v i t y . B u t let the anger caused b y a r i t u a l misdeed be e x -

pressed o p e n l y a n d energetically, a n d the e v i l i t caused is counteracted. I f that
anger is strongly felt b y a l l , t h e reason is that t h e i n f r a c t i o n c o m m i t t e d is an
e x c e p t i o n , w h i l e the shared f a i t h is still i n t a c t . H e n c e t h e m o r a l u n i t y o f the
g r o u p is n o t i n danger. T h e p a i n i n f l i c t e d as e x p i a t i o n is b u t a manifestation
o f this p u b l i c anger a n d physical p r o o f o f its u n a n i m i t y . I n this way, the p a i n
really does have the r e d e e m i n g powers t h a t p e o p l e i m p u t e t o i t . Basically, the
feeling at t h e r o o t o f the p r o p e r l y e x p i a t o r y rites is n o different i n k i n d from
t h e o n e w e have f o u n d at the r o o t o f o t h e r piacular rites. I t is a sort o f a n g r y
sorrow, w h i c h tends t o express itself t h r o u g h destructive acts. A t times, this
p a i n is relieved t o t h e d e t r i m e n t o f t h e v e r y o n e w h o feels i t ; at times, i t is at
the expense o f an outside t h i r d party. B u t the psychic m e c h a n i s m is basically
58
the same i n b o t h cases.

IV
O n e o f t h e greatest services R o b e r t s o n S m i t h r e n d e r e d t o t h e science o f r e -
l i g i o n s is t o have called a t t e n t i o n t o the a m b i g u i t y o f t h e idea o f the sacred.
R e l i g i o u s forces are o f t w o k i n d s . S o m e are benevolent, guardians o f
physical and m o r a l order, as w e l l as dispensers o f life, health, a n d all the q u a l -
ities that m e n value. T h i s is t r u e o f t h e t o t e m i c p r i n c i p l e , w h i c h is spread o u t
over the w h o l e species, o f the m y t h i c a l ancestor, o f the a n i m a l - p r o t e c t o r , o f
c i v i l i z i n g heroes, a n d o f t u t e l a r y gods i n all t h e i r k i n d s a n d degrees. W h e t h e r
they are t h o u g h t o f as distinct personalities o r as diffused energies makes l i t t l e
difference. I n b o t h f o r m s , they play the same role a n d affect the consciousness
o f the faithful i n the same manner. T h e y inspire a respect that is full o f love
a n d gratitude. T h e persons a n d things that are o r d i n a r i l y i n contact w i t h t h e m
participate i n the same feelings a n d the same quality. T h e y are sacred persons
a n d things. So, t o o , are the places consecrated t o the c u l t , the objects used i n
the regular rites, the priests, the ascetics, a n d so o n . O n the o t h e r hand, there
are e v d and i m p u r e powers, bringers o f disorder, causes o f death and sickness,
instigators o f sacrilege. T h e o n l y feelings m a n has f o r t h e m is a fear that usu-
ally has a c o m p o n e n t o f h o r r o r . Such are the forces o n w h i c h and t h r o u g h
w h i c h the sorcerer acts: those that c o m e from corpses a n d from menstrual
b l o o d , those that unleash every p r o f a n a t i o n o f h o l y [siJi'wies] things, and so o n .
T h e spirits o f the dead a n d the e v i l genies o f all kinds are its p e r s o n i f i e d f o r m s .
B e t w e e n these t w o categories o f forces a n d beings, there is the sharpest
possible contrast, u p t o a n d i n c l u d i n g the m o s t radical antagonism. T h e g o o d

58
Cf. what I have said about expiation in my Division du travail social, 3d ed., Paris, F. Alcan, 1902,
pp. 64£F.
The Piacular Rites and the Ambiguity of the Notion of the Sacred 413

and w h o l e s o m e forces p u s h far away f r o m themselves those o t h e r forces,

w h i c h negate a n d c o n t r a d i c t t h e m . Besides, t h e first are f o r b i d d e n t o the
second. A n y contact b e t w e e n t h e m is considered t h e w o r s t o f profanations.
T h i s is the archetype o f those p r o h i b i t i o n s b e t w e e n sacred things o f different
59
k i n d s , w h o s e existence I have m e n t i o n e d a l o n g t h e w a y . Since w o m e n d u r -
i n g m e n s t r u a t i o n are i m p u r e , a n d especially so at t h e first appearance o f the
menses, t h e y are r i g o r o u s l y sequestered at that t i m e , a n d m e n must have n o
6 0
contact w i t h t h e m . T h e b u l l roarers a n d the churingas are never i n contact
61
w i t h a dead p e r s o n . A sacrilegious p e r s o n is c u t o f f from the society o f the
faithful a n d n o t a l l o w e d t o take p a r t i n t h e c u l t . T h e w h o l e o f religious life
gravitates a r o u n d t w o opposite poles, t h e n , t h e i r o p p o s i t i o n b e i n g the same
as that b e t w e e n the p u r e a n d the i m p u r e , the saint a n d t h e sacrilegious p e r -
son, t h e d i v i n e a n d t h e d i a b o l i c a l .
B u t a l t h o u g h opposite t o o n e another, these t w o aspects o f religious life
are at t h e same t i m e closely a k i n . First, b o t h have t h e same r e l a t i o n t o p r o -
fane beings. T h e y m u s t abstain f r o m all contact w i t h i m p u r e things a n d w i t h
v e r y h o l y [saintes] things. T h e f o r m e r are n o less f o r b i d d e n t h a n the latter,
a n d they, t o o , are taken o u t o f c i r c u l a t i o n , w h i c h is t o say that t h e y are also
sacred [sdrres]. T o be sure, t h e t w o d o n o t p r o v o k e i d e n t i c a l feelings. Disgust
a n d h o r r o r are o n e t h i n g a n d respect another. Nonetheless, f o r actions t o be
the same i n b o t h cases, the feelings expressed m u s t n o t be different i n k i n d .
I n fact, there actually is a c e r t a i n h o r r o r i n r e l i g i o u s respect, especially w h e n
i t is v e r y intense; a n d t h e fear i n s p i r e d b y m a l i g n a n t p o w e r s is n o t w i t h o u t a
c e r t a i n reverential quality. I n d e e d , the shades o f difference b e t w e e n these
t w o attitudes are sometimes so elusive that i t is n o t always easy t o say i n j u s t
w h i c h state o f m i n d the f a i t h f u l are. A m o n g c e r t a i n Semitic peoples, p o r k
was f o r b i d d e n , b u t o n e d i d n o t always k n o w w i t h c e r t a i n t y i f i t was f o r b i d -
6 2
d e n as an i m p u r e t h i n g o r as a h o l y [sainte] t h i n g . A n d the same p o i n t can
be a p p l i e d t o a v e r y large n u m b e r o f d i e t a r y restrictions.
T h e r e is m o r e : A n i m p u r e t h i n g o r an e v i l p o w e r o f t e n becomes a h o l y
t h i n g o r a t u t e l a r y p o w e r — a n d v i c e v e r s a — w i t h o u t c h a n g i n g i n nature, b u t

5,
See pp. 304-306 above.
60
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 460; Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 601; Roth, [Super-
stition, Magic and Medicine], North Queensland Ethnography, Bull. 5 [Brisbane, G. A. Vaughn, 1903], p. 24.
There is no need to multiply references in support of such a well-known fact.
6l
However, Spencer and Gillen cite a case in which churingas are placed under the head of the dead
person (Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 156). As they acknowledge, however, this is unique and ab-
normal (ibid., p. 157), and it is strenuously denied by Strehlow (Aranda, vol. II, p. 79).
62
Robertson Smith, Religion of the Semites, p. 153, cf. p. 446, the additional note tided "Holiness, Un-
cleanness and Taboo."
414 T H E PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

s i m p l y t h r o u g h a change i n e x t e r n a l circumstances. W e have seen that the

soul o f the dead person, at first a dreaded p r i n c i p l e , is t r a n s f o r m e d i n t o a p r o -
tective genie w h e n t h e m o u r n i n g is over. S i m i l a r l y the corpse, w h i c h at first
inspires o n l y t e r r o r a n d distance, is later treated as a venerated relic. Funeral
anthropophagy, w i d e l y p r a c t i c e d i n the A u s t r a l i a n societies, is evidence o f
63
this t r a n s f o r m a t i o n . T h e t o t e m i c a n i m a l is archetypically the h o l y b e i n g ,
b u t f o r h i m w h o w r o n g f u l l y consumes its flesh, i t is a p r i n c i p l e o f death. T h e
p e r s o n g u d t y o f sacrilege is, generally speaking, o n l y a profane person w h o
has b e e n i n f e c t e d b y a b e n e v o l e n t r e l i g i o u s force. C h a n g i n g its nature w h e n
64
i t changes its habitat, this force pollutes rather t h a n sanctifies. The blood
that comes f r o m t h e g e n i t a l organs o f a w o m a n , t h o u g h i t is o b v i o u s l y as i m -
65
p u r e as that o f the menses, is o f t e n used as a r e m e d y against sickness. The
v i c t i m i m m o l a t e d i n e x p i a t o r y sacrifices is saturated w i t h i m p u r i t y , because
t h e sins t o be e x p i a t e d have b e e n m a d e t o converge u p o n i t . H o w e v e r , o n c e
66
i t is slaughtered, its flesh a n d b l o o d are p u t t o t h e m o s t p i o u s uses.
Inversely, a l t h o u g h c o m m u n i o n is a r e l i g i o u s p r o c e d u r e w h o s e f u n c t i o n
is o r d i n a r i l y consecration, i t sometimes has the same effects as a sacrilege. I n -
dividuals w h o have c o m m u n e d t o g e t h e r are, i n c e r t a i n cases, f o r c e d t o flee
o n e another, l i k e carriers o f plague. I t is as t h o u g h t h e y have b e c o m e sources
o f dangerous c o n t a m i n a t i o n f o r o n e another. T h e sacred b o n d that j o i n s
t h e m separates t h e m at t h e same time. C o m m u n i o n s o f this sort are c o m m o n
i n Australia. O n e o f the m o s t t y p i c a l has b e e n observed a m o n g the N a r r i n -
y e r i a n d n e i g h b o r i n g tribes. W h e n a c h i l d comes i n t o t h e w o r l d , its parents
carefully preserve its u m b i l i c a l c o r d , w h i c h is t h o u g h t t o c o n t a i n some part
o f t h e chdd's soul. T w o i n d i v i d u a l s w h o exchange u m b i l i c a l cords preserved
i n this w a y c o m m u n e b y the v e r y fact o f this exchange; i t is as t h o u g h t h e y
e x c h a n g e d souls. B u t b y the same t o k e n , t h e y are f o r b i d d e n t o t o u c h o n e a n -
other, t o speak t o one another, a n d even t o see o n e another. I t is as t h o u g h
67
t h e y w e r e objects o f h o r r o r f o r one a n o t h e r .

63
Howitt, Native Tribes, pp. 448-450; Brough Smyth, Aborigines of Victoria, vol. I, pp. 118, 120; Daw-
son, The Australian Aborigines, p. 67; Eyre, Journals of Expedition, vol. II, p. 257; [Walter Edmund] Roth,
"Burial Ceremonies," p. 367.
M
See pp. 324-325 above.
65
Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes, p. 464; Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes, p. 599.
''For example, among the Israelites, the altar is purified with the blood of the expiatory victim (Lev.
4: 5ff.); thefleshis burned, and the ashes are used to make a purifying water (Num.: 19.)
67
Taplin, "The Narrinyeri Tribe," in [James Dominick Woods, The Native Tribes of South Australia,
Adelaide, E. S. Wigg, 1879], pp. 32-34. When the two individuals who have exchanged their umbilical
cords belong to different tribes, they are used as agents of intertribal commerce. In this case, the exchange
of cords takes place shortly after their births and through the intermediary of their respective parents.
The Piacular Rites and the Ambiguity of the Notion of the Sacred 415

So the p u r e a n d t h e i m p u r e are n o t t w o separate genera b u t t w o varieties

o f the same genus that includes all sacred t h i n g s . T h e r e are t w o sorts o f sa-
cred, l u c k y a n d u n l u c k y ; a n d n o t o n l y is there n o radical d i s c o n t i n u i t y b e -
t w e e n the t w o opposite f o r m s , b u t t h e same o b j e c t can pass from o n e t o the
o t h e r w i t h o u t c h a n g i n g its nature. T h e i m p u r e is made f r o m the pure, a n d
v i c e versa. T h e possibility o f such transformations constitutes the a m b i g u i t y
o f the sacred.
B u t w h i l e R o b e r t s o n S m i t h had a k e e n sense o f this ambiguity, he never
a c c o u n t e d f o r i t explicidy. H e c o n f i n e d h i m s e l f t o p o i n t i n g o u t that since all
religious forces are intense a n d contagious, i n w h a t e v e r d i r e c t i o n t h e i r i n f l u -
ence is exercised, the w i s e t h i n g is t o approach t h e m w i t h respectful precau-
tions. I t seemed t o h i m that the farrufy resemblance they all have c o u l d be
a c c o u n t e d f o r i n this way, despite the contrasts that otherwise distinguish
t h e m . B u t first o f all, that o n l y shifted the question. Still t o be s h o w n was
h o w the powers o f e v i l c o m e t o have the i n t e n s i t y a n d contagiousness o f
the others. P u t differendy, h o w does i t h a p p e n that these powers are o f a r e l i -
gious nature? Second, the energy a n d v o l a t i l i t y c o m m o n t o b o t h d o n o t
enable us t o understand h o w , despite the c o n f l i c t b e t w e e n t h e m , they can
t r a n s f o r m themselves i n t o o n e a n o t h e r o r replace o n e another i n t h e i r respec-
tive functions, o r h o w t h e p u r e can c o n t a m i n a t e w h i l e the i m p u r e sometimes
68
sanctifies.
T h e e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h e piacular rites that I have j u s t p r o p o s e d enables us
t o answer this t w o f o l d q u e s t i o n .
W e have seen that the e v i l p o w e r s actually result from a n d s y m b o l i z e
these rites. W h e n society is g o i n g t h r o u g h events that sadden, distress, o r
anger i t , i t pushes its m e m b e r s t o give witness t o t h e i r sadness, distress, o r
anger t h r o u g h expressive actions. I t demands c r y i n g , l a m e n t i n g , a n d w o u n d -
i n g o n e s e l f a n d others as a m a t t e r o f duty. I t does so because those c o l l e c t i v e
demonstrations, as w e l l as t h e m o r a l c o m m u n i o n t h e y simultaneously
bear witness t o a n d reinforce, restore t o t h e g r o u p t h e energy that the events

68
It is true that [William Robertson] Smith does not accept the reality of these substitutions and trans-
formations. According to him, the expiatory victim could purify only because it was itself in no way im-
pure. From the beginning, it was a holy thing; it was intended to reestablish, through communion, the
ties of kinship that united the worshipper to his god, after a ritual lapse had loosened or broken them. For
that operation, they chose an exceptionally holy animal, so that communion would be more efficacious
and might remove the effects of the wrong more completely. Only when they had ceased to understand
the meaning of the rite was the sacrosanct animal considered impure (Religion of the Semites, pp. 347ff.).
But it is inadmissible that such universal beliefs and practices as those that we find at the basis of expiatory
sacrifice should result from a mere error of interpretation. In fact, it is beyond doubt that the impurity of
the sin was loaded onto the expiatory victim. Moreover, we have just seen that these transformations from
pure to impure, or vice versa, are found in the simplest societies we know.
416 THE PRINCIPAL MODES OF RITUAL C O N D U C T

threatened t o take away, a n d thus enables i t t o recover its e q u i l i b r i u m . I t is

this e x p e r i e n c e that m a n is i n t e r p r e t i n g w h e n he imagines e v d beings o u t -
side h i m w h o s e hostility, w h e t h e r i n h e r e n t o r transitory, can be d i s a r m e d
o n l y t h r o u g h h u m a n suffering. So these beings are n o t h i n g o t h e r t h a n c o l -
lective states o b j e c t i f i e d ; t h e y are society itself seen i n o n e o f its aspects. B u t
w e also k n o w that the b e n e f i c e n t p o w e r s are n o t made any differently; they
t o o result from a n d express c o l l e c t i v e life; they t o o represent society, b u t so-
ciety captured i n a v e r y different p o s t u r e — t h a t is, at t h e m o m e n t w h e n i t
c o n f i d e n d y affirms itself and zealously presses things i n t o the service o f the
ends i t is p u r s u i n g . Since these t w o k i n d s o f forces have a c o m m o n o r i g i n ,
i t is n o t s u r p r i s i n g that, even t h o u g h m o v i n g i n opposite directions, t h e y
s h o u l d have t h e same nature, that they s h o u l d be equally intense and c o n t a -
g i o u s — a n d hence, p r o h i b i t e d a n d sacred.
F r o m precisely this fact, w e can u n d e r s t a n d h o w they are t r a n s f o r m e d
i n t o o n e another. Since they reflect t h e e m o t i o n a l state i n w h i c h the g r o u p
finds itself, a change i n that state is sufficient t o m a k e the forces themselves
change d i r e c t i o n . W h e n the m o u r n i n g ends, the h o u s e h o l d o f the deceased
has b e e n c a l m e d b y the m o u r n i n g itself; i t gathers n e w c o n f i d e n c e ; the
i n d i v i d u a l s are relieved o f t h e p a i n f u l pressure t h a t was exerted u p o n t h e m ;
they feel m o r e at ease. I t therefore seems t o t h e m that the spirit o f t h e d e -
ceased has set aside its hostile feelings i n order t o b e c o m e a b e n e v o l e n t p r o -
tector. T h e o t h e r transmutations, examples o f w h i c h I have c i t e d , are t o be
e x p l a i n e d i n the same way. W h a t makes a t h i n g sacred is, as I have s h o w n , the
collective feeling o f w h i c h i t is t h e object. I f , i n v i o l a t i o n o f the p r o h i b i t i o n s
that isolate i t , i t comes i n c o n t a c t w i t h a profane p e r s o n , this same feeling w i l l
spread c o n t a g i o u s l y t o that p e r s o n a n d m a r k h i m w i t h a special quality. H o w -
ever, w h e n i t arrives at that, i t finds i t s e l f i n a v e r y different state from t h e o n e
i n w h i c h i t was at t h e outset. H a v i n g b e e n s h o c k e d a n d angered b y the p r o -
fanation e n t a i l e d b y this w r o n g f u l , u n n a t u r a l e x t e n s i o n , i t becomes aggressive
and i n c l i n e d t o w a r d destructive v i o l e n c e ; i t is i n c l i n e d t o seek revenge f o r the
trespass i t has e n d u r e d . F o r this reason, the i n f e c t e d subject is as t h o u g h i n -
vaded b y a v i r u l e n t and n o x i o u s force, t h r e a t e n i n g t o all that comes near h i m ;
thereafter, he inspires n o t h i n g b u t distance a n d repugnance, as t h o u g h he was
m a r k e d w i t h a t a i n t o r stain. A n d yet t h e cause o f this stain is the v e r y psy-
chic state that i n o t h e r circumstances consecrated a n d sanctified. B u t let t h e
anger thus aroused be satisfied b y an e x p i a t o r y r i t e , a n d i t subsides, relieved.
T h e offended f e e l i n g is p r o p i t i a t e d and returns t o its i n i t i a l state. T h u s , i t
again acts as i t acted at first. Instead o f c o n t a m i n a t i n g , i t sanctifies. Because i t
goes o n i n f e c t i n g the o b j e c t t o w h i c h i t has b e c o m e attached, that o b j e c t
c a n n o t b e c o m e profane a n d r e l i g i o u s l y i n d i f f e r e n t again. B u t t h e d i r e c t i o n o f
The Piacular Rites and the Ambiguity of the Notion of the Sacred 417

the religious force that appears t o o c c u p y i t has b e e n i n v e r t e d . F r o m b e i n g

i m p u r e i t has b e c o m e p u r e a n d an i n s t r u m e n t o f p u r i f i c a t i o n .
I n summary, the t w o poles o f religious life correspond t o the t w o opposite
states t h r o u g h w h i c h all social life passes. T h e r e is the same contrast b e t w e e n
the l u c k y a n d the u n l u c k y sacred as b e t w e e n the states o f collective e u p h o r i a
and dysphoria. B u t because b o t h are equally collective, the m y t h o l o g i c a l c o n -
structions that symbolize t h e m are i n t h e i r v e r y essence closely related. W h i l e
the feelings placed i n c o m m o n v a r y f r o m extreme d e j e c t i o n to extreme h i g h -
spiritedness, from painful anger t o ecstatic enthusiasm, the result i n all cases is
c o m m u n i o n a m o n g i n d i v i d u a l consciousnesses a n d m u t u a l c a l m i n g . W h i l e the
fundamental process is always the same, different circumstances c o l o r i t differ-
endy. I n the end, t h e n , i t is the u n i t y and diversity o f social life that creates at
the same t i m e the u n i t y and the diversity o f sacred beings and things.
T h i s a m b i g u i t y is n o t peculiar t o t h e idea o f the sacred alone. S o m e t h i n g
o f this same q u a l i t y is t o be f o u n d i n all the rites studied. O f course, i t was
necessary t o d i s t i n g u i s h t h e m . T r e a t i n g t h e m as o n e a n d the same w o u l d have
b e e n t o m i s u n d e r s t a n d the m u l t i p l e aspects o f religious life. B u t h o w e v e r d i f -
ferent t h e y m a y be, there is n o d i s c o n t i n u i t y b e t w e e n t h e m . Q u i t e the c o n -
trary, t h e y are o v e r l a p p i n g a n d even interchangeable. I have already s h o w n
that rites o f o f f e r i n g a n d c o m m u n i o n , m i m e t i c rites, a n d c o m m e m o r a t i v e
rites o f t e n p e r f o r m the same f u n c t i o n s . O n e m i g h t t h i n k that the negative
c u l t is m o r e clearly separated from the positive c u l t , yet w e have seen that the
negative c u l t can nonetheless b r i n g a b o u t positive effects i d e n t i c a l t o those
o f the positive c u l t . T h e same results are o b t a i n e d t h r o u g h fasts, abstinences,
a n d s e l f - m u t i l a t i o n as t h r o u g h c o m m u n i o n s , offerings, and commemora-
tions. Conversely, offerings a n d sacrifices i m p l y p r i v a t i o n s and renunciations
o f all k i n d s . T h e c o n t i n u i t y b e t w e e n ascetic a n d piacular rites is even m o r e
apparent. B o t h are m a d e o f sufferings, accepted o r e n d u r e d , t o w h i c h similar
efficacy is ascribed. T h u s , t h e practices n o m o r e fall i n t o t w o separate genera
t h a n t h e beliefs do. H o w e v e r c o m p l e x the o u t w a r d manifestations o f religious
life m a y be, its i n n e r essence is simple, a n d o n e a n d the same. E v e r y w h e r e i t
fulfills t h e same n e e d a n d derives from the same state o f m i n d . I n all its f o r m s ,
its object is t o lift m a n above h i m s e l f a n d t o m a k e h i m live a h i g h e r hfe t h a n
he w o u l d i f he o b e y e d o n l y his i n d i v i d u a l impulses. T h e beliefs express this
hfe i n terms o f representations; the rites organize a n d regulate its f u n c t i o n i n g .
 CONCLUSION

I said at the b e g i n n i n g o f this b o o k that the r e l i g i o n w h o s e study I was u n -

d e r t a k i n g c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n itself the m o s t characteristic elements o f r e l i -
gious life. T h e t r u t h o f t h a t p r o p o s i t i o n can n o w be tested. H o w e v e r simple
the system I have s t u d i e d m a y be, I have nonetheless f o u n d w i t h i n i t all the
great ideas a n d all the p r i n c i p a l f o r m s o f r i t u a l c o n d u c t o n w h i c h even the
m o s t advanced r e l i g i o n s are based: the d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n sacred a n d p r o -
fane things; the ideas o f soul, spirit, m y t h i c a l personality, n a t i o n a l a n d even
i n t e r n a t i o n a l d i v i n i t y ; a negative c u l t w i t h t h e ascetic practices that are its e x -
treme f o r m ; rites o f sacrifice a n d c o m m u n i o n ; m i m e t i c , c o m m e m o r a t i v e ,
a n d piacular rites. N o t h i n g essential is absent. T h u s I have reason t o be c o n -
f i d e n t that t h e results achieved are n o t specific t o t o t e m i s m b u t can h e l p us
u n d e r s t a n d w h a t r e l i g i o n i n general is.
S o m e w i l l object that a single r e l i g i o n , w h a t e v e r its geographic spread, is
a n a r r o w basis f o r such an i n d u c t i o n . I t is b y n o means m y i n t e n t t o i g n o r e
w h a t an e x p a n d e d test can a d d t o the persuasiveness o f a theory. B u t i t is n o
less t r u e that w h e n a l a w has b e e n p r o v e d b y a single w e l l - m a d e e x p e r i m e n t ,
this p r o o f is universally v a l i d . I f a scientist m a n a g e d t o i n t e r c e p t the secret o f
life i n o n l y a single case, the t r u t h s thus o b t a i n e d w o u l d be applicable t o all
l i v i n g things, i n c l u d i n g the m o s t advanced, even i f this case was the simplest
p r o t o p l a s m i c b e i n g i m a g i n a b l e . A c c o r d i n g l y i f , i n t h e v e r y h u m b l e societies
j u s t studied, I have managed t o capture some o f the elements that c o m p r i s e
the m o s t f u n d a m e n t a l r e l i g i o u s ideas, there is n o reason n o t t o e x t e n d the
m o s t general results o f this research t o o t h e r r e l i g i o n s . I n fact, i t is i n c o n -
ceivable that the same effect c o u l d be sometimes due n o w t o o n e cause, n o w
t o another, a c c o r d i n g t o the circumstances, unless f u n d a m e n t a l l y the t w o
causes w e r e b u t one. A single idea c a n n o t express o n e reality here a n d a d i f -
ferent o n e there unless this d u a l i t y is m e r e l y apparent. I f , a m o n g c e r t a i n p e o -
ples, the ideas "sacred," " s o u l , " a n d " g o d s " can be e x p l a i n e d sociologically,
t h e n scientifically w e m u s t presume that t h e same e x p l a n a t i o n is v a l i d i n
p r i n c i p l e f o r all the peoples a m o n g w h o m t h e same ideas are f o u n d w i t h es-
sentially the same characteristics. A s s u m i n g that I a m n o t mistaken, t h e n , at
least some o f m y conclusions can l e g i t i m a t e l y be generalized. T h e t i m e has
c o m e t o d r a w these o u t . A n d an i n d u c t i o n o f this sort, based o n a w e l l -
d e f i n e d e x p e r i m e n t , is less reckless t h a n so m a n y c u r s o r y generalizations that,
i n t h e i r s t r i v i n g t o reach the essence o f r e l i g i o n i n a single stroke w i t h o u t

418
Conclusion 419

g r o u n d i n g themselves i n t h e analysis o f any p a r t i c u l a r r e l i g i o n , are at great

risk o f floating away i n t o the v o i d .

I
M o s t o f t e n , t h e theorists w h o have set o u t t o express r e l i g i o n i n r a t i o n a l
terms have regarded i t as b e i n g , first a n d foremost, a system o f ideas that c o r -
respond t o a d e f i n i t e object. T h a t object has b e e n c o n c e i v e d i n different
ways—nature, the i n f i n i t e , the u n k n o w a b l e , the ideal, a n d so f o r t h — b u t
these differences are o f l i t d e i m p o r t a n c e . I n every case, the representations—
that is, the beliefs—were considered the essential e l e m e n t o f r e l i g i o n . F o r
t h e i r part, rites appeared f r o m this s t a n d p o i n t t o be n o m o r e t h a n an e x t e r -
nal, c o n t i n g e n t , a n d physical translation o f those i n w a r d states that alone
w e r e d e e m e d t o have i n t r i n s i c value. T h i s n o t i o n is so widespread that most
o f t h e t i m e debates o n the t o p i c o f r e l i g i o n t u r n a r o u n d and about o n the
q u e s t i o n o f w h e t h e r r e l i g i o n can o r c a n n o t b e r e c o n c i l e d w i t h science—that
is, w h e t h e r there is r o o m alongside scientific k n o w l e d g e f o r another f o r m o f
t h o u g h t h e l d t o be specifically religious.
B u t t h e believers—the m e n w h o , l i v i n g a r e l i g i o u s life, have a direct
sense o f w h a t constitutes r e l i g i o n — o b j e c t that, i n t e r m s o f t h e i r d a y - t o - d a y
e x p e r i e n c e , this w a y o f seeing does n o t r i n g t r u e . I n d e e d , they sense that the
t r u e f u n c t i o n o f r e l i g i o n is n o t t o m a k e us t h i n k , e n r i c h o u r k n o w l e d g e , o r add
representations o f a different sort a n d source t o those w e o w e t o science. Its
t r u e f u n c t i o n is t o make us act a n d t o help us live. T h e believer w h o has c o m -
m u n e d w i t h his g o d is n o t s i m p l y a m a n w h o sees n e w truths that the u n b e -
liever k n o w s n o t ; he is a m a n w h o is stronger. * W i t h i n himself, he feels m o r e
strength t o endure the trials o f existence o r t o overcome t h e m . H e is as t h o u g h
l i f t e d above the h u m a n miseries, because h e is l i f t e d above his h u m a n c o n d i -
t i o n . H e believes he is delivered from e v i l — w h a t e v e r the f o r m i n w h i c h he
conceives o f e v i l . T h e first article o f any f a i t h is b e l i e f i n salvation b y faith.
B u t i t is h a r d t o see h o w a m e r e idea c o u l d have that p o w e r . I n fact, an
idea is b u t o n e e l e m e n t o f ourselves. H o w c o u l d i t confer o n us powers that
are s u p e r i o r t o those g i v e n us i n o u r n a t u r a l makeup? As r i c h i n e m o t i v e
p o w e r as an idea m a y be, i t c a n n o t a d d a n y t h i n g t o o u r natural v i t a l i t y ; i t can
o n l y release e m o t i v e forces that are already w i t h i n us, n e i t h e r creating n o r i n -
creasing t h e m . F r o m the fact that w e i m a g i n e an object as w o r t h y o f b e i n g
l o v e d a n d s o u g h t after, i t does n o t f o l l o w that w e s h o u l d feel stronger. E n e r -
gies greater t h a n those at o u r disposal m u s t c o m e from the object, and, m o r e

* Qui pent davantage. Literally "who is capable of more." Durkheim italicized peut.
420 Conclusion

t h a n that, w e m u s t have some means o f m a k i n g t h e m enter i n t o us a n d b l e n d

i n t o o u r i n n e r life. T o achieve this, i t is n o t e n o u g h that w e t h i n k about
t h e m ; i t is indispensable that w e place ourselves u n d e r t h e i r i n f l u e n c e , that
w e t u r n ourselves i n the d i r e c t i o n f r o m w h i c h w e can best feel that i n f l u e n c e .
I n short, w e m u s t act; a n d so w e m u s t repeat the necessary acts as o f t e n as is
necessary t o r e n e w t h e i r effects. F r o m this s t a n d p o i n t , i t becomes apparent
that the set o f regularly repeated actions that m a k e u p the c u l t regains all its
i m p o r t a n c e . I n fact, anyone w h o has t r u l y p r a c t i c e d a r e l i g i o n k n o w s v e r y
w e l l that i t is t h e c u l t that stimulates the feelings o f j o y , i n n e r peace, serenity,
a n d enthusiasm that, f o r the f a i t h f u l , stand as e x p e r i m e n t a l p r o o f o f t h e i r b e -
liefs. T h e c u l t is n o t m e r e l y a system o f signs b y w h i c h t h e f a i t h is o u t w a r d l y
expressed; i t is the s u m t o t a l o f means b y w h i c h that f a i t h is created a n d
recreated periodically. W h e t h e r the c u l t consists o f physical operations o r
m e n t a l ones, i t is always the c u l t that is efficacious.
T h i s e n t i r e study rests o n the postulate that the u n a n i m o u s feeling o f b e -
lievers d o w n t h e ages c a n n o t be m e r e i l l u s i o n . T h e r e f o r e , l i k e a recent a p o l -
1
ogist o f f a i t h , I accept that r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f rests o n a definite experience,
w h o s e demonstrative value is, i n a sense, n o t i n f e r i o r t o that o f scientific e x -
p e r i m e n t s , t h o u g h i t is different. I t o o t h i n k " t h a t a tree is k n o w n b y its
2
fruits," a n d that its f e r t i l i t y is the best p r o o f o f w h a t its roots are w o r t h . B u t
m e r e l y because there exists a " r e l i g i o u s experience," i f y o u w i l l , that is
g r o u n d e d i n some m a n n e r (is there, b y t h e way, any e x p e r i e n c e that is not?),
i t b y n o means f o l l o w s that t h e reality w h i c h g r o u n d s i t s h o u l d c o n f o r m o b -
j e c t i v e l y w i t h the idea t h e believers have o f i t . T h e v e r y fact that the w a y i n
w h i c h this reality has b e e n c o n c e i v e d has v a r i e d i n f i n i t e l y i n different times
is e n o u g h t o prove that n o n e o f these c o n c e p t i o n s expresses i t adequately. I f
the scientist sets i t d o w n as a x i o m a t i c that the sensations o f heat and l i g h t that
m e n have c o r r e s p o n d t o some o b j e c t i v e cause, h e does n o t thereby c o n c l u d e
that this cause is t h e same as i t appears t o the senses. L i k e w i s e , even i f the
feelings the faithful have are n o t i m a g i n a r y , t h e y still d o n o t c o n s t i t u t e p r i v -
deged i n t u i t i o n s ; there is n o reason w h a t e v e r t o t h i n k that t h e y i n f o r m us
b e t t e r a b o u t t h e nature o f t h e i r o b j e c t t h a n o r d i n a r y sensations d o a b o u t the
nature o f bodies a n d t h e i r properties. T o discover w h a t that object consists
of, t h e n , w e m u s t a p p l y t o those sensations an analysis similar t o the o n e that
has replaced t h e senses' representation o f the w o r l d w i t h a scientific a n d c o n -
ceptual one.
T h i s is precisely w h a t I have t r i e d t o do. W e have seen t h a t this r e a l i t y —

'William James, The Varieties of Religious Experience [London, Longmans, 1902].

2
Ibid. (p. 19 of the French translation).
Conclusion 421

w h i c h m y t h o l o g i e s have represented i n so m a n y different f o r m s , b u t w h i c h

is t h e objective, universal, a n d eternal cause o f those sui generis sensations o f
w h i c h r e l i g i o u s e x p e r i e n c e is made—is society. I have s h o w n w h a t m o r a l
forces i t develops a n d h o w i t awakens that feeling o f s u p p o r t , safety, and p r o -
tective guidance w h i c h binds the m a n o f f a i t h t o his c u l t . I t is this reality that
makes h i m rise above himself. I n d e e d , this is the reality that makes h i m , f o r
w h a t makes m a n is that set o f i n t e l l e c t u a l goods w h i c h is c i v i l i z a t i o n , a n d c i v -
i l i z a t i o n is t h e w o r k o f society. I n this w a y is e x p l a i n e d the p r e e m i n e n t role
o f the c u l t i n all r e l i g i o n s , w h a t e v e r t h e y are. T h i s is so because society c a n -
n o t m a k e its i n f l u e n c e felt unless i t is i n a c t i o n , a n d i t is i n a c t i o n o n l y i f the
i n d i v i d u a l s w h o c o m p r i s e i t are assembled a n d a c t i n g i n c o m m o n . I t is
t h r o u g h c o m m o n a c t i o n that society becomes conscious o f and affirms itself;
society is above all an active c o o p e r a t i o n . A s I have s h o w n , even collective
ideas a n d feelings are possible o n l y t h r o u g h t h e o v e r t m o v e m e n t s that s y m -
3
b o l i z e t h e m . T h u s i t is a c t i o n that dominates r e l i g i o u s life, f o r the v e r y rea-
son that society is its source.
T o all t h e reasons a d d u c e d t o j u s t i f y this c o n c e p t i o n , a final one can be
added that emerges from this b o o k as a w h o l e . A l o n g the way, I have estab-
lished that the f u n d a m e n t a l categories o f t h o u g h t , a n d thus science itself,
have r e l i g i o u s o r i g i n s . T h e same has b e e n s h o w n t o be t r u e o f magic, a n d
thus o f the various techniques d e r i v e d f r o m m a g i c . Besides, i t has l o n g been
k n o w n that, u n t i l a relatively advanced m o m e n t i n e v o l u t i o n , t h e rules o f
m o r a l i t y a n d l a w w e r e n o t d i s t i n c t from r i t u a l prescriptions. I n short, t h e n ,
4
w e can say that nearly all the great social i n s t i t u t i o n s w e r e b o r n i n r e l i g i o n .
F o r t h e p r i n c i p a l features o f collective life t o have b e g u n as n o n e o t h e r t h a n
various features o f r e l i g i o u s life, i t is e v i d e n t that r e l i g i o u s life m u s t necessar-
i l y have b e e n the e m i n e n t f o r m and, as i t w e r e , t h e e p i t o m e o f collective life.
I f r e l i g i o n gave b i r t h t o all that is essential i n society, that is so because the
idea o f society is the s o u l o f r e l i g i o n .
T h u s r e l i g i o u s forces are h u m a n forces, m o r a l forces. P r o b a b l y because
collective feelings b e c o m e conscious o f themselves o n l y b y settling u p o n e x -
t e r n a l objects, those v e r y forces c o u l d n o t organize themselves w i t h o u t t a k -
i n g some o f t h e i r traits from t h i n g s . I n this way, t h e y t o o k o n a k i n d o f

3
See above, pp. 23Iff.
4
Only one form of social activity has not as yet been explicitly linked to religion: economic activity.
Nevertheless, the techniques that derive from magic turn out, by this very fact, to have indirectly religious
origins. Furthermore, economic value is a sort of power or efficacy, and we know the religious origins of
the idea of power. Since mana can be conferred by wealth, wealth itself has some. From this we see that
the idea of economic value and that of religious value cannot be unrelated; but the nature of these rela-
tionships has not yet been studied.
422 Conclusion

physical nature; t h e y came t o m i n g l e as such w i t h the life o f the physical

w o r l d , and t h r o u g h t h e m i t was t h o u g h t possible t o e x p l a i n events i n that
w o r l d . B u t w h e n they are considered o n l y f r o m this s t a n d p o i n t and i n this
role, w e see o n l y w h a t is m o s t superficial a b o u t t h e m . I n reality, the essential
elements o u t o f w h i c h t h e y are m a d e are b o r r o w e d f r o m consciousness. O r -
dinarily, they d o n o t seem t o have a h u m a n character except w h e n t h e y are
5
t h o u g h t o f i n h u m a n f o r m , b u t even the m o s t i m p e r s o n a l a n d m o s t a n o n y -
m o u s are n o t h i n g o t h e r t h a n o b j e c t i f i e d feelings.
O n l y b y seeing r e l i g i o n s i n this w a y does i t b e c o m e possible t o detect
t h e i r real m e a n i n g . I f w e r e l y o n appearances, the rites o f t e n seem t o be
p u r e l y m a n u a l o p e r a t i o n s — a n o i n t i n g s , p u r i f i c a t i o n s , meals. T o consecrate a
t h i n g , o n e places i t i n c o n t a c t w i t h a source o f r e l i g i o u s energy, j u s t as today
a b o d y is placed i n c o n t a c t w i t h a source o f heat o r e l e c t r i c i t y i n order t o heat
o r electrify i t . T h e procedures used i n t h e t w o cases are n o t essentially dif-
ferent. U n d e r s t o o d i n this way, r e l i g i o u s t e c h n i q u e seems t o be a k i n d o f
mystical mechanics. B u t these physical operations are b u t the o u t e r envelope
i n w h i c h m e n t a l operations l i e h i d d e n . I n the e n d , t h e p o i n t is n o t t o exert
a k i n d o f physical constraint u p o n b l i n d and, m o r e t h a n that, i m a g i n a r y
forces b u t t o reach, fortify, a n d d i s c i p l i n e consciousnesses. T h e l o w e r r e l i -
gions have sometimes b e e n called materialistic. T h a t t e r m is i n c o r r e c t . A l l
religions, even the crudest, are i n a sense spiritualistic. T h e p o w e r s t h e y b r i n g
i n t o play are, above all, s p i r i t u a l , a n d t h e i r p r i m a r y f u n c t i o n is t o act u p o n
m o r a l life. I n this way, w e u n d e r s t a n d that w h a t was d o n e i n t h e name o f r e -
l i g i o n c a n n o t have b e e n d o n e i n v a i n , f o r i t is necessarily t h e society o f m e n ,
i t is h u m a n i t y , that has reaped the fruits.
I t m a y be asked, E x a c t l y w h a t society is i t that i n this w a y becomes the
substrate o f r e l i g i o u s life? Is i t the real society, such as i t exists a n d f u n c t i o n s
before o u r eyes, w i t h t h e m o r a l a n d j u r i d i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n t h a t i t has t o i l e d t o
fashion f o r itself over the course o f history? B u t that society is full o f flaws
a n d i m p e r f e c t i o n s . I n that society, g o o d rubs shoulders w i t h e v i l , injustice is
ever o n t h e t h r o n e , a n d t r u t h is c o n t i n u a l l y d a r k e n e d b y error. H o w c o u l d a
b e i n g so c r u d e l y m a d e inspire t h e feelings o f love, ardent enthusiasm, a n d
w i l l i n g self-sacrifice that all the r e l i g i o n s d e m a n d o f t h e i r faithful? Those
perfect beings that are t h e gods c a n n o t have taken t h e i r traits f r o m such a
m e d i o c r e , sometimes even base, reality.
W o u l d i t n o t be instead the perfect society, i n w h i c h j u s t i c e a n d t r u t h
r e i g n e d , a n d f r o m w h i c h e v i l i n all its f o r m s was u p r o o t e d ? N o o n e disputes

3
It is for this reason that Frazer and even Preuss set the impersonal religious forces outside religion, or
at most at its threshold, in order to relate them to magic.
Conclusion 423

that this perfect society has a close relationship t o r e l i g i o u s sentiment, f o r r e -

l i g i o n s are said t o a i m at r e a l i z i n g i t . H o w e v e r , this society is n o t an e m p i r i -
cal fact, w e l l d e f i n e d a n d observable; i t is a fancy, a d r e a m w i t h w h i c h m e n
have l u l l e d t h e i r miseries b u t have never e x p e r i e n c e d i n reality. I t is a m e r e
idea that expresses i n consciousness o u r m o r e o r less obscure aspirations t o -
w a r d t h e g o o d , the b e a u t i f u l , a n d t h e ideal. T h e s e aspirations have t h e i r roots
i n us; since t h e y c o m e f r o m the v e r y depths o f o u r b e i n g , n o t h i n g outside us
can a c c o u n t f o r t h e m . F u r t h e r m o r e , i n a n d o f themselves, they are already
r e l i g i o u s ; hence, far f r o m b e i n g able t o e x p l a i n r e l i g i o n , the ideal society p r e -
6
supposes i t .
B u t t o see o n l y the idealistic side o f r e l i g i o n is t o s i m p l i f y arbitrarily. I n
its o w n way, r e l i g i o n is realistic. T h e r e is n o physical o r m o r a l ugliness, n o
v i c e , a n d n o e v i l that has n o t b e e n d e i f i e d . T h e r e have b e e n gods o f theft a n d
t r i c k e r y , lust a n d war, sickness a n d death. A s u p l i f t e d as its idea o f d i v i n i t y is,
C h r i s t i a n i t y itself was o b l i g e d t o m a k e a place i n its m y t h o l o g y f o r the spirit
o f evd. Satan is an essential c o m p o n e n t o f t h e C h r i s t i a n m a c h i n e r y ; yet, even
i f h e is an i m p u r e b e i n g , he is n o t a profane b e i n g . T h e a n t i - g o d is a g o d —
l o w e r a n d subordinate, i t is t r u e , yet invested w i t h b r o a d powers; he is even
t h e o b j e c t o f rites, at t h e v e r y least negative ones. Far f r o m i g n o r i n g a n d dis-
r e g a r d i n g t h e real society, r e l i g i o n is its image, r e f l e c t i n g a l l its features, even
t h e m o s t v u l g a r a n d repellent. E v e r y t h i n g is t o be f o u n d i n i t , a n d i f w e m o s t
o f t e n see g o o d t r i u m p h i n g over e v i l , life over death, a n d the forces o f l i g h t
over the forces o f darkness, this is because i t is n o different i n reality. I f the
relationship b e t w e e n these forces was reversed, life w o u l d be impossible,
whereas i n fact, life m a i n t a i n s itself a n d even tends t o develop.
B u t i t is q u i t e t r u e that even i f the m y t h o l o g i e s a n d theologies a l l o w a
clear glimpse o f t h e reality, t h e reality w e f i n d i n t h e m has b e e n enlarged,
t r a n s f o r m e d , a n d idealized. T h e m o s t p r i m i t i v e r e l i g i o n s are n o different i n
this respect f r o m the m o s t m o d e r n a n d t h e m o s t r e f i n e d . W e have seen, f o r
e x a m p l e , h o w the A r u n t a place at t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t i m e a m y t h i c a l society
w h o s e o r g a n i z a t i o n exactly replicates t h e o n e t h a t still exists today. I t is made
u p o f t h e same clans a n d phratries, i t is subject t o t h e same m a r r i a g e rules,
a n d i t practices the same rites. B u t the personages that c o m p r i s e i t are ideal
beings e n d o w e d w i t h capacities t o w h i c h m e r e m o r t a l s c a n n o t lay c l a i m . B e -
l o n g i n g t o a n i m a l i t y a n d h u m a n i t y at t h e same time, t h e i r nature is n o t o n l y
h i g h e r b u t also different. T h e e v i l p o w e r s u n d e r g o a similar m e t a m o r p h o s i s

6
[Emile] Boutroux, Science et religion [dans la philosophie contemporaine, Paris, E. Flammarion, 1907],
pp. 206-207.
424 Conclusion

i n that r e l i g i o n . I t is as t h o u g h e v i l i t s e l f undergoes r e f i n e m e n t a n d idealiza-

t i o n . T h e q u e s t i o n that arises is w h e r e this i d e a l i z a t i o n comes f r o m .
O n e p r o p o s e d answer is that m a n has a n a t u r a l capacity t o idealize, that
is, t o replace the real w o r l d w i t h a different o n e t o w h i c h h e travels i n
t h o u g h t . B u t such an answer changes the t e r m s o f t h e p r o b l e m , n e i t h e r s o l v -
i n g n o r even a d v a n c i n g i t . T h i s persistent i d e a l i z a t i o n is a f u n d a m e n t a l fea-
t u r e o f r e l i g i o n s . So t o e x p l a i n r e l i g i o n s i n terms o f an i n n a t e capacity t o
idealize is s i m p l y t o replace o n e w o r d w i t h its equivalent; i t is l i k e saying that
m a n created r e l i g i o n because h e has a r e l i g i o u s nature. Yet the a n i m a l k n o w s
o n l y o n e w o r l d : t h e w o r l d i t perceives t h r o u g h e x p e r i e n c e , i n t e r n a l as w e l l
as e x t e r n a l . M a n alone has the capacity t o conceive o f t h e ideal and add i t t o
the real. W h e r e , t h e n , does this remarkable d i s t i n c t i o n c o m e from? Before
t a k i n g i t t o be a p r i m a r y fact o r a m y s t e r i o u s v i r t u e that eludes science, o n e
s h o u l d first have m a d e sure that this remarkable d i s t i n c t i o n does n o t arise
f r o m c o n d i t i o n s t h a t can b e d e t e r m i n e d e m p i r i c a l l y .
M y p r o p o s e d e x p l a n a t i o n o f r e l i g i o n has t h e specific advantage o f p r o -
v i d i n g an answer t o this q u e s t i o n , since w h a t defines t h e sacred is that t h e
sacred is added t o the real. A n d since the ideal is d e f i n e d i n t h e same way,
w e c a n n o t e x p l a i n t h e o n e w i t h o u t e x p l a i n i n g t h e other. W e have seen, i n
fact, that i f c o l l e c t i v e life awakens r e l i g i o u s t h o u g h t w h e n i t rises t o a cer-
t a i n intensity, that is so because i t b r i n g s a b o u t a state o f effervescence that
alters t h e c o n d i t i o n s o f psychic activity. T h e v i t a l energies b e c o m e hyper-
e x c i t e d , the passions m o r e intense, t h e sensations m o r e p o w e r f u l ; there are
i n d e e d some that are p r o d u c e d o n l y at this m o m e n t . M a n does n o t r e c o g -
nize himself; he feels s o m e h o w t r a n s f o r m e d a n d i n consequence transforms
his s u r r o u n d i n g s . T o a c c o u n t f o r the v e r y p a r t i c u l a r impressions he receives,
he i m p u t e s t o the t h i n g s w i t h w h i c h he is m o s t d i r e c t l y i n c o n t a c t properties
that t h e y d o n o t have, e x c e p t i o n a l p o w e r s a n d v i r t u e s that t h e objects o f o r -
d i n a r y e x p e r i e n c e d o n o t possess. I n short, u p o n the real w o r l d w h e r e p r o -
fane life is l i v e d , he superimposes a n o t h e r that, i n a sense, exists o n l y i n his
t h o u g h t , b u t o n e t o w h i c h he ascribes a h i g h e r k i n d o f d i g n i t y t h a n he as-
cribes t o the real w o r l d o f profane life. I n t w o respects, t h e n , this o t h e r w o r l d
is an ideal one.
T h u s the f o r m a t i o n o f an ideal is b y n o means an i r r e d u c i b l e d a t u m that
eludes science. I t rests o n c o n d i t i o n s that can be u n c o v e r e d t h r o u g h observa-
tion. I t is a n a t u r a l p r o d u c t o f social life. I f society is t o be able t o b e c o m e
conscious o f i t s e l f a n d keep the sense i t has o f itself at the r e q u i r e d intensity,
i t m u s t assemble a n d concentrate. T h i s c o n c e n t r a t i o n b r i n g s a b o u t an u p l i f t -
i n g o f m o r a l life that is expressed b y a set o f ideal c o n c e p t i o n s i n w h i c h t h e
n e w life thus awakened is d e p i c t e d . These ideal c o n c e p t i o n s c o r r e s p o n d t o
Conclusion 425

the o n r u s h o f psychic forces added at that m o m e n t t o those w e have at o u r

disposal f o r the everyday tasks o f life. A society can n e i t h e r create n o r recre-
ate itself w i t h o u t c r e a t i n g some k i n d o f ideal b y t h e same stroke. T h i s cre-
a t i o n is n o t a sort o f o p t i o n a l extra step b y w h i c h society, b e i n g already made,
m e r e l y adds f i n i s h i n g touches; i t is the act b y w h i c h society makes itself, and
remakes itself, p e r i o d i c a l l y . T h u s , w h e n w e set t h e ideal society i n o p p o s i t i o n
t o the real society, l i k e t w o antagonists supposedly l e a d i n g us i n opposite d i -
rections, w e are r e i f y i n g a n d o p p o s i n g abstractions. T h e ideal society is n o t
outside the real o n e b u t is p a r t o f i t . Far f r o m o u r b e i n g d i v i d e d b e t w e e n
t h e m as t h o u g h b e t w e e n t w o poles that repel o n e another, w e c a n n o t h o l d
t o the o n e w i t h o u t h o l d i n g t o the other. A society is n o t c o n s t i t u t e d s i m p l y
b y the mass o f i n d i v i d u a l s w h o c o m p r i s e i t , t h e g r o u n d they occupy, the
things t h e y use, o r t h e m o v e m e n t s t h e y make, b u t above all b y t h e idea i t has
o f itself. A n d there is n o d o u b t that society sometimes hesitates over the
m a n n e r i n w h i c h i t m u s t conceive itself. I t feels p u l l e d i n all directions.
W h e n such conflicts break o u t , t h e y are n o t b e t w e e n the ideal and the r e a l -
i t y b u t b e t w e e n different ideals, b e t w e e n t h e ideal o f yesterday a n d that o f t o -
day, b e t w e e n the ideal that has the a u t h o r i t y o f t r a d i t i o n a n d one that is o n l y
c o m i n g i n t o b e i n g . S t u d y i n g h o w ideals c o m e t o evolve c e r t a i n l y has its
place, b u t n o m a t t e r h o w this p r o b l e m is solved, t h e fact remains that the
w h o l e o f i t unfolds i n the w o r l d o f the ideal.
T h e r e f o r e the collective ideal that r e l i g i o n expresses is far f r o m b e i n g due
t o some vague capacity innate t o the i n d i v i d u a l ; rather, i t is i n the school o f
collective life that the i n d i v i d u a l has learned t o f o r m ideals. I t is b y assimilating
the ideals w o r k e d o u t b y society that the i n d i v i d u a l is able t o conceive o f the
ideal. I t is society that, b y d r a w i n g h i m i n t o its sphere o f action, has g i v e n h i m
the need t o raise h i m s e l f above the w o r l d o f experience, w h i l e at the same time
f u r n i s h i n g h i m the means o f i m a g i n i n g another. I t is society that b u i l t this n e w
w o r l d w h i l e b u i l d i n g itself, because i t is society that the n e w w o r l d expresses.
T h e r e is n o t h i n g mysterious about the faculty o f idealization, t h e n , w h e t h e r i n
the i n d i v i d u a l o r i n the g r o u p . T h i s faculty is n o t a sort o f l u x u r y , w h i c h m a n
c o u l d d o w i t h o u t , b u t a c o n d i t i o n o f his existence. I f he h a d n o t acquired i t ,
he w o u l d n o t be a social b e i n g , w h i c h is t o say that he w o u l d n o t be m a n . T o
be sure, collective ideals t e n d t o b e c o m e i n d i v i d u a l i z e d as they b e c o m e incar-
nate i n individuals. E a c h person understands t h e m i n his o w n w a y a n d gives
t h e m an i n d i v i d u a l i m p r i n t , some elements b e i n g taken o u t and others b e i n g
added. A s the i n d i v i d u a l personality develops and becomes an a u t o n o m o u s
source o f action, the personal ideal diverges f r o m the social one. B u t i f w e w a n t
t o understand that aptitude f o r l i v i n g outside the real, w h i c h is seemingly so r e -
markable, all w e need t o d o is relate i t t o the social c o n d i t i o n s o n w h i c h i t rests.
426 Conclusion

B u t the last t h i n g t o d o is t o see this t h e o r y o f r e l i g i o n as m e r e l y a refur-

b i s h m e n t o f h i s t o r i c a l m a t e r i a l i s m . T h a t w o u l d be a t o t a l m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g
o f m y t h o u g h t . I n p o i n t i n g o u t an essentially social t h i n g i n r e l i g i o n , I i n n o
w a y m e a n t o say that r e l i g i o n s i m p l y translates the m a t e r i a l f o r m s a n d i m -
m e d i a t e v i t a l necessities o f society i n t o a n o t h e r language. I d o i n d e e d take i t
t o be o b v i o u s that social life depends o n a n d bears t h e m a r k o f its m a t e r i a l
base, j u s t as t h e m e n t a l life o f the i n d i v i d u a l depends o n t h e b r a i n and i n d e e d
o n the w h o l e body. B u t collective consciousness is s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n a
mere epiphenomenon o f its m o r p h o l o g i c a l base, j u s t as i n d i v i d u a l c o n -
sciousness is s o m e t h i n g o t h e r t h a n a m e r e p r o d u c t o f t h e n e r v o u s system. I f
collective consciousness is t o appear, a sui generis synthesis o f i n d i v i d u a l c o n -
sciousnesses m u s t occur. T h e p r o d u c t o f this synthesis is a w h o l e w o r l d o f
feelings, ideas, a n d images that f o l l o w t h e i r o w n laws o n c e t h e y are b o r n .
T h e y m u t u a l l y attract one another, repel one another, fuse together, s u b d i -
v i d e , a n d proliferate; a n d n o n e o f these c o m b i n a t i o n s is d i r e c t l y c o m m a n d e d
a n d necessitated b y the state o f t h e u n d e r l y i n g reality. I n d e e d , the life thus
unleashed enjoys such great i n d e p e n d e n c e that i t sometimes plays a b o u t i n
f o r m s that have n o a i m o r u t i l i t y o f any k i n d , b u t o n l y f o r t h e pleasure o f af-
f i r m i n g itself. I have s h o w n that precisely this is o f t e n t r u e o f r i t u a l a c t i v i t y
7
and mythological t h o u g h t .
B u t i f r e l i g i o n has social causes, h o w can the i n d i v i d u a l c u l t and t h e u n i -
versalistic character o f c e r t a i n r e l i g i o n s be explained? I f i t is b o r n in foro ex¬
terno, * h o w was i t able t o pass i n t o t h e i n n e r core o f the i n d i v i d u a l a n d
b e c o m e ever m o r e deeply i m p l a n t e d i n h i m ? I f i t is t h e w o r k o f d e f i n i t e a n d
p a r t i c u l a r societies, h o w c o u l d i t b e c o m e detached e n o u g h f r o m t h e m t o be
c o n c e i v e d o f as the c o m m o n h o l d i n g o f all h u m a n i t y ?
Since, i n the course o f o u r study, w e came u p o n the first seeds o f i n -
d i v i d u a l r e l i g i o n a n d r e l i g i o u s c o s m o p o l i t a n i s m a n d saw h o w they were
f o r m e d , w e possess the m o s t general elements o f an answer t o that t w o f o l d
question.
I have s h o w n that t h e religious force a n i m a t i n g the clan becomes i n d i -
v i d u a l i z e d b y i n c a r n a t i n g i t s e l f i n i n d i v i d u a l consciousnesses. Secondary sa-
cred beings are f o r m e d i n this way, each i n d i v i d u a l h a v i n g his o w n that is
m a d e i n his o w n image, p a r t o f his i n t i m a t e life, a n d at one w i t h his fate.
T h e y are the soul, the i n d i v i d u a l t o t e m , t h e p r o t e c t i n g ancestor, a n d so f o r t h .

*In the external world.

'See above, pp. 382ff. Cf. my article on the same question: "Représentations individuelles et
représentations collectives," RMM, vol. VI, 1898 [pp. 273ff.].
Conclusion 427

These beings are the objects o f rites that the w o r s h i p p e r can c o n d u c t o n his
o w n , apart f r o m any g r o u p , so i t is actually a p r i m i t i v e f o r m o f the i n d i v i d -
ual c u l t . O f course, i t is still o n l y a v e r y u n d e v e l o p e d cult, b u t that is because
the c u l t expressing t h e i n d i v i d u a l p e r s o n a l i t y c o u l d n o t be v e r y w e l l d e v e l -
o p e d , g i v e n that the i n d i v i d u a l p e r s o n a l i t y is at that stage still m a r k e d v e r y
slightly, w i t h l i t t l e value a t t r i b u t e d t o i t . As i n d i v i d u a l s became m o r e differ-
e n t i a t e d a n d the value o f t h e p e r s o n grew, t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g c u l t itself t o o k
o n a larger role i n r e l i g i o u s life as a w h o l e , at t h e same t i m e m o r e c o m p l e t e l y
sealing itself o f f f r o m t h e outside.
T h e existence o f i n d i v i d u a l cults does n o t therefore i m p l y a n y t h i n g that
contradicts o r complicates a s o c i o l o g i c a l e x p l a n a t i o n o f r e l i g i o n . T h e r e l i -
gious forces t h e y address are m e r e l y collective forces i n i n d i v i d u a l i z e d f o r m s .
E v e n w h e r e r e l i g i o n seems t o be e n t i r e l y w i t h i n the i n d i v i d u a l , the l i v i n g
source that feeds i t is t o be f o u n d i n society. W e can n o w j u d g e the w o r t h o f
the radical i n d i v i d u a l i s m that is i n t e n t o n m a k i n g r e l i g i o n o u t t o be a p u r e l y
i n d i v i d u a l t h i n g : I t misconceives the f u n d a m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n s o f religious life.
A n d i f that radical i n d i v i d u a l i s m has r e m a i n e d i n t h e state o f unrealized t h e -
o r e t i c a l aspiration u p t o n o w , that is because i t is unrealizable i n fact. A p h i -
l o s o p h y can v e r y w e l l be w o r k e d o u t i n t h e silence o f i n w a r d m e d i t a t i o n , b u t
n o t a f a i t h . A f a i t h above all is w a r m t h , life, enthusiasm, e n h a n c e m e n t o f all
m e n t a l activity, u p l i f t o f the i n d i v i d u a l above himself. E x c e p t b y reaching
outside himself, h o w c o u l d t h e i n d i v i d u a l add t o the energies he possesses?
H o w c o u l d he transcend h i m s e l f b y his o w n strength? T h e o n l y h e a r t h at
w h i c h w e can w a r m ourselves m o r a l l y is the h e a r t h m a d e b y the c o m p a n y o f
o u r f e l l o w m e n ; the o n l y m o r a l forces w i t h w h i c h w e can n o u r i s h o u r o w n
a n d increase t h e m are those w e get f r o m others. L e t us even grant the exis-
tence o f beings m o r e o r less l i k e those t h e m y t h o l o g i e s d e p i c t f o r us. I f t h e y
are t o have t h e useful i n f l u e n c e over souls that is t h e i r raison d'être, w e m u s t
believe i n t h e m . T h e beliefs are at w o r k o n l y w h e n t h e y are shared. W e m a y
w e l l keep t h e m t h e m g o i n g f o r a time t h r o u g h personal effort alone, b u t they
are n e i t h e r b o r n n o r o b t a i n e d i n this way, a n d i t is d o u b t f u l that they can be
preserved u n d e r those c o n d i t i o n s . I n fact, t h e m a n w h o has a g e n u i n e faith
feels an irrepressible n e e d t o spread i t . T o d o so, he comes o u t o f his i s o l a t i o n ,
he approaches others, he seeks t o c o n v i n c e t h e m , a n d i t is the ardor o f the
c o n v i c t i o n s he b r i n g s a b o u t that i n t u r n reinforces his o w n . T h a t ardor
w o u l d speedily dissipate i f left alone.
W h a t is t r u e o f religious i n d i v i d u a l i s m is t r u e o f religious universalism.
Far f r o m b e i n g exclusively the trait o f a f e w v e r y great religions, w e have
f o u n d i t i n t h e A u s t r a l i a n s y s t e m — n o t at its base, t o be sure, b u t at its p i n n a -
cle. Bunjil,- D a r a m u l u n , and B a i a m e are n o t m e r e t r i b a l gods, since each is
428 Conclusion

r e c o g n i z e d b y a n u m b e r o f different tribes. T h e i r c u l t is i n a sense i n t e r n a -

t i o n a l . So this c o n c e p t i o n is q u i t e close t o the o n e f o u n d i n the most m o d e r n
theologies. As a result, a n d f o r that v e r y reason, c e r t a i n w r i t e r s have felt d u t y
b o u n d t o d e n y its a u t h e n t i c i t y , even t h o u g h its a u t h e n t i c i t y c a n n o t be d e n i e d .
B u t I have b e e n able t o s h o w h o w this c o n c e p t i o n was f o r m e d .
Tribes that n e i g h b o r o n e a n o t h e r a n d are o f the same c i v i l i z a t i o n c a n n o t
h e l p b u t have o n g o i n g relationships w i t h o n e another. A l l k i n d s o f c i r c u m -
stances p r o v i d e t h e occasion f o r contact. A p a r t f r o m business, w h i c h is still
r u d i m e n t a r y , there are marriages; i n t e r n a t i o n a l marriages are v e r y c o m m o n
i n Australia. I n the course o f these contacts, m e n n a t u r a l l y b e c o m e conscious
o f the m o r a l k i n s h i p that unites t h e m . T h e y have the same social organiza-
t i o n , t h e same d i v i s i o n i n t o phratries, clans, a n d m a r r i a g e classes; t h e y c o n -
d u c t the same o r s i m i l a r i n i t i a t i o n rites. T h e effect o f m u t u a l b o r r o w i n g s o r
agreements is t o consolidate the spontaneous similarities. T h e gods t o w h i c h
such o b v i o u s l y i d e n t i c a l i n s t i t u t i o n s w e r e attached c o u l d h a r d l y r e m a i n dis-
t i n c t i n people's m i n d s . E v e r y t h i n g b r o u g h t t h e m together; a n d i n conse-
quence, even supposing that each t r i b e h a d w o r k e d o u t its o w n n o t i o n o f
t h e m i n d e p e n d e n d y t h e y m u s t as a m a t t e r o f course have h a d a t e n d e n c y t o
amalgamate. F u r t h e r m o r e , the l i k e l i h o o d is that the gods w e r e first c o n -
ceived i n these i n t e r t r i b a l assemblies, f o r t h e y are gods o f i n i t i a t i o n , first a n d
foremost, a n d various tribes are usually represented at the i n i t i a t i o n cere-
m o n i e s . T h u s i f sacred beings u n c o n n e c t e d w i t h any t e r r i t o r i a l l y d e f i n e d so-
c i e t y w e r e f o r m e d , i t is n o t because t h e y h a d an extrasocial o r i g i n . R a t h e r ,
i t is because above these t e r r i t o r i a l g r o u p i n g s are others w i t h m o r e f l u i d
b o u n d a r i e s . These o t h e r g r o u p i n g s d o n o t have f i x e d frontiers b u t i n c l u d e a
great m a n y m o r e o r less n e i g h b o r i n g a n d related tribes. T h e v e r y special so-
cial life that emerges tends t o spread over an area w i t h o u t clear l i m i t s . Q u i t e
naturally, t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g m y t h o l o g i c a l personages are o f the same charac-
ter; t h e i r sphere o f i n f l u e n c e is n o t d e f i n i t e ; t h e y h o v e r above t h e i n d i v i d u a l
tribes a n d above t h e l a n d . T h e s e are t h e great i n t e r n a t i o n a l gods.
N o t h i n g i n this s i t u a t i o n is p e c u l i a r t o A u s t r a l i a n societies. T h e r e is n o
people, a n d n o State, that is n o t engaged w i t h a n o t h e r m o r e o r less u n d e -
l i m i t e d society that includes all peoples a n d a l l States* w i t h w h i c h i t is d i -
r e c d y o r i n d i r e c t l y i n contact; there is n o n a t i o n a l life that is n o t u n d e r the
sway o f an i n t e r n a t i o n a l collective life. T h e m o r e w e advance i n history, the
larger a n d t h e m o r e i m p o r t a n t these i n t e r n a t i o n a l g r o u p i n g s b e c o m e . I n this
way, w e see h o w , i n some cases, the universalistic t e n d e n c y c o u l d develop t o

'Dürkheim capitalized "Church" and "State."

Conclusion 429

the p o i n t o f affecting n o t o n l y the highest ideas o f t h e religious system b u t

also the v e r y p r i n c i p l e s o n w h i c h i t rests.

II
T h u s there is s o m e t h i n g eternal i n r e l i g i o n that is destined t o o u t l i v e the suc-
cession o f p a r t i c u l a r symbols i n w h i c h religious t h o u g h t has c l o t h e d itself.
T h e r e can be n o society that does n o t e x p e r i e n c e t h e n e e d at regular i n t e r -
vals t o m a i n t a i n a n d strengthen t h e collective feelings a n d ideas that p r o v i d e
its coherence a n d its d i s t i n c t i n d i v i d u a l i t y . T h i s m o r a l r e m a k i n g can be
achieved o n l y t h r o u g h meetings, assemblies, a n d congregations i n w h i c h the
i n d i v i d u a l s , pressing close t o o n e another, r e a f f i r m i n c o m m o n t h e i r c o m -
mon sentiments. S u c h is the o r i g i n o f ceremonies that, b y t h e i r object, b y
t h e i r results, a n d b y t h e t e c h n i q u e s used, are n o t different i n k i n d from cer-
emonies that are specifically r e l i g i o u s . W h a t basic difference is there b e t w e e n
C h r i s t i a n s ' celebrating the p r i n c i p a l dates o f Christ's life, Jews' celebrating
the exodus from E g y p t o r the p r o m u l g a t i o n o f the D e c a l o g u e , a n d a citizens'
m e e t i n g c o m m e m o r a t i n g t h e advent o f a n e w m o r a l charter o r some o t h e r
great event o f n a t i o n a l life?
I f today w e have some d i f f i c u l t y i m a g i n i n g w h a t the feasts a n d cere-
m o n i e s o f t h e future w i l l be, i t is because w e are g o i n g t h r o u g h a p e r i o d o f
t r a n s i t i o n a n d m o r a l m e d i o c r i t y . T h e great things o f the past that e x c i t e d o u r
fathers n o l o n g e r arouse the same zeal a m o n g us, e i t h e r because t h e y have
passed so c o m p l e t e l y i n t o c o m m o n c u s t o m that w e lose awareness o f t h e m o r
because t h e y n o l o n g e r suit o u r aspirations. M e a n w h i l e , n o replacement f o r
t h e m has yet b e e n created. W e are n o l o n g e r e l e c t r i f i e d b y those p r i n c i p l e s
i n w h o s e n a m e C h r i s t i a n i t y e x h o r t e d t h e masters t o treat t h e i r slaves h u -
m a n e l y ; a n d besides, C h r i s t i a n i t y ' s idea o f h u m a n e q u a l i t y a n d f r a t e r n i t y
seems t o us today t o leave t o o m u c h r o o m f o r unjust inequalities. Its p i t y for
t h e downcast seems t o us t o o p l a t o n i c . W e w o u l d l i k e o n e that is m o r e v i g -
orous b u t d o n o t yet see clearly w h a t i t s h o u l d be o r h o w i t m i g h t be realized
i n fact.
I n short, the f o r m e r gods are g r o w i n g o l d o r d y i n g , a n d others have n o t
b e e n b o r n . T h i s is w h a t v o i d e d C o m t e ' s a t t e m p t t o organize a r e l i g i o n using
o l d h i s t o r i c a l m e m o r i e s , artificially r e v i v e d . I t is life itself, and n o t a dead
past, that can p r o d u c e a l i v i n g c u l t . B u t that state o f u n c e r t a i n t y a n d confused
a n x i e t y c a n n o t last forever. A day w i l l c o m e w h e n o u r societies o n c e again
w i l l k n o w h o u r s o f creative effervescence d u r i n g w h i c h n e w ideals w i l l again
s p r i n g f o r t h a n d n e w f o r m u l a s e m e r g e t o g u i d e h u m a n i t y for a t i m e . A n d
430 Conclusion

w h e n those h o u r s have b e e n l i v e d t h r o u g h , m e n w i l l spontaneously feel the

n e e d t o relive t h e m i n t h o u g h t f r o m t i m e t o t i m e — t h a t is, t o preserve t h e i r
m e m o r y b y means o f celebrations that r e g u l a r l y recreate t h e i r fruits. W e have
already seen h o w t h e [ F r e n c h ] R e v o l u t i o n i n s t i t u t e d a w h o l e cycle o f cele-
brations i n o r d e r t o keep t h e p r i n c i p l e s that i n s p i r e d i t eternally y o u n g . I f
that i n s t i t u t i o n q u i c k l y perished, i t is because t h e r e v o l u t i o n a r y f a i t h lasted
o n l y briefly, a n d because d i s a p p o i n t m e n t s a n d discouragements q u i c k l y r e -
placed the first m o m e n t o f enthusiasm. B u t a l t h o u g h that w o r k m i s c a r r i e d ,
i t helps us t o i m a g i n e w h a t m i g h t have c o m e t o be u n d e r o t h e r c o n d i t i o n s ;
a n d e v e r y t h i n g leads us t o believe that t h e w o r k w i l l sooner o r later b e taken
u p again. T h e r e are n o i m m o r t a l gospels, a n d there is n o reason t o believe
that h u m a n i t y is incapable o f c o n c e i v i n g n e w ones i n t h e future. As t o k n o w -
i n g w h a t t h e symbols w i l l be i n w h i c h t h e n e w f a i t h w i l l c o m e to express i t -
self, w h e t h e r t h e y w i l l resemble those o f t h e past, w h e t h e r t h e y w i l l better
suit t h e reality t o be expressed—that is a q u e s t i o n that exceeds h u m a n f a c u l -
ties o f p r e d i c t i o n a n d that, m o r e o v e r , is beside t h e p o i n t .
B u t feasts a n d r i t e s — i n a w o r d , t h e c u l t — a r e n o t t h e w h o l e o f r e l i g i o n .
R e l i g i o n is n o t o n l y a system o f practices b u t also a system o f ideas w h o s e
object is t o express the w o r l d ; even t h e h u m b l e s t have t h e i r o w n c o s m o l o -
gies, as w e have seen. N o m a t t e r h o w these t w o elements o f religious life m a y
be related, t h e y are nonetheless q u i t e different. O n e is t u r n e d t o w a r d a c t i o n ,
w h i c h i t elicits a n d regulates; t h e o t h e r t o w a r d t h o u g h t , w h i c h i t enriches
a n d organizes. Since t h e y d o n o t rest o n the same c o n d i t i o n s , t h e n , there is
reason t o ask w h e t h e r t h e ideas c o r r e s p o n d t o needs as universal a n d as p e r -
m a n e n t as t h e practices do.
W h e n w e i m p u t e specific traits t o r e l i g i o u s t h o u g h t a n d believe its f u n c -
t i o n is t o express, b y its o w n m e t h o d s , a w h o l e aspect o f t h e real t h a t eludes
b o t h o r d i n a r y k n o w l e d g e a n d science, w e n a t u r a l l y refuse t o grant that the
speculative role o f r e l i g i o n c o u l d ever be o v e r t h r o w n . B u t i t does n o t seem
t o m e that analysis o f t h e facts has d e m o n s t r a t e d this specificity o f r e l i g i o n .
T h e r e l i g i o n w e have j u s t s t u d i e d is o n e o f those i n w h i c h the symbols used
are the m o s t u n s e t t l i n g t o reason. E v e r y t h i n g a b o u t i t seems f u l l o f mystery.
A t first glance, those beings that s i m u l t a n e o u s l y participate i n the m o s t dis-
parate k i n g d o m s , m u l t i p l y w i t h o u t ceasing t o be one, a n d break u p w i t h o u t
d i m i n i s h i n g , seem t o b e l o n g t o an e n t i r e l y different w o r l d from the o n e i n
w h i c h w e live. S o m e have even g o n e so far as t o say that t h e t h o u g h t that
b u i l t i t was t o t a l l y i g n o r a n t o f t h e laws o f l o g i c . N e v e r , perhaps, has t h e c o n -
trast b e t w e e n reason a n d f a i t h b e e n so p r o n o u n c e d . I f ever there was a m o -
m e n t i n h i s t o r y w h e n t h e difference b e t w e e n t h e m m u s t have s t o o d o u t
plainly, t h e n that t r u l y was t h e m o m e n t .
Conclusion 431

B u t I have n o t e d , c o n t r a r y t o such appearances, that the realities t o

w h i c h religious speculation was a p p l i e d t h e n are t h e same ones that w o u l d
later serve as objects o f scientists' r e f l e c t i o n . T h o s e realities are nature, m a n ,
a n d society. T h e m y s t e r y that appears t o s u r r o u n d t h e m is e n t i r e l y superficial
a n d fades u p o n closer scrutiny. T o have t h e m appear as t h e y are, i t is e n o u g h
t o p u l l aside the v e i l w i t h w h i c h t h e m y t h o l o g i c a l i m a g i n a t i o n covered t h e m .
R e l i g i o n strives t o translate those realities i n t o an i n t e l l i g i b l e language that
does n o t differ i n nature from that used b y science. B o t h a t t e m p t t o c o n n e c t
things t o o n e another, establish i n t e r n a l relations b e t w e e n those things, clas-
sify t h e m , a n d systematize t h e m . W e have even seen that the essential n o t i o n s
o f scientific l o g i c are o f r e l i g i o u s o r i g i n . O f course, science r e w o r k s those
n o t i o n s i n o r d e r t o use t h e m . I t distills o u t a l l sorts o f extraneous elements
a n d generally b r i n g s t o all its efforts a c r i t i c a l s p i r i t that is u n k n o w n i n r e l i -
g i o n ; i t surrounds itself w i t h precautions t o " a v o i d haste and bias" and to
keep passions, prejudices, a n d all subjective influences at bay. B u t these i m -
provements i n m e t h o d are n o t e n o u g h t o differentiate science f r o m r e l i g i o n .
I n this regard, b o t h pursue the same goal; scientific t h o u g h t is o n l y a m o r e
perfected f o r m o f religious t h o u g h t . H e n c e i t seems natural that r e h g i o n
s h o u l d lose g r o u n d as science becomes better at p e r f o r m i n g its task.
T h e r e is n o d o u b t , i n fact, that this regression has taken place over the
course o f history. A l t h o u g h the o f f s p r i n g o f r e l i g i o n , science tends t o replace
r e l i g i o n i n e v e r y t h i n g that involves the c o g n i t i v e a n d i n t e l l e c t u a l functions.
C h r i s t i a n i t y has b y n o w d e f i n i t i v e l y sanctioned that replacement, i n the
r e a l m o f physical p h e n o m e n a . R e g a r d i n g m a t t e r as a profane t h i n g par e x -
cellence, C h r i s t i a n i t y has easfly a b a n d o n e d k n o w l e d g e t o a discipline that is
alien t o i t , tradidit mundum hominum disputationi. * So i t is that the sciences o f
nature have, w i t h relative ease, succeeded i n establishing t h e i r a u t h o r i t y a n d
i n h a v i n g that a u t h o r i t y a c k n o w l e d g e d . B u t C h r i s t i a n i t y c o u l d n o t l e t the
w o r l d o f souls o u t o f its g r i p as easily, f o r i t is above all over souls that the g o d
o f t h e Christians wishes t o r u l e . T h i s is w h y t h e idea o f subjecting psychic
life t o science l o n g a m o u n t e d t o a k i n d o f p r o f a n a t i o n ; even today, that idea
is still r e p u g n a n t t o many. Today, e x p e r i m e n t a l a n d comparative p s y c h o l o g y
has b e e n created a n d m u s t be r e c k o n e d w i t h . B u t the w o r l d o f religious a n d
m o r a l life still remains f o r b i d d e n . T h e great m a j o r i t y o f m e n c o n t i n u e t o b e -
lieve that there is an o r d e r o f things that the i n t e l l e c t can enter o n l y b y v e r y
special routes. H e n c e t h e s t r o n g resistance o n e encounters w h e n e v e r o n e at-
tempts t o treat r e l i g i o u s a n d m o r a l p h e n o m e n a scientifically. Yet these efforts

*It abandoned the world to the disputes of men.

432 Conclusion

persist despite o p p o s i t i o n , a n d that v e r y persistence makes i t foreseeable that

this last b a r r i e r w i l l give w a y i n t h e e n d , a n d t h a t science w i l l establish itself
as mistress, even i n this preserve.
T h i s is w h a t t h e c o n f l i c t o f science a n d r e l i g i o n is about. People o f t e n
have a m i s t a k e n idea o f i t . * Science is said t o d e n y r e l i g i o n i n p r i n c i p l e . B u t
r e l i g i o n exists; i t is a system o f g i v e n facts; i n short, i t is a reality. H o w c o u l d
science d e n y a reality? F u r t h e r m o r e , insofar as r e l i g i o n is a c t i o n and insofar
as i t is a means o f m a k i n g m e n live, science c a n n o t possibly take its place. A l -
t h o u g h science expresses life, i t does n o t create life, a n d science can v e r y w e l l
seek t o e x p l a i n f a i t h b u t b y that v e r y fact presupposes f a i t h . H e n c e there is
c o n f l i c t o n o n l y a l i m i t e d p o i n t . O f the t w o f u n c t i o n s o r i g i n a l l y p e r f o r m e d
by r e l i g i o n , there is one, o n l y o n e , that tends m o r e a n d m o r e t o escape i t , a n d
that is the speculative f u n c t i o n . W h a t science disputes i n r e l i g i o n is n o t its
r i g h t t o exist b u t its r i g h t t o d o g m a t i z e a b o u t t h e nature o f things, its p r e -
tensions t o special expertise f o r e x p l a i n i n g m a n a n d the w o r l d . I n fact, r e l i -
g i o n does n o t k n o w itself. I t k n o w s n e i t h e r w h a t i t is made o f n o r w h a t
needs i t responds t o . Far from b e i n g able t o t e l l science w h a t t o do, r e l i g i o n
is itself an o b j e c t f o r science! A n d o n the o t h e r h a n d , since apart from a r e -
ality that eludes scientific r e f l e c t i o n , r e l i g i o u s speculation has n o special o b -
j e c t o f its o w n , that r e l i g i o n o b v i o u s l y c a n n o t play the same r o l e i n the f u t u r e
as i t d i d i n the past.
H o w e v e r , r e l i g i o n seems destined t o t r a n s f o r m itself rather t h a n disappear.
I have said that there is s o m e t h i n g eternal i n r e l i g i o n : the c u l t a n d t h e
f a i t h . B u t m e n can n e i t h e r c o n d u c t ceremonies f o r w h i c h t h e y can see n o r a -
tionale, n o r accept a f a i t h that t h e y i n n o w a y understand. T o spread o r s i m -
p l y m a i n t a i n r e l i g i o n , o n e m u s t j u s t i f y i t , w h i c h is t o say o n e must devise a
t h e o r y o f i t . A t h e o r y o f this sort m u s t assuredly rest o n the various sciences,
as s o o n as t h e y c o m e i n t o existence: social sciences first, since r e l i g i o u s f a i t h
has its o r i g i n s i n society; p s y c h o l o g y n e x t , since society is a , synthesis o f h u -
man consciousnesses; sciences o f nature finally, since m a n a n d society are
l i n k e d t o t h e universe a n d can be abstracted from i t o n l y artificially. B u t as
i m p o r t a n t as these b o r r o w i n g s from t h e established sciences m a y be, t h e y are
i n n o w a y sufficient; f a i t h is above all a spur t o a c t i o n , whereas science, n o
m a t t e r h o w advanced, always remains at a distance from a c t i o n . Science is
fragmentary a n d i n c o m p l e t e ; i t advances b u t s l o w l y a n d is never finished; b u t
l i f e — t h a t c a n n o t w a i t . T h e o r i e s w h o s e c a l l i n g is t o m a k e p e o p l e live a n d
m a k e t h e m act, m u s t therefore r u s h ahead o f science a n d c o m p l e t e i t p r e m a -

*This sentence is missing from Swain.

Conclusion 433

turely. T h e y are possible o n l y i f the demands o f p r a c t i c a l i t y and v i t a l necessi-

ties, such as w e feel w i t h o u t d i s t i n c t l y c o n c e i v i n g t h e m , push t h o u g h t b e -
y o n d w h a t science p e r m i t s us t o a f f i r m . I n this way, even the m o s t r a t i o n a l
a n d secularized r e l i g i o n s c a n n o t a n d can never d o w i t h o u t a p a r t i c u l a r k i n d
o f speculation w h i c h , a l t h o u g h h a v i n g the same objects as science itself, still
c a n n o t b e p r o p e r l y scientific. T h e obscure i n t u i t i o n s o f sense a n d sensibility
o f t e n take t h e place o f l o g i c a l reasons.
T h u s , from o n e p o i n t o f v i e w , this s p e c u l a t i o n resembles the speculation
w e e n c o u n t e r i n t h e r e l i g i o n s o f t h e past, w h i l e from another, i t differs from
t h e m . W h i l e exercising the r i g h t t o g o b e y o n d science, i t m u s t b e g i n b y
k n o w i n g a n d d r a w i n g i n s p i r a t i o n f r o m science. A s s o o n as the a u t h o r i t y o f
science is established, science m u s t b e r e c k o n e d w i t h ; u n d e r pressure o f need,
o n e can g o b e y o n d science, b u t i t is f r o m science that o n e m u s t start o u t .
O n e can a f f i r m n o t h i n g that science denies, d e n y n o t h i n g that science af-
firms, a n d establish n o t h i n g that does n o t d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y rest o n p r i n -
ciples t a k e n from science. F r o m t h e n o n , f a i t h * n o l o n g e r h o l d s the same
sway as i n t h e past over t h e system o f representations that can c o n t i n u e t o be
called r e l i g i o u s . T h e r e rises a p o w e r before r e l i g i o n that, even t h o u g h r e l i -
gion's offspring, from t h e n o n applies its o w n c r i t i q u e a n d its o w n testing t o
r e l i g i o n . A n d e v e r y t h i n g p o i n t s t o t h e prospect that this testing w i l l b e c o m e
ever m o r e extensive a n d effective, w i t h o u t any possibility o f assigning a l i m i t
t o its f u t u r e i n f l u e n c e .

Ill
I f t h e f u n d a m e n t a l n o t i o n s o f science are o f r e l i g i o u s o r i g i n , h o w c o u l d r e l i -
g i o n have e n g e n d e r e d them? I t is n o t o b v i o u s at first glance w h a t the p o i n t s
o f c o n t a c t b e t w e e n l o g i c a n d r e l i g i o n m i g h t be. I n d e e d , since the reality that
religious t h o u g h t expresses is society, the q u e s t i o n can be posed i n t e r m s that
b r i n g o u t the d i f f i c u l t y m o r e clearly, as f o l l o w s : W h a t c o u l d have made so-
cial life such an i m p o r t a n t source o f l o g i c a l life? N o t h i n g predisposed society
for this role, i t w o u l d seem, since i t is o b v i o u s that m e n d i d n o t c o m e t o -
gether f o r the p u r p o s e o f satisfying speculative needs.
S o m e w i l l t h i n k i t reckless o f m e t o b r o a c h a p r o b l e m o f such c o m p l e x -
i t y here. F o r t h e t r e a t m e n t i t deserves t o be possible, the s o c i o l o g i c a l c o n d i -
t i o n s o f k n o w l e d g e w o u l d have t o be b e t t e r k n o w n t h a n t h e y are. W e can
o n l y b e g i n t o discern a f e w o f those c o n d i t i o n s . H o w e v e r , the q u e s t i o n is so

"The first edition says la foi—"faith"; the second says la hi—"law."

434 Conclusion

i m p o r t a n t a n d so d i r e c t l y i m p l i e d b y e v e r y t h i n g that has g o n e before that I

m u s t m a k e an effort n o t t o leave i t w i t h o u t an answer. Perhaps, moreover, i t
m a y be possible t o set f o r t h even n o w a f e w general p r i n c i p l e s o f a k i n d that
m a y at least shed l i g h t o n t h e s o l u t i o n .
T h e basic m a t e r i a l o f l o g i c a l t h o u g h t is concepts. T o t r y t o discover h o w
society c o u l d have played a role i n t h e genesis o f l o g i c a l t h o u g h t therefore
a m o u n t s t o asking h o w i t can have taken p a r t i n t h e f o r m a t i o n o f concepts.
I f w e see the c o n c e p t o n l y as a general idea, as is m o s t usually the case,
the p r o b l e m seems i n s o l u b l e . B y his o w n means, t h e i n d i v i d u a l can i n d e e d
c o m p a r e his perceptions o r images a n d sift o u t w h a t t h e y have i n c o m m o n ;
i n o t h e r w o r d s , he can generalize. So i t is n o t easy t o see w h y generalization
s h o u l d be possible o n l y i n a n d t h r o u g h society. B u t , first o f all, i t is i n a d m i s -
sible that l o g i c a l t h o u g h t s h o u l d be characterized exclusively b y the w i d e r
scope o f the representations that c o n s t i t u t e i t . I f there is n o t h i n g l o g i c a l a b o u t
the p a r t i c u l a r ideas, w h y w o u l d t h e general ones be any different? T h e g e n -
eral exists o n l y i n t h e p a r t i c u l a r ; i t is the particular, s i m p l i f i e d and s t r i p p e d
d o w n . T h e general, t h e n , c a n n o t have v i r t u e s and p r i v i l e g e s that the p a r t i c -
ular does n o t have. Inversely, i f c o n c e p t u a l t h o u g h t can be a p p l i e d t o genus,
species, a n d variety, h o w e v e r small, w h y c o u l d i t n o t e x t e n d t o the i n d i v i d -
ual, that is, t o t h e l i m i t t o w a r d w h i c h the idea tends i n p r o p o r t i o n as its scope
narrows? A s a m a t t e r o f fact, there are a g o o d m a n y concepts that have i n d i -
v i d u a l objects. I n every k i n d o f r e l i g i o n , t h e gods are i n d i v i d u a l i t i e s d i s t i n c t
f r o m o n e another; t h e y are nevertheless c o n c e i v e d , n o t perceived. E a c h p e o -
ple imagines its h i s t o r i c a l o r l e g e n d a r y heroes i n a c e r t a i n fashion, w h i c h is
h i s t o r i c a l l y variable, a n d these representations are c o n c e p t u a l . Finally, each o f
us has a c e r t a i n n o t i o n o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h w h o m he is i n c o n t a c t — t h e i r
character, t h e i r appearance, a n d the d i s t i n c t i v e traits o f t h e i r physical and
m o r a l temperaments. S u c h n o t i o n s are t r u e concepts. N o d o u b t , t h e y are i n
general rather c r u d e l y f o r m e d ; b u t even a m o n g scientific concepts, are there
m a n y that are perfectly adequate t o t h e i r objects? I n this regard, o u r o w n
concepts a n d those o f science differ o n l y i n degree.
T h e r e f o r e , t h e c o n c e p t m u s t be d e f i n e d b y o t h e r traits. T h e f o l l o w i n g
properties d i s t i n g u i s h i t f r o m t a n g i b l e representations o f any sort—sensa-
tions, perceptions, o r images.
Sense representations are i n p e r p e t u a l f l u x ; they c o m e a n d g o like the
ripples o f a stream, n o t staying the same even as l o n g as t h e y last. E a c h is
l i n k e d w i t h the exact m o m e n t i n w h i c h i t occurs. W e are never assured o f r e -
t r i e v i n g a p e r c e p t i o n i n the same w a y w e felt i t t h e first t i m e ; f o r even i f the
t h i n g perceived is u n c h a n g e d , w e ourselves are n o l o n g e r t h e same. T h e c o n -
cept, o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , is s o m e h o w outside time a n d change; i t is shielded
Conclusion 435

from all such disturbance; o n e m i g h t say that i t is i n a different r e g i o n o f the

m i n d , a r e g i o n that is calmer a n d m o r e serene. T h e c o n c e p t does n o t m o v e
o n its o w n b y an i n t e r n a l , spontaneous d e v e l o p m e n t ; q u i t e the contrary, i t
resists change. I t is a w a y o f t h i n k i n g that at any g i v e n m o m e n t i n t i m e is
8
f i x e d a n d c r y s t a l l i z e d . T o t h e e x t e n t that i t is w h a t i t has to be, i t is u n -
changeable. I f i t does change, change does n o t c o m e a b o u t because o f its na-
t u r e b u t because w e have discovered some i m p e r f e c t i o n i n i t , because i t
needs t o be rectified. T h e system o f concepts w i t h w h i c h w e t h i n k i n e v e r y -
day life is the o n e the v o c a b u l a r y o f o u r m o t h e r t o n g u e expresses, f o r each
w o r d translates a c o n c e p t . Language is f i x e d ; i t changes b u t slowly, and,
hence, the same is t r u e o f the c o n c e p t u a l o r g a n i z a t i o n i t translates. T h e sci-
entist finds h i m s e l f i n the same p o s i t i o n v i s - à - v i s t h e special t e r m i n o l o g y
used b y t h e science t o w h i c h he is c o m m i t t e d , a n d consequently v i s - à - v i s the
special system o f concepts t o w h i c h that t e r m i n o l o g y corresponds. H e m a y
i n n o v a t e , o f course, b u t his i n n o v a t i o n s always d o a c e r t a i n v i o l e n c e t o es-
tablished ways o f t h i n k i n g .
A t t h e same t i m e as b e i n g relatively unchangeable, a c o n c e p t is universal,
o r at least universalizable. A c o n c e p t is n o t m y c o n c e p t ; i t is c o m m o n t o m e
a n d o t h e r m e n o r at least can be c o m m u n i c a t e d t o t h e m . I t is impossible f o r
m e t o m a k e a sensation pass f r o m m y consciousness i n t o someone else's; i t is
closely d e p e n d e n t o n m y b o d y and p e r s o n a l i t y a n d c a n n o t be detached from
t h e m . A l l I can d o is i n v i t e a n o t h e r p e r s o n t o set h i m s e l f before t h e same o b -
j e c t as I a n d o p e n h i m s e l f t o its i n f l u e n c e . B y contrast, conversation a n d i n -
tellectual dealings a m o n g m e n consist i n an exchange o f concepts. The
c o n c e p t is, i n essence, an i m p e r s o n a l representation. B y means o f i t , h u m a n
9
intelligences c o m m u n i c a t e .
D e f i n e d i n that way, t h e nature o f the c o n c e p t bespeaks its o r i g i n s . I t is
c o m m o n t o all because i t is t h e w o r k o f the c o m m u n i t y . I t does n o t bear the
i m p r i n t o f any i n d i v i d u a l i n t e l l e c t , since i t is fashioned b y a single intellect i n
w h i c h all the others m e e t , a n d t o w h i c h t h e y c o m e , as i t were, f o r n o u r i s h -
m e n t . I f i t has greater stability t h a n sensations o r images, that is so because
collective representations are m o r e stable t h a n i n d i v i d u a l ones; f o r w h i l e the

8
William James, The Principles of Psychology, I [New York, Macmillan, 1890], p. 464.
'This universality of the concept must not be confused with its generality. The two are very different
things. What I call universality is the property the concept has of being communicated to a number of
minds and indeed to all minds, in principle. That communicability is altogether independent of its scope.
A concept that applies only to a single object, one whose scope is therefore minimal, can be universal in
the sense that it is the same for all minds: The concept of a deity is of this sort.
436 Conclusion

i n d i v i d u a l is sensitive t o even slight changes i n his i n t e r n a l o r e x t e r n a l e n v i -

r o n m e n t , o n l y q u i t e w e i g h t y events can succeed i n c h a n g i n g the m e n t a l
10
e q u d i b r i u m o f society. W h e n e v e r w e are i n the presence o f a type of
t h o u g h t o r a c t i o n that presses u n i f o r m l y o n i n d i v i d u a l intellects o r w i l l s , that
pressure o n t h e i n d i v i d u a l reveals t h e i n t e r v e n t i o n o f the collectivity. F u r t h e r ,
I said before that t h e concepts w i t h w h i c h w e r o u t i n e l y t h i n k are those d e -
p o s i t e d i n the vocabulary. I t is b e y o n d d o u b t that speech, a n d hence the sys-
t e m o f concepts i t translates, is t h e p r o d u c t o f a c o l l e c t i v e e l a b o r a t i o n . W h a t
i t expresses is t h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h society as a w h o l e conceives t h e objects
o f e x p e r i e n c e . T h e n o t i o n s c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o the various elements o f l a n -
guage are therefore c o l l e c t i v e representations.
T h e v e r y c o n t e n t o f these n o t i o n s testifies i n t h e same way. I n d e e d , there
are scarcely any w o r d s , even a m o n g those w e m o s t c o m m o n l y use, w h o s e
m e a n i n g does n o t t o some degree g o b e y o n d t h e l i m i t s o f o u r personal e x -
p e r i e n c e . O f t e n a t e r m expresses things w e have never perceived and e x p e r i -
ences w e have never h a d o r never witnessed. E v e n w h e n w e k n o w c e r t a i n o f
the objects t o w h i c h t h e t e r m refers, w e k n o w t h e m o n l y as p a r t i c u l a r e x -
amples that serve t o illustrate t h e idea b u t that w o u l d never have been
e n o u g h t o f o r m i t b y themselves. T h e r e is a w h o l e science condensed i n
w o r d s t h e n , a science that is m o r e t h a n i n d i v i d u a l ; a n d i t so far surpasses m e
that I c a n n o t even m a k e all the results m y o w n . W h o o f us k n o w s all t h e
w o r d s o f t h e language he speaks a n d t h e f u l l m e a n i n g o f each w o r d ?
T h i s p o i n t enables m e t o define the sense i n w h i c h I say that concepts are
collective representations. I f t h e y are c o m m o n t o an e n t i r e social g r o u p , i t is
n o t because t h e y are a s i m p l e average o f t h e c o r r e s p o n d i n g i n d i v i d u a l r e p r e -
sentations; i f t h e y w e r e that, t h e y w o u l d be o f p o o r e r i n t e l l e c t u a l c o n t e n t
t h a n i n d i v i d u a l representations, whereas t h e y are i n fact replete w i t h k n o w l -
edge surpassing that o f the average i n d i v i d u a l . C o n c e p t s are n o t abstract
things that have reality o n l y i n p a r t i c u l a r circumstances. T h e y are representa-
tions j u s t as concrete as any t h e i n d i v i d u a l can m a k e o f his o w n e n v i r o n m e n t ,
for t h e y c o r r e s p o n d t o t h e w a y i n w h i c h t h e special b e i n g that is society
t h i n k s a b o u t t h e things o f its o w n experience. I f , i n fact, concepts m o s t o f -
t e n are general ideas, i f t h e y express categories a n d classes rather t h a n p a r t i c -

I0
Some will object that, in the individual, ways of acting or thinking often become fixed and crystal-
lized as habits that resist change, through the effect of repetition alone. But habit is only a tendency to re-
peat an action or an idea automatically whenever the same circumstances reactivate it; habit does not
imply that the idea or action is constituted in the state of exemplary types, proposed or imposed on the
mind or will. It is only when a type of this sort is preestablished—that is, when a rule or norm is insti-
tuted—that the workings of society can and must be presumed.
Conclusion 437

ular objects, that is because i n d i v i d u a l a n d variable characteristics o f beings

are rarely o f interest t o society. Because o f its v e r y scope, society can h a r d l y
be affected b y any b u t t h e i r m o s t general a n d lasting properties. H e n c e i t is
this general aspect that bears society's a t t e n t i o n . I t is i n t h e nature o f society
m o s t o f t e n t o see things i n large masses a n d i n the f o r m they take m o s t g e n -
erally. H o w e v e r , that generality is n o t indispensable; and, i n any case, even
w h e n these representations have t h e g e n e r i c character that is m o s t usual f o r
t h e m , t h e y are the w o r k o f society a n d are e n r i c h e d b y its experience.
T h i s , f u r t h e r m o r e , is w h a t makes c o n c e p t u a l t h o u g h t valuable t o us.
I f the concepts w e r e m e r e l y general ideas, t h e y w o u l d n o t gready e n r i c h
k n o w l e d g e , f o r as I have already said, the general contains n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n
t h e particular. B u t i f t h e y are c o l l e c t i v e representations, first a n d foremost,
t h e y add t o w h a t o u r personal e x p e r i e n c e can teach us all the w i s d o m and
science that t h e c o l l e c t i v i t y has amassed over centuries. T o t h i n k w i t h c o n -
cepts is n o t m e r e l y t o see t h e real i n its m o s t general characteristics b u t t o
t u r n u p o n sensation a b e a m that lights, penetrates, a n d transforms i t . T o c o n -
ceptualize a t h i n g is t o a p p r e h e n d its essential elements better a n d t o place i t
i n t h e g r o u p t o w h i c h i t belongs. E a c h c i v i l i z a t i o n has its o w n o r d e r e d sys-
t e m o f concepts, w h i c h characterizes i t . B e f o r e this system o f ideas, the i n d i -
v i d u a l i n t e l l e c t is i n the same s i t u a t i o n as t h e vois o f Plato before the w o r l d o f
Ideas. H e strives t o assimilate t h e m , f o r he needs t h e m i n order t o deal w i t h
his f e l l o w m e n , b u t this assimilation is always i n c o m p l e t e . E a c h o f us sees
t h e m i n his o w n way. S o m e escape us c o m p l e t e l y , r e m a i n i n g b e y o n d o u r
range o f v i s i o n , w h i l e others are g l i m p s e d i n o n l y some o f t h e i r aspects.
T h e r e are some, a n d i n d e e d many, that w e d i s t o r t b y t h i n k i n g t h e m . Since
t h e y are b y nature collective, t h e y c a n n o t b e c o m e i n d i v i d u a l i z e d w i t h o u t b e -
i n g added t o , m o d i f i e d , a n d c o n s e q u e n d y d i s t o r t e d . T h i s is w h y w e have so
m u c h d i f f i c u l t y u n d e r s t a n d i n g o n e another, a n d w h y , i n d e e d o f t e n , w e He t o
o n e a n o t h e r u n i n t e n t i o n a l l y . T h i s happens because w e all use the same w o r d s
w i t h o u t g i v i n g t h e m t h e same m e a n i n g .
W e can n o w b e g i n t o see society's share i n the o r i g i n o f l o g i c a l t h o u g h t .
L o g i c a l t h o u g h t is possible o n l y w h e n m a n has m a n a g e d t o go b e y o n d the
f l e e t i n g representations he owes t o sense e x p e r i e n c e a n d i n the e n d t o c o n -
ceive a w h o l e w o r l d o f stable ideals, t h e c o m m o n g r o u n d o f intelligences. To
t h i n k logically, i n fact, is always, i n some measure, t o t h i n k i m p e r s o n a l l y ; i t is
also t o t h i n k sub specie aeternitatis. * I m p e r s o n a l i t y a n d stability: Such are the
t w o characteristics o f t r u t h . L o g i c a l life o b v i o u s l y presupposes that m a n
k n o w s , at least confusedly, that there is a t r u t h d i s t i n c t f r o m sense appear-

* Under the aspect of eternity.

438 Conclusion

ances. B u t h o w c o u l d he have a r r i v e d at any such idea? People p r o c e e d m o s t

often as t h o u g h l o g i c a l life m u s t have appeared spontaneously, as soon as m a n
o p e n e d his eyes u p o n the w o r l d . B u t there is n o t h i n g i n d i r e c t experience t o
suggest i t ; i n d e e d , e v e r y t h i n g opposes i t . T h u s , c h i l d r e n a n d animals have n o t
even a clue o f i t . H i s t o r y shows, f u r t h e r m o r e , that i t t o o k centuries t o
emerge a n d take shape. I n o u r W e s t e r n w o r l d , o n l y w i t h t h e great t h i n k e r s
o f Greece d i d l o g i c a l life f o r the first t i m e b e c o m e clearly conscious o f itself
and o f t h e consequences i t i m p l i e s . A n d w h e n the discovery came, i t p r o -
v o k e d w o n d e r m e n t , w h i c h Plato expressed i n m a g n i f i c e n t language. B u t
even i f i t was o n l y t h e n t h a t t h e idea was expressed i n p h i l o s o p h i c a l f o r m u -
las, i t necessardy existed before t h e n as a vague awareness. Philosophers
sought t o clarify this awareness; t h e y d i d n o t create i t . T o have b e e n able t o
reflect u p o n a n d analyze i t , t h e y m u s t have b e e n g i v e n i t , and the q u e s t i o n is
w h e r e this awareness came f r o m , that is, o n w h a t e x p e r i e n c e i t was based.
The answer is c o l l e c t i v e experience. I t is i n t h e f o r m o f collective t h o u g h t
that i m p e r s o n a l t h o u g h t revealed itself t o h u m a n i t y f o r t h e first t i m e , and b y
w h a t o t h e r r o u t e that r e v e l a t i o n c o u l d have c o m e a b o u t is h a r d t o see.
Solely because society exists, there also exists b e y o n d sensations a n d i m -
ages a w h o l e system o f representations that possess marvelous properties. B y
means o f t h e m , m e n understand o n e another, and m i n d s g a i n access t o o n e
another. T h e y have a k i n d o f force a n d m o r a l a u t h o r i t y b y v i r t u e o f w h i c h
they i m p o s e themselves u p o n i n d i v i d u a l m i n d s . F r o m t h e n o n , the i n d i v i d u a l
realizes, at least d i m l y , that above his p r i v a t e representations there is a w o r l d o f
type-ideas a c c o r d i n g t o w h i c h he has t o regulate his o w n ; he glimpses a w h o l e
intellectual w o r l d i n w h i c h he participates b u t w h i c h is greater t h a n he. T h i s
is a first i n t u i t i o n o f the r e a l m o f t r u t h . A s s o o n as he became aware o f that
h i g h e r intellectuality, he set a b o u t s c r u t i n i z i n g its nature, t r y i n g t o find o u t
how these p r e e m i n e n t representations came b y t h e i r prerogatives. A n d t o the
extent that he t h o u g h t he h a d discovered t h e i r causes, he u n d e r t o o k t o p u t
those causes t o w o r k h i m s e l f and, b y himself, t o d r a w the conclusions t h e y
lead t o ; that is, he gave h i m s e l f the r i g h t t o m a k e concepts. I n this way, the fac-
u l t y o f c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n i n d i v i d u a l i z e d itself. B u t t o understand the o r i g i n s o f
that faculty, i t must be l i n k e d t o the social c o n d i t i o n s o n w h i c h i t depends.
S o m e w i l l o b j e c t that I a m p r e s e n t i n g t h e c o n c e p t i n o n l y o n e o f its as-
pects—that its role is t o ensure n o t o n l y a g r e e m e n t a m o n g m i n d s b u t also,
and even m o r e , t h e i r agreement w i t h the nature o f things. A c o n c e p t w o u l d
seem n o t t o f u l f i l l its raison d'être unless i t was t r u e — t h a t is, o b j e c t i v e — a n d
its i m p e r s o n a l i t y t o be o n l y a consequence o f its o b j e c t i v i t y . I t is i n things
c o n c e i v e d as adequately as t h e y can be that m i n d s s h o u l d c o m m u n i c a t e . I d o
n o t d e n y that c o n c e p t u a l e v o l u t i o n moves p a r t l y i n this d i r e c t i o n . T h e c o n -
Conclusion 439

cept that is at first h e l d t o be t r u e because i t is collective tends n o t t o b e c o m e

collective unless i t is h e l d t o be t r u e : W e d e m a n d its credentials before g i v -
i n g i t credence. B u t first, w e m u s t n o t lose sight o f the fact that, even today,
the great m a j o r i t y o f t h e concepts that w e use are n o t m e t h o d i c a l l y c o n -
structed; w e c o m e b y t h e m f r o m language, that is, f r o m c o m m o n e x p e r i -
ence, a n d w i t h o u t s u b j e c t i n g t h e m t o any p r i o r c r i t i q u e . Concepts that are
scientifically w r o u g h t a n d c r i t i c i z e d are always i n a v e r y small m i n o r i t y . Sec-
ond, there are o n l y differences o f degree b e t w e e n those concepts and the
ones that d r a w all t h e i r a u t h o r i t y o n l y f r o m the fact o f b e i n g collective. A
collective representation, because i t is c o l l e c t i v e , already presents assurances
o f o b j e c t i v i t y . N o t w i t h o u t reason has i t b e e n able t o generalize a n d m a i n t a i n
itself w i t h such persistence. I f i t was i n disagreement w i t h the nature o f
things, i t w o u l d n o t have succeeded i n a c q u i r i n g b r o a d a n d p r o l o n g e d d o -
m i n i o n over m i n d s . F u n d a m e n t a l l y , w h a t makes scientific concepts inspire
c o n f i d e n c e is that t h e y can be tested m e t h o d i c a l l y . A collective representa-
t i o n necessarily undergoes a test that is repeated indefinitely. T h e m e n w h o
adhere t o a collective representation verify i t t h r o u g h t h e i r o w n experience.
T h u s i t c a n n o t be w h o l l y inadequate t o its object. C e r t a i n l y i t m a y e x p l a i n
that o b j e c t w i t h i m p e r f e c t symbols, b u t scientific symbols are themselves
never m o r e t h a n a p p r o x i m a t e . T h e m e t h o d I f o l l o w i n the study o f religious
p h e n o m e n a is based o n exactly this p r i n c i p l e . I regard i t as a x i o m a t i c that,
strange t h o u g h religious beliefs m a y sometimes be i n appearance, t h e y c o n -
11
t a i n t h e i r o w n t r u t h , w h i c h m u s t be u n c o v e r e d .
Inversely, even w h e n c o n s t r u c t e d i n accordance w i t h all the rules o f sci-
ence, concepts are far f r o m t a k i n g t h e i r a u t h o r i t y f r o m t h e i r objective value
alone. T o be b e l i e v e d , i t is n o t e n o u g h that t h e y be t r u e . I f they are n o t i n
h a r m o n y w i t h o t h e r beliefs a n d o t h e r o p i n i o n s — i n short, w i t h the w h o l e set
o f collective representations—they w i l l be d e n i e d ; m i n d s w i l l be closed t o
t h e m ; as a result, t h e y w i l l be a n d yet n o t be. I f b e a r i n g the seal o f science is
usually e n o u g h today t o g a i n a sort o f p r i v i l e g e d credibility, that is because
w e have f a i t h i n science. B u t that faith is n o t essentially different f r o m r e l i -
gious f a i t h . T h e value w e a t t r i b u t e t o science depends, i n the last analysis,
u p o n t h e idea w e c o l l e c t i v e l y have o f its nature a n d role i n life, w h i c h is t o
say that i t expresses a state o f o p i n i o n . T h e reason is that e v e r y t h i n g i n social
life rests o n o p i n i o n , i n c l u d i n g science itself. T o be sure, w e can m a k e o p i n -
i o n an o b j e c t o f study a n d create a science o f i t ; that is w h a t sociology p r i n -
cipally consists i n . Still the science o f o p i n i o n does n o t create o p i n i o n , b u t

"From the very fact that a representation has a social origin, we see how far it is from being without
objective value.
440 Conclusion

can o n l y clarify i t a n d m a k e i t m o r e conscious o f itself. I n this way, i t is t r u e ,

science can lead o p i n i o n t o change, b u t science remains the p r o d u c t o f o p i n -
i o n even at the m o m e n t i t seems t o r u l e o p i n i o n ; f o r as I have s h o w n , science
12
draws the strength i t takes t o act u p o n o p i n i o n f r o m o p i n i o n i t s e l f .
T o say that concepts express t h e m a n n e r i n w h i c h society conceives o f
things is also t o say that c o n c e p t u a l t h o u g h t is c o n t e m p o r a n e o u s w i t h h u -
m a n i t y . T h e r e f o r e , I refuse t o see t h e m as t h e p r o d u c t o f m o r e o r less m o d -
ern c u l t u r e . A m a n w h o d i d n o t t h i n k w i t h concepts w o u l d n o t be a m a n ,
for he w o u l d n o t be a social b e i n g . L i m i t e d t o i n d i v i d u a l perceptions alone,
he w o u l d n o t be d i s t i n c t from an a n i m a l . I t has b e e n possible t o u p h o l d t h e
c o n t r a r y thesis o n l y because the c o n c e p t has b e e n d e f i n e d b y features that are
not f u n d a m e n t a l t o i t . T h e c o n c e p t has b e e n i d e n t i f i e d w i t h the general
13 14
i d e a — a n d w i t h the clearly d e l i m i t e d a n d c i r c u m s c r i b e d general i d e a . In
that case, the l o w e r societies c o u l d appear t o be i g n o r a n t o f the concept
p r o p e r l y so-called, f o r t h e y have o n l y u n d e v e l o p e d processes o f generaliza-
t i o n , a n d t h e n o t i o n s t h e y use are generally n o t w e l l d e f i n e d . Yet m o s t o f o u r
present concepts also lack clear d e f i n i t i o n ; w e can barely force ourselves t o
define t h e m except i n debate, a n d w h e n w e are o p e r a t i n g as scientists. B e -
sides, w e have seen that c o n c e p t u a l i z i n g is n o t the same as generalizing. T o
t h i n k c o n c e p t u a l l y is n o t m e r e l y t o isolate a n d g r o u p the features c o m m o n
to a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f objects. I t is also t o subsume t h e variable u n d e r t h e
p e r m a n e n t a n d the i n d i v i d u a l u n d e r the social. A n d since l o g i c a l t h o u g h t b e -
gins w i t h the c o n c e p t , i t f o l l o w s that l o g i c a l t h o u g h t has always existed; there
has b e e n n o h i s t o r i c a l p e r i o d w h e n m e n l i v e d i n c h r o n i c c o n f u s i o n a n d c o n -
t r a d i c t i o n . C e r t a i n l y , t h e different features o f l o g i c i n different h i s t o r i c a l p e -
r i o d s c a n n o t be overemphasized; l o g i c evolves as societies themselves evolve.
B u t h o w e v e r real, t h e differences s h o u l d n o t cause us t o miss t h e similarities,
w h i c h are n o less f u n d a m e n t a l .

IV
1 5
W e can n o w take u p a f i n a l q u e s t i o n , w h i c h was set o u t i n the I n t r o d u c t i o n
a n d has r e m a i n e d m o r e o r less i m p l i c i t t h r o u g h o u t this b o o k . W e have seen

12
Cf. above, p. 210.
13
[Lucien] Lévy-Bruhl, Les Fonctions mentales dans les sociétés inférieures [Paris, F. Alcan, 1910],
pp. 131-138.
,4
Ibid„ p. 446.
15
See above, p. 12.
Conclusion 441

that at least c e r t a i n o f the categories are social things. T h e q u e s t i o n is w h e r e

t h e y g o t this trait.
N o d o u b t , since t h e y are themselves concepts, w e easily understand that
t h e y are t h e w o r k o f t h e c o l l e c t i v i t y . I n d e e d , n o concepts display the d i s t i n -
g u i s h i n g marks o f a c o l l e c t i v e representation t o t h e same degree. I n d e e d ,
t h e i r stability a n d i m p e r s o n a l i t y are such that t h e y have often b e e n taken t o
be absolutely universal a n d i m m u t a b l e . Besides, since t h e y express the f u n d a -
m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n s o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g b e t w e e n m i n d s , i t seems o b v i o u s that
t h e y c o u l d o n l y have b e e n fashioned b y society.
Yet the p r o b l e m is m o r e c o m p l e x , insofar as t h e categories are c o n -
c e r n e d , f o r t h e y are social i n a n o t h e r sense and, as i t w e r e , t o a h i g h e r degree.
N o t o n l y d o t h e y c o m e f r o m society, b u t the v e r y things they express are so-
cial. I t is n o t o n l y that t h e y are i n s t i t u t e d b y society b u t also that t h e i r c o n -
t e n t is various aspects o f the social b e i n g . T h e c a t e g o r y o f genus was at first
i n d i s t i n c t from t h e c o n c e p t o f h u m a n g r o u p ; t h e category o f t i m e has the
r h y t h m o f social life as its basis; the space society occupies p r o v i d e d the r a w
m a t e r i a l f o r t h e category o f space; c o l l e c t i v e force was the p r o t o t y p e f o r the
c o n c e p t o f effective force, an essential e l e m e n t i n the category o f causality.
Nevertheless, a p p l i c a t i o n t o the social r e a l m is n o t t h e o n l y f u n c t i o n o f the
categories; t h e y e x t e n d t o reality as a w h o l e . W h y is i t , t h e n , that the m o d -
els o n w h i c h t h e y w e r e b u d t have b e e n b o r r o w e d f r o m society?
T h e answer is that these are p r e e m i n e n t concepts that have a p r e p o n d e r -
ant role i n k n o w l e d g e . I n d e e d , t h e f u n c t i o n o f the categories is t o g o v e r n a n d
c o n t a i n the o t h e r concepts. T h e y f o r m the p e r m a n e n t f r a m e w o r k o f m e n t a l
life. B u t t o encompass such an object, t h e y m u s t be m o d e l e d o n a reality o f
equally w i d e scope.
D o u b d e s s the relations t h e y express exist, i m p h c i d y , i n i n d i v i d u a l c o n -
sciousnesses. T h e i n d i v i d u a l lives i n time and, as I have said, has a c e r t a i n
sense o f t e m p o r a l o r i e n t a t i o n . H e is at a d e f i n i t e p o i n t i n space, a n d i t has
b e e n possible t o h o l d , w i t h g o o d reason, that all sensations have a spatial as-
16
pect. H e has a sense o f similarity. S i m i l a r representations attract o n e a n o t h e r
a n d c o m e t o g e t h e r w i t h i n h i m , a n d the n e w representation f o r m e d b y t h e i r
c o m i n g t o g e t h e r has a c e r t a i n generic quality. W e also have the sensation o f
a c e r t a i n r e g u l a r i t y i n t h e o r d e r o f succession i n p h e n o m e n a ; even t h e a n i m a l
is n o t incapable o f that. B u t all these relationships are personal t o the i n d i -
v i d u a l w h o is i n v o l v e d w i t h t h e m , a n d hence t h e n o t i o n he can g a i n from
t h e m can i n n o case stretch b e y o n d his n a r r o w h o r i z o n . T h e generic images

16
James, Principles of Psychology, vol. I, p. 134.
442 Conclusion

that f o r m i n m y consciousness t h r o u g h t h e c o m i n g t o g e t h e r o f similar images

represent o n l y those objects that I have p e r c e i v e d d i r e c d y ; n o t h i n g is there t o
give m e the idea o f a class, that is, a f r a m e w o r k able t o encompass t h e whole
g r o u p o f all possible objects that f u l f i l l the same c r i t e r i o n . I w o u l d still n e e d
t o have the idea o f g r o u p b e f o r e h a n d , an idea t h a t the mere u n f o l d i n g o f o u r
i n n e r hfe c a n n o t be sufficient t o arouse i n us. A b o v e all, there is n o i n d i v i d -
ual experience, n o m a t t e r h o w b r o a d o r p r o l o n g e d , that c o u l d make us even
suspect t h e existence o f a w h o l e genus e m b r a c i n g t h e u n i v e r s a l i t y o f beings,
and i n w h i c h t h e o t h e r genera w o u l d be o n l y species c o o r d i n a t e d a m o n g , o r
s u b o r d i n a t e d t o , o n e another. T h i s n o t i o n o f the whole, w h i c h lies at t h e b a -
sis o f the classifications I have c i t e d , c a n n o t c o m e t o us from t h e i n d i v i d u a l
himself, w h o is o n l y a p a r t o f the w h o l e a n d never comes i n contact w i t h
m o r e t h a n an i n f i n i t e s i m a l p a r t o f reality. A n d y e t there is perhaps n o m o r e
f u n d a m e n t a l category. Since t h e role o f the categories is t o encompass all t h e
o t h e r concepts, the c a t e g o r y par excellence w o u l d i n d e e d seem t o b e t h e
v e r y c o n c e p t of totality. T h e theorists o f k n o w l e d g e usually postulate t o t a l i t y
as i f i t is self-evident, b u t i n fact i t goes i n f i n i t e l y b e y o n d t h e c o n t e n t o f each
i n d i v i d u a l consciousness, t a k e n separately.
F o r the same reasons, t h e space I k n o w t h r o u g h m y senses, w h e r e I a m
at t h e center a n d w h e r e e v e r y t h i n g is arranged i n r e l a t i o n t o m e , c o u l d n o t
be the space as a w h o l e , w h i c h contains all the i n d i v i d u a l spaces a n d i n
w h i c h , m o r e o v e r , those i n d i v i d u a l spaces are c o o r d i n a t e d i n r e l a t i o n t o i m -
personal reference p o i n t s c o m m o n t o a l l i n d i v i d u a l s . Similarly, the concrete
d u r a t i o n that I feel passing w i t h i n a n d w i t h m e c o u l d never give m e the idea
o f t i m e as a w h o l e . T h e first expresses o n l y the r h y t h m o f m y i n d i v i d u a l hfe;
the second m u s t c o r r e s p o n d t o t h e r h y t h m o f a hfe that is n o t that o f any p a r -
17
t i c u l a r i n d i v i d u a l , b u t o n e i n w h i c h all p a r t i c i p a t e . I n the same way, finally,
t h e regularities that I can perceive i n the w a y m y sensations f o l l o w o n e a n -
o t h e r m a y v e r y w e l l have value f o r m e ; t h e y e x p l a i n w h y I t e n d t o w a i t f o r
the second w h e n the first o f t w o p h e n o m e n a w h o s e constant c o n j u n c t i o n I
have e x p e r i e n c e d is g i v e n t o m e . B u t that state o f personal expectancy c a n -
n o t be assinulated t o t h e c o n c e p t i o n o f a universal o r d e r o f succession that
imposes i t s e l f o n all m i n d s a n d all events.
Since t h e w o r l d expressed b y t h e w h o l e system o f concepts is t h e w o r l d
society conceives of, o n l y society can p r o v i d e us w i t h the m o s t general n o -

17
Space and time are often spoken of as if they were only concrete extension and duration, such as in-
dividual consciousness can experience them, but impoverished through abstraction. In reality, they are
representations of an entirely different kind—constructed out of different elements, following a very dif-
ferent plan, and with ends in view that are different as well.
Conclusion 443

tions i n t e r m s o f w h i c h that w o r l d m u s t be c o n c e i v e d . O n l y a subject that

encompasses every i n d i v i d u a l subject has the capacity t o encompass such an
o b j e c t . Since the universe exists o n l y insofar as i t is t h o u g h t o f a n d since i t is
t h o u g h t o f i n its t o t a l i t y o n l y b y society, i t takes its place w i t h i n society; i t
becomes an e l e m e n t o f society's i n n e r life, a n d thus is itself the t o t a l genus
outside w h i c h n o t h i n g exists. T h e c o n c e p t o f t o t a l i t y is b u t the c o n c e p t o f
society i n abstract f o r m . I t is the w h o l e that includes all things, the supreme
class that contains all o t h e r classes. S u c h is the u n d e r l y i n g p r i n c i p l e o n w h i c h
rest those p r i m i t i v e classifications that situated a n d classified beings o f all t h e
1 8
k i n g d o m s , i n the same r i g h t as m e n . B u t i f t h e w o r l d is i n the society, the
space society occupies merges w i t h space as a w h o l e . A s w e have seen, each
t h i n g does i n d e e d have its assigned place i n social space. B u t w h a t brings o u t
the e x t e n t t o w h i c h that t o t a l space differs f r o m those concrete expanses that
o u r senses cause us t o perceive is t h e fact that l o c a l i z a t i o n is w h o l l y ideal a n d
i n n o w a y resembles w h a t i t m i g h t be i f i t was d i c t a t e d t o us b y sense e x p e -
19
rience. F o r t h e same reason, the r h y t h m o f collective life governs a n d c o n -
tains t h e various r h y t h m s o f all the e l e m e n t a r y lives o f w h i c h i t is the result;
consequendy, the t i m e that expresses i t governs a n d contains all the i n d i v i d -
u a l times. I t is t i m e as a w h o l e .
F o r a l o n g time, t h e w o r l d ' s h i s t o r y was o n l y a different aspect o f s o c i -
ety's history. T h e o n e begins w i t h t h e o t h e r ; the p e r i o d s o f the w o r l d are d e -
t e r m i n e d b y the p e r i o d s o f t h e society. M e a s u r i n g that i m p e r s o n a l and global
d u r a t i o n a n d s e t t i n g reference p o i n t s i n r e l a t i o n t o w h i c h i t is d i v i d e d and o r -
ganized are society's m o v e m e n t s o f c o n c e n t r a t i o n o r dispersal—or, m o r e
generally, the p e r i o d i c n e e d f o r c o l l e c t i v e r e n e w a l . I f those c r i t i c a l m o m e n t s
are m o s t o f t e n attached t o some physical p h e n o m e n o n , such as the regular
reappearance o f a c e r t a i n star o r t h e a l t e r n a t i o n o f the seasons, i t is because
objective signs are n e e d e d t o m a k e that essentially social o r g a n i z a t i o n t a n g i -
ble f o r all. Similarly, the causal r e l a t i o n becomes i n d e p e n d e n t o f any i n d i v i d -
u a l consciousness f r o m t h e m o m e n t i t is c o l l e c t i v e l y established b y the g r o u p ;
i t hovers above all t h e m i n d s a n d all t h e i n d i v i d u a l events. I t is a l a w h a v i n g
i m p e r s o n a l validity. I have s h o w n that t h e l a w o f causality seems t o have b e e n
b o r n i n j u s t this way.
T h e r e is a n o t h e r reason w h y the c o n s t i t u e n t elements o f the categories
m u s t have b e e n t a k e n f r o m social life: T h e relationships t h e y express c o u l d

l8
In all probability, the concepts of totality, society, and deity are at bottom merely different aspects of
the same notion.
"See "Classifications primitives" [Emile Durkheim, "De Quelques formes primitives de classifica-
tion," AS, vol. VI, 1903], pp. 40ff.
444 Conclusion

n o t b e c o m e conscious relationships except i n a n d t h r o u g h society. E v e n i f , i n

a sense, t h e y are i m m a n e n t i n the life o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l , the i n d i v i d u a l h a d
n e i t h e r reason n o r means t o grasp t h e m , t h i n k a b o u t t h e m , make t h e m e x -
p l i c i t , a n d b u i l d t h e m u p i n t o d i s t i n c t n o t i o n s . T o o r i e n t his i n d i v i d u a l self i n
space a n d t o k n o w at w h a t times t o satisfy v a r i o u s physical needs, he h a d n o
n e e d f o r a c o n c e p t u a l representation o f t i m e o r space, o n c e a n d f o r all. M a n y
animals k n o w h o w t o f i n d t h e i r w a y b a c k t o the paths l e a d i n g t o places f a -
m i l i a r t o t h e m ; t h e y r e t u r n there at t h e r i g h t t i m e yet w i t h o u t t h e i r h a v i n g
any category at all; sensations are e n o u g h t o g u i d e t h e m automatically. T h e s e
w o u l d be sufficient f o r m a n as w e l l i f his m o v e m e n t s h a d t o satisfy i n d i v i d u a l
needs alone. I n o r d e r t o recognize that o n e t h i n g resembles others with
w h i c h w e are already acquainted, w e n e e d n o t arrange t h e m i n genera a n d
species. T h e w a y i n w h i c h similar images call o n e a n o t h e r f o r t h and m e r g e
are e n o u g h t o create t h e feeling o f resemblance. T h e i m p r e s s i o n of déjà vu, of
s o m e t h i n g already e x p e r i e n c e d , i m p l i e s n o classification. I n order t o differ-
entiate b e t w e e n those things w e m u s t seek after a n d those w e must flee, w e
have n o n e e d t o j o i n the effects o f b o t h t o t h e i r causes w i t h a l o g i c a l l i n k , i f
i n d i v i d u a l c o n v e n i e n c e alone is at stake. P u r e l y e m p i r i c a l sequences, strong
c o n n e c t i o n s b e t w e e n c o n c r e t e representations, are equally sure guides t o the
w i l l . N o t o n l y does t h e a n i m a l have n o others, b u t o u r o w n i n d i v i d u a l p r a c -
tice q u i t e o f t e n presupposes n o t h i n g m o r e . T h e w i s e m a n is o n e w h o has a
v e r y clear sense o f w h a t he m u s t d o b u t o n e that he w o u l d usually be unable
t o translate i n t o a law.
I t is o t h e r w i s e w i t h society. Society is possible o n l y i f the i n d i v i d u a l s a n d
things t h a t m a k e i t u p are d i v i d e d a m o n g different groups, w h i c h is t o say
genera,* a n d i f those groups themselves are classified i n r e l a t i o n t o o n e a n -
other. T h u s , society presupposes a conscious o r g a n i z a t i o n o f itself that is
n o t h i n g o t h e r t h a n a classification. T h a t o r g a n i z a t i o n o f society is n a t u r a l l y
passed o n t o the space i t occupies. T o forestall c o n f l i c t , a d e f i n i t e p o r t i o n o f
space m u s t be assigned t o each i n d i v i d u a l g r o u p . I n o t h e r w o r d s , t h e space
m u s t b e d i v i d e d , differentiated, a n d o r i e n t e d , a n d these divisions and o r i e n -
tations m u s t be k n o w n t o a l l . I n a d d i t i o n , every call t o a feast, h u n t , o r m i l -
i t a r y e x p e d i t i o n i m p l i e s that dates are f i x e d a n d agreed u p o n and, therefore,
that a c o m m o n t i m e is established that everyone conceives i n the same way.

*Here and later in the paragraph (as well as twice previously in this chapter), Durkheim shifts to the
word classe. Since the English term "class" can imply economic differentiation, which would move the ar-
gument out of its present context, I have used the term "genus" throughout. Nonetheless, what the eco-
nomic sense of "class" would add or subtract should be kept in mind—for example, in the end of the last
sentence in this paragraph.
 Conclusion 445

Finally, t h e c o l l a b o r a t i o n o f several i n p u r s u i t o f a c o m m o n goal is possible

o n l y i f there is agreement o n t h e r e l a t i o n b e t w e e n that goal a n d t h e means
that m a k e its achievement possible—that is, i f a single causal r e l a t i o n is ac-
cepted b y all w h o are w o r k i n g t o g e t h e r i n t h e same enterprise. I t is n o t sur-
p r i s i n g , t h e n , that social t i m e , social space, social genera [classes], a n d
collective causality s h o u l d be t h e basis o f the c o r r e s p o n d i n g categories, since
i t is i n t h e i r social f o r m s that t h e y w e r e first c o n c e i v e d w i t h any degree o f
c l a r i t y b y h u m a n consciousness.
T o s u m m a r i z e , society is b y n o means t h e i l l o g i c a l o r alogical, inconsis-
t e n t , a n d changeable b e i n g that p e o p l e t o o o f t e n l i k e t o i m a g i n e . Q u i t e t h e
contrary, t h e collective consciousness is t h e highest f o r m o f psychic life, f o r
i t is a consciousness o f consciousnesses. B e i n g outside a n d above i n d i v i d u a l
a n d l o c a l contingencies, collective consciousness sees things o n l y i n t h e i r
p e r m a n e n t a n d f u n d a m e n t a l aspect, * w h i c h i t crystallizes i n ideas that can b e
c o m m u n i c a t e d . A t t h e same t i m e as i t sees f r o m above, i t sees far ahead; at
every m o m e n t , i t embraces all k n o w n reality; that is w h y i t alone can f u r n i s h ;
t h e i n t e l l e c t w i t h f r a m e w o r k s that are applicable t o t h e t o t a l i t y o f beings a n d !
t h a t enable us t o b u i l d concepts a b o u t t h e m . I t does n o t create these f r a m e - \
w o r k s artificially b u t finds t h e m w i t h i n itself, m e r e l y b e c o m i n g conscious o f
t h e m . T h e y express ways O f b e i n g that are m e t w i t h at all levels o f the real b u t
that appear w i t h f u l l c l a r i t y o n l y at t h e pinnacle, because the e x t r e m e c o m -
p l e x i t y o f t h e psychic life that unfolds there requires a m o r e h i g h l y developed
" consciousness. T h e r e f o r e , t o a t t r i b u t e social o r i g i n s t o l o g i c a l t h o u g h t is n o t >
t o denigrate i t , d i m i n i s h its w o r t h , o r reduce i t t o n o m o r e t h a n a system o f
artificial c o m b i n a t i o n s — b u t is, q u i t e t h e contrary, t o relate l o g i c a l t h o u g h t t o
a cause that n a t u r a l l y i m p l i e s i t . Assuredly, this is n o t t o say that n o t i o n s
w o r k e d o u t i n that w a y c o u l d b e d i r e c d y adequate t o t h e i r objects. I f society
is s o m e t h i n g universal as c o m p a r e d t o t h e i n d i v i d u a l , i t is still an i n d i v i d u a l -
i t y , h a v i n g its o w n f o r m a n d idiosyncrasies; i t is a particular subject and,
.consequently, o n e that particularizes w h a t i t t h i n k s o f . So even collective
representations c o n t a i n subjective elements, a n d i f t h e y are t o b e c o m e closer
t o t h i n g s , t h e y m u s t b e g r a d u a l l y r e f i n e d . B u t c r u d e as these representa-
t i o n s m i g h t have b e e n at first, i t remains t r u e that w i t h t h e m came t h e seed
o f a n e w m o d e o f t h i n k i n g , o n e t o w h i c h t h e i n d i v i d u a l c o u l d never have
l i f t e d h i m s e l f o n his o w n . T h e w a y was o p e n t o stable, i m p e r s o n a l , ordered
t h o u g h t , w h i c h h a d o n l y t o develop its o w n special nature f r o m t h e n o n .

*Note the similarity between this formulation about conscience collective as "a permanent and funda-
mental" aspect of society and a similar one about religion as a "fundamental and permanent aspect of hu-
manity" in the Introduction (above, p. 1). {'
446 Conclusion

M o r e o v e r , the factors that have b r o u g h t a b o u t this d e v e l o p m e n t seem t o

be n o different i n k i n d f r o m those that b r o u g h t i t f o r t h o r i g i n a l l y . I f l o g i c a l
t h o u g h t tends m o r e a n d m o r e t o j e t t i s o n the subjective a n d personal ele-
ments that w e r e l a u n c h e d w i t h i t , the reason is n o t that extrasocial factors
have entered i n b u t far m o r e that a n e w k i n d o f social life gradually d e v e l -
o p e d : i n t e r n a t i o n a l life, w h o s e effect even t h e n was t o universalize religious
beliefs. As that i n t e r n a t i o n a l life broadens, so does t h e collective h o r i z o n ; so-
ciety n o l o n g e r appears as the w h o l e , par excellence, a n d becomes p a r t o f a
w h o l e that is m o r e vast, w i t h frontiers that are i n d e f i n i t e a n d capable o f
r o l l i n g b a c k i n d e f i n i t e l y . As a result, things can n o l o n g e r f i t w i t h i n the so-
cial frames w h e r e t h e y w e r e o r i g i n a l l y classified; t h e y m u s t be o r g a n i z e d w i t h
p r i n c i p l e s o f t h e i r o w n ; l o g i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n thus differentiates itself from so-
cial o r g a n i z a t i o n a n d becomes a u t o n o m o u s . T h i s , i t seems, is h o w t h e b o n d
that at first j o i n e d t h o u g h t t o d e f i n e d collective entities becomes m o r e a n d
m o r e detached a n d h o w , consequently, i t becomes ever m o r e i m p e r s o n a l a n d
universalizes. * T h o u g h t t h a t is t r u l y a n d p e c u l i a r l y h u m a n is n o t a p r i m i t i v e
g i v e n , therefore, b u t a p r o d u c t o f h i s t o r y ; i t is an ideal l i m i t t o w h i c h w e
c o m e ever closer b u t i n all p r o b a b i l i t y w i l l never attain.
T h u s , the sort o f a n t i m o n y that has so o f t e n b e e n accepted, b e t w e e n sci-
ence o n o n e h a n d a n d r e l i g i o n a n d m o r a l i t y o n the other, is far from the case.
I n reality, these different m o d e s o f h u m a n a c t i v i t y d e r i v e from one a n d the
same source. T h i s K a n t w e l l u n d e r s t o o d , a n d therefore he considered specu-
lative reason a n d practical reason t o be t w o different aspects o f t h e same fac-
ulty. A c c o r d i n g t o h i m , w h a t j o i n s t h e m is that b o t h are o r i e n t e d t o w a r d the
universal. T o t h i n k r a t i o n a l l y is t o t h i n k a c c o r d i n g t o the laws that are self-
e v i d e n t t o all reasonable beings; t o act m o r a l l y is t o act a c c o r d i n g t o m a x i m s
that can be e x t e n d e d w i t h o u t c o n t r a d i c t i o n t o all w i l l s . I n o t h e r w o r d s , b o t h
science a n d m o r a l i t y i m p l y that t h e i n d i v i d u a l is capable o f l i f t i n g h i m s e l f
above his o w n p o i n t o f v i e w a n d p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n an i m p e r s o n a l life. A n d , i n -
deed, h e r e i n w e u n d o u b t e d l y have a trait that is c o m m o n t o a l l the h i g h e r
f o r m s o f t h o u g h t a n d a c t i o n . B u t w h a t K a n t i a n i s m does n o t e x p l a i n is w h e r e
the sort o f c o n t r a d i c t i o n that m a n thus e m b o d i e s comes from. W h y m u s t he
d o v i o l e n c e t o h i m s e l f i n o r d e r t o transcend his i n d i v i d u a l nature; a n d i n -
versely, w h y m u s t i m p e r s o n a l l a w w e a k e n as i t b e c o m e s incarnate i n i n d i v i d -
uals? W i l l i t be said that there are t w o antagonistic w o r l d s i n w h i c h w e
participate equally: the w o r l d o f m a t t e r a n d sense, o n the o n e h a n d , a n d o n
the other, that o f p u r e a n d i m p e r s o n a l reason? B u t that is t o repeat the ques-

*This sentence was omitted from the Swain translation but is in both French versions of Formes.
Conclusion 447

t i o n i n terms that are barely different: f o r the p o i n t precisely is t o k n o w w h y

w e m u s t * lead those t w o lives c o n c u r r e n t l y . Since the t w o w o r l d s seem t o
c o n t r a d i c t o n e another, w h y d o t h e y n o t r e m a i n separate f r o m o n e another,
a n d w h a t makes i t necessary f o r t h e m t o interpenetrate, despite t h e i r antag-
onism? T h e hypothesis o f the Fall, w i t h all its attendant difficulties, is the
o n l y e x p l a n a t i o n o f that singular necessity that has ever b e e n o f f e r e d — a n d i t
n e e d n o t be r e c i t e d here.
O n the o t h e r h a n d , the m y s t e r y dissolves o n c e w e have a c k n o w l e d g e d
that i m p e r s o n a l reason is b u t collective t h o u g h t b y a n o t h e r name. C o l l e c t i v e
t h o u g h t is possible o n l y t h r o u g h the c o m i n g t o g e t h e r o f individuals; hence i t
presupposes the i n d i v i d u a l s , a n d t h e y i n t u r n presuppose i t , because they
c a n n o t sustain themselves except b y c o m i n g together. T h e r e a l m o f i m p e r -
sonal aims a n d t r u t h s c a n n o t be realized except t h r o u g h the c o l l a b o r a t i o n o f
i n d i v i d u a l w i l l s a n d sensibilities;f the reasons t h e y participate a n d the reasons
t h e y collaborate are t h e same. I n short, there is s o m e t h i n g i m p e r s o n a l i n us
because there is s o m e t h i n g social i n us, a n d since social life embraces b o t h
representations a n d practices, that i m p e r s o n a l i t y extends q u i t e naturally t o
ideas as w e l l as t o actions.
S o m e w i l l be astonished, perhaps, t o see m e c o n n e c t i n g the highest
f o r m s o f the h u m a n m i n d w i t h society. T h e cause seems q u i t e h u m b l e as
c o m p a r e d t o t h e value w e a t t r i b u t e t o the effect. So great is the distance b e -
t w e e n t h e w o r l d o f the senses a n d appetites o n the o n e hand, a n d the w o r l d
o f reason a n d m o r a l i t y o n the other, that i t seems the second c o u l d have been
added t o t h e first o n l y b y an act o f c r e a t i o n . B u t t o a t t r i b u t e t o society this
d o m i n a n t r o l e i n the o r i g i n o f o u r nature is n o t t o d e n y that creation. S o c i -
ety does i n d e e d have at its disposal a creative p o w e r that n o observable b e i n g
can m a t c h . E v e r y c r e a t i o n , unless i t is a m y s t i c a l p r o c e d u r e that escapes sci-
ence a n d i n t e l l e c t , is i n fact t h e p r o d u c t o f a synthesis. I f the syntheses o f par-
t i c u l a r representations that o c c u r w i t h i n each i n d i v i d u a l consciousness are
already, i n a n d o f themselves, p r o d u c t i v e o f novelties, h o w m u c h m o r e effec-
tive m u s t societies be—these vast syntheses o f entire consciousnesses! A s o c i -
ety is the m o s t p o w e r f u l c o l l e c t i o n o f physical a n d m o r a l forces that w e can
observe i n nature. S u c h riches o f v a r i o u s materials, so h i g h l y concentrated,
are t o b e f o u n d n o w h e r e else. I t is n o t s u r p r i s i n g , t h e n , that a h i g h e r life d e -
velops o u t o f t h e m , a life that acts o n the elements f r o m w h i c h i t is made,
t h e r e b y raising t h e m t o a h i g h e r f o r m o f life a n d t r a n s f o r m i n g t h e m .

*The second edition says U nous fait instead of il nous faut, surely a typographical error.
T
The phrase "and sensibilities" does not appear in Swain.
448 Conclusion

T h u s , i t seems the v o c a t i o n o f s o c i o l o g y is t o o p e n a n e w w a y t o the sci-

ence o f m a n . U n t i l n o w , w e s t o o d before these alternatives: e i t h e r t o e x p l a i n
the h i g h e r and specific faculties o f m a n b y r e l a t i n g t h e m t o l o w e r f o r m s o f
being—reason t o sense, m i n d t o m a t t e r — w h i c h a m o u n t e d t o d e n y i n g t h e i r
specificity; o r t o c o n n e c t t h e m w i t h some reality above experience that w e
postulated b u t w h o s e existence n o o b s e r v a t i o n can establish. W h a t placed the
m i n d i n that d i f f i c u l t y is that the i n d i v i d u a l was taken t o be finis naturae. * I t
seemed there was n o t h i n g b e y o n d h i m , at least n o t h i n g that science m i g h t
discover. B u t a n e w w a y o f e x p l a i n i n g m a n becomes possible as soon as w e
recognize that above the i n d i v i d u a l there is society, and that society is a sys-
t e m o f active f o r c e s — n o t a n o m i n a l b e i n g , a n d n o t a c r e a t i o n o f the m i n d .
To preserve man's distinctive attributes, i t is n o l o n g e r necessary t o place t h e m
outside experience. Before d r a w i n g that e x t r e m e c o n c l u s i o n , at any rate, i t is
best t o f i n d o u t w h e t h e r that w h i c h is i n the i n d i v i d u a l b u t surpasses h i m m a y
n o t c o m e t o h i m f r o m that s u p r a i n d i v i d u a l , yet concretely e x p e r i e n c e d , real-
i t y that is society. T o be sure, i t c a n n o t be said at this m o m e n t h o w far these
explanations can be e x t e n d e d a n d i f t h e y can lay every p r o b l e m t o rest.
Equally, however, i t is impossible t o m a r k i n advance a l i m i t b e y o n d w h i c h
t h e y c a n n o t go. W h a t m u s t be d o n e is t o t r y o u t the hypothesis and test i t
against the facts as m e t h o d i c a l l y as possible. T h i s is w h a t I have t r i e d t o do.

*The culmination of nature.

 INDEX
Abstinences, 303—15. See also Prohibitions
Agni, 29, 70-71, 83n39
Alatunja, 333, 335, 338-39, 341, 356
Alcheringa, 250, 251, 253, 255, 256, 257,
272, 277, 281, 283, 285, 287, 294, 339,
358, 378, 380
Altjira, 258, 262nll0, 289, 289n72,
295-96
Altjirangamitjina, 250, 257-58, 260, 277
Ambiguity: of representative rites, 387-91;
of sacredness, 412-17
American Indians: and animals as cosmic
deities, 64; clans of, 85-86, 93, 94,
109-10, 109fw47^18, 110; classification
among, 145; individual totemism in,
158, 158«2, 159, 160nl8, 162, 163-64,
165, 175-76, 182«38; initiation rites of,
44; and kinship between man and
totemic animal, 135-36,
135-36rm32—35; orenda of Iroquois,
195-96, 200, 205-206; and pain, 317;
and reincarnation, 261, 264-65; space
conceived of, as circle by, 11; totemic
emblems of, 112-17, 125; and totemic
principle, 194-96, 201; totemism of, 87,
93-95, 100n3, 101, 109-11; wakan of,
194-95, 198, 203, 205, 327
Ancestor cult, 49-52, 57, 59, 60-61,
170-73
Ancestors: and churinga, 122, 122«126,
256-57; civilizing heroes as, 286—88; and
conception, 253-59, 253n59, 255«70,
277; dramatic depictions of, 378,
378««10-12; high gods as, 299; mythol-
ogy on, 175—76; as origin of clans, 252,
279-80; protective relationship to per-
sons, 277-78; and reincarnation,
249-61, 268, 277-78; relationship be-
449
tween individual soul, individual totem,
and, 280-84, 283«30; relationship of,
to things, 278-79; souls of, 250-52;
as totem, 103-104, 258, 293-94; to
tern transmitted from, 105, 105n27,
105n29, 163; and totemic emblem,
176
Anderson, Benedict, xxxiii
Animal societies, 370n29
Animals: civilization lacking among, 370,
370n29; compared with humans, 50-51,
62; humans as participants in animal na-
ture, 65; mental faculties of, 50-51,
62, 438, 444; primitive's view of, 172; as
sacred beings, 64—65; soul in form of,
263-65, 265nl21; tattooing of, 116n89.
See also Individual totem; Totem;
Totemic animal
Animism: and anthropomorphism, 61-65,
237; conditions of, 47-51; critique of,
xlviii, 52-67, 84-85, 226; definition of,
45-46; and dreaming, 47, 48, 53-56;
and force, 368; and mentality of chil-
dren, 63; naturism compared with,
45—46, 70, 84; and reduction of religion
to system of hallucinations, 65—67; and
soul, 47-48, 52-56, 68; Spencer on,
46-47, 50-52, 66n42; and spirit, 48-50,
57-61, 68; and transformation of cult of
spirits into cult of nature, 50-52, 61-65;
Tylor on, lvii, 46—50, 46n3, 65; univer-
sal animism of Leibniz, 24
Anje-a, 260-61, 294
Anjir, 261, 294
Année sociologique, xxii, 44n68
Anthropological school, 91
Anthropomorphism, 61-65, 237, 410
Antisemitism, Lxviiiri84, 404n
450
Apriorism, 12-16, 14»16, 17w22, 18, 370,
372
Aquinas, Thomas, xxxviii
Aristode, 8
Aron, Raymond, xx—xxi, xxxi, lxvi«63
Art, origin of, 385-86
Arumburinga, 278
Arúnkulta, 199-200
Asceticism, 37, 314-21
Associarion of ideas, 361
Atnatu, 287, 287n55, 288, 295
Augustine, St., xxvii
Australia: early documentation of totemism
in, 87-90, 88nl6, 89nn20-21; method-
ological reasons for basing study on
totemism in, 90—93; phases of societies
in, 216-18. See also Totemism; and
headings beginning with Totemic
Authority, 209-11, 210-1 1H6, 224
Bachofen, Johann, 6, 6n
Baiame, 289, 292, 295, 297, 298, 309, 315,
316, 427
Barclay, Craig, lxviii«87
Barth, Auguste, 28, 31
Basedow, H., 263
Beliefs, 34-38. See also Faith
Bellah, Robert, 1XVK54
Bergaigne, Abel, 32-33, 32«38
Berger, Peter, lxviii«85
Bewitchment, 361
Bible, xxiv, xxvii, xxxviii, xliv, xlvi—xlviii,
32, 32«33, 32«34, 32n38, 341, 346«48
Blood: atonement for bloodshed, 389; and
churinga, 125; and expiatory rites, 410;
fecundating virtues of, 348-49; as life-
principle, 334—36; menstrual blood, 412,
413; mother's drinking of blood of cir-
cumcision, 137«41; and nurtunja, 136;
offerings of, 327n25, 346«48; part ver-
sus whole of, 231; prohibitions on, 137,
307; ritual shedding of, 137, 307, 317,
317«71, 334-36, 346n48, 347n52,
348-49, 358, 358wl3, 388, 391, 397¬
400, 406-11, 406n36, 409»51; sacred-
ness of, 125, 136-37, 137»41, 188, 307;
shedding of, as communion, 410; shed-
ding of, in mourning, 397-400, 406,
Index
406n36; as symbol, 228-29; totemic
essence in, 262; of women, 138n50;
from women's genital organs, 414
Boas, Franz, 87, 147n24, 175, 178, 182n38
Body: interdependence and assimilation be-
tween soul and, 245—47, 274; localiza-
tion of soul in, xxvii, 1, 53, 245—46,
246n«22-23, 260, 262; sacredness of
parts of, 136-38; soul separated from, at
death, 48, 49, 245; soul/body dualism,
xxvii, 245, 265-67, 274
Brahma, 31
Brahmanism, 28, 31
Bréal, Michel, 69, 74
Bridgmann, 142
Brinton, Daniel Garrison, 61
Buddha, 29-30, 30«26, 30rm26-28
Buddhism, 28-31, 35, 316
Bunjil, 289-92, 290n83, 295-97, 309, 315,
427
Bureau of American Ethnology, 86
Burial rites, 49, 117, 150, 185-86. See also
Death; Funeral rites; Mourning
Burnouf, Eugène, 28, 29-30, 29nl9, 29«22
Casimir, St., relics of, xxv, xlv, bdxnlOO
Categorical imperative, 305
Categories of undertanding, 8-18, 8M,
17H22, 372, 421, 440-44
Category, notion of, 146
Causality: and collective consciousness,
443; and force, 368-70, 441; and
mimetic rites, 363, 367, 371; principle
of, 367—73; and science, 373, 373«30;
social origin of, 367-68; sociological
theory of, 372
Charcot, Jean-Martin, liii
Children, 63, 125, 243»4, 246«22, 409,
414, 438
Christianity: and anthropomorphic god,
64; Catholic Church, 43; devil in, 40;
divinity in, 30, 39, 64, 76n26, 193; and
equality, 429; and faith, 365; and folk-
lore, 34; individual practices within, 43;
magical elements in, 40; and missionar-
ies' influence, 248, 248n44; Müller on,
76n26; mystery in, 23; and pain, 320;
plurality of sacred things in, 38-39;
Index
Protestantism, 41; and Satan, 423; and
science, 36«45, 431; and seasonal feasts,
353; and tattoos, 233-34
Church: centrality of, in religion, 41—43;
exclusion of, from individual religious,
43; as imagined community, 42; and in-
dividual cults, 43-44
Churinga, 115, 118-22, 119«103, 125,
132-33, 137, 140, 183, 200«41, 229,
250, 254, 256-59, 268, 269, 281, 287,
307, 311, 312, 323, 406, 407, 413,
413«61
Circumcision, 115«, 120, 137«41, 286,
287, 297, 319
Civilizing heroes, 286-88, 287«48,
287n«54-55, 288«60, 295, 297
Clans: of American Indians, 85—86, 93, 94,
109-10, 109n«47-48, 110; ancestors as
origin of, 252, 279-80; classification of
things by, 141—45; coherence of, as im-
probable, lxvi«66; definition of, 100,
100«2, 155; and phratry organization,
105, 107, 107«40, 142; similarity
among,
428; as simplest form of social organiza-
tion, 169; totem as name of, 100-101;
and totemic principle, 207-208, 223;
and totemism, 85-86, 93, 94; Tylor on,
171«8
Classification: among American Indians,
145; by clan, phratry, and class, 141-45;
dichotomous organization of, 146—47,
147n«22—23; differences between re-
semblance and idea of genus, 146—49,
147-48n«24—26; and hierarchical order,
149; modeled on social organization,
145-46,149; religious meaning of,
149-57; and society, 444-45; and the
whole, 442, 443. See also Cosmology
Clement, E . , 359
Codrington, Robert Henry, 56, 59, 64,
196-97, 206, 327
Collective consciousness: and causality, 443;
and exploration of culture, lvi; and Holy
Ark, xlviii; and impersonal reason, 445;
and moral powers, 224; as more than
epiphenomenon of morphological base,
426; and Mount Sinai, xlvii; normative
and cognitive aspects of, li; as not sepa-
451
rate from individuals, xlii—xliii; and reli-
gion, 239; and representative rites, 379;
and sacredness, xliii, xliv, xlvi,
xlviii—xlix, 268-69; and symbols, 232-34
Collective representations, xviii, xix, xxvi,
lvi, 15, 228, 230, 273, 349-50, 436-37,
439, 439«11, 445
Collective thought, 447
Collective totem, 162-66, 162«33, 178-82
Collins, David, 114
Command, bases of, 209-11
Communion, 341-44, 347, 389-90, 410,
414
Comparative method, proper use of, 90-92
Comte, Auguste, xxxii, xxxix, xl, xli,
lxiii«27, lxvn53, lxviiin80, 206, 429
Conception: and animal form of soul, 264;
Australian theories of, 253—59, 253«55,
253«59, 255«68, 255«70, 261, 277; sex-
ual intercourse as insufficient for, 253,
253«55; and souls, 250; and totem, 263
Conceptional totemism, 183—84
Concepts, 434-40, 435n9, 441
Conscience collective, xl-xliii, xlvii,
xlviii—xlix, li, lvi, 445«. See also Collec-
tive consciousness
Consciousness. See Collective conscious-
ness; Individual consciousness
Consciousness of consciousnesses, 445
Consecration, 323, 325
Contagiousness: causes of, 325-29; of feel-
ings associated with symbol, 221-22; of
magic forces, 328«105, 361; of religious
forces, 238-39n60, 327-29, 415; of sa-
credness, 224, 281, 322—29; and scien-
tific explanation, 327, 329; of taboos,
326«100; of totemic principle, 224
Contrariety, law of, 361 «20
Copernicus, 1
Corpses. See Death
Corroboree, 217, 357, 387, 387«32
Coser, Lewis A., xxxi
Cosmology: and classification by clan,
phratry, and class, 141—45; modeled on
social organization, 145-46, 149; and
morality, 1—li; morality and history tied
to, 379; religious meaning of classifica-
tions, 149—57; of totemism, 141-57. See
also Classification
452
Creation myths, 290-91, 290«83
Creation science, 1—li
Crusades, 213
Cult: definition of, 59-60, 420, 430; indi-
vidual forms of, 426-27; international
forms of, 428; meanings and connotations
of, lvi, lxxi-lxxii«125; periodicity of, 60.
See also Ancestor cult; Dead, cult of
Curie, Marie and Pierre, xli
Curr, Edward Micklethwaite, 143
Cushing, Frank Hamilton, 11, 86«8, 87
Dall, 87
Daramulun, 289, 292, 295, 296, 297, 309,
315, 323, 427
Darwin, Charles, 237«
Dawson, James, 248, 248«44, 324
De Couianges, Fustel, 46«2
Dead, cult of, 59, 60-61, 62, 76«26
Death: belief in life after, 270-72; hair of
man cut at, 138; honor of dead with
mana, 59, 61; Millier on, 75, 75«24;
prohibitions surrounding, 309—10, 324,
393, 395, 413; responsibility for,
263-64; sacredness of dead person, 307,
323; as separation of soul and body, 48,
49, 245; soul after, 48-49, 57, 59,
246-50, 252-53, 264-65, 265«121,
276—77; of totem as threat to individual,
160, 168; totemic emblem on corpse
before burial, 117; transformation of soul
into spirit through, 48-49, 57, 59. See
also Burial practices; Funeral rites;
Mourning
Delusions. See Hallucinations; Illusion
Demons, 34, 40, 423
Descartes, René, xxvii, brix«98
Determinism, 24—25
Deuteronomy, book of, xxvii, 32, 32n38
Dietary restrictions, 32, 78n31, 108-109,
127-31, 140, 151-52, 152«42, 160, 221,
306«7, 307-308, 307«16, 315, 338, 413
Divinity. See God
Domination, 370
Dorsey, James Owen, 87, 194-95, 194«10
Double. See Soul
Douglas, Mary, lxv-lxvi«63
Doyle, Sir Arthur Conan, lx
Index
Dramatic performances, 376—80, 383—84
Dreaming, lxviii«84, 47, 48, 53-56, 56«20,
57«22, 65, 150, 258, 261, 270-71
Dreyfus Affair, lxviii«84
Drought, 407-408
Duality: of body and soul, xxvii, 245,
265-67, 274; of human nature, 15—16,
50, 52-53, 134-36, 224n34
Dueling, 397
Eating, as profane, 311, 3311 «42. See also
Dietary restrictions
Ecclesiastes, book of, xxiv
Economic activity, 421 «4
Effervescence: collective, xli-xlii, xliv-xlv,
218-20, 228, 424; in funeral rites, 398,
399; mental effervescence, 238; and
mourning, 397-98, 399, 403; of Nazis,
btix«88; and piacular rite, 397-99, 403,
411; and representative rites, 385,
386-87
Elementary Forms of Religious Life (Dür-
kheim). See Formes élémentaires de la vie
religieuse (Dürkheim)
Elementary versus elemental, lix—lxi
Ellington, Duke, xxiii—xxiv
Emblem, 231—35. See also Totemic em-
blem
Empedocles, xxvii, lxiii«33
Empiricism, 12-18, 12-13«15, 370, 372
Equation of religion and society. See
God/society equation
Ertnatulunga, 119-21, 120«, 281, 281«21,
312
Essential, meanings of, lvi—lvii, lxxii«128.
See also specific ethnographers
Ethnography, xxxii, 5-6, 8, 27, 27«12, 85,
101
Evans-Pritchard, E . E . , li
Evil, 284-86, 285«40, 402, 404-^106,
412-17, 419, 423-24
Evolution, 1—Li» 236-37
Excrement, sacredness of, 230«43, 334,
336
Exodus, book of, xxxviii, xliv, xlvi—xlviii,
346«48
Expiatory rites, 131 «18, 151, 409, 410,
411-12, 414
Index
Eylmann, Richard, 244«9, 389«72, 407
Fables, 80n36. See abo Folklore; Mythology
Fagan, Garth, xxiii
Faith, 364-66, 379, 419-20, 427, 432, 433
Family. See Clans
Famines, 407-408
Fertility rites, 354-60
Festivals, 386-87
Fetishism, 35-36, 161 «26, 176-77
Filloux, J. C , lxiv«52
Fire rituals, 219-20
First fruits, sacredness of, 342, 343
Fison, Lorimer, 86, 111, 116, 141-43
Flag, as symbol, 228, 229, 231
Fletcher, Alice C , 175, 178, 195nll, 197,
201, 327
Folklore, 34, 39, 42, 305«5. See also
Mythology
Food restrictions. See Dietary restrictions
Force: and causality, 368-70; collective
force as prototype for effective force,
441; concept of, xl-xlii, 1, 191-92; and
domination, 370; magic forces, 328«105;
mobility of religious forces, 327-28;
physical contrasted with moral or col-
lective force, 192—93, 369; priority of
impersonal force over mythical per-
sonalities, 201-205; religious force as
prototype of force in general, 205—
206; religious forces as external to
their substrates, 326-29; social origin of,
369; of society that raise individual
above himself, 211—16, 214«; and soul,
370
Ford, Harrison, xlviii
Foreskin, 138, 138«49
Formalism, religious, 33
Formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse (Dür-
kheim): critique on, xxxiii; English
translation of tide of, lix—bei; goals for,
and approaches to retranslating,
xxii—xxiv, li—bri; reaction to, as scandal,
XX—xxi; rhetorical mode of, xxi—xxii,
liv; second edition of, lxxinl 15; Swain's
translation of, xviii, xxxiii, li-liv, lvii, lix,
lxi, brix«98, 211«; "we" used in, lviii,
lxxii«130
453
Foucault, Michel, xxiii, xxix, lxiii«25
Frazer, Sir James G., 21, 27, 58«24, 86-88,
90-92, 102«14, 109«46, 129«10,
132«22, 158«2, 160«18, 161«26,
162«33, 163«35, 166«54, 167, 175,
177-78, 182-87, 189, 193«5, 204«56,
283-84, 361, 366, 422«5
French Revolution, xlii, 213, 215-16,
430
Freud, Sigmund, xlviii, liii, lxx«103,
lxx—lxxi««113-114, lxxi«122
Functionalism, xxxii
Funeral rites, 39«49, 48„58, 59, 225,
243«4, 246, 305, 395, 397-99, 405«35,
414. See also Burial rites; Death; Mourn-
ing
Games, origin of, 385
Gane, Michael, lviii
Gason, 259
Gayandi, 295, 297
Generic image, 442
Genital mutilation, 115, 115«, 137,
137«41, 286, 297, 319 See also Circum-
cision; Subincision
Genus, idea of, 147-49, 148«26, 441, 442,
444
Ghosts, versus spirits, 277
Gillen, Francis James, 27«12, 88-90,
102«13, 103, 105, 118, 121, 122,
123«133, 128-29, 131«14, 134, 135,
153, 182, 185, 186, 199, 200«41,
218-20, 247, 248«36, 252, 253, 254,
255«70, 268, 280, 281, 285, 288«60,
289, 311, 330, 333, 335«16, 337«25,
356-57, 374, 376, 381, 382«20, 383,
387, 388, 393, 394, 398, 408
God/gods: anthropomorphic god, 64-65;
authority of, 211; of Christianity, 30, 39,
64, 76«26, 193; as common noun in na-
turism, 70—71; deification of cosmic
phenomena, 83; dependence of, on hu-
mans, 345, 349-51; distribution of na-
ture among various gods, 155; divinity
connected with agency, 83«39; God/so¬
ciety equation, xxxv—xxxviii, 351; Greek
and Roman gods and goddesses, 64—65,
71, 79, 80«35, 202, 208; high gods,
454
God/gods: (cont.) 288-99, 309, 315,
408, 427-28; jealous and terrible gods,
225-26; Lang on high gods, 188,
189n62; in mythology, 79-80,
79-80««33-35; orenda of Iroquois,
195—96; physical and moral force of,
192—93; Pickering on God's separateness,
Lxviin71; reduction of, xxxv—xxxvi,
Lxvi-lxvii«69; religion as defined in rela-
tion to idea of, 27-33; religions without
gods, 28—31; rites without gods in deistic
religions, 32—33; sacrifice to create
bond between humans and, 344;
Samoan gods, 193—94; as symbolic ex-
pression of society, 351; of totemism,
191, 208; wakan of Sioux, 194-95,
198-98
Gouldner, Alvin, xxxi
Grey, George, 85, 111, 200
Grief. See Mourning; Piacular rites
Grimm brothers, 68
Gruppe, Otto, 69
Habits, 436nl0
Hair, 137-38, 138»49, 307, 347n52,
394-95, 397, 398
Hall, Stuart, Lxiiin25
Hallucinations, 226, 228-30, 351-52
Hamelin, Octave, 8«4, 10
Hardand, Edwin Sidney, 87«14, 293«100
Hazing, 318n74
Hearne, Samuel, 112
Hebrews, 32, 353. See also Judaism
Heckewelder, John Gotdieb Ernestus,
164
Heroes, civilizing, 286-88, 287n48,
287MK54-55, 288«60, 295, 297
Hewitt, N.J. B., 201
Hierarchy, 149
High gods, 288-99, 293nl00, 309, 315,
408, 427-28
Hill Tout, Charles, 87, 165, 166, 175-77,
178, 179«32, 180-81
Hindu sacrifice, 389-90
Historical materialism, 426
History, 376, 379, 380, 382, 397, 443
Holy Ark, xliv, xlviii, 121
Homeopathic magic, 361
Index
Howitt, Alfred William, 56, 86, 89-90,
102, 107«40, 111, 116, 142-44, 144nll,
154, 187, 262, 296, 323«89, 396
Hubert, Henri, lxxiinl31, 41, 203-204,
361«20, 366-67,389
Hugo, Victor, liv
Human reason. See Reason
Humans: compared with animal nature,
50—51, 62; as culmination of nature, 448;
duality of, 15-16, 50, 52-53, 134-36,
224n34; gods' dependence on, 345,
349-51; invalidity of inference from an-
imals and children, 62—63; kinship with
totemic animal, 133—36, 135«31,
135n33, 136««34-35, 139-40, 139H55,
224, 224n32, 307-308, 362, 391; as par-
ticipants in animal nature, 65; sacredness
of, 133-34, 133n24, 136-40, 138«50.
See abo Men; Old men; Uninitiated
men; Women
Hurston, Zora Neale, xxiv
Husserl, Edmund, xviii
Idealization, 229-30, 422-25
Illness, 49, 408-409, 414
Illusion, 51-52, 83. See also Delusions;
Hallucinations
Imagined communities, xxxii—xxxiii, xlv,
42
Imitation. See Mimetic rites
Immortality, xxix, 270—72. See also Soul
Indians. See American Indians
Individual consciousness, 224, 231-32,
252, 266, 426
Individual totem: acquisition of, 163—66,
163«37, 164n40, 165nn46-47, 166M54;
as alter ego, 160, 161, 282; bonds be-
tween individual and, 159-63; character-
istics of, 282, 426—27; compared with
collective totem, 162-66; Frazer on,
162, 177-78, 178n30; name of, 158-59;
as personal emblem, 159; relationship
between ancestral spirit, soul, and,
280-284, 283«30, 284«31; totemism de-
rived from, 174—82
Individualism, li, 426-27
Individuation, 273-75, 275«128, 283
Indo-European languages. See Language
Index
Initiation rites, 37, 44, 116-17, 117n95,
137, 138«50, 163-65, 256-57, 286,
291-92, 297, 307, 311, 314-15, 317-19,
318«74, 389n40
Intelligence. See Thought
Intichiuma: failures of, 365; first phase of,
331-37, 345-46; as mimetic rite,
355—57, 364; as representative or com-
memorative rite, 374, 375-78, 381,
387-89; ritual eating of totemic plant of
animal during, 338—44, 340n36; as sacri-
fice, 346-47, 364; seasonal nature of,
353; second phase of, 338-44, 340n36;
Strehlow on, 337«25, 340n36; well-be-
ing of totemic animal or plant during,
331-37, 345-46. See also Sacrifice
Intoxicating liquors, 228
Jainism, 31
James, William, lxviii-lxix«87, 420
Jay, Nancy, lix, lxviin77
Jevons, Frank Byron, 25, 26, 46«3, 57»22,
173-74, 174«17, 326«100
Jews. See Judaism
Joan of Arc, 213
Jones, Robert Alun, lxxinll7
Jovis, 71
Judaism, xx, xxix, xxx, xxxi, xliv, lxiii«21,
32, 33, 352, 353, 429
Kant, Immanuel, xviii, xxix, xxxii, 8n,
273, 305, 446
Kaplan, Mordecai, lxiii«21
Karween, 296, 297
Kempe, Rev. H . , 119nl03
Kern, Hendrick, 29, 30n26
Kerr, John, lxv«54
Khomeini, Ruhollah, xxv, xliv-xlv
Kind, idea of, 147-49, 148«26, 441
Kings, book of, 346n48
Kinship: in clan, 100, 100«2; man/totemic
animal kinship, 133-36, 135«31,
135«33, 136nn34-35, 139-40, 139n55,
224, 224M32, 307-308, 362, 391; ma-
trihny versus patriarchy, 6, 6n; sacrifice
and creation of artificial kinship, 341,
344
455
Knowledge, theory of: and apriorism ver-
sus empirisism, 12-18, 12-15n«15-18,
17«22; and categories of understanding,
8-18, 8n, 17n22, 372, 421, 440-44;
fundamental notions in, 8-12, 8nn; ori-
gins of, in religion, 8; and society,
15-16, 447-48
Krause, Avrel, 87, 113, 261
Ku Klux Klan, xlii
Kuhn, Adalbert, 69, 70
Kushner, Harold, lxiiin21
LaCapra, Dominick, xxxvii
Lalande, André, 237«
Lang, Andrew, 46nl, 56-57n21, 61, 106,
186-89, 186-87nn52-53, 292-93,
292-93«n99-100
Language: and collective representations,
436; conceptual organization of, 435;
Indo-European languages, 73—76;
metaphors in, 51, 74; Millier on, 72-76;
and mythology, 75, 78; and natural phe-
nomena, 74-75; and naturism, 72-75;
sacred language, 310; and speech prohi-
bitions, 309-10, 311 «45, 324, 393, 395,
395«8; and thought, 73
Laughing Boy totem, 383
Laws of nature, 24
Legends, 79«33. See also Folklore;
Mythology
Leibniz, G. W , xxix, 24, 273
Leonhardi, 263«112
Lévi-Strauss, Claude, li, lxviii«78,
lxxii«130
Leviticus, book of, xxvii, 32, 32«34,
346«48
Lévy-Bruhl, Lucien, 9«, 236n58, 269«125,
365«24
Lithuania, xxv, xlv, LxixnlOO
Local totemism, 182-86, 184«43
Logical norms, versus moral norms, 17,
17n20
Logical thought, 433-40, 445-46
Lombroso, Césare, 234
Long, John, 85, 101«7
Looking, prohibitions against, 308-309
Lukes, Steven, xxvi, xxxiii, xliv, liii,
lxiinl3, lxviiin87
456
Magic: and asceticism, 316«69; compared
with religion, lxiinl6, 39-42, 200, 204,
285-86, 304-305, 361, 366-67, 366»26,
421; contagiousness and, 328nl05, 361;
definition of, 39-40; faith in, 366;
homeopathic magic, 361; origins of,
366; prohibitions in, 304—305; and spir-
its, 284-86, 286n47; sympathic magic,
360—61, 366; totemism as, xx
Malinowski, Bronislaw, li
Mana: and dead, 59, 61; definition of,
xxxix, xl, 59, 215nl4; as force, 327; and
gods, 203; and men of influence, 215;
Lang on, 188; and magic, 204; rites ad-
dressed to, 203; and soul, 268-70,
299;
as totemic principle, 196-200, 206; and
wealth, 421«4. See also Totemic principle
Mangarkunjerkunja, 287, 287n54, 294¬
95
Mannhardt, Wilhelm, 34, 68»1, 87
Marrett, R . R., 203, 203n49, 204«57
Marriage classes, 107-108, 108n43,
108-109n«45-46, 152«42, 253-54,
254n60, 255n68, 428
Marsalis, Wynton, xxiii
Marx, Karl, xix, lxvin65
Maternal totem, 104, 131, 131«14, 163,
185-86, 258, 262nll0
Mathews, Robert Hamilton, 143-44,
144nll, 163«37, 167, 182n39, 260
Matriliny, 6, 6«
Maudsley, 230n41
Mauss, Marcel, Lxixn88, lxxii«131, 41,
203-204, 361 n20, 366-67, 389
McLennan, John Ferguson, 6, 6«, 85, 87
Medicine bag, 160nl8
Men: ascetic practices before and after mar-
riage, 316-17n69; batdes between
women and, 168, 168«62; creation of,
290, 290«83; lack of respect for senile
old men, 245; old men and choice of in-
dividual totem, 165; old men exempted
from prohibitions against eating totemic
animal, 128, 129, 139, 307, 307«16; pi¬
acular rites and old men, 408; sacredness
of, compared with women, 138-39; sa-
credness of old men, 129, 139, 244, 245,
307nl6; sexual totems of, 167—68,
Index
167«56, 296; uninitiated men, 132-33,
138, 139, 288, 312, 384
Menstrual blood, 412, 413
Mentality. See Thought
Mestrovic, Stjepan G., bdv«25, lxxi«114,
lxxinl22
Metaphors, 51, 74
Mexico, 204
Mimetic rites: anthropological explanation
of, 361-62; and bewitchment, 361;
and causality, 363, 367, 371; definition
of, 355; effects on participants, 363-64;
examples of, 355—60; failures not the
rule, 365; and faith, 364—66; Intichiuma
as, 355—57, 364; moral efficacy of,
363—65; physical efficacy of, 365—66; as
primitive form of totemic cult, 391; and
principle of like produces like, 360-61,
371; reasons for imitation of plant or an-
imal, 362—63
Mindeleff, 87
Minkani, 336
Miracles, 25
Modeh, xxix
Monasticism, 37
Moral authority, 209-11, 210-1 ln6, 224
Morality, xlviii, lv-lvi, 17, 17n20, 34, 270,
362
Morgan, Lewis Henry, 6, 6n, 86, 87
Mortuary rites. See Burial rites; Death; Fu-
neral rites; Mourning
Moses, xlvi—xlvii
Mount Sinai, xlvi-xlviii
Mourning: anger expressed during, 397,
404; bloodshedding during, 397-400,
406, 406n36; as collective expression of
emotion, 400-401, 403; and double
transformation of deceased, 402—405;
dueling during, 397; and effervescence,
397-98, 399, 403; examples of, 393-99;
explanation of, 400-406; prohibitions
during, 309-10, 324, 393, 394, 395«8;
sadness expressed during, 393-97; self-
mutilation in, 394-99, 402, 404; and
soul of dead, 252, 404-406, 414; and
women, 393, 395-96, 395n8, 398-99,
404. See also Burial rites; Death; Funeral
rites
Muk-Kurnai, 260, 277
Index
Millier, Max, 23, 46«3, 69-76, 78-79,
82«38, 83n39
Mullian, 296
Mungan-ngaua, 289, 295, 408
Mura-mura, 259-60, 277, 287, 289, 294,
336, 407
Mutilation. See Self-mutilation
Mystery, in definition of religion, 22-26
Mythology: of allied totems, 153«51; of
ancestors, 175-76; contradiction in, 12,
12«13; creation myths, 290-91, 290n83;
and eating of totemic animal, 128—29,
129n9; fables compared with, 80«36;
formation of international mythology,
298, 298«131; gods in, 79-80,
79-80n«33—35; on kinship between man
and totemic animal, 134—36, 134«28,
135—36nn31-34, 187; and language, 75,
78; legends compared with, 79n33;
Miiller on, 69n5, 70, 75, 78, 79; as not
historical evidence,
129; on origin of clan, 252; and poetry,
386; priority of impersonal force over
mythical personalities, 201-205; religion
compared with, 79; scholars on, 68-70;
vampire myth, 244«9. See also
Folklore
Nakedness, 310, 332
Namatuna, 254, 255, 255n66
Name: of dead person, 309-10, 324; of in-
dividual and individual totem, 158—59;
sacredness of, 309; totem as, 100-11,
186-88
Natural order of things, 24—26
Nature: as animate, 57n22; disasters in,
407-408; distribution of, among various
gods, 155; man's relationship with,
81—83; savage's admiration of, 81; and
society, 17—18; totemism derived from
cult of nature, 173—74; transformation of
cult of spirits into cult of nature, 50-52,
61-65
Naturism: animism compared with, 45—46,
70, 84; critique of, xlvih, lxvii«74,
76-83, 84-85, 226; definition of, 45-46;
and language, 72-76; Miiller on, 69—76,
78-79; and mythology distinguished
457
from religion, 78-81; as original form of
religious life, 71-72; principles of,
70-76; and sacred/profane dichotomy,
81—83; scholars interested in, 68—70; and
soul, 75-76; Spencer on, 51
Nazis, xlii, lxixn88
Negative rites: and asceticism, 314—21; and
contagiousness of the sacred, 322—25;
definition of, 303—304, 306; positive ef-
fects of, 313-21, 417; purpose of, 330;
as system of abstinences, 303-13. See also
Prohibitions
Nisbet, Robert, xxxiii
Norms, 17, 17n20
North America. See American Indians
Nuralie, 289, 296, 297
Nurtunja, 123-25, 123nl31, 124-25«140,
132, 133, 136
Obedience, bases, 209-11
Ochre, red, 137
Offerings: in Bible, 346n48; of Intichiuma,
331-37, 345-46; in piacular sacrifices,
347«53
Oknanikilla, 250, 250n49
Old men: and ability to see souls, 244; and
choice of individual token, 165; ex-
empted from prohibitions against eating
totemic animal, 128, 129, 139, 307,
307nl6; lack of respect for, at senility,
245; and piacular rites, 408; sacredness
of, 129, 139, 244, 245, 307nl6
Oldenberg, Hermann, 28, 31
Opinion, 210, 439-40
Order. See Natural order of things
Orenda, 195-96, 200, 205-206
Oruncha, 285, 285n40
Oxley, 113-14
Pain, religious role of, 317-21,
317»n70-71, 318M74, 411, 411n57. See
also Asceticism; Self-mutilation
Pallyan, 290n83, 296, 297
Palmer, Edward, 142
Parker, Mrs., 178«29, 282, 298, 316
Parsons, Talcott, lxvnn55-56, brixn93
Pascal, Blaise, 23
458
Paschal meal, 343
Paternal totem, 104-105, 131, 131«14, 163
Paul, St., 292n99
Pearce, Frank, lxiiiii25
Pensée collective. See Collective thought
Personal totem. See Individual totem
Personality, 272-75, 272«127, 275«128
Philosophy, 4, 8, 206, 438
Phratries, 105-107, 107n30, 110-11,
lllnn52-53, 130, 130nnl2-13, 142-47,
147««22-23, 381, 428
Piacular rites: and ambiguity of the sacred,
415-17; and anger, 397, 404, 412;
bloodshedding during, 397—400,
406- 10, 406«36, 409n51; as collective
expression of emotion, 400-401, 403,
410-12, 416-17; definition of, 392-93;
dueling during, 397; and effervescence,
397-98, 399, 403, 411; efficacy of,
415—17; explanation of, 400—406; and
loss ofchuringa, 406—407; mourning,
393-406; and natural disasters, 407-408;
offerings in, 347n53; prohibitions in,
393; and ritual misdeed, 411-12; self-
mutilation in, 394-99, 402, 404,
407- 10, 409«51; and sickness, 408-409;
and southern lights, 408. See also
Mourning
Picasso, Pablo, xxii
Pickering, W. S. F., xxvi, xxxi, xxxiii, hi,
bdinl5, lxviin71, lxixn98
Pikler, Julius, 187n53, 208«2
Plants, as sacred beings, 64. See also
Totemic plants
Plato, 437
Poetry, and religion, 386
Positive rites: definition of, 330; feelings as-
sociated with, 392; Intichiuma as exam-
ple of, 330-48; mimetic rites, 355-67;
periodicity of, 350, 353-54; representa-
tive or commemorative rites, 374—91;
sacrifice, 340—54; as sacrilege, 342-43
"Positive science." See Science positive
Powell, John Wesley, 86«8, 162-63
Power, social origin of, 370
Preanimism, 203, 204«57, 269
Preuss, Konrad Theodor, 27nl2, 204,
204n57, 269nl25, 317, 317n«70-71,
422»5
Index
Primitive: and admiration of nature, 81;
and animals, 172; dreams of, 55-56,
56«20; mentality of, xxxi, 47, 49-51, 55,
62, 177-78, 193, 198, 236-41, 326,
328-29; missionaries' influence on,
248, 248«44; and soul, 52-53; as term,
l n l . See also Savage
Primitive religion: objections to study of,
1—2; rationale for study of, 1-8, 5«2. See
also Totemism
Procopius of Gaza, 233
Procreation. See Conception
Profane: cycle of, in Australian societies,
220-21; eating as, 311, 311«42;
matter as, 431; prohibitions against sa-
cred life mingling with, 310-13,
311«45, 312n47; women as, 138, 308,
308nl8, 384. See also Sacred/profane di-
chotomy
Prohibitions: and antagonisms between sa-
cred and profane, 306—13, 321—22,
324-25; of contact, 132, 132n22,
306—10; and contagiousness of sacred,
322—25; dietary restrictions, 32, 78n31,
108-109, 127-31, 140, 151-52, 152«42,
160, 221, 306«7, 307-308, 307nl6, 315,
338, 413; against eating or killing
totemic animal/plant, 127-32,
131««16-18, 140, 151-52, 152n42,
160, 160nl8, 221, 307-308, 307nl6,
338; in folklore, 305M5; as logically en-
tailed by notion of sacred, 321—22;
against looking, 308—309; magic versus
religious prohibitions, 304—305; during
mourning, 393, 395, 395n8; old men
exempted from, 128, 129, 139; positive
influences of, 313-15; against profane
life mingling with sacred life, 310—13,
311n45, 312«47; and property right,
312n47; between sacred things of differ-
ent kinds, 305—306, 413; on sexual con-
tact, 308nl8; on speech, 309-10,
311 «45; on totemic emblem, 132-33;
types of, 306—11; for uninitiated men,
132-33, 138, 288, 312; for women,
32, 125, 132, 137, 138, 288, 308,
309, 393, 395, 395n8; on work,
311-12
Property rights, 140, 312«47
Index
Psychology, xlviii, liii, lxviii-lxix«87,
lxx«103, lxx—ixxin«113—114, lxxi«122,
69, 69«, 431-32
Putiaputia, 287, 287«48, 294
Raiders of the Lost Ark, xlviii
Rainmaking, 358-59, 358nl3
Ratapa, 253-54, 253«59, 255, 255«68,
259, 263
Ratzel, Friedrich, 230«41
Reason, xlix—li, lxviii«79, 13—17, 273,
446
Red ochre, 137
Redding, hi, lxii«15, lxix«98
Reincarnation: among American Indians,
261, 264—65; in Australian societies,
249-61, 268, 277-78; facts supporting,
262-65; and perpetuation of group,
271-72
Religion: all religions as true, 2-3; and art,
385-86; centrality of Church in, 41^13;
compared with magic, lxii«16, 39-42,
200, 204, 285-86, 304-305, 361,
366—67, 366«26, 421; contagiousness of
religious forces, 238-39«60, 327-29,
415; defined by supernatural and myste-
rious, 22—26; defined in relation to idea
of God, 27-33; definition of, xxxiv,
33-34, 38-39, 44, 44«68; and economic
activity, 421 «4; eternal nature of,
429-30, 432-33; feelings released by,
419-20; function of, 227, 419; as hy-
gienic technique, 78n31; idealization of,
229-31, 422-25; and individual cults,
43-44, 426-27; Muller on, 23, 70, 79;
mythology distinguished from, 78-81;
needs fulfilled by, xviii; not defined by
mythical personalities, gods, or spirits,
202—203; as not originating in fear,
225-26, 409; origins of, 7-8, 7«3,
45^16, 220, 225-26; and part as equal to
whole, 230—31; philosophers on, 4; and
poetry, 386; prohibitions in, 304—25;
recreational aspect of, 385—87; rites
without gods in deistic religions, 32—33;
as rooted in "the real," xvii—xviii, xxviii,
xxxvii, 226—28; and science, xxv, xxx,
xxxvii, xli, xlix-li, 8, 12«13, 25, 36«45,
459
77-78, 83, 240-41, 419, 421, 430-33,
446; in seemingly nonreligious life,
xlix—li; social aspects of, xix-xx, xlviii, 9,
238-39, 238-39«60, 351-54, 421-29;
speculative role of, 430-31, 433; study
of, through primitive religion, 1—8; Ty-
lor on, 27; universalism in, 427-28, 446;
without gods, 28-31. See also Brahmin-
ism; Buddhism; Christianity; God/gods;
Judaism; Primitive religion; Science of
religions; Totemism
Religious beliefs. See Beliefs
Religious formalism, 33
Religious individualism, 426-27
Religious rites. See Rites
Religious universalism, 427-28, 446
Representations, 349-50, 349«55, 438. See
also Collective representations
Representative or commemorative rites:
ambiguity of, 387-91; Arunta and War-
ramunga compared, 375-80, 388-89;
definition of, 374-75; dramatic perfor-
mances in, 376-80, 383—84; and effer-
vescence, 385, 386-87;and festival,
386-87; Intichiuma as, 374, 375-78,
381, 387-89; nonutilitarian functions of,
380—87; and periodic reaffirmation of
society, 390; as recreation and aesthetic
expression, 383—87; utilitarian interpre-
tation of, 375-80; Wollunqua in,
380-83
Réville, Albert, 27, 61, 64, 85«2
Richard, Gaston, bain 15
Riggs, Stephen Return, 195
Rites: as addressed to definite personalities,
79; arguments against utilitarian view
of, 382, 384; automatic effects of,
32—33; compared with moral practices,
34; cult compared with, 60; definition
of, 34, 38; function of, 422; inter-
changeability of, 390; as myths in
action, 79; necessary cyclicity of, xlii; in
preanirnist religion, 203; as recreation
and aesthetic expression, 383—87; and re-
ligious formalism, 33; separate from
deities, 202; without gods, 32-33. See
also Burial rites; Expiatory rites; Funeral
rites; Initiation rites; Mimetic rites; Neg-
ative rites; Piacular rites; Positive rites;
460
Rites (cont.) Representative or commem-
orative rites; Sacrifice
Roche, Maurice, lviii
Roth, Walter Edmund, 258, 279
Rules of Sociological Method, The (Dürkheim),
lviii, lxin4, lxxifil21
Ryan, Judith, lxiiin24, lxv«54
Sabatier, Auguste, 43n65
Sacrament, 127
Sacred objects and beings, xlii, 58-61, 65.
See also God/gods; Totem; Totemic ani-
mal; Totemic plant; specific objects, such
as Churinga; Nurtunja; Waninga
Sacred/profane dichotomy: absolute het-
erogeneity between, 36, 37, 58; and be-
liefs, 34—38; characteristics of sacred
versus profane, 35—39; inversions of,
413—15; and naturism, 81-83; overview
of, xhii-xlix; passage from profane to sa-
cred, 36—37; prohibitions concerning,
305-13, 321-22, 324-325
Sacredness: ambiguity of, 412-17; of
blood, 125, 136-37, 137«41, 188,
307; and collective consciousness,
xliii, xliv, xlvi, xlviii-xlix, 268-69; con-
tagiousness of, 224, 281, 322-29; cre-
ation of, xlv-xlvi, 208-16, 312-13,
312«47, 328, 349-50; of dead person,
307, 323; of hair, 137-38, 307; of hu-
mans, 133-34, 133n24, 136-40; as ideal,
424; of Khomeini, xlv; levels of, 306«7;
localization of, 134, 137-39; of men,
138—39; of Mount Sinai, xlvi—xlviii;
as not physical, xliv, xlvii; of old men,
129, 139, 244, 245, 307«16; pure and
impure forms of, 306, 412-17; and sa-
cred/profane dichotomy, xhii-xlix; of
totemic animal, 127—33; of totemic em-
blems, 118-25, 133; translation of terms
corresponding to, lxix—lxxnlOl; of
women as less than men, 138, 138n50,
243, 243«3. See also Blood; Soul
Sacrifice: ambiguity of, 389-90; and artifi-
cial kinship among humans, 341,
344; Bergaine on, 32—33, 32n38; in
Bible, 341; and circle in which sacrifice
moves, 350-51; and communion,
Index
341-44, 347; definition of, 343; food of-
ferings to ancestors, 49; and gods' de-
pendence on humans, 345, 349-51;
Hindu sacrifice, 389—90; as hygienic
technique, 78n31; Intichiuma as,
346-47, 364; and kinship between hu-
mans and gods, 344; offerings of,
345-54; periodicity of, 350, 353-54;
seeming contradictions in, 344-45,
348-49; Smith on, 340-41, 343-45,
350, 351, 357; and soul, 341-42; and
suffering, 320; theory of, 347-48; and
transformation, 37»46; in Vedic
religion, 32—33, 35; without deities,
32-33
Sacrilege, 304-305, 342^13, 414
Sadness. See Mourning; Piacular rites
Salvation by faith, 419
Samoa, 193-94, 193n5
Samuel, book of, 32, 32n33
Savage: and admiration of nature, 81; and
animals, 172; dreams of, 47; as term,
47«6, 91. See also Primitive
Say, 198
Scapegoating, 404, 404«
Schmidt, Wilhelm, 46nl, 293«100
Scholasticism, 23«5
Schoolcraft, Henry Rowe, 101, 111
Schulze, Rev. Louis, 185, 255, 330, 357
Schutz, Alfred, xviii
Schwartz, Friedrich, 69
Science: authority of, 210; and causality,
373, 373«30; concepts in, 434, 439; and
contagiousness, 327, 329; as discipline
applying to reality, 66-67; and duality of
human nature, 224«34; and faith, 365;
and magic, 366; and notion of necessary
order, 26; of opinion, 439—40; profane
character of, 36«45; and religion, xxv,
xxx, xxxvii, xli, xlix-li, 8, 12nl3, 25,
36«45, 77-78, 83, 240-41, 419, 421,
430-33, 446; and single well-made ex-
periment, 249, 418-19
Science of religions, 66—67, 91, 91n33
Science positive, xxiv—xxv, xxvi, xxxv—xxxvi,
lxiii«27, 1, in, 26
Secular. See Profane
Self-mutilation, 394-99, 402, 404, 407-11,
409«
Index
Sense perceptions, 82n38, 275, 434—35,
438, 444
Sexual communism, 62, 62n35
Sexual intercourse: as insufficient for pro-
creation, 253, 253n55; prohibitions on,
308nl8; and sexual license, 219,
387nn32-33, 408, 411
Sexual totem, 166-68, 167rm56-57, 296
Shestov, Lev, 1
Sickness, 49, 408-409, 414
Simplifying case, logic/methodology of,
xxxii, xxxviii-xl, lx-bri, lxviiinn83—84,
1, 4-8
Sin, xxix, 409
Single well-made experiment, 249, 418—19
Smith, William Robertson, Lxvin65, 42«62,
61, 86-87, 340-41, 343-45, 347n52,
348, 350, 351, 357, 410-12, 415
Smyth, Brough, 396
Society: and asceticism, 321; authority of,
16- 17, 209-11, 210-lln6, 224, 266;
and categories of understanding, 442—44;
classification in, 444-45; as consciousness
of consciousnesses, 445; and duality of
human nature, 15—17; as force raising
individual above himself, 211-16,
214«13; and fusion of objects and ideas,
238-39; God/society equation,
XXXV—xxxviii, 351; as highest form of
human mind, 447-48; ideal society,
422—23, 425; and imperative norms,
266; individuals in, 252; and logical
thought, 433—40; mourning and affirma-
tion of, 403, 405, 416; and nature,
17- 18; nature of, 266; periodic reaffir-
mation of, 350—54, 390; phases of Aus-
tralian societies, 216—18; and power,
370; as reality sui generis, 15; and reli-
gion, xix-xx, xlviii, 9, 238—39,
238-39n60, 351-54, 427-29; sacredness
created by, 208-16; and soul, 274-75,
275nl28
Sociology, 1, 2, 448
Socrates, li
Soul: analysis of notion of, in Australian so-
cieties, 242—48; animal form of, 263-65,
265nl21; of animate and inanimate
things, 49—50; animist theory of, 47—48,
52-56, 65, 68; and belief in life after
461
death, 270—72; body/soul dualism, xxvii,
245, 265-67, 274; of children, 243«4;
after death, 48-49, 57, 59, 246-50,
264-65, 265«121, 276-77, 414;
Descartes on, xxvii; as double, xxviii,
47-48, 52-54, 57, 58, 65, 283-84,
284n31; and dreaming, 53-56, 57n22,
65, 270-71; dual individual and collec-
tive aspect of, 267-69; Durkheim on,
xxvi-xxxii; exchange of, 414; as expla-
nation of perpetuation of group, 271—72;
facts supporting origin of, 262-65; and
force, 370; hiding of, for safety, 177-78,
178»30; immortality of, xxix, 270-72;
and individual cults, 43; individuation
of, 283; interdependence and assimila-
tion between body and, 245-47, 274;
Jewish view of, xxx; localization of,
xxvii, 1, 53, 245-46, 246««22-23, 260,
262; and mana, 268-70, 299; mobility
of, 245, 327—28; and mourning, 252,
404-406, 414; and naturism, 75-76; ori-
gin of idea of, 249-59; parts of, 231;
and personality, 272-75, 272«127; and
positive rites, 353; pregnancy as result
of soul entering woman's body, 250;
primitive's idea of, 52-53; as principle
of explanation, 50; and reincarnation,
249-61, 268; relationship between an-
cestral spirit, individual totem, and,
280-84, 283«30, 284M31; relationship
of, to body's life, 57-58; residences of,
after death, 247-48, 248n36; and sacri-
fice, 341-42; separation from body at
death, 48, 49, 245; and sin, xxix; and
society, 274—75, 275nl28; Spencer
and Gillen on, 249-52, 257n78; spirit
distinguished from, 48, 63-64, 276-84;
and stars, 235n55; Strehlow on, 252-59,
257«78; totemic nature of, 249-59,
262-65; traits of, 243-44, 244«9; as
transformation of impersonal power
and force, 204; transformation of spirit
into, through death, 48-49, 57, 59,
276-77; Tylor on, xxvi-xxvii, 47-48,
52-56, 65; and vampire myth, 244n9;
women's lack of, 243, 243n3; Wundt on,
172nl2. See also Sacredness
Southern lights, 408
462
Space, 8, 8«, 10-12, 11«8, 82, 441, 442,
442«17, 444
Speech, prohibitions on, 309—10, 311 «45,
324, 393, 395, 395«8
Spencer, Sir Baldwin, 27nl2, 58«23,
88-90, 102«13, 103, 105, 118, 121,
122, 122«127, 123«133, 128-29,
131«14, 134, 135, 153, 182, 185,
186, 199, 200«41, 218-20, 247, 248«36,
252, 253, 254, 255«70, 257«78, 268,
280, 281, 285, 288«60, 289, 311, 330,
333, 335«16, 337«25, 374, 376, 381,
382«20, 383, 387, 388, 393, 394, 398,
408
Spencer, Herbert, xx, xxviii, 12-13« 15,
43«65, 46-47, 50-52, 62-63, 66«42
Spielberg, Stephen, xlviii
Spirits: of ancestors, 277—80; and animism,
48-50, 57-61, 63-64, 68; and civilizing
heroes, 286-88; evil spirits, 284-86,
285«40; ghosts versus, 277; and magic,
284—86, 286«47; of natural phenomena,
63-64; relationship between ancestral
spirit, individual soul, and individual
totem, 280—84; Roman and Greek be-
liefs on, 278, 281«, 283; soul distin-
guished from, 48, 63-64, 276-84;
Spencer on, 66«42; and transformation
of cult of spirits into cult of nature,
50-52, 61-65; as transformation of im-
personal power and force, 204; transfor-
mation of soul to, through death, 48—49,
57, 59, 276-77; Tylor on, 27
Split-totems, 102«14
Stanner, W. E . H . , xliii, xliv
Steinthal, Hymann, 69
Stevenson, Mrs., 87
Strehlow, Carl, 89, 102-104, 105«27, 118,
119nl03, 120«108, 121-22, 132«22,
153, 185, 199-200, 236, 248, 252-59,
263, 268, 272, 279, 281, 282, 285«40,
289, 330, 337«25, 346, 347«51, 357,
374-75, 378«10, 378«12, 380«15,
388
Subincision, 115, 115«, 137, 137«, 286,
297, 319
Subtotem, 152-54, 224
Suffering: and mourning, 394-99; religious
role of, 317-21, 317««70-71, 318«74,
Index
411, 411 «57. See also Asceticism; Self-
mutilation
Suicide (Dürkheim), xxii, lxi-lxii«4
Suicide, religious, 37
Supernatural: in definition of religion,
22-26; and mana, 206. See also
God/gods; Spirits
Swain, Joseph Ward, xviii, xxxiii, li-liv,
lvii, lix, lxi, lxix«98, 211«
Swanton.John Reed, 87, 145«17, 147«22,
175
Symbols, 221-23, 232-34
Sympathetic magic, 360-61, 366
Taboos, 188, 304, 326«100. See also Prohi-
bitions
Taplin, George, 260
Tarlow, 359-60
Tattooing, 116-17, 116«89,
116-17n«92-93, 132, 159, 233-34
Technology, 93-94
Ten Commandments, xxxviii
Thalaualla, 376, 377
Thomas, Northcote Whitridge, 147«23,
235«54
Thomas, W. I., xxxvi, xlvi
Thought: of animals, 50-51, 62, 438, 444;
of children, 63, 438; collective
thought, 447; and language, 73; logical
thought, 433—40, 445—46; of primitive,
xxxi, 47, 49-51, 55, 62, 177-78, 193,
198, 236-11, 326, 328-29
Time, 8, 8«, 9-10, 10«6, 18«23, 82, 311,
353-54, 441, 442, 442«17, 444
Tindalo, 59
Tjurunga. See Churingas
Tools, 18«24
Tooth extraction, 115, 165, 286, 319, 323,
407
Totality, concept of, 442, 443
Totem: acquiring of, 104-105; allied
totem, 153-54, 153«51; of American In-
dians, 109-11, 109-10««47-48,
111 ««52-53, 112-13; ancestor transmis-
sion of, 105, 105«27, 105«29, 163; col-
lective totem, 162-66, 178-82;
conceptional totemism, 183-84;
cosmic phenomena not seen as, 83, 235;
Index
and cosmological system, 142—45, 147,
147««24-25, 149-56; definition of,
101«7, 191, 208; as emblem, 111-26,
221-25; etymology of term, 111-12;
first use of term, 85; and high gods,
295-98; individual totem, 158-66,
174-82, 282-84, 426-27; local
totemism, 182-86, 184«43; of
marriage class, 107—108,
108-109««45-46; maternal totem,
104, 131, 131«14, 163, 185-86,
258, 262«110; as name, 100-11,
186—88; nature of objects
serving as, 101-104, 102««13-16,
103«18, 103«20, 104«22; paternal
totem, 104-105, 131, 131«14, 163
of phratries, 105-107; phratry versus
clan totems, 107; property rights in,
140; sexual totem, 166-68, 296;
soul's totemic nature, 249—59,
262-65; spelling of, 101 «7; split-
totems, 102«14; subtotem, 152-54,
224
Totemic animal: compared with totemic
emblem, 132—33; Intichiuma for well-
being of, 331-37, 345-46; man's
kinship with, 133-36, 135«31, 135«33,
136««34-35, 139-40, 139«55, 224,
224«32, 307-308, 362, 391; obligatory
eating of, 128-30, 152«42; old men
exempted from dietary restrictions on,
128, 129, 139, 307, 307«16; origin
of, 234-36; prohibitions against contact
with, 132, 132«22; prohibitions against
eating, 127-31, 140, 151-52, 152«42,
160, 221, 307-308, 307«16; prohibi-
tions against killing, 131-32,
131««16-18, 140, 160, 160«18,
221; restrictions on amount eaten, 128,
128«4, 130; ritual eating of, in Intichi-
uma, 338—44, 340«36; sacredness of,
127-33
Totemic centers, 236, 250
Totemic costumes, 115-16, 132, 159
Totemic emblem: and ancestors, 176; on
bodies, 114—17; on churingas, 118-22,
125; conventional nature of, 125-26,
126«150; feelings aroused by, 221-23;
origin of, 234—36; prohibitions concern-
463
ing, 132-33; sacredness of, 118-25, 133;
on things, 112-14
Totemic object, xli
Totemic plant, 127-29, 131, 133, 140, 151,
235-36, 307-308, 307«16, 331-46,
340«36
Totemic principle: Arunkulta as, 199—200;
and clan, 207-208, 223; contagiousness
of, 224; description of, 190-91; essence
of, 223-25; and idea of force, 191-93;
localization of, 224, 230; mana as,
196-200, 206; orenda as, 195-96, 200,
205-206; origin of notion of, 207-41;
and primitive's mentality, 236-41; prior-
ity of impersonal force over mythical
personalities, 201-205; in Samoa,
193-94; secular aspect of, 205-206; si-
multaneously physical and moral charac-
ter of, 191—92; ubiquity of, 191; wakan
as, 194-95, 197-98, 203, 205
Totemic representations, xli-xlii
Totemism: clan associated with, 155; co-
herence of, 298—99; collective totem,
162-66, 178-82; conceptional totemism,
183-84; as confederated religion,
155-57, 199; as containing all elements
of religion, 418—19; cosmological system
of, 141—57; critique of theories of origin
of, 169-89; derived from ancestor cult,
170-73; derived from cult of nature,
173—74; derivedfromindividual
totemism, 174—82; as embryonic Chris-
tianity, xx ; essence of, 223-26, 238;
ethnograhies on, xxxii; and high gods,
295-98; history of question of, 85-90;
individual totem, 158-66, 174-82; local
totemism, 182-86, 184«43; as magic, xx;
man's kinship with totemic animal,
133-36; man's sacredness, 136-40;
methodological reasons for basing study
on Australian totemism, 90-93; as not
zoolatry, 139-40, 173; and origin of no-
tion of totemic principle, 207-41; rarity
of expiatory rites in, 409; as religion
based on Durkheim's definition,
xviii—xxii; sexual totem, 166-68; as sim-
plifying case, xxxii, xxxviii-xl; totem as
emblem, 111-26; totem as name,
100-11; and totem as name only,
464
Totemism (cont.) 186—88; totemic ani-
mals and plants, 127-33; totemic princi-
ple and idea of force, 190-206; as tribal
religion, 155-57, 299. See also American
Indians; and headings beginnnig with
Totem and Totemic
Transformism, 236-37, 237n
Tregear, E, 268
Tribe, 155-57, 156-57«61, 168, 297-99,
299
Tundun, 287, 287«55, 295, 297
Tylor, Edward Burnett, xxvi—xxviii, lvii,
27, 46-50, 52-56, 65, 86«10, 162-63,
170-73, 292, 361
Type-ideas, 436, 438
Umbana, 355—56
Umbilical cord, 414, 414«67
Understanding. See categories of under-
standing
Uninitiated men, 132-33, 138, 139, 288,
312, 384
Universal animism, 24
Universal determinism, 24
Universalism, religious, 427—28, 446
Urine, 312«47
Urpmilchima, 397-98
Usener, Hermann Karl, 46«3
Vampire myth, 244«9
Varuna, 29
Vedas, 69, 70, 71, 75
Vedic religion, 32—33, 35
Wadnungadni, 408
Wakan, 188, 194-95, 194«10, 197-98,
203, 205, 327
Waninga, 123-25, 132
Index
Weber, Max, xxxi
White Cockatoo, 357
Whole, notion of, 442, 443
Wife exchange, 219, 408
Wilkin, Albertus Christian Kruijt,
170-73
Will, 273, 369
Witchetty Grub, 332-33, 338-39, 355-56
Witurna, 287, 287«55
Wollunqua, 219, 280, 309, 380-83,
380«16, 381««17-18, 382«20
Women: battles between men and, 168,
168n62; blood from genital organs of,
414; blood of, 138«50; conception and
pregnancy of, 183-84, 250, 253-59,
255«68, 255«70, 261, 263, 264, 277,
278; creation of, 290«83; dreams of
pregnant women, 261; Dürkheims
view of, fix; exclusion of,fromrepresen-
tative rites, 384; food for, 308; funeral
rite of, 398-99; and initiation rites,
138«50, 319; lack of soul of, 243,
243«3; menstrual blood of, 412,
413; mother's drinking of blood of
circumcsion, 137 «41; and mourning,
393, 395-96, 395«8, 398-99, 404; old
women and choice of individual
totem, 164-65; and piacular rites other
than mourning,407; as profane, 138,
138«50, 243, 243«3, 308, 308«18, 384;
prohibitions for, 32, 125, 132, 137, 138,
288, 308, 309, 393, 395, 395«8; scape-
goating of, 404; sexual totems of,
167-168, 167«56, 296; wife exchange,
219, 408
Work, prohibitions on, 311—12
Wundt, Wilhelm, Lxviii«87, 69«, 172«
12
Zeus, 71, 79, 80«35, 202, 20
The Elementary Forms
of Religious Life
". . . [T]he a r g u m e n t o f Formes is m a r k e d l y p e r s o n a l i n b o t h
r h e t o r i c a l style a n d scientific substance; a n d it r e v e a l s a m a n w h o
w a s far m o r e t h a n t h e h a r d - n o s e d o p p o n e n t o f t h e second-rate
a n d the s e n t i m e n t a l i n s o c i a l s c i e n c e , a l t h o u g h h e w a s that t o o . . .
Formes i s l i k e a virtuoso p e r f o r m a n c e that builds u p o n but leaps
b e y o n d t h e t e c h n i c a l limits o f the artist's d i s c i p l i n e , b e y o n d t h e
safe s t r i v i n g m e r e l y to hit the c o r r e c t notes, into felt reality o f ele-
m e n t a l truth. T o r e a d it is to w i t n e s s s u c h a p e r f o r m a n c e . T h e illu-
m i n a t i o n s a r e public, the p e r f o r m a n c e , p e r s o n a l . "
—from the Introduction by Karen E. Fields

" K a r e n Fields h a s given u s a splendid n e w translation o f the

greatest w o r k o f s o c i o l o g y e v e r w r i t t e n , o n e w e w i l l n o t be
e m b a r r a s s e d to a s s i g n to o u r students. I n a d d i t i o n s h e h a s w r i t -
t e n a brilliant a n d p r o f o u n d i n t r o d u c t i o n . T h e public ation o f this
t r a n s l a t i o n i s a n o c c a s i o n f o r g e n e r a l c e l e b r a t i o n , f o r a veritable
'collective effervescence.'"
— R O B E R T N. B E L L A H
c o - a u t h o r o f Habits
of the Heart, a n d
editor of Entile Durkheim on Morality and Society

"This superb n e w translation finally allows n o n - F r e n c h speaking

A m e r i c a n r e a d e r s fully to a p p r e c i a t e D u r k h e i m ' s genius. It i s a
l a b o r o f love for w h i c h a l l s c h o l a r s m u s t b e grateful."
—LEWIS A. COSER