642 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



though, even apart from any further interpretation, we may say that 

 it approaches as nearly to actual transfer as the nature of the case 

 permits. We are not, however, obliged to regard this ceremony as 

 one artificially devised ; but we may affiliate it upon a ceremony of a 

 simpler kind which at once elucidates it, and is elucidated by it. I 

 refer to giving up a part of the body as implying a surrender of the 

 whole. In Feejee, tributaries approaching their masters were told by 

 a messenger that " they must all cut off their tobe (locks of hair that 

 are left like tails). . . . They all docked their tails." Still, it may be 

 replied that this act, too, is a symbolic act an act artificially devised 

 rather than naturally derived. If we carry our inquiry a step back, 

 however, we shall find a clew to its natural derivation. 



First, let us remember the honor which accrues from accumulated 

 trophies ; so that, among the Shoshones, for instance, " he who takes 

 the most scalps gains the most glory." Let us join with this Ban- 

 croft's statement respecting the treatment of prisoners by the Chichi- 

 mecs, that " often were they scalped while yet alive, and the bloody 

 trophy placed upon the heads of their tormentors." And now let us 

 ask what will happen if the scalped enemy survives and is taken pos- 

 session of by his captor. The captor preserves the scalp as an addi- 

 tion to his other trophies ; the vanquished enemy becomes his slave ; 

 and he is shown to be a slave by the loss of his scalp. Here, then, are 

 the beginnings of a custom that may become established when social 

 conditions make it advantageous to keep conquered foes as servants 

 instead of eating them. The conservative savage will change his 

 custom as little as possible. While the new practice of enslaving the 

 captured grows up, there will continue the old practice of cutting 

 from their bodies such parts as serve for trophies without impairing 

 their usefulness ; and it will thereafter result that the marks left will 

 be marks of subjugation. Gradually as the receipt of such marks 

 becomes by use identified with bondage, not only will those taken in 

 war be marked, but also those born to them ; until at length the bear- 

 ing of the mark shows subordination in general. 



That submission to mutilation may eventually grow into the seal- 

 ing of an agreement to be bondsmen, is shown us by Hebrew history : 

 " Then Nahash the Ammonite came up, and encamped against Jabesh- 

 gilead : and all the men of Jabesh said unto Nahash, Make a covenant 

 with us, and we will serve thee. And Nahash the Ammonite answered 

 them, On this condition will I make a covenant with you, that I may 

 thrust out all your right eyes." They agreed to be subjects, and the 

 mutilation (not in this case consented to, however) was to mark their 

 subjection. And while mutilations thus serve, like the brands a 

 farmer puts on his sheep, to show first private ownership, and after- 

 ward political ownership, they also serve as perpetual reminders of 

 the ruler's power ; so keeping alive the dread that brings obedience. 

 This fact we see in the statement that when the second Basil deprived 



