It is quite obvious that the nature of totemism and exogamy could be most readily grasped if we could get into closer touch with the origin of both institutions. But in judging the state of affairs we must not forget the remark of Andrew Lang, that even primitive races have not preserved these original forms and the conditions of their origin, so that we are altogether dependent upon hypotheses to take the place of the observation we lack[146]. Among the attempted explanations some seem inadequate from the very beginning in the judgment of the psychologist. They are altogether too rational and do not take into consideration the effective character of what they are to explain. Others rest on assumptions which observation fails to verify; while still others appeal to facts which could better be subjected to another interpretation. The refutation of these various opinions as a rule hardly presents any difficulties; the authors are, as usual, stronger in the criticism which they practice on each other than in their own work. The final result as regards most of the points treated is a _non liquet_. It is therefore not surprising that most of the new literature on the subject, which we have largely omitted here, shows the unmistakable effort to reject a general solution of totemic problems as unfeasible. (See, for instance, B. Goldenweiser in the _Journal of American Folklore_ <small>XXIII</small>, 1910. Reviewed in the _Brittanica Year Book_, 1913.) I have taken the liberty of disregarding the chronological order in stating these contradictory hypotheses. (_a_) THE ORIGIN OF TOTEMISM The question of the origin of totemism can also be formulated as follows: How did primitive people come to select the names of animals, plants and inanimate objects for themselves and their tribes?[147] The Scotchman, MacLennan, who discovered totemism and exogamy for science[148], refrained from publishing his views of the origin of totemism. According to a communication of Andrew Lang[149] he was for a time inclined to trace totemism back to the custom of tattooing. I shall divide the accepted theories of the derivation of totemism into three groups, ([Greek: α a]) nominalistic, ([Greek: β b]) sociological, ([Greek: γ g]) psychological. ([Greek: α a]) _The Nominalistic Theories_ The information about these theories will justify their summation under the headings I have used. Garcilaso de La Vega, a descendant of the Peruvian Inkas, who wrote the history of his race in the seventeenth century, is already said to have traced back what was known to him about totemic phenomena to the need of the tribes to differentiate themselves from each other by means of names[150]. The same idea appears centuries later in the _Ethnology_ of A. K. Keane where totems are said to be derived from heraldic badges through which individuals, families and tribes wanted to differentiate themselves[151].