There might be a tendency, by way of making assurance doubly sure, for the totem kins to be assorted into the two phratries, but some kind of deliberate arrangement does seem necessary. The same necessity attends Dr. Durkheim’s theory later criticised.] [Footnote 4: See again Durkheim, in _L’Année Sociologique_, i. 47-57, on the superstition as to blood, and the totem as a sacred representative of the inviolable blood of the kindred. That superstition gives religious sanction to a pre-existing exogamous tendency.] [Footnote 5: _Totemism_, p. 60 (1889).] [Footnote 6: _Totemism_, p. 62.] [Footnote 7: The people of New Britain group of islands are divided into two exogamous sets. The totems of these classes are two insects, but I incline to suppose that there are, or may have been, totem kins included within these totemic classes. Our informant, the Rev. B. Danks, regrets that he did not pay more attention to these matters. _J. A. I._ xviii. 281-294.] [Footnote 8: On the other hand, among the Mohegans, I can admit that Little Turtle, Mud Turtle, and Great Turtle may be deliberate subdivisions of the Turtle totem, now a phratry, but even this need not necessarily be the case; the different species of turtles being quite capable of giving names to different totems. I would not deny the possibility of the occasional segmentation of a totem group--far from it--but I doubt whether great tribes originally (and, as it seems, deliberately) first bisected themselves, and then cut up the two main divisions.] [Footnote 9: My italics.] [Footnote 10: _J. A. I._, N.S. i. 278.] [Footnote 11: _Ibid_. p. 282.] [Footnote 12: Mr. Mathews counts thirty-four totems in the _Dilbi_, and as many in the Rupathin ‘phratries.’ _Proc. Ray. Soc. N.S.W._ xxxi. 157-158.] [Footnote 13: _J. A. I._, N.S. i. 284-285.] [Footnote 14: _Studies in Ancient History_, second series, p. 605.] [Footnote 15: Local totem groups, in my theory.] [Footnote 16: Brough Smyth, _Aborigines of Victoria_, i. 423-424.] [Footnote 17: _On the Organisation of Australian Tribes_, p. 186.] [Footnote 18: I know that many students will decline to admit that there is such a myth of a Maker.] [Footnote 19: _Report of Bureau of Ethnology_, 1892-1893, pt. i. pp. 32-43.] [Footnote 20: _Natives of Central Australia_, pp. 12-15.] [Footnote 21: _Ibid_. pp. 15, 421-422, also p. 272.] [Footnote 22: Here I dissent from Mr. Frazer and Messrs. Spencer and Gillen; the point is discussed later.] [Footnote 23: _Fortnightly Review_, June 1889.] [Footnote 24: In 1895, _J. A. I._ xxiv., no. 4, p. 371, Mr. Fison abandons hope of a certain discovery of the origin of exogamy.] [Footnote 25: _Fortnightly Review_, April, May, 1899.] [Footnote 26: Spencer and Gillen, pp. 68, 69, 121.] [Footnote 27: _Ibid_. p. 70.] [Footnote 28: _Ibid_. p. 10.] [Footnote 29: See ‘The Origin of Totemism,’ _infra_.] [Footnote 30: _L’Année Sociologique_, 1900-1901, pp. 82-121.] [Footnote 31: _Ibid_. v. 89-90.]