Books: The Pagan Tribes of Borneo

C >> Charles Hose and William McDougall >> The Pagan Tribes of Borneo

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46

Thirdly, although it may be said that even at the present time many
of the features of the religious side of totemism are present, we
have not been able to discover any traces of a social organisation
based upon totemism. There is no trace of any general division of
the people of any tribe into groups which claim specially intimate
relations with different animals, except in the case of the Klemantans;
and in their case such special relations seem to be the result merely
of the different conditions under which the various scattered groups
now live. There are no restrictions in the choice of a wife that might
indicate a rule of endogamy or exogamy. There are no ceremonies to
initiate youths into tribal mysteries; certain ceremonies in which the
youths take a leading part are directed exclusively to training them
for war and the taking of heads in battle. We know of no instance
of any group of people being named after an animal or plant which
is claimed as a relative; and in the case of the more homogeneous
tribes, such as the Kenyahs and Kayans, all prohibitions with regard to
animals and all benefits conferred by them are shared equally by all
the members of any one community, and, with but very few exceptions,
are the same for all the communities of the tribe.

Lastly, we think it unnecessary to regard the various animal
superstitions of these tribes as survivals of totemism, because
it seems possible to find a more direct and natural explanation of
almost every case. The numerous cases seem to fall into two groups:
the superstitious practices concerned with the sacrificial animals,
the pig and fowl on the one hand, and all those concerned with the
various other animals on the other hand. These latter may, we think,
be regarded as the expression of the direct and logical reaction of
the mind of the savage to the impression made upon it by the behaviour
of the animals.

It has been admirably shown by Professor Lloyd Morgan[145] how
we ourselves, and even professed psychologists among us, tend to
overestimate the complexity of the mental processes of animals;
and there can be no doubt that savages generally are subject to
this error in a very much greater degree, that, in fact, they make,
without questioning and in most cases without explicit statement even
to themselves, the practical assumption that the mental processes of
animals -- their passions, desires, motives, and powers of reasoning
-- are of the same order as, and in fact extremely similar to, their
own. That the Kenyahs entertain this belief in a very practical manner
is shown by their conduct when preparing for a hunting or fishing
excursion. If, for example, they are preparing to poison the fish
of a section of the river with the "tuba" root, they always speak
of the matter as little as possible, and use the most indirect and
fanciful modes of expression. Thus they will say, "There are many
leaves floating here," meaning, "There are plenty of fish in this
part of the river." And these elaborate precautions are taken lest
the birds should overhear their remarks and inform the fish of their
intentions -- when, of course, the fish would not stay to be caught,
but would swim away to some other part of the river.

Since this belief seems to be common to all or almost all savages
and primitive peoples, it would be a strange thing if prohibitions
against killing and eating certain animals and various superstitious
practices in regard to animals were not practically universal among
them. Bearing in mind the reality of this belief in the minds of these
peoples, it is easy to understand why they should shrink from killing
any creature so malignant-looking and powerful for harm as a snake,
and why they should feel uneasy in the presence of, and to some extent
dread, the MAIAS and the longnosed monkey, creatures whose resemblance
to man seems even to us somewhat uncanny. Their objection to killing
their troublesome and superfluous dogs seems to be due to a somewhat
similar feeling -- a recognition of intelligence and emotions not
unlike their own, but mysteriously hidden from them by the dumbness of
the animals. In the same way it is clear that it is but a very simple
and logical inference that the crocodiles are a friendly race, and
but the clearest dictate of prudence to avoid offending creatures so
powerful and agile; for if the crocodiles were possessed of the mental
powers attributed to them by the imagination of the people, they might
easily make it impossible for men to travel upon the rivers or dwell
on their banks. A similar process would lead to the prohibition against
the eating of the tiger-cat, the only large and dangerous carnivore.

The origin of the prohibitions against killing and eating deer and
horned cattle is perhaps not so clear. But it must be remembered that
until very recently the only horned cattle known to the tribes of the
interior were the wild cattle (the Seladang of the Malay peninsula),
very fierce and powerful creatures. These wild cattle hide themselves
in the remotest recesses of the forests, and, as they are but very
rarely seen, they may well be regarded as somewhat mysterious and
awful. Deer, on the other hand, abound in the forests, and, like most
deer, are very timid; and it is perhaps their timidity that has led in
some cases to the prohibition against their flesh, for we have seen
how a Kenyah chief feared lest his little son, safe at home, should
be infected with the deer's timidity if he himself a hundred miles
away should come in contact with the skin of one. In another case we
have seen that by the people of one community deer are regarded as
relatives, or as containing the souls of their ancestors, and that
this belief probably had its origin in the fact that deer are in
"the habit of frequenting the grassy clearings made about the tombs
by the people. And we saw that a similar belief in respect of certain
carnivores probably had a similar origin.

We think that even the elaborate cult of the hawk and of the other
omen-birds is to be explained on these lines. If we think of the
hawk's erratic behaviour, how he will come suddenly rushing down out
of the remotest blue of the sky to hover overhead, and then perhaps
to circle hither and thither in an apparently aimless manner, or
will keep flying on before a boat on the river, or come swiftly to
meet it, screaming as he comes, -- if we think of this, it is easy to
understand how a people whose whole world consists of dense forests and
dangerous rivers, a people extremely ignorant of natural causation,
yet intelligent and speculative, and always looking out for signs
that shall guide them among the mystery and dangers that surround
them, may have come to see in the hawk a messenger sent to them by
the beneficent Supreme Being. For this Being is vaguely conceived by
them as dwelling in the skies whence the hawk comes, and whither he so
often returns. And then we may suppose that the messenger himself has
come to be an object of worship in various degrees with the different
tribes, as seems to be the rule in all religious systems in which
servants of a deity mediate between him and man.

The origin of the various rites in which the fowl and pig are
sacrificed, and their blood smeared or sprinkled on men or on the
altar-posts of gods, or on the image of the hawk, and their souls
charged with messages to the Supreme Being -- the origin of this
group of customs must be sought in a different direction. To any
one acquainted with Robertson Smith's RELIGION OF THE SEMITES,
and with Mr. Jevon's INTRODUCTION TO THE HISTORY OF RELIGION, the
idea naturally suggests itself that these animals are or were true
totems, of which the cult has passed into a late stage of decay. It
might be supposed that, being originally totem animals, they thereby
became domesticated by their worshippers; that they were occasionally
slain as a rite for the renewal of the bond between them and their
worshippers, their blood being smeared or sprinkled on the latter,
and their flesh ceremonially eaten by them; and that the eating of
them has become more and more frequent, until now every religious
rite, of however small importance, is made the occasion for the
killing and eating of them. It might also be supposed that, with the
development or the adoption of the conception of a Supreme Being,
the original purpose and character of the rites had become obscure,
so that the slaughtered animals are now regarded in some cases as
sacrifices offered to the deity.

But we do not think that this tempting hypothesis as to the origin of
the rites can be upheld in this case. In the first place, the wild
pig of the jungle is hunted in sport and killed and eaten freely by
all the various tribes, and is, in fact, treated on the whole with
less respect and ceremony than perhaps any other animal. Secondly,
the domestic pig differs so much from the wild pig that Mr. Oldfield
Thomas has pronounced it to be of a different species, and it seems
possible that it has been introduced to Borneo by the Chinese at
a comparatively recent date. Further, there is reason to suppose
that the custom of sacrificing pigs and fowls arose through the
substitution of them for human beings in certain rites. For there
is a number of rites of which it is admitted by the people that the
slaughter of human beings was formerly a central feature; of these,
the most important and the most widely spread are the funeral rites
of a great chief, the rites at the building of a new house, and those
on returning from a successful war expedition. In all these fowls
or pigs are now substituted as a rule, but we know of instances in
which in recent years human beings were the victims. Thus some years
ago, on the death of the chief of a community of Klemantans (the
Orang Bukit), a slave was bought by his son, and a feast was made,
and the slave was killed through each man of the community giving
him a slight wound. This was said to be the revival of an old and
almost obsolete custom. In another recent case, when a mixed party
of Kayans and Kenyahs returned from a successful war expedition, only
the Kenyahs had secured heads. The Kayans therefore took an old woman,
one of the captives, and killed her by driving a long pole against her
abdomen, as many of them as possible taking part by holding and helping
to thrust the pole. The head was then divided among the parties of
Kayans, and pieces of the flesh were hung on poles beside the river,
just as is done with the flesh of slain enemies and with the flesh of
the pigs that are always slaughtered on such occasions. It was said
that this killing of a human being was equivalent to killing a pig,
only much finer.

Kayans tell us that they used to kill slaves at the death of a chief,
usually three, but at least one, and that they nailed them to the tomb,
in order that they might accompany the chief on his long journey to
the other world and paddle the canoe in which he must travel. This is
no longer done, but a wooden figure of a man is put up at the head
and another of a woman at the foot of the coffin of a chief as it
lies in state before the funeral. And a small wooden figure of a man
is usually fixed on the top of the tomb, and it is said that this
is to row the canoe for the chief. A live fowl is usually tied to
this figure, and although it is said to be put there merely to eat
the maggots, we think there can be no doubt that we see here going
on the process of substitution of fowl for slave.

In building a new house it is customary among almost all these tribes
to put a fowl into the hole dug to receive the first of the piles
that are to support the house, and to allow the end of the pile to
fall upon the fowl so as to kill it. The Kenyahs admit that formerly
a girl was usually killed in this way, and there is reason to believe
that in all cases a human victim was formerly the rule, and that the
fowl is a substitute merely.[146]

In the following cases, too, we see the idea of substitution of fowls
or pigs for men.

It is customary with the Malanaus of Niah to kill buffalo, and also
to kill fowls, and put them together with eggs on poles in the caves
in which the swifts build the edible nests, in order to secure a good
crop of nests. One year, when the nests were scanty they bought a slave
in Brunei, and killed him in the cave, in the hope of increasing the
number of nests.

It was formerly the custom to exact a fine of one or more slaves as
punishment for certain offences, E.G. the accidental setting fire to
a house. At the present time, when slaves are scarcer than of yore,
they are rarely given in such cases, but usually brass gongs; and
the gongs are always accompanied by a pig.

Now, when slaves were killed and nailed to the tomb of a chief,
the purpose was perfectly clear and simple. It Was done in just the
same spirit in which the weapons and shield and clothing are still
always hung on the tomb of a deceased warrior, in order, namely,
that his shade may not be without them on the journey to the other
world. On the introduction of the domestic pig it may well have become
customary for the poorer classes, who could not afford to kill a
slave, or for families which owned no slaves, to kill a pig as in
some degree a compensation for the want of human victims. If such
a custom were once introduced, it may well have spread rapidly from
motives of both economy and humanity; for a slave is as a rule very
kindly treated by his master, and in many cases comes to be regarded
as a member of the family.

We may suppose, too, that it was formerly the custom to kill a slave
when prayers of public importance were made to the Supreme Being, in
order that the soul of the slave might carry the prayer to him. If this
was the case, the substitution of pig for slave, on the introduction
of the domestic pig, may be the more readily conceived to have become
customary, when we remember that these people regard the souls of
animals as essentially similar to their own.[147] If such a custom of
substitution once gained a footing, it would naturally become usual to
take the opportunity of communicating with the higher powers whenever
a pig was to be slaughtered.

This view, that in all sacrifices of the pig and fowl these are
but substitutes for human victims, finds very strong support in the
following facts: -- The Kalabits, a tribe inhabiting the north-western
corner of the Baram district, breed the water-buffalo and use it in
cultivating their land. It has probably been introduced to this area
from North Borneo at a recent date. The religious rites of this people
closely resemble those of the tribes with which we have been dealing
above; but in all cases in which pigs are sacrificed by the latter,
buffaloes are used by the Kalabits.

The rite of sprinkling the blood of pigs and fowls on men and on the
altar-posts and images may, we think, be an extension or adaptation
of the blood-brotherhood ceremony. We have seen that with the Kayans
and Kenyahs the essential feature of this ceremony is the drawing of
a little blood from the arm of the two men, each of whom then drinks
or consumes in a cigarette the blood of the other one. Such a rite
calls for no remote explanation; it seems to have suggested itself
naturally to the minds of primitive people all the world over as a
process for the cementing of friendship. When two hostile communities
wished to make a permanent peace with one another, it would be natural
that they should wish to perform a ceremony similar to the rite of
blood-brotherhood. But the interchange of drops of blood between large
numbers of persons would obviously be inconvenient; and if the idea of
substituting fowls and pigs for human victims had once taken root in
their minds, it would have been but a small step to substitute their
blood for human blood in the peacemaking ceremonies. We have seen
above that in such a ceremony fowls are exchanged by the two parties,
so that the men of either party are smeared with the blood of the fowl
originally belonging to the other party. It may be that here, too, the
blood of slaves was formerly used, but of this we have no evidence. The
custom of smearing the blood of fowls and pigs on the two parties to
a friendly compact having been arrived at in this way, the rite might
readily be extended to the cases in which the hawk, represented by
his wooden image, or the Supreme Being, also represented by an image,
is invoked as one of the parties to the compact. We are inclined to
think that in some such way as we have here suggested, namely, by the
substitution of pigs and fowls for human victims, and of their blood
for human blood, the origin of the customs of sacrificing fowls and
pigs, and of ceremonially sprinkling their blood, may be explained.

We conclude, then, that the various superstitions entertained by these
tribes in regard to animals are not to be looked upon as survivals
of totemism, but that they may all be explained in a simpler and more
satisfactory manner.

Suggested Theory of the Origin of Totemism

Before bringing this chapter to an end, we would point out that among
the facts we have described there are some which seem to suggest a
possible and, indeed, as it seems to us, a very natural and probable
mode of origin of totem-worship. We refer to the varieties of the
NGARONG of the Ibans and sporadic analogous cases among the other
tribes. We have seen that the NGARONG may assume the form of some
curious natural object, or of some one animal distinguished from its
fellows by some slight peculiarity, which receives the attentions of
some one man only. In such cases the NGARONG is hardly distinguishable
from a fetish. In other cases the man, being unable to distinguish the
particular animal which he believes to be animated by his NGARONG,
extends his regard and gratitude to the whole species. In such a
case it seems difficult to deny the name "individual totem" to the
species, if the term is to be used at all. In other cases, again,
all the members of a man's family and all his descendants, and, if
he be a chief, all the members of the community over which he rules,
may come to share in the benefits conferred by his NGARONG, and in the
feeling of respect for it and in the performance of rites in honour
of the species of animal in one individual of which it is supposed
to reside. In such cases the species approaches very closely the
clan-totem in some of its varieties. (In speaking of the "Kobong"
of certain natives of Western Australia, Sir G. Grey[148] says,
"This arises from the family belief that some one individual of the
species is their nearest friend, to kill whom would be a great crime,
and to be carefully avoided.")

Of similar cases among other tribes of guardian-animals appearing
to men in dreams and claiming their respect and gratitude, we must
mention the case of Aban Jau, a powerful chief of the Sebops, a
Klemantan sub-tribe. He had hunted and eaten the wild pig freely
like all his fellow-tribesmen, until once in a dream a wild boar
appeared to him, and told him that he had always helped him in his
fighting. Thereafter Aban Jau refused, until the day of his death,
to kill or eat either the wild or the domestic pig, although he would
still consult for omens the livers of pigs killed by others.[149]

We have described above (vol. ii., p. 76) how a Kayan may become
blood-brother to a crocodile in a dream, and may thereafter be called
Baya (crocodile), and how in this way one Kayan chief had come to
regard himself as both son and nephew to crocodiles, and how he
believed that they brought him success in hunting and carried him
ashore when (in a dream) he had fallen into the river. The cousin
of this chief, too, regarded himself as specially befriended by
crocodiles because his great-grandfather had become blood-brother to
one in a dream. So it is clear that the members of the family to which
these young men belong are likely to continue to regard themselves
as related by blood to the crocodiles, and bound to them by special
ties of gratitude.

In another case we saw how all the people of one household regard
themselves as related to the crocodiles and specially favoured by them,
explaining the relation as due to one of their ancestors having become
a crocodile. In another case we saw that some ill-defined relation
to the gibbon is claimed by a community of Kenyahs whose house is
decorated with carvings of the form of the gibbon, and whose members
will not kill the gibbon. And in yet another case we saw that a Kayan
house is decorated with conventionalised carvings of some animal
whose species has been forgotten by the community. In each of these
last three cases, it seems highly probable that the special relation
to the animal was established by some such process as we see going
on in the preceding case; so that we seem to have in this series one
case of incipient totemism and others illustrating various stages of
decay of abortive beginnings of totemism. And it is easy to imagine
how in the absence of unfavourable conditions such beginnings might
grow to a fully developed totem-system. For suppose that in any one
community there happened to be at one time two or more prosperous
families, each claiming to be related with and protected by some
species of animal as the result of friendly overtures made by the
animals to members of the families in their dreams. It would then be
highly probable that members of other families, envious of the good
fortune of these, would have similar dream experiences, and so come
to claim a similar protection; until very soon the members of any
family that could claim no such protection would come to be regarded
as unfortunate and even somewhat disreputable beings, while the faith
of one family in its guardian-animal would react upon and strengthen
the faith of others in theirs. So a system of clan-totems would be
established, around which would grow up various myths of origin,
various magical practices, and various religious rites.

It is well known that such dreams as convince the Iban, the Kayan,
and the Kenyah of the reality of his special relation to some animal,
and lead him to respect all animals of some one species, produce
similar results in other parts of the world. We quote the following
passages from Mr. Frazer's remarks on individual totems in his book
on totemism: -- "An Australian seems usually to get his individual
totem by dreaming that he has been transformed into an animal of that
species." "In America the individual totem is usually the first animal
of which a youth dreams during the long and generally solitary fast
which American Indians observe at puberty." Such dream experiences
are then the VERA CAUSA of the inception of faith in individual
totems among the peoples in which totemism is most highly developed;
and among the tribes of Sarawak we find cases which illustrate how a
similar faith, strengthened by further dreams and by the good fortune
of its possessor, may spread to all the members of his family or
of his household and to his descendants, until in some cases the
guardian animal becomes almost, though not quite, a clan-totem. The
further development of such incipient totems among these tribes is
probably prevented at the present time, not only by their agricultural
habits, but also by their passionate addiction to war and fighting and
head-hunting; for these pursuits necessitate the strict subordination
of each community to its chief, and compel all families to unite
in the cult of the hawk to the detriment of all other animal-cults,
because the hawk is, by its habits, so much better suited than any
other animal to be a guide to them on warlike expeditions.[150]

The prevalence of the belief in a Supreme Being must also tend to
prevent the development of totemism.

Plants

In Chapter VI. we have described most of the superstitious beliefs
and practices connected with the PADI plant and the rice.

It is not clear that any other plants are regarded as be-souled; but
we mention here certain customs in connection with some of them that
seem to point in that direction. The SILAT, a common jungle palm,
figures most prominently in rites and beliefs of the Kayans. The
leaves of this palm are used to decorate the heads taken in war;
and on the occasion of any ceremonial use of the heads, fresh leaves
are always hung upon or about them. No other leaves will serve this
purpose, though it is difficult to say in what the special virtue of
this plant consists. The leaves of the same plant are hung about the
doorway of a new house when the people first take up their abode in it;
but it is hung in such a way that passers-by do not brush against it,
and children especially are kept away from it. It is commonly hung
about the altar-posts of the gods; and it is a strip of this leaf
that is tied about the wrist of a sick man to confine his soul to his
body at the close of the soul-catching ceremony. It is tied also about
the wrists of men returning from any warlike expedition. When applied
for any ceremonial purpose it is called ISANG; and it is not until it
has been so used that it becomes an "unclean" object. It is used in
its merely material aspect for roofing leaf shelters in the jungle,
and is put to other similar uses to which the broad tough leaves are
well adapted. Most or all of the peoples use the leaves of this plant
in the same ways as the Kayans.