Part 25 (1/2)

An important inst.i.tution among some of the Ibans, which occurs but in rare instances among the other peoples, is the NGARONG[143]

or secret helper. The NGARONG IS one of the very few topics in regard to which the Ibans display any reluctance to speak freely. So great is their reserve in this connection that one of us lived for fourteen years on friendly terms with Ibans of various districts without ascertaining the meaning of the word NGARONG, or suspecting the great importance of the part played by the notion in the lives of some of these people. The NGARONG seems to be usually the spirit of some ancestor or dead relative, but not always so, and it is not clear that it is always conceived as the spirit of a deceased human being. This spirit becomes the special protector of some individual Iban, to whom in a dream he manifests himself, in the first place in human form, and announces that he will be his secret helper; and he may or may not inform the dreamer in what form he will appear in future. On the day after such a dream the Iban wanders through the jungle looking for signs by which he may recognise his secret helper; and if an animal behaves in a manner at all unusual, if a startled deer stops a moment to gaze at him before bounding away, if a gibbon gambols about persistently in the trees near him, if he comes upon a bright quartzcrystal or a strangely. contorted root or creeper,[144]

that animal or object is for him full of a mysterious significance and is the abode of his NGARONG. Sometimes the NGARONG, then a.s.sumes the form of an Iban and speaks with him, promising all kinds of help and good fortune. If this occurs the seer usually faints away, and when he comes to himself again the NGARONG will have disappeared. Or, again, a man may be told in his dream that if he will go into the jungle he will meet his NGARONG in the form of a wild boar. He will then, of course, go to seek it, and if by chance other men of his house should kill a wild boar that day, he will go to them and beg for its head or buy it at a good price if need be, carry it home to his bed-place, offer it cooked rice and kill a fowl before it, smearing the blood on the head and on himself, and humbly begging for pardon. Or he may leave the corpse in the jungle and sacrifice a fowl before it there. On the following night he hopes to dream of the NGARONG again, and perhaps he is told in his dream to take the tusks from the dead boar and that they will bring him good luck. Unless he dreams something of this sort, he feels that he has been mistaken, and that the boar was not really his secret helper.

Perhaps only one in a hundred men is fortunate enough to have a secret helper, though it is ardently desired by many of them. Many a young man goes to sleep on the grave of some distinguished person, or in some wild and lonely spot, and lives for some days on a very restricted diet, hoping that a secret helper will come to him in his dreams.

When, as is most commonly the case, the secret helper takes on the form of some animal, all individuals of that species become objects of especial regard to the fortunate Iban; he will not kill or eat any such animal, and he will as far as possible restrain others from doing so. A NGARONG may after a time manifest itself in some new form, but even then the Iban will continue to respect the animal-form in which it first appeared.

In some cases the cult of a secret helper will spread through a whole family or household. The children and grandchildren will usually respect the species of animal to which a man's secret helper belongs, and will perhaps sacrifice fowls or pigs to it occasionally, although they expect no help from it; but it is a.s.serted that if the great-grandchildren of a man behave well to his secret helper, it will often befriend them just as much as its original protege.

The above general account of the secret helper is founded on the descriptions of many different Ibans, and we will now supplement it by describing several particular instances.

Anggus (an Ulu Ai Iban of the Batang Lupar) says that every Iban who has no NGARONG hopes to get some bird or beast as his helper at the BEGAWAI, the feast given to the PETARA. He himself has none, but he will not kill the gibbon because the NGARONG of his grandfather, who died twenty years ago, was a gibbon. Once a man came to his grandfather in a dream and said to him, ”Don't you kill the gibbon,”

and then turned into a grey gibbon. This gibbon helped him to become rich and to take heads, and in all possible ways. On one occasion, when he was about to go on the war-path, his NGARONG came to him in a dream and said, ”Go on, I will help you,” and the next day he saw in the jungle a grey gibbon which was undoubtedly his NGARONG. When he died he said to his sons, ”Don't you kill the gibbon,” and his sons and grandsons have obeyed him in this ever since. Anggus adds that when a man dreams of a NGARONG. for the first time he does not accept it, and will still kill animals of that kind; nor is a second dream enough; but when he dreams the same dream a third time, then his scepticism is overcome and he can no longer doubt his good fortune.

Anggus himself once shot a gibbon when told to do so by one of us. He first said to it, ”I don't want to kill you, but the TUAN who is giving me wages expects me to, and the blame is his. But if you are really the NGARONG of my grandfather, make the shot miss you.” He then shot and missed three times, and on shooting a fourth time he killed a gibbon, but not the one he had spoken to. Anggus does not think the gibbon helps either his father or himself.

Payang, an old Katibas Iban, tells us that he has been helped by a python ever since he was a youth, when a man came to him in a dream and said, ”Sometimes I become a python and sometimes a cobra, and I will always help you.” It has certainly helped him very much, but he does not know whether it has helped his children; nevertheless he has forbidden them to kill it. He does not like to speak of it, but he does so at our request. Payang concluded by saying that he had no doubt that we white men have secret helpers, very much more powerful than the Iban's, and that to them we owe our ability to do so many wonderful things.

Imban, an Iban who had recently moved to the Baram river from the Rejang, had once when sick seen in a dream the LABI-LABI, the large river-turtle (TRIONYX SUBPLa.n.u.s), and had made a promise that if he should recover he would never kill it. So when he settled on the Baram river as head of a household, he attempted to impose a fine on his people for killing the LABI-LABI, insisting that it was MALI to kill it or bring its carcase into his river. They appealed to one of us as the resident magistrate, and it was decided that if Imban wished to insist on this observance he must remove to a small tributary stream. This he has done, and a few of his people have followed him; and on them he enforces a strict observance of his cult of the river-turtle.

A still more interesting case is the following one: -- A community of Ibans were building a new house on the Dabai river some years ago, and one day, while they were at work, a porcupine ran out of a hole in the ground near by. During the following night one of the party was told by the porcupine in a dream to join their new house with his (the porcupine's). So they completed their house; and ever since that time they have made yearly feasts in honour of the porcupines that live beneath the house, and no one in the house dare injure one of them, though they will still kill and eat other porcupines in the jungle. They have had no death in the house during the seven years that it has been built, and this they attribute to the protecting power of the porcupines; and when any one is sick, they offer food to them, and regard their good offices as far more important than the ministrations of the MANANG (the medicine-man). Last year some relatives of these Ibans moved to this village, and for three months the knowledge of the part played by the porcupines was hidden from them as a mysterious secret. At the end of that time this precious mystery was disclosed to the new-comers, and the porcupines were feasted with every variety of cooked rice, some of it being made into a rude image of a porcupine, and with rice-spirit and cakes of sugar and rice-flour, salt and dried fish, oil, betel-nut, and tobacco. Several fowls were slain, and their blood was daubed on the chin of each person in the house, a ceremony known as ENSELAN. The liver of one fowl was carefully taken out and put with the food offered to the porcupines, that they might read the omens from it; and they were then informed of the arrival of the new-comers. The fowls were waved over the heads of the people by the old men, while they prayed the porcupines to give them long life and health, and a token of their goodwill in the form of a smooth rounded pebble. On an occasion of this sort it is highly probable that the required token will be found; for the secret helper would no doubt be surrept.i.tiously helped by some member of the household who, being deficient in faith, prefers to make a certainty of so important a matter rather than leave it entirely to the NGARONG.

Inquiries made since the publication of the facts reported in the foregoing paragraphs have shown us that the cult of the NGARONG or secret helper is probably not common to all branches of the Sea Dayaks people. We have heard of its occurrence amongst the Ulu Ai Dayaks both of the Batang Lupar and Rejang districts, but we have no positive knowledge of its occurrence among other branches unless the custom known as NAMPOK has some connection with it.

Conclusion

We have now to discuss some problems suggested by a review of the facts set forth above, and to bring forward a few additional facts that seem to throw light on these questions.

The question that we will first discuss is this: Are all or any of the instances of peculiar regard paid to animals, or of animals sacrificed to G.o.ds or spirits, or of the ceremonial use of their blood, to be regarded as inst.i.tutions surviving from a fully developed system of totemism now fallen into decay? It will have been noticed that many of the features of totemism, as it occurs in its best developed forms, occur among the people of one or other of the tribes of Sarawak. We have, in the first place, numerous cases in which a whole community refuses to kill or eat an animal which is believed to protect and aid them by omens and warnings and in other ways, and in which the animal is wors.h.i.+pped with prayer and sacrifice (E.G. the hawk among various tribes); we have at least one instance of a community claiming to be related to a friendly species (Long Patas and the crocodile), and having as usual an extravagant myth to account for the belief; we have the domestic animal that is sacrificially slain, its blood being sprinkled on the wors.h.i.+ppers and its flesh eaten by them, and that is never slain without religious rites (pig of the Kenyahs and Kayans); we have the animal that must not be killed tatued on the skin of the men (the dog), or its skin worn by fully grown men only (the tiger-cat), or images of it made of clay or carved in wood and set up before the house (the hawk and crocodile); we have also the animal that is claimed as a relative imitated in popular dances (the Dok-monkey of the Kayans); the belief that the souls of men a.s.sume the form of some animal that must not be killed or eaten (deer and the ARCTOGALE among Klemantans); the observance by invalids of a very strict avoidance of contact with any part of an animal that must not be killed or eaten in any case (horned cattle among many Kenyahs and Kayans).

Not only do we see these various customs, which in several parts of the world have been observed as living elements of totem-cults, and which in other parts have been accepted as evidence of totem-wors.h.i.+p in the past, but in the agricultural habits of the people we may see an efficient cause of the decay of totemism, if at some time in the past it has flourished among them. For it has been pointed out, especially by Mr. Jevons in his INTRODUCTION TO THE HISTORY OF RELIGION, that totemism seems to flourish most naturally among tribes of hunters, and that the introduction of agriculture must tend towards its decay. Now there is some reason to suppose that the introduction to Borneo of rice and of the art of cultivating it is of comparatively recent date. Crawford reckoned that the cultivation of PADI was introduced to the southern parts of Borneo from Java some 300 years ago, and into the northern parts from the Philippine Islands about 150 years ago. But whatever the date of the occurrence may have been, it seems to be certain that, by the introduction of PADI cultivation from some other country, most of the tribes of Sarawak were converted, probably very rapidly, from hunting to agriculture. This conversion must have caused great changes in their social conditions and in their customs and superst.i.tions; and, if totemism flourished among them while they were still simple hunters, its decay may well have been one of the chief of these changes.

A second factor that would have tended to bring about this change is the prevalence of a belief in a G.o.d or beneficent spirit more powerful than all others, and more directly concerned with the welfare of his wors.h.i.+ppers, however this belief may have come into being. And a third factor that may have tended in the same direction is the custom of head-hunting, and the important part played by the heads in the religious life of the people. For there is some reason to think that head-hunting is a comparatively young inst.i.tution among the tribes of Sarawak.

But in spite of all this, and although we do not think it is possible completely to disprove the truth of the hypothesis that some or all of these animal cults are vestiges of a once fully developed totemic system, we are inclined to reject it. We are led to do so by four considerations. In the first place, if by totemism we mean a social organisation consisting in the division of a people into groups or clans, each of which wors.h.i.+ps or holds in superst.i.tious regard one or more kinds of animal or plant, or other natural objects to which the members of the group claim to be related by blood or by descent, then it seems to us sufficiently wonderful that this system should have existed among peoples so remote from one another in all things, save certain of the external conditions of life, as the Indians of North America and the natives of Australia. And it seems to us that to invoke the aid of the hypothesis of totemism in the past to explain the existence of a set of animal or plant superst.i.tions in any particular case is but to increase the mystery that shrouds their origin; for unless it can be shown that the adoption or development of totemism by any people brings with it immense advantages for them in the struggle for existence, every fresh case in which the evidence compels us to admit its occurrence, whether in the past or as a still flouris.h.i.+ng inst.i.tution, can but increase the wonder with which we have to regard its wide distribution.

Secondly, we have in the total absence of totemism among the Punans very strong ground for rejecting the suggestion of its previous existence among the Kenyahs. For in physical characters, in language, and, as far as the difference in the mode of life permits, in customs and beliefs, the Punans resemble the Kenyahs so closely that we must a.s.sume them to be closely allied by blood; and it seems probable that the Punans have merely persisted in the cultural condition from which the Kenyahs and other tribes have been raised by the adoption of agriculture and the practice of building substantial houses. Yet, as we have said, the Punans, although in that condition of nomadic hunters which is probably the most favourable to the development and persistence of totemism, observe hardly any restrictions in their hunting, and in fact seem to kill and eat with equal freedom almost every bird and beast of the jungle, shooting them with the blow-pipe and poisoned darts with consummate skill. The only exceptions to this rule are, so far as we know, the omen-birds, a carnivore, and a lizard, and, as we have said, it seems doubtful whether even these are excepted in the case of Punans who have not had much intercourse with other peoples.

Thirdly, although it may be said that even at the present time many of the features of the religious side of totemism are present, we have not been able to discover any traces of a social organisation based upon totemism. There is no trace of any general division of the people of any tribe into groups which claim specially intimate relations with different animals, except in the case of the Klemantans; and in their case such special relations seem to be the result merely of the different conditions under which the various scattered groups now live. There are no restrictions in the choice of a wife that might indicate a rule of endogamy or exogamy. There are no ceremonies to initiate youths into tribal mysteries; certain ceremonies in which the youths take a leading part are directed exclusively to training them for war and the taking of heads in battle. We know of no instance of any group of people being named after an animal or plant which is claimed as a relative; and in the case of the more h.o.m.ogeneous tribes, such as the Kenyahs and Kayans, all prohibitions with regard to animals and all benefits conferred by them are shared equally by all the members of any one community, and, with but very few exceptions, are the same for all the communities of the tribe.

Lastly, we think it unnecessary to regard the various animal superst.i.tions of these tribes as survivals of totemism, because it seems possible to find a more direct and natural explanation of almost every case. The numerous cases seem to fall into two groups: the superst.i.tious practices concerned with the sacrificial animals, the pig and fowl on the one hand, and all those concerned with the various other animals on the other hand. These latter may, we think, be regarded as the expression of the direct and logical reaction of the mind of the savage to the impression made upon it by the behaviour of the animals.

It has been admirably shown by Professor Lloyd Morgan[145] how we ourselves, and even professed psychologists among us, tend to overestimate the complexity of the mental processes of animals; and there can be no doubt that savages generally are subject to this error in a very much greater degree, that, in fact, they make, without questioning and in most cases without explicit statement even to themselves, the practical a.s.sumption that the mental processes of animals -- their pa.s.sions, desires, motives, and powers of reasoning -- are of the same order as, and in fact extremely similar to, their own. That the Kenyahs entertain this belief in a very practical manner is shown by their conduct when preparing for a hunting or fis.h.i.+ng excursion. If, for example, they are preparing to poison the fish of a section of the river with the ”tuba” root, they always speak of the matter as little as possible, and use the most indirect and fanciful modes of expression. Thus they will say, ”There are many leaves floating here,” meaning, ”There are plenty of fish in this part of the river.” And these elaborate precautions are taken lest the birds should overhear their remarks and inform the fish of their intentions -- when, of course, the fish would not stay to be caught, but would swim away to some other part of the river.

Since this belief seems to be common to all or almost all savages and primitive peoples, it would be a strange thing if prohibitions against killing and eating certain animals and various superst.i.tious practices in regard to animals were not practically universal among them. Bearing in mind the reality of this belief in the minds of these peoples, it is easy to understand why they should shrink from killing any creature so malignant-looking and powerful for harm as a snake, and why they should feel uneasy in the presence of, and to some extent dread, the MAIAS and the longnosed monkey, creatures whose resemblance to man seems even to us somewhat uncanny. Their objection to killing their troublesome and superfluous dogs seems to be due to a somewhat similar feeling -- a recognition of intelligence and emotions not unlike their own, but mysteriously hidden from them by the dumbness of the animals. In the same way it is clear that it is but a very simple and logical inference that the crocodiles are a friendly race, and but the clearest dictate of prudence to avoid offending creatures so powerful and agile; for if the crocodiles were possessed of the mental powers attributed to them by the imagination of the people, they might easily make it impossible for men to travel upon the rivers or dwell on their banks. A similar process would lead to the prohibition against the eating of the tiger-cat, the only large and dangerous carnivore.

The origin of the prohibitions against killing and eating deer and horned cattle is perhaps not so clear. But it must be remembered that until very recently the only horned cattle known to the tribes of the interior were the wild cattle (the Seladang of the Malay peninsula), very fierce and powerful creatures. These wild cattle hide themselves in the remotest recesses of the forests, and, as they are but very rarely seen, they may well be regarded as somewhat mysterious and awful. Deer, on the other hand, abound in the forests, and, like most deer, are very timid; and it is perhaps their timidity that has led in some cases to the prohibition against their flesh, for we have seen how a Kenyah chief feared lest his little son, safe at home, should be infected with the deer's timidity if he himself a hundred miles away should come in contact with the skin of one. In another case we have seen that by the people of one community deer are regarded as relatives, or as containing the souls of their ancestors, and that this belief probably had its origin in the fact that deer are in ”the habit of frequenting the gra.s.sy clearings made about the tombs by the people. And we saw that a similar belief in respect of certain carnivores probably had a similar origin.