382 The OrigiJi of Totem Names and Beliefs,
be a sin, forbidden by a superstition, but still] the tendency might run strong against marriage within each group.
How THE Groups got Names.
Up to this point we may conceive that the groups were anonymous. Each group would probably speak of itself as "the men " (according to a well recognised custom among the tribes of to-day), while it would know neighbouring groups as "the others," or "the wild blacks," But this arrange- ment manifestly lacks distinctness. Even " the others down there " is too like the vague manner in which the Mulligan indicated his place of residence. Each group will need a special name for each of its unfriendly neighbours.
These names, as likely as not, or more likely than not, will be animal or plant names, given for various reasons ; among others, perhaps, from fancied resemblances. It may be objected that an individual may bear a resemblance to this or that animal, but that a group cannot. But it is a pecularity of human nature to think that strangers (of another school eleven, say) are all very like each other, and if one of them reminds us of an emu or a kangaroo, all of them will. Moreover the name may be based on some real or fancied group-trait of character, good or bad, which also marks this or that type of animal, such as cunning, cruelty, cowardice, strength, and so forth. We have also to reckon with the kinds of animals, plants, trees, useful flints, and other objects, which may be more prevalent in the area occupied by each group ; and with specialities in the food of each group's area, as in ]Mr. Haddon's theory. Thus there are plenty of reasons for the giving. of plant and animal names, which, I suggest, were imposed on each groupyVc'w ivithout. It is true that place-names would serve the turn, if they were in use. But the " hill-men," " the river-men," " the bush-men," " the men of the thorn-country," " the rock-men, " are at once too scanty and too general. Many
