minent in the mythical narratives of the Australians. The names of matrimonial classes occur continually as part of the general setting of the myths, but the matter with which these narratives primarily deal is the appearance and conduct of beings who had the half human, half animal features which are so characteristic of the mythical personages of totemic peoples.
I know of only one definite case in which an Australian myth gives an account of the origin of the dual system, viz. the account given to Siebert by the Wurunjerri people which has been recorded by Howitt.[1] According to this account, the Kulin, of whom the Wurunjerri form only one tribe, were told by Bunjil to divide themselves into two parts. "Bunjil on this side and Waang on that side, and Bunjil should marry Waang, and Waang marry Bunjil." In his account of this narrative Howitt compares it with the well-known myth of the Dieri, ignoring the fact that in the latter it was the totemic groups which were instituted either by the order of a superior being or by the commands of the elders. It is noteworthy that, though the Wurunjerri have only two moieties, one is definitely connected with a totem. There is little doubt that we have to do with a much modified social system, and this isolated example of a myth concerning the origin of the dual organisation suggests that it may be a survival of a totemic myth, the subject of which has been transferred to the dual system.
In another case in which the matrimonial classes are concerned, the evidence is conflicting. According to Spencer and Gillen,[2] the four class names of the Arunta were first conferred by certain Ullakupera or little hawk men, these Ullakupera men already belonging to these classes.[3] It is expressly stated that it was the names,
