Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 17, 1906.djvu/130

This page needs to be proofread.

1 1 8 Reviews.

black friends. Interesting points are that the continuance of the totem-kin is in some way bound up with the continuance of the totem-species ; that the penalty for intermarriage by two of a totem-kin is that their children will " throw back " to the totem- species from which they are named ; and that the totem-kins are emancipated from the usual restriction on the eating of the totem.

A feature of totemism which is prominently developed among many of the Australian tribes (if we had complete information we might perhaps say alt) is " the division of all things among the categories [namely, the totem-kins] provided by the social system of the human society." By this attempt at classification certain objects (species of animals and plants, the winds and other phenomena) are assigned to each totem-kin. Mrs. Parker calls these objects by the unfortunate name of " multiplex totems " or " sub-totems." It is no doubt difficult to discover a suitable name to express their relation to the totem-kins ; but both the names chosen have been already employed in other connections. However, a com- parison of Mrs. Parker's statement on p. 22 with Mr. Howitt's on p. 454 of his Native Tribes of Soutli-East Australia shows clearly what is meant. It would be desirable to know whether there is any division of the points of the compass between the totem-kins. When the tribe assembles for a ceremony do the totem-kins occupy any special positions? Are they arranged in any order, as among the North American Indians and other peoples ? The authoress speaks sometimes of totems, i.e. totem-kins, and some- times of " family clans " or " clans." Is there any distinction between them? If so, what is it?

The book is so full of interest and gives rise to so many questions that the foregoing are only a very few samples of the matters touched upon which would amply repay further investiga- tion. I trust it is not yet too late lor Mrs. Parker to attempt this. She is evidently so competent, and has so much of the confidence of the people that such enquiries would in all probability bear excellent fruit. Every Anthropologist who studies the work will be grateful for the valuable information she has already put together. But it only whets our appetite for more. We want more details, and the clearing up of points left doubtful. I must indulge in one last grumble, but more in the hope of future