By Collin Wanñiang
What is a Totem? It is said that a Totem is an object representing an animal or plant that serves as an emblem for a group of people, such as a family, clan, lineage, or tribe, reminding them of their ancestry or mythic past. The term “totem” is derived from the word “odoodem” which means “one’s brother-sister or kinship-related” in the dialect of the Native American-First Nations “Ojibwa Tribe”. The Grammatical root “ote” signifies a blood relationship between brothers and sisters who have the same mother and who may not marry each other. It is said that in English, the word “totem” was first introduced in 1791 by a certain British merchant and translator who saw the Ojibwa clans portraying an animal by their wearing of animal skins; thus, giving it a false meaning in the belief that it designated the guardian spirit of an individual, who appeared in the form of an animal. It was reported at the end of the 18th century that the Ojibwa tribals named their clans after those animals that live in the area in which they live and appear to be either friendly or fearful. The first accurate report about Totemism in North America was written by a Methodist missionary, Peter Jones, himself an Ojibwa, who died in 1856 and whose report was published posthumously. According to Jones, the Great Spirit had given “toodaims” (“totems”) to the Ojibwa clans, and because of this act, it should never be forgotten that members of the group are related to one another and on this account may not marry among themselves.
Knowing the background of the origin of the word “totem” and its meaning, can we say that the Khasis portray or unconsciously propagate Totemism? It’s true that among the Khasis there is no worship of the Totem, but it is used in some cases to convey a mysterious descent of a clan from some object, generally an animal or plant, and in other cases it is founded in food restrictions. An obvious case is the legendary tale of “U Woh Ryndi bad ka Li-dohkha” which ushers the narration about the origin of the “Hima Sutnga” (Sutnga Syiemship) later known as Jaintia Kingdom. It is said that ‘U Woh Ryndi’ caught a big fish from the river while he went fishing; he brought it home, kept it and then forgot to eat it. The fish turned itself into a beautiful lady who married ‘U Woh Ryndi’. Thereafter, the off-springs from this marriage became the ruling kings of Sutnga kingdom. Similarly, the origin of the Khyrim-Mylliem Syiemships is linked to a legendary tale of “Ka Pah Syntiew” who was the daughter of a mountain god, “U ‘Lei Shillong”.
Why were the Khasis fond of narrating such legendary tales? In the reviewed article “Principles of Khasi Culture” contained in the Source: Folklore, Vol. 47, No. 4 (Dec., 1936), pp. 375-393, the Reviewer, David Roy commented:
“Such a conception can be easily explained in the present day as an ingenious explanation to get people to give the woman the idea of mysterious descent and hence to be a fit ancestress of a family of chiefs; and secondly, it also explains the fact that unless some such woman is brought from somewhere and some such explanation of her origin given, there is no woman of any known family who would agree to become a Syiem or ancestress of Syiems as no Khasi family would perform such duties as the receiving of certain property. There are certain kinds of property which are believed to be affected by pernicious spirits, supposed to be kept by certain people in the States, who, when they wish to free themselves from such spirits, must divest themselves of all their property and leave it to the States. Since there was no one in the State to accept it, the Great (Leaders) may be regarded as having created a family of Syiems (Chiefs) who can do this, and so as having invented the mystery of an ancestress who could have no relationship with existing families. Similarly there are duties which no family in the State would perform for fear of similar misfortunes to their own family, as the receiving of property of people who die without having any other relatives left in the family. These duties must be performed by a family which is interpreted to be above all such contamination and consequent misfortunes. Thus to suit the idea of the State, the mysterious descent from a fish is given and that fish is regarded as a taboo in the family.”
Totemism is not confined to Khasi culture alone. Besides the Native American totemic cultures, it seems that in the Sanxingdui Culture in southern China, dating back more than 5000 years, bronze and gold heads were possibly placed on totems. In Korea, wooden totem poles called Jangseungs (village guardians) were traditionally erected at the edges of the villages to mark the village boundaries as well as a sign to either frighten the demons or as a sign to welcome people. It is said that throughout the Tibetan plateau area and adjacent areas, certain beaded jewellery is believed to have totemistic capabilities. It seems that in Poland, the Rodnidze known among the pre-Christian ancestors of the Poles is considered to have been similar to the totem. There are some scholars who are of the opinion that the animals and birds represented on the coats-of-arms of various Polish aristocratic clans may have been remnants of such totems.
But the most common fundamental characteristic of Totemism in Khasi culture is founded in food restrictions. Hence we find clans who are forbidden to eat certain plants, fish, meat or vegetables. There are those who cannot eat certain kinds of millet, pumpkin, and certain kinds of lemon fruits, dried fish, or the young shoots of bamboos. David Roy, in his Review “Principles of Khasi Culture” commented: “The reason is not due to any idea of domestic economy, but that at some time in the history of the family some accident must have occurred to that family by which members of the family must have had an attack of sores, or nasty carbuncles appeared on their body, or somebody became blind, and it must have been attributed to the eating of that plant, fish or meat. Hence all members of the clan are adjured not to eat it, and hence it became a taboo in the family and clan.” However, David Roy, in his Review “Principles of Khasi Culture” in the Source: Folklore, Vol. 47, No. 4 (Dec., 1936), pp. 375-393, concluded way back in 1936 saying: There are evidences now in Khasi of totemism being regarded as “the merest peg for exogamy to hang upon,” and its decaying “into a mere totemistic clan name.”
(The Writer is currently a Scholar at Universiteit Leiden, Nederland)