Page:Folk-lore - A Quarterly Review. Volume 9, 1898.djvu/277

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.

REVIEWS.


L'Année Sociologique, publiée sous la direction de Émile Durkheim, Prof. de Sociologie à la Faculté des Lettres de l'Université de Bordeaux. Première Année (1896-7). Paris: F. Mean. 1898.

M. Durkheim, with the collaboration of a number of scientific colleagues, has commenced the publication of an annual, of which this is the pioneer, with the object not merely of presenting from year to year a picture of the condition of literature properly called sociological, but of supplying a periodical account of the researches made in the special sciences in which sociology finds its materials, such as historical jurisprudence, various branches of folklore (including the history of religions), moral statistics, criminal anthropology, economics. Each department is supervised by a specialist; and the articles comprised in the volume are of two kinds. The larger part of the volume consists in critical analyses of books and scientific papers published from Midsummer, 1896, to Midsummer, 1897. These are preceded by original matter, in the case of the volume before us by two articles, one by M. Durkheim himself on the prohibition of incest and its origin, the other by Professor Simmel of Berlin, entitled "How Social Forms are maintained."

M. Durkheim's paper is of the greatest interest for students of folklore, especially at this moment, when the universal distribution of totemism is so strongly contested, when the origins of exogamy are under discussion, and the early forms of the family and the meaning of the clan-system are being so keenly examined. He derives the prohibition of sexual relations between near kindred from the clan-system, and finds its basis in totemism, which he assumes to be universal. Defining the clan as a group of individuals who consider themselves all akin one to another, but who recognise that kinship solely from the fact that they are the bearers of the same totem, he lays it down that we know of no