beings and which depend on a woman’s activity without
symbolic value. Likewise, only game that is consumed forms
the subject of sociologically pertinent collective practices
(hunting, ritual of consumption) and popular discourse
(myths, tales, stories).
Birds appear to be particularly rich in symbolic value,
a value that derives primarily from their signaling function.
Thus, birds of prey and birds living on carrion, which signal
the presence of game, serve as evocations of hunting. Migra-
tors, which signal the coming and going of the seasons, evoke
the voyage to the supernatural world and the circulation of
souls between the world of the living and that of the dead.
Species-specific hunting and consumption restrictions
are imposed upon each clan based on the mythical animal
that is regarded as the clan’s founder. This system has led
many writers to speak of totemism, but the theory linked
with this term is outdated today and even forgotten. Such
a distribution of symbolic attributes—found in other places
in the world—is to be understood as the clans’ way of assur-
ing networks of relationships among themselves and the nec-
essary complementarity for general cohesion. However, the
facts are insufficient to allow a systematic establishment of
the roots of the symbolic exploitation of one animal species
or another, except those whose relationship can be assimilat-
ed to that of a hunter and a guide (e.g., the eagle or crow).
In the representations and the ritual treatment of the
slain animal, the taking of game is reduced to a taking of
meat. The bones are not destroyed but are disposed of (along
with the head and other parts believed to contain the vital
breath of life) in such a way that the animal will be reincar-
nated or that another animal of the same species will appear.
Seemingly out of gratitude to the animal that came to offer
its flesh, the hunter treats it as a guest of honor and invites
it to return. That he symbolically takes only meat and not
the animal as such prevents the hunt from being likened to
the murder of a member of another clan, which would un-
leash a chain of vengeance. It also happens that the death of
the animal is recognized, but the responsibility for it is attri-
buted to a stranger belonging to another tribe.
Just as there is a system of matrimonial alliance that le-
gitimizes the individual’s taking a wife, there is a system of
economic (or one could say “food”) alliance that justifies the
hunter’s taking of game. These two systems are often com-
pared in detail in mythical discourse, as are their subjects and
their protagonists: wife and game, the taker of wife and hunt-
er, giver of wife and giver of game. As opposed to the others,
the giver of game is an imaginary being, generally called the
“spirit of the forest” and qualified as “rich.” With this title
and that of “owner of hunted species,” he is indeed a “super-
natural” power in the etymological sense of the word.
In societies divided into two exogamic moieties, the
matrimonial system is one of restricted exchange, which is
realized in the marriage of bilateral cross-cousins (children
of both the mother’s brother and the father’s sister) and
which amounts to an exchange of sisters. Whereas this sys-
tem is sociologically simple and efficient considering the pre-
carious conditions of life known to the Siberian hunters, it
is nevertheless lacking in the constraints (debt of one side,
claim from the other) necessary for its perpetuation: Partners
are released immediately through the simple act of exchange.
However, the system is conceived of by people who bring it
into operation as though it involves three stages or three part-
ners, thereby preventing a person from perceiving himself as
both giver and taker at the same time with respect to the
same partner and delaying the obligation of exchange. Thus,
the taker’s and giver’s positions toward the same partner al-
ternate from one generation to the next. In this way the sys-
tem becomes self-perpetuating within a patrilineal line:
Compensation for the wife taken by the father is a daughter
of this same woman given by the son.
The hypothesis of the analogy of hunting with the mat-
rimonial system leads both to the discovery of what compen-
sation the hunter gives for the game he has taken and to an
understanding of what are otherwise inexplicable practices:
These come from the need for a third partner to create dy-
namics in the exchange system. The compensation for game
taken is one of the same nature as the game itself—food—
and is given by the hunter’s wife to small tame animals (most
of which belong to species that are neither hunted nor used:
eagles, swans, cranes, nutcracker crows, foxes, etc.) as well as
animal representations (furs, wooden figurines, etc.). The
latter (Selkup, khekhe; Tuva, eeren; Buriat, ongon; Tunguz,
singken, sevek), made at the time of marriage, are “fed” pieces
of meat through their mouths, smeared with blood, and
anointed with animal fat. In this way, the food taken from
the animal world is symbolically returned. From the point
of view of a tripartite system, these tame animals or animal
representations occupy the taker position with respect to the
hunter and the debtor position with respect to the forest spir-
it, the giver of game. If they are not fed, these spirits suppos-
edly prevent the hunter from taking game and cause him and
his family to fall ill and even die.
Built on an analogous model, these two systems—
matrimonial and economic—also make use of mutual com-
pensation. Frequently, the myths and tales attribute a loss in
the realm of alliance (abduction of the hunter’s wife or sister
while he is away hunting) to excessive hunting. In the Evenk
ritual called the Feast of the Bear, the taker of a wife becomes
a supplier of game for his wife’s brother. The numerous re-
strictions concerning the hunter’s sexual activity before the
hunt, on the one hand, and the wife’s behavior (notably con-
cerning menstrual blood) with respect to hunting weapons
on the other, may also be interpreted in terms of maintaining
a balance between hunting and alliance. Furthermore, in
these two systems, the act of taking requires the observance
of strict rules vis-à-vis the giver, such as the giving of specific
offerings and demonstrating the qualities of taker. One will
note that what is offered to the forest spirit (incense, tobacco,
amusing stories) is intended to put him in a good mood and8670 SOUTHERN SIBERIAN RELIGIONS