Very different is the _third_ stage of totemic culture. As was remarked above, this falls into two essentially distinct divisions of apparently very different origin. American culture, on the one hand, represents a remarkable offshoot of totemic beliefs; besides this there is the African culture, which, because of peculiar conditions, again connected with racial fusion, is, in part, far in advance of the totemic age, though in some details it clearly represents a unique development of it. To one who wishes to gain a coherent picture of totemic culture, nothing, indeed, is more surprising than the fact that foremost among the peoples who may be regarded as the representatives of this great epoch are the Australians. Strange to say, the condition of the Australians approximates to that of primitive man. On the other hand, the North American Indians, particularly those of the Atlantic Coast regions, may be classed among semi-cultural peoples, and yet they seem, at first glance, to have made exactly the same _social_ application of totemic ideas as have the Australians. The typical tribal organization of the Australians and that of the Iroquois tribes who formerly lived in the present state of New York, are, in fact, so very similar that a superficial view might almost cause them to appear identical. This is all the more surprising since we have not the slightest ground for supposing any transference of institutions. That which makes the similarity so striking is primarily the fact that the single groups or clans are designated by animal names, that they entertain the conception of an animal ancestor, and that the regular tribal organization is based on the principle of dual division. Nevertheless, the more advanced culture of the Iroquois has already led to certain changed conditions. The animal ancestor recedes to some extent. In its stead, there are associated with the animal other conceptions, such as are connected with more systematically conducted hunting. The American Indian, in contrast to the Australian, no longer regards the totem animal as a wonderful and superior being, to be hunted only with fear and not to be used for food if this can possibly be avoided. He requires for his subsistence all the game available. Hence he does not practise the custom of abstaining from the flesh of the totem animal. On the other hand, he observes ceremonies of expiation, such as are unknown to the Australian. The totem ceremonies of the latter are chiefly objective means of magic designed to bring about the increase of the totem animals. This idea appears among the Indians likewise. Their totem ceremony, however, has also an essentially subjective significance and is concerned with the past no less than with the future. Its object is to obtain forgiveness for the slaying of the animal, whether this has preceded or is to follow the act of expiation. Connected with these customs is a further difference, which