FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284  
285   286   287   288   289   290   291   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   >>   >|  
d by all belonging to him, was the family surname. Years passed before I learned that the real surname was Cameron; that the father was called Croshek, after the name of his cottage, to distinguish him from other Camerons employed about the premises; and that his children had come to be similarly distinguished. Though here, as very generally in Scotland, the nickname was derived from the place of residence, yet had it been derived from an animal, the process would have been the same: inheritance of it would have occurred just as naturally. Not even for this small link in the argument, however, need we depend on inference. There is fact to bear us out. Mr. Bates, in his _Naturalist on the River Amazons_ (2d ed., p. 376), describing three half-castes who accompanied him on a hunting trip, says--"Two of them were brothers, namely, Joao (John) and Zephyrino Jabuti: Jabuti, or tortoise, being a nickname which their father had earned for his slow gait, and which, as is usual in this country, had descended as the surname of the family." Let me add the statement made by Mr. Wallace respecting this same region, that "one of the tribes on the river Isanna is called 'Jurupari' (Devils). Another is called 'Ducks;' a third, 'Stars;' a fourth, 'Mandiocca.'" Putting these two statements together, can there be any doubt about the genesis of these tribal names? Let "the Tortoise" become sufficiently distinguished (not necessarily by superiority--great inferiority may occasionally suffice) and the tradition of descent from him, preserved by his descendants themselves if he was superior, and by their contemptuous neighbours if he was inferior, may become a tribal name.[30] "But this," it will be said, "does not amount to an explanation of animal-worship." True: a third factor remains to be specified. Given a belief in the still-existing other self of the deceased ancestor, who must be propitiated; given this survival of his metaphorical name among his grandchildren, great-grandchildren, etc.; and the further requisite is that the distinction between metaphor and reality shall be forgotten. Let tradition fail to keep clearly in view the fact that the ancestor was a man called "the Wolf"--let him be habitually spoken of as "the Wolf", just as when alive; and the natural mistake of taking the name literally will bring with it, firstly, a belief in descent from an actual wolf, and, secondly, a treatment of the wolf in a manner likely to pro
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   277   278   279   280   281   282   283   284  
285   286   287   288   289   290   291   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

called

 

surname

 
ancestor
 

animal

 
tribal
 

belief

 

descent

 
tradition
 

Jabuti

 

grandchildren


distinguished

 

nickname

 

father

 
derived
 

family

 

suffice

 
firstly
 

inferiority

 

actual

 

occasionally


preserved
 

superior

 
contemptuous
 
neighbours
 

inferior

 
mistake
 

taking

 

literally

 

descendants

 

necessarily


statements

 

Mandiocca

 

Putting

 
treatment
 

sufficiently

 

Tortoise

 

genesis

 

manner

 

superiority

 

fourth


metaphorical

 

propitiated

 
survival
 

requisite

 

metaphor

 

forgotten

 

distinction

 

explanation

 

worship

 
factor