244 



NA TURE 



[July 14, 1904 



The majority, in fact, must in all such questions have 

 their way, and the existing system of chronology and 

 its zero point (the end of u.c. i or of the year o reckoned 

 astronomicallv) now so extensively pervade all history 

 that they cannot be displaced. As regards the real 

 date of the event on which they are nominally 

 founded, that is another question. It seems clear that 

 Herod the Great died in the spring of 750 by the years 

 of Rome, corresponding to B.C. 4, and that our Lord 

 was probably born towards the end of the preceding 

 year, B.C. 5. Mr. Jordan refers (p. 28) to the proposal 

 to put it back two years further, to a.d. 7, but as that 

 theory is founded on Kepler's suggestion (which can- 

 not be accepted) that the Star of Bethlehem was in 

 fact a conjunction of planets, it may be dismissed as 

 quite untenable. All who have studied mediaeval 

 writers on this subject are aware that the original 

 proposal was to date, not from the birth, but from the 

 incarnation of Christ, i.e. the Ladv Dav preceding the 

 nativity ; but that was soon merged in the other, which 

 in fact superseded it. ^^'e must remind our author 

 that astronomers when making chronological calcu- 

 lations do not call the vulgar era 5 B.C. (for instance) 

 4 B.C.; they call it A.D. — 4, in the ordinary mathe- 

 matical form when on the other side of the zero point. 



It should be added that the book contains some 

 interesting discussions respecting the first use of 

 Christian chronology (superseding the era of Dio- 

 cletian) and the early cycles used in the determination 

 of Easter. In the application of a cycle there has to 

 be taken into account not only its degree of accuracy 

 {which is only approximate), but the date from which 

 its use has been commenced. It is often forgotten 

 what a twofold operation the Gregorian reformation 

 involved; this, however, was graduallv accepted in it- 

 entirety in the western church. W. T. L. 



TOTEMISM .iXD EXOGAMY. 

 Social Origins. By .\ndrew Lang, M..\., LL.D. 

 Primal Law. By J. J. Atkinson. Pp. xvili + 311. 

 (London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1903.) Price 

 los. 6d. net. 



MR. L.ANG'S critical genius has done great service 

 to anthropology and the science of religion, and 

 the present work, both in its criticism and constructive 

 theory, definitely advances the study of primitive 

 marriage and social organisation. 



The essay on " primal law " deals with the origin 

 of exogamy, and mav be considered first. Its author, 

 the late Mr. J. J. Atkinson, spent most of his life in 

 New Caledonia, and knew the natives well. His 

 theory, therefore, merits our careful consideration. He 

 takes man in the semi-brutal stage, before language 

 was evolved — living, as Darwin thought, not in 

 hordes, but in small unsocial groups, each composed 

 of one adult male with several wives and children. 

 The sons of such a family would be expelled as soon 

 as they reached maturity, owing to the fierce sexual 

 jealousy of the father. This picture is based on what 

 we know, little enough, of man-like apes, such as the 

 gorilla ; rightlv or wrongly, evidence from cattle and 

 other herding animals is also employed. Such, at 

 NO. 181 I, VOL. "/O] 



least, according to the author, is the genesis of 

 exogamy. He explains the well known avoidance 

 customs between mother and son, brother and sister, 

 as the result of the " primal law," finding a corrobor- 

 ation of his m.iin point in the absence of avoidance 

 between father and daughter. In his account of the 

 further development he is not so successful. The 

 theory, as a whole, is a striking one, and will have 

 to be reckoned with, especially by those who believe 

 in the " horde " as the first form of social organisation, 

 and in communal " marriage " as the original type 

 of union. We are taken so far back in the evolution 

 of man that savage analogies can hardly be applied, 

 and here our difficulties begin. What are the con- 

 jugal habits of the higher animals generallv, and of 

 the anthropoid apes in particular? Can zoologists give 

 us further evidence beyond the few and possiblv 

 doubtful facts hitherto observed on which the theory 

 is based? .'\nother difficulty is the psychological 

 question. We can understand proprietary jealousv, 

 and an exclusion of potential rivals, both marital and 

 patriarchal ; but the sexual instinct of animals in a 

 natural state is as absolutely regulated and free from 

 excess as is that of the normal savage. With regard 

 to the absence of avoidance in the case mentioned 

 above, I am informed by Mr. A. W. Howitt and Prof. 

 Baldwin Spencer that there is no evidence in Australia 

 of such a practice as it would imply. Lastlv, one is 

 inclined to suspect single-key theories. 



Mr. Lang discusses exogamy, as defined by 

 M'Lennan, and the origin of totemism. With his 

 usual acuteness, he fixes on essential points. In the 

 question of exogamy, an essential phenomenon is the 

 bisection of a tribe, as commonly in .Australia, into 

 two exogamous intermarrying moieties, which contain 

 totem-kins; of this a luminous explanation is offered. 

 .An e.xogamous tendency, of whatever origin, is pre- 

 supposed; then an exogamous local group, which, 

 after the institution of totemism, finds itself composed 

 of variously named units, owing to the presence of 

 alien women, agrees to intermarry solely with another 

 community similarly composed. Such is the origin of 

 the dual phratry system. This explanation is directly 

 opposed to the prevalent view that the bisection was 

 deliberately arranged at a mass meeting of the primitive 

 horde, which had at last discovered the ill effects of 

 promiscuity. But Mr. Lang himself is bound to admit 

 some deliberate grouping of the totems, for we never 

 find the same in both phratries. A final theory might 

 be expected to supply an automatic reason for this 

 result. A more important difficulty, to my mind, is 

 the arrangement of ciiniiiibitim between the two local 

 groups; it does not seem clear enough why so many 

 tribes should owe their urlgin to a dual matrimonial 

 alliance. 



The explanation of the origin of totemism is 

 suggested by the practice, found in English and French 

 folk-custom, rmd paralleled elsewhere, of " blazon- 

 ing " neighbouring villages with sobriquets, which are 

 frequently animal names. The evidence cited on this 

 head is very interesting, and the essential fact has 

 emerged that totem names are group names given 

 from without. When accepted, they would be invested 



