CONTENTS
| [INTRODUCTION] | |
| Subject of our Study: Religious Sociology and the Theory ofKnowledge | PAGE |
| I.—Principal subject of the book: analysis of the simplest religion knownto determine the elementary forms of the religious life—Why they aremore easily found and explained in the primitive religions | [1] |
| II.—Secondary subject of research: the genesis of the fundamentalnotions of thought or the categories—Reasons for believing thattheir origin is religious and consequently social—How a way ofrestating the theory of knowledge is thus seen | [9] |
[BOOK I] PRELIMINARY QUESTIONS | |
| CHAPTER I Definition of Religious Phenomena and of Religion | |
| Usefulness of a preliminary definition of religion; method to be followedin seeking this definition—Why the usual definitions should beexamined first | [23] |
| I.—Religion defined by the supernatural and mysterious—Criticism: thenotion of mystery is not primitive | [24] |
| II.—Religion defined in connection with the idea of God or a spiritual being.—Religionswithout gods—Rites in deistic religions which imply noidea of divinity | [29] |
| III.—Search for a positive definition—Distinction between beliefs andrites—Definition of beliefs—First characteristic: division of thingsbetween sacred and profane—Distinctive characteristics of thisdefinition—Definition of rites in relation to beliefs—Definition ofreligion | [36] |
| IV.—Necessity of another characteristic to distinguish magic fromreligion—The idea of the Church—Do individualistic religions excludethe idea of a Church? | [42] |
| CHAPTER II Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion I.—Animism | |
| Distinction of animism and naturism | [48] |
| I—The three theses of animism: Genesis of the idea of the soul; Formationof the idea of spirits; Transformation of the cult of spirits intothe cult of nature | [49] |
| II.—Criticism of the first thesis—Distinction of the idea of the soul fromthat of a double—Dreams do not account for the idea of the soul | [55] |
| III.—Criticism of the second thesis—Death does not explain the transformationof a soul into a spirit—The cult of the souls of the dead isnot primitive | [60] |
| IV.—Criticism of the third thesis—The anthropomorphic instinct—Spencer'scriticism of it; reservations on this point—Examinationof the facts by which this instinct is said to be proved—Differencebetween a soul and the spirits of nature—Religious anthropomorphismis not primitive | [65] |
| V.—Conclusion: animism reduces religion to nothing more than a systemof hallucinations | [68] |
| CHAPTER III Leading Conceptions of the Elementary Religion—(continued) II.—Naturism | |
| History of the theory | [71] |
| I.—Exposition of Max Müller's naturism | [73] |
| II.—If the object of religion is to express natural forces, it is hard to seehow it has maintained itself, for it expresses them in an erroneousmanner—Pretended distinction between religion and mythology | [78] |
| III.—Naturism does not explain the division of things into sacred andprofane | [84] |
| CHAPTER IV Totemism as an Elementary Religion | |
| I.—Brief history of the question of totemism | [88] |
| II.—Reasons of method for which our study will be given specially to thetotemism of Australia—The place which will be given to facts fromAmerica | [93] |
[BOOK II] THE ELEMENTARY BELIEFS | |
| CHAPTER I Totemic Beliefs The Totem as Name and as Emblem | |
| I.—Definition of the clan—The totem as name of the clan—Nature of thethings which serve as totems—Ways in which the totem is acquired—Thetotems of phratries; of matrimonial classes | [102] |
| II.—The totem as emblem—Totemic designs engraved or carved uponobjects; tatooings or designs upon the body | [113] |
| III.—Sacred character of the totemic emblem—The churinga—Thenurtunja—The waninga—Conventional character of totemic emblems | [119] |
| CHAPTER II Totemic Beliefs—(continued) The Totemic Animal and Man | |
| I.—Sacred character of the totemic animals—Prohibition to eat them, killthem or pick the totemic plants—Different moderations given theseprohibitions—Prohibition of contact—The sacred character of theanimal is less marked than that of the emblem | [128] |
| II.—The man—His relationship with the totemic animal or plant—Differentmyths explaining this relationship—The sacred characterof the man is more apparent in certain parts of the organism: theblood, hair, etc.—How this character varies with sex and age—Totemismis not plant or animal worship | [134] |
| CHAPTER III Totemic Beliefs—(continued) The Cosmological System of Totemism and the Idea of Class | |
| I.—The classification of things into clans, phratries and classes | [141] |
| II.—Genesis of the notion of class: the first classifications of things taketheir forms from society—Differences between the sentiment of thedifferences of things and the idea of class—Why this is of social origin | [144] |
| III.—Religious significance of these classifications: all of the thingsclassified into a clan partake of the nature of the totem and its sacredcharacter—The cosmological system of totemism—Totemism as thetribal religion | [148] |
| CHAPTER IV Totemic Beliefs—(end) The Individual Totem and the Sexual Totem | |
| I.—Individual totem as a forename; its sacred character—Individualtotem as personal emblem—Bonds between the man and his individualtotem—Relations with the collective totem | [157] |
| II.—The totems of sexual groups—Resemblances and differences with thecollective and individual totems—Their tribal nature | [165] |
| CHAPTER V Origins of these Beliefs Critical Examination of Preceding Theories | |
| I.—Theories which derive totemism from a previous religion: from theancestor cult (Wilken and Tylor); from the nature cult (Jevons)—Criticismof these theories | [168] |
| II.—Theories which derive collective totemism from individual totemism—Originsattributed by these theories to the individual totem (Frazer,Boas, Hill Tout)—Improbability of these hypotheses—Reasonsshowing the priority of the collective totem | [172] |
| III.—Recent theory of Frazer: conceptional and local totemism—Thebegging of the question upon which it rests—The religious characterof the totem is denied—Local totemism is not primitive | [180] |
| IV.—Theory of Lang: that the totem is only a name—Difficulties inexplaining the religious character of totemic practices from this pointof view | [184] |
| V.—All these theories explain totemism only by postulating other religiousnotions anterior to it | [186] |
| CHAPTER VI Origins of these Beliefs—(continued) The Notion of the Totemic Principle, or Mana, and the Idea of Force | |
| I.—The notion of the totemic force or principle—Its ubiquity—Itscharacter at once physical and moral | [188] |
| II.—Analogous conceptions in other inferior societies—The gods in Samoa,the wakan of the Sioux, the orenda of the Iroquois, the mana ofMelanesia—Connection of these notions with totemism—The Arunkultaof the Arunta | [191] |
| III.—Logical priority of impersonal force over the different mythicalpersonalities—Recent theories which tend to admit this priority | [198] |
| IV.—The notion of religious force is the prototype of that of force ingeneral | [203] |
| CHAPTER VII Origins of these Beliefs—(end) Origin of the Idea of the Totemic Principle or Mana | |
| I.—The totemic principle is the clan, but thought of under a more empirical form | [205] |
| II.—General reasons for which society is apt to awaken the sensation of thesacred and the divine—Society as an imperative moral force; thenotion of moral authority—Society as a force which raises the individualoutside of himself—Facts which prove that society creates thesacred | [206] |
| III.—Reasons peculiar to Australian societies—The two phases throughwhich the life of these societies alternatively passes: dispersion, concentration—Greatcollective effervescence during the periods ofconcentration—Examples—How the religious idea is born out of thiseffervescence | [214] |
| Why collective force has been thought of under totemic forms: it is thetotem that is the emblem of the clan—Explanation of the principaltotemic beliefs | [219] |
| IV.—Religion is not the product of fear—It expresses something real—Itsessential idealism—This idealism is a general characteristic of collectivementality—Explanation of the external character of religious forcesin relation to their subjects—The principle that the part is equal tothe whole | [223] |
| V.—Origin of the notion of emblem: emblems a necessary condition ofcollective representations—Why the clan has taken its emblems fromthe animal and vegetable kingdoms | [230] |
| VI.—The proneness of the primitive to confound the kingdoms andclasses which we distinguish—Origins of these confusions—Howthey have blazed the way for scientific explanations—They do notexclude the tendency towards distinction and opposition | [234] |
| CHAPTER VIII The Idea of the Soul | |
| I.—Analysis of the idea of the soul in the Australian societies | [240] |
| II.—Genesis of this idea—The doctrine of reincarnation according toSpencer and Gillen: it implies that the soul is a part of the totemicprinciple—Examination of the facts collected by Strehlow; theyconfirm the totemic nature of the soul | [246] |
| III.—Generality of the doctrine of reincarnation—Diverse facts in supportof the proposed genesis | [256] |
| IV.—Antithesis of the soul and the body: what there is objective in this—Relationsof the individual soul with the collective soul—The idea ofthe soul is not chronologically after that of mana | [262] |
| V.—Hypothesis to explain the belief in its survival | [267] |
| VI.—The idea of a soul and the idea of a person; impersonal elements inthe personality | [269] |
| CHAPTER IX The Idea of Spirits and Gods | |
| I.—Difference between a soul and a spirit—The souls of the mythicalancestors are spirits, having determined functions—Relations betweenthe ancestral spirit, the individual soul and the individual totem—Explanationof this latter—Its sociological significance | [273] |
| II.—Spirits and magic | [281] |
| III.—The civilizing heroes | [283] |
| IV.—The great gods—Their origin—Their relations with the totemicsystem—Their tribal and international character | [285] |
| V.—Unity of the totemic system | [295] |
[BOOK III] THE PRINCIPAL RITUAL ATTITUDES | |
| CHAPTER I The Negative Cult and its Functions The Ascetic Rites | |
| I.—The system of interdictions—Magic and religious interdictions—Interdictionsbetween sacred things of different sorts—Interdictionsbetween sacred and profane—These latter are the basis of the negativecult—Leading types of these interdictions; their reduction to twoessential types | [299] |
| II.—The observance of interdictions modifies the religious state of individuals—Caseswhere this efficacy is especially apparent: asceticpractices—The religious efficacy of sorrow—Social function ofasceticism | [309] |
| III.—Explanation of the system of interdictions: antagonism of thesacred and the profane, contagiousness of the sacred | [317] |
| IV.—Causes of this contagiousness—It cannot be explained by the lawsof the association of ideas—It is because religious forces are outsideof their subjects—Logical interest in this property of religious forces | [321] |
| CHAPTER II The Positive Cult I.—The Elements of Sacrifice | |
| The Intichiuma ceremony in the tribes of Central Australia—Differentforms which it presents | [326] |
| I.—The Arunta Form—The two phases—Analysis of the first: visit tosacred places, scattering of sacred dust, shedding of blood, etc., toassure the reproduction of the totemic species | [327] |
| II.—Second phase: ritual consumption of the totemic plant or animal | [333] |
| III.—Interpretation of the complete ceremony—The second rite consistsin a communion meal—Reason for this communion | [336] |
| IV.—The rites of the first phase consists in oblations—Analogies withsacrificial oblations—The Intichiuma thus contains the two elementsof sacrifice—Interest of these facts for the theory of sacrifice | [340] |
| V.—On the pretended absurdity of sacrificial oblations—How they areexplained: dependence of sacred beings upon their worshippers—Explanationof the circle in which sacrifice seems to move—Origin ofthe periodicity of positive rites | [344] |
| CHAPTER III The Positive Cult—(continued) II.—Imitative Rites and the Principle of Causality | |
| I.—Nature of the imitative rites—Examples of ceremonies where theyare employed to assure the fertility of the species | [351] |
| II.—They rest upon the principle: like produces like—Examination of theexplanation of this given by the anthropological school—Reasons whythey imitate the animal or plant—Reasons for attributing a physicalefficacy to these gestures—Faith—In what sense it is founded uponexperience—The principles of magic are born in religion | [355] |
| III.—The preceding principle considered as one of the first statementsof the principle of causality—Social conditions upon which this latterdepends—The idea of impersonal force or power is of social origin—Thenecessity for the conception of causality explained by theauthority inherent in social imperatives | [362] |
| CHAPTER IV The Positive Cult—(continued) III.—Representative or Commemorative Rites | |
| I.—Representative rites with physical efficacy—Their relations with theceremonies already described—Their action is wholly moral | [371] |
| II.—Representative rites without physical efficacy—They confirm thepreceding results—The element of recreation in religion: its importance;its reason for existence—The idea of a feast | [376] |
| III.—Ambiguity of function in the various ceremonies studied; theysubstitute themselves for each other—How this ambiguity confirmsthe theory proposed | [383] |
| CHAPTER V Piacular Rites and the Ambiguity of the Notion of Sacredness | |
| Definition of the piacular rite | [389] |
| I.—Positive rites of mourning—Description of these rites | [390] |
| II.—How they are explained—They are not a manifestation of privatesentiments—The malice attributed to the souls of the dead cannotaccount for them either—They correspond to the state of mind inwhich the group happens to be—Analysis of this state—How it endsby mourning—Corresponding changes in the way in which the soulsof the dead are conceived | [396] |
| III.—Other piacular rites; after a public mourning, a poor harvest, adrought, the southern lights—Rarity of these rites in Australia—Howthey are explained | [403] |
| IV.—The two forms of the sacred: the pure and the impure—Theirantagonism—Their relationship—Ambiguity of the idea of thesacred—All rites present the same character | [409] |
[CONCLUSION] | |
| To what extent the results obtained may be generalized | [415] |
| I.—Religion rests upon an experience that is well founded but notprivileged—Necessity of a science to reach the reality at the bottomof this experience—What is this reality?—The human groups—Humanmeaning of religion—Concerning the objection which opposesthe ideal society to the real society | [416] |
| How religious individualism and cosmopolitanism are explained in thistheory | [424] |
| II.—The eternal element in religion—Concerning the conflict betweenscience and religion; it has to do solely with the speculative side ofreligion—What this side seems destined to become | [427] |
| III.—How has society been able to be the source of logical, that is tosay conceptual, thought? Definition of the concept: not to be confoundedwith the general idea; characterized by its impersonality andcommunicability—It has a collective origin—The analysis of itscontents bears witness in the same sense Collective representationsas types of ideas which individuals accept—In regard to the objectionthat they are impersonal only on condition of being true—Conceptualthought is coeval with humanity | [431] |
| IV.—How the categories express social things—The chief category is theconcept of totality which could be suggested only by society—Whythe relations expressed by the categories could become conscious onlyin society—Society is not an a-logical being—How the categories tendto detach themselves from geographically determined groups | [439] |
| The unity of science on the one hand, and of morals and religion on theother—How the society accounts for this unity—Explanation of therôle attributed to society: its creative power—Reactions of sociologyupon the science of man | [445] |
THE
ELEMENTARY FORMS OF
THE RELIGIOUS LIFE