Archaeology and language

How can we speak about Babel as fact if some of us do not believe that Babel ever existed or existed as some letters on a paper? I am writing much about understanding the messages not only in text and glyphs but also in the entire message. Another aspect is what kind of language they use in archaeology.

In scientific language we usually expect correspondence between reality and words, otherwise it is speculation and imagination/ fiction. Then this essay on the topic "Archaeology and language" is an introduction to my studies in ancient scripts. It is essential that we use exact language and speak the same language when we are discussing or at least we should have some compiler between different tongues.

The idea to coming essays I got from Discovery where an elderly investigator of cave art spoke about the pictures in a cave. At a particular image of a bison he told that the painter had seen the structure of the cave wall and then he saw the spirit of a bison and outlined the shape with painting. We often hear about those painters making magic out of painting and try to catch the spirit of the animal.

How does anyone know about the thinking of our ancestors? Do they use some special crystal globe when they are on the bike? I think they forget to set a label when they tell things in this way. They should say, "My imaginations tells me usw." … I think those hunter painters discussed the nature of the animal and how to catch and where was the best place to spear it.

Religious people like my grandma, New Age people and some other archaeologists use a very different language and much of it is based on beliefs that should not be questioned or cannot be proofed. It is the preconceived idea that our ancestors were more spiritual than we are. It is supposed they saw spirits in everything. It is much like the language of poets and there is some pattern in the words that could look like a description of the topic on the agenda.

In fact our ancestors used much the same language when they described the unknown world of those days I think. They made odd figures out of known things to describe the unknown. The worst is that the spectator today believes that our ancestors meant the symbol and not the meaning of the symbol that could be an abstract quality. To be a prisoner under the words in religion is very easy.

Surely we could make several categories of languages. Here I set the "poetic" category against the "scientific" that want to understand what the language describes since language is just a tool for describing the unknown. We have to keep track of what is reality and what are abstract ideas with no real existence. That is the way we westerners think. They tell that the Japanese and Chinese think differently since their script consists of pictures or pictorial symbols. When they describe the world they just paint a row of pictures. That is much our "ancestors tongue" and even the spiritual people of today use that technique.

That means that the table your are sitting at could "speak to you" about its shape, its colour, its functions and of course the people around it. Our ancestors were bound to pretending since they wanted to understand the nature around them. This is logic and not imagination. But how should we describe the process of pretending. Some prefer to tell about the spirit of the animal speaking to the spectator, while our western scientific mind ask for some more concrete an detailed description of that process.

Sumerian use

First a short example from around 2500 BC. We get to know how the deities were part of society at least in textual samples. We can not know about everyday language. We also get example how they used stones and mounds as manifestos and memory in society. The cuneiform tablet tells about the struggle between Sumerian city-states Umma and Lagash:

..… He ordered the royal field not to be seized. At the canal he inscribed a stele. He returned the stele of Mesilim to its place. He did not encroach on the plain of Mesilim. At the boundary-line of Ningirsu, as a protecting structure, he built the sanctuary of Enlil, the sanctuary of Ninkhursag (the great mother goddess; worshipped also as Aruru and Mama and Nintu.) .....

Observe that the words are how the interpreter see and feel the written language.

Birth of written literature

Enheduanna is the world's oldest known author whose works were written in cuneiform approximately 4300 years ago. Two of her known works are hymns to the goddess Inanna, The Exaltation of Inanna and In-nin sa-gur-ra. A third identified work, The Temple Hymns, addresses the sacred temples and their occupants, the goddess or god to whom they were consecrated. In each of these works she steps forward to speak in the first person moving from the third.

Her extant works include a compilation of 42 brief temple hymns and three longer hymns to the Sumerian goddess. The three Inanna hymns are Inninsagurra, Ninmesarra, and. All of Enheduanna's known works have been translated into English, as have some attributed fragments.

Enheduanna was daughter of King Sargon, the first real worldly ruler that dared to say, "I am the king and ruler". He started the trend of god-begotten kings. Enheduanna is the old fashion in which high priests and temples write and present hymns to one or more deities, while later kings praise themselves.

We could also say that Enheduanna started the production of literature and mainly in the temples. She was a priestess in the temple of Nanna, full-moon god in Ur and she wrote songs to the new moon goddess Inanna. Before Enheduanna they use pictorial and half-pictorial symbolism that demanded for relatively much space.

Maybe she or people around her invented the real cuneiform script on tablets they burnt and stored. The new system made it possible to write much text on little space. She initiated the writing of old texts/ oral texts and that saved perhaps stories thousand year's back. So let us praise Enheduanna by reading her poem. For the birth of Literature!

The exaltation of Inanna

The Sumerians created maybe in 4^th millennium the season ritual with the midwives and the deities having incarnations in the night sky. Most of the deities are marked with a star. In Mesopotamia the core of the "state ritual" was descending of the moon goddess Inanna/ Ishtar symbolising the fertility of rain and sowing. It become also a part of the Babylonian Akitu festival in spring and even the Assyrians used it in last millennium BC. From the beginning the lead was practised by high priests in the city-states. Even in later feudal kingdoms the ritual lead was the most important part.

We see the Naked also in Indus symbolism and still they practice the Gangaur water rituals in Rajasthan. West European megalith monuments we see the same idea use and in Scandinavian rock-carvings that continued to middle first millennium AD.

A praise poem of Shulgi (Šulgi)

Shulgi, the son of Ur-Nammu lived perhaps ca 2000 BC and Third Dynasty of Ur. He ruled for 48 years as military commander, temple builder, patron of Instrumental Music in worship and Song praising himself.

Shulgi, too, called himself king of the four quarters of the earth. That was the normal formula that also meant four quarters of the year. Although he resided in Ur, another important centre was in Nippur, whence Enlil, the chief god in the Sumerian state pantheon, had bestowed on Shulgi the royal dignity. Shulgi and his successors enjoyed divine honours, as Naram-Sin of Akkad had before them; by now, however, the process of deification had taken on clearer outlines in that sacrifices were offered and chapels built to the king and his throne, while the royal determinative turned up in personal names:

Here are alternative texts in brackets to show how difficult it is to copy and translate old texts. In Scandinavia we call it Jante's law expelled as "Don't think you are someone". It is the normal democratic mind of people that no one should rise above the people. If they do they are taken down. It is the same as the advice of Prophet Amos telling beer-heavers and people with hubris to avoid the hangover. Once the king dared to say, "I am god-begotten" he was above the people

Half-god

traduction par / translation by Ian Russell Lowell

Treaty Hittitians and Amurru

Let us look at a treaty between the Hittian high-king Mursilis II in the heydays when they dominated the Akkadian kings. The other part is king Duppi-Tessub of Amurru (little land in Syria)ruling ther Amorites that should continue to pay "300 shekels of refined and first- class gold, the tribute which my father had imposed upon your father, he brought year for year; he never refused it."

Hantidassus of Hurma, Abaras of Samuhas, Katahhas of Ankuwa, the Queen of Katapa, Ammammas of Tahurpa, Hallaras of Dunna, Huwassanas of Hupisna, Tapisuwa of Ishupitta, the "Lady" of Landa, Kunniyawannis of Landa, NIN.PISAN.PISAN of Kinza, Mount Lablana, Mount Sariyana, Mount Pisaisa, the Lulahhi gods (and) the Hapiri gods, Ereskigal (Queen of Netherworld), the gods and goddesses of the Hatti land, the gods and goddesses of Amurru land, all the olden gods, Naras, Napsaras, Minki, Tuhusi, Ammunki, Ammizadu, Allalu, Anu, Antu, Apantu, Ellil, Ninlil, the mountains, the rivers, the springs, the great Sea, heaven and earth, the winds (and) the clouds—let these be witnesses to this treaty and to the oath."

We can notice many things out from this list. The Storm-god with many names was besides the sun goddess highest deities. Even mountains were seen as gods. But not all gods were valid in all places since many of these are local. Only a few of the deities we know from general descriptions of the "Fertile Crescent". This section shows us also that our descriptions of their world are very rough and we are just simplifying.

Surely someone look for "Aryan/ Indo-European gods" in vain. We can notice that the Amurru have Tessup as stormgod like some places in Hatti and Mitanni. The Greeks called him Zeus and in Indian Rigveda it is Indra. Hard to see that these documents could be used as evidence of Indo-European language

We see from the seals of different kings that their style varies. The languages varies also but times with a king in common mixed languages as for instance the time of Sargon and that of the Hittites. But the point here is that starry sky and the archetypes in heaven and on earth were much the same. Here I call the iconography Lingua Franca of Middle East. The myths varies a little, but on the other hand we normally look at three thousand years of culture.

Much of this is surely mixed with heritage from the leading Sumerian order in third millennium and maybe earlier. Significant in Mesopotamia, Levant, Anatolia and the Aegean world is the federative order of society. It begins with independent city-states in Sumer probably. As long as there were space and fertility enough the ritual order kept the societies peaceful except for the "mountain people" in the Sumerian legends. They attacked sometimes the Sumerian cities.

Hymn I. Agni.

An Egyptologist told that he always became confused when being in the temples and reading the scripts. It is much like schizophrenia. I think it depends on the ancient language that was filled with metaphors, allegories and analogies. We Westerners are not use to pictorial language and double thinking. It is easy to see the "gods" as persons and the intrigue about human life.

For the Greek mythological world I recommend the Greek Karl Kerenyi. When he write about the mythological persons he mostly give us the meaning of the name

Indo-Iranian

Maybe we should prefer the term "Indo-Iranian" as group name of more than 100 languages from Persia to Burma and south of Himalaya. The group goes as far back as we can imagine languages in the area. Naturally there are groups within the group but we can not know much about the tribes when we go beyond 2000 BC.

Unfortunately we have the Aryan-syndrome that confuses real science. The amazing fact is that the concept Aryan is pure fiction still very many believe in it as facts. There is no archaeological evidence from the 2^nd millennium told to be heydays of Aryans. Rigveda is mainly from that time and not a single mentioning of Aryans in that important ritual epos. No contemporary sources tell about warfare concerning a big area from Anatolia to Burma.

Friedrich Max Müller (December 6, 1823 - October 28, 1900), more commonly known as Max Müller, was a German Orientalist, one of the founders of Indian studies, who virtually founded the discipline of comparative religion. Müller wrote both scholarly and a popular works on comparative religion, a discipline he introduced to the British reading public.

Müller formulated the linguistic theory about Indo-Aryans and others followed with the wretched theories about Aryan invasion build on too little archaeological evidence. Later he regretted that he mixed his view of a group of similar languages with possible tribes and genetic relations. He was deeply saddened by the fact that these later came to be expressed in racist terms. This was far from Müller's own intention … as always there are also those who misunderstand or interpret in their own favour.

I agree with Müller about this: "He saw the gods of the Rig-Veda as active forces of nature, only partly personified as imagined supernatural persons. From this claim Müller derived his theory that mythology is 'a disease of language'. By this he meant that myth transforms concepts into beings and stories. In Müller's view 'gods' began as words constructed in order to express abstract ideas (and natural forces), but were transformed into imagined personalities."

He named his view of Indian religion "henotheism" as something between polytheism and monotheism. Nowadays some writers think that Moses practised this and set it "between totemism and monoteism" … I have shown that totemism is a fictive word so why use that. They have not understood the World Order and how "following time and fertility in nature" demanded for metaphors and allegories in the systematic way. Academics seldom know a bit about natural agriculture and the year at countryside.

My view is not far from Müllers however I see the practical use and I do not think our ancestors were more superstitious than we are. Thinking about former president Reagan using astrology and Englishmen believing more in astrology than in politicians.-;) We can define the act of abstracting the natural processes in nature as animation, but that is not the same as superstitious and animated language.

The core of Sumer-Akkadian ritual is more than thousand years older than Rigveda is. The environment is different from Indian monsoon cycle with the Rain Dragon Vrtha as abstraction. In Mesopotamia with little rain they has to be "rain makers" and pray for rain. We see clearly in the ritual that it was all about praying for rain and preparing for sowing and harvesting. Here follows a few examples from Rigveda that shows the use of metaphors and allegories used in rituals that preceded the three seasons:

In second millennium The Horse became the noble animal before the chariot everywhere in the Old World. We see it in Scandinavian rock-carvings drawing the battle-chariot or maybe just riding the wild ride for fun. At one Vitlycke someone make trials in the wild "Elk ride" at least in his imagination. So it is natural that we find it in many places in Rigveda and they also pray to Indra for cows and horses. The Sun ride could be wild:

I do not find a single mentioning of Aryans but several of Gotama (Buddha incarnation)

Five shedders of benefits: Indra, Varun.a, Agni, Aryaman, and Savita or in plain English: fire, wind, the sun warmth, the moon (water) and the lightning, for these are luminous in their respective spheres. Mitra is that day sun born in a cave and Varuna is Time or World Order. Varuna is Vishnu in Hindu and probably seen in Indus as the sitting god with four faces in different directions.

In time all deities got more and more adjectives and attributes to their original name. For instance Aryaman was also hospitality "bosom friend, play-fellow, companion, a friend who asks a woman in marriage for another; name of an Aditya; the sun; the Asclepias plant". He was invoked together with Bhaga at marriage. Here it is difficult to separate Vedic and Hindu times and use of deities. Roughly we have Indus in 3 - 4^th , Vedic in 2^nd and Hindu in last millennium and the core of myths survived as we for instance see some of the Indus animals in the Hindu symbolism.

The term 'Aryan' is as late as 19^th century innovation … and "The Indo-Aryan family of languages dates back to the middle first millenium B.C. when epic Sanskrit comes onto the world stage." That is 1000 years after the supposed Aryans. General modern linguistic builds on last millennium languages since we have written sources only from that time.

Still the use of the world is established and will live forever. It is much like example from Danish BA finds were they name a bronze box "hanging tub" since they did not know the use. The box was used like the rucksack many young girls have nowadays. Another strange word is "spectacle brooch" used about a bronze bra. Often we carry along the mistakes of earlier generations.

I do not use the word "Aryan / Indo-Aryan" since we do not need such superficial words that have too much bias from the past. The linguists often take just a few words as example of family. However it is difficult for me to see the family in the world for "stormgod" - Indra, (Enlil, Marduk) Teshub, Zeus, Tiwas and they tell that Tir also was stormgod however the name means Tir/ Tyr is the Taurus/ Oxen. However the storm god is perhaps the oldest and most widely seen active highest god the idol of Time and World Order is Ouranos, Varuna, El and could be symbolised as the old man sitting and watching times go bye.

The Aryan race is a pseudo concept, which reached its height of popularity during the 19th century and first half of the 20th century. The excavations at Harappa in early 20th century also fired it. Too fast conclusions gave the idea of warlike destruction that nowadays is seen as caused by nature. Inspired by the discovery of the Indo-European language family, 19th century ethnologists speculated that all "white" European peoples descended from an ancient people called the Aryans.

The last enthusiasts try to use DNA as evidence and tell that there are some tenth or less of European DNA in the Brahmins. That would be natural since the upper class always mingled over the borders. Just a single marriage could affect a little number of Brahmins that practised much inbreed as normal behaviour of a class.

This idea was adopted by several European colonialist and nationalist movements of that era — notably Nazis, who used the concept of the Aryan race (redefined to mean a "master race" of people of northern European descent) to justify their racial and military policies.

We have no evidence of the use of the concept Aryan in 2^nd millennium. But the leaders of Persia in last millennium called themselves Aryans. Darius the Great, King of Persia (521 - 486 BC), in an inscription in Naqsh-e-Rostam (near Shiraz, Iran) proclaims: "I am Darius, the Great King, ..., A Persian, son of a Persian, an Aryan, having Aryan lineage...". the last words shows they could be used in the meaning noble. That is the only real meaning of that word.

Barbarian

Warm up from Herodotus ca 440 BC Book II

This illustrates the problem in understanding and giving name to foreign people in ancient times … For some reason I think about people from Skaane as well as the Danes speaking deep in the trout. However for people today writing more or less scientific language there is no reason to copy ancient Greek, I think

Some words make it immediately evident that the writer writes pamphlets to satisfy some ruler or imaginary cultural imperialism.

Greek Aristotle 350 BC means that:

Roman Virgilius wrote in Aeneid ca 19 BC.

But when generation after generation copies the attitude and word we could ask if they ever think about what they mean. There are lots of writers still using the word 'barbarian' about people outside limes. They become Pro-Roman and at the same time they discriminate people.

How do they define 'barbarian'? The Greeks meant simply that it was a foreigner with language they did not understand … and linguists tells that maybe because foreigners were bearded. It is much like my foster mother that told I should not visit her if I had bear ... I know everything about being the Barbarian. The hubris of the Greek implied that they thought the Greek culture was much better higher than outside Greece. They did not mention Egyptians and Persians with much older and wider culture I guess, since that would lower Greek culture.

We also learn that Barbarians are uncultured, but compared to what and according to which references? Do writers of today really know if the Barbarians lacked culture and that they were crueller than Roman imperialists? To me it seems that most Roman writers told rumours about Barbarians and never visited or spoke with Barbarians. I see it as bad science if we in our time just copy ancient writers without analysing the truth and intentions. They just copy the behaviour of some ancient writers. I do not know if they think they become more sophisticated cultural beings? Anyway it is like borrowed feathers.

To the same category of language with bias is the Christian words and values mixed into the text. That is not objective language that could fit 21^st century with Human Right and whatever high stuff we say we use. In Scandinavian and German we have the word avgud, Abgott that does not exist in English since we use the more neutral 'idol' with more positive sound. The word 'pagan' has the understood value of unenlightened and irreligious. How do they know that. As far as we can see most ancient people even in the wilderness practised some kind of religion and were enlightened as much as they needed in everyday life

Here I borrow a definition from Wikipedia and some sociologist I believe:

A non-pejorative, simply functional concept of "barbarian," as sociologists have redefined the term, depends upon a carefully-defined use of "civilization," denoting a settled, urban way of life that is organized on principles broader than the extended family or tribe, in which surpluses of necessities can be stored and redistributed and division of labor produces some luxury goods (even if only for gods and kings). The barbarian is technically a social parasite on civilization, who depends on settlements as a source of slaves, surpluses and portable luxuries: booty, loot and plunder.

Take the last sentence that sounds like our neo-liberals. They tell that social welfare sector in state is parasite on private enterprise. However as soon as social welfare is produced as private enterprise it is not parasiting???

The first sentence led to the conclusion that only city-life is civilised and then non-parasite. However how would the cities live without food produced by "parasites". It is a tricky question since I would see the Roman urban societies as parasites in the countryside and when they subdued other people. The word 'barbarian' was also used outside the empire about people that could not parasite the empire.

I see the definition as pure rubbish and I ask do we need the word 'barbarian' at all?

Dreamtime

From Australia and their Dreamtime we can take this cut from a present folk memory:

In the short piece we see how focus change from the bird to man and mankind and everyday life. That is because the Dreamtime is endless of course since time is added all the time. Dreamtime has no timeline and there is not border/ step between the idea and reality. The Australians have their language and we have ours.

We hardly understand that our ancestors for instance the Celts were using the concept "worlds" instead for grammatical tenses like past tense, future tense and present time. For people living at that time it was no problem to move between the past world/grave and the present. It is like a reflex that many believe that our ancestors were more spiritual than we are. They created animated language they believe was used in those days. That creates distance between now and then and sometimes it gives the flavour of primitive ancestors and that is not my worldview

Many writers set focus on the abstraction instead for on the reality behind. Many philosophers through the ages have done the same mistake by believing that the word as such is reality. That means, "when the word is outspoken the problem is solved", they think. The Sumerians told that the hero Gilgamesh fell in dreams when the problems came and then his mate Enkidu (the first to do it) did the hard work. In our words this means split of mind and body. In reality we cannot make the split and the ideas of the mind need hard work to get results. Normally the outcome is in the focus for the people.

The word Algonquin means "At the place of spearing fishes and eels". The meaning tells about people living in the countryside and that is reflected in their language that tells, "nature is our brother". Environment, available technology and size of population decide what kind of culture grows in a certain place. It can be measured only within the frames of the place. It is just cultural imperialism if urban people try to apply urban frames on the countryside. And it is just stupid foolishness.

Because the Northern climates made agriculture difficult, the Algonquin were a semi-nomadic people, moving their encampments from one place to the next in search of food, which came from hunting, trapping, fishing and the gathering of various plant roots, seeds, wild rice and berries. They travelled on foot and by birchbark canoe in the summer months, and used toboggans and snowshoes in the winter. Their clothes were made from animal skins, as were their tents, also known as wigwams; sometimes also covered with birchbark.

Baetylus

It is quite annoying when some words in a text is non-intelligible for me. I read in 30 lines about Tanit and I wonder if the writer understood the text himself:

baetylic column, astral baetyl, baetylic form,

cuippus, altar-cippus, acroteria

… and I could not find these words in my Concise Oxford Dictionary. Especially 'astral baetyl' puzzles me. Normally I leave such texts since at Internet there are bunches of easily read articles. But I can also make a search on 'baetyl' and get bunches of suggestions. Since I have recently met the word in several places I made a check and got some etymology in 7630 URLs:

I would not use word like these: endowed with life. These fetish objects … since that is disparaging and could be understood as political flavour and baetyls were made also of other material than meteoric stone. … Sometimes when I have to remember something I make a knot on my handkerchief or set a rubber band around my ear. Then I am making it "baetylic" as a natural act. We have a lot of baetylic things in society. That is when we make icons and idols for common use with underlying meanings. "Already" the Sumerians and early Egyptians made baetyls and usually of stones since stone is eternal. For long it was use that pillars, altars and other ritual facilities were made of stones (sometimes wood) with no engraving that could tell anything.

In our time we need wide definition of 'baetyl' that is carrying the known or unknown convention of the ritual stone, stone row or part, stone circle or part, pillar and other details in shrine or temple. Local people could carry the meaning for thousands of years as for instance Bride's Suite used about a stone row in Bohuslen and many more foundations with a name that sound reasonable as heritage from Stone Age.

Even god, deity and godhead need wider definition in connection with baetyl. For instance they gave names Rahu and Ketu to rising and descending node of the moon. Sometimes the names are misunderstood as planets, but in late time they are manifested as Dragon Eye and Dragon Tail and then certain stars. In ancient days they used the same word for star and planet. Many more "gods" are just important concepts in every day life. Nearest example that some tells that baetyl was Baetyl son of Ouranos. That must be seen as Late Greek explanation to a word they did not really understand. Later the Romans made gods of nearly everything and of every virtue and quality.

I rather use neutral common words like idol and archetype for picturing abstract entities. It is not the place for adding some pseudo-values about pagan to this when we look at the general use. Who would blame Moses for the use of the baetyl: Genesis 28:22 "And this stone which I have set for a pillar, shall be God's house" … It was an elegant scapegoat since it was forbidden to picture God, but not to make a house for him.

I understand this that a stone = bethel as such can symbolise god or anything else as soon as the community make the convention. The language of those days was not poor but many poetic metaphors were used and strange words were created.

The most famous ancient baetyl is the black stone in the Aphrodite temple at Paphos Cyprus Local people tell that the Lady is so wonderful that she cannot be pictured. … the Danish king Erik Ejegod visited the temple in 1096 AD and died there. Maybe the experience was too hot for the king who usually kept a "harem" at home.

Lucian of Samosata wrote in middle first century in his Dea Syria

It is his knowledge and opinion of the time but the events go a few thousand years back as we see the use in the Negew Desert in Stone Age. The Egyptians probably started with baetyls and the temples in the Levant were influenced especial few hundred years before the Hyksos when Egyptians dominated in the entire Levant in early second millennium…

In the Levantine temples were usually one, two or three pillars representing deities. For instance the Asheras seem to have been the lotus stalks that symbolises the helpers of the fertility goddess Ashera/ Astarte. We see lotus stalks at both side of the goddess also in India and in some connection they are named Asvins. Same developments from stones to statues we see in Greece were Cadmus = the Phoencians brought some new ideas during a period. There is a rumour that Baetylus was son of Ouranos so the high gods must have created the idea.

Totem

Maybe I should blame the Jesuit Paters from 18th century for my first and only scalping around 1950. My friend Erik owned a hut in a grove and the Bad Boy had destroyed it. Little did we know that he took revenge mostly on his father that used his head as punch-ball and maybe some of the boys teased him for not controlling himself among boys.

Anyway we sought revenge and wanted to teach him a lesson during Erik's birthday when also Bad Boy was present. We did a lot of job in advance by digging a pit for catching him. We got him on the path and we took him home and bind him to a tree = Totem Pole in the garden. Then we danced around him hauling like Indians we believed and shouting "Scalp him, Scalp him!" and we had fun when his face grew white and he began to cry. Later on we got his whole story and peace pipe was smoked.

Maybe I am to blame for the imagination behind this event. I was the one that read Fennimore Cooper and other writers telling about the "Noble Indian". Seldom we invent new things and use others experiences or stories about events and methods. Many years later I got to know that my knowledge about Indians and Totem Poles was highly false. Totem Poles never existed among Indians in general and the use was restricted to a small area in the Northwest Territories. The origin of the word 'totem' from Jesuit Paters

"Totemism from ote, root ot, possessive form otem, in the Ojibway dialect of the Algonquin stock of American Indians. By some authorities spelled dodeme (Father de Smet), todem (Father Petitot), Toodaim, dodaim, totam (J. Long 1791). The original signification was apparently a person's family or tribe, and in a narrower sense his belongings".

We can notice that the word totem is fairly young compared to the word "Barbarian" used about North Europeans. It is one of the few words we can date in the use of the high Westerners. This said because the name became early deterrent when the Church deliberately began to civilise Indians. No Indian asked to be civilised and it was the cultural imperialism of the Europeans.

The word 'totem' has a lot of bias and it is not quite the same today as when the Paters defined it. In OCD I read: Totem = natural object especial animal adopted among N. American Indians as emblem of clan or individual on ground on kinship. Image of this totem pole on which totems are carved or hung, often in tall vertical array. (As said this apply only to NW Territory in Yukon and British Columbia)

Else I would compare with football teams such as The Wolves and ice-hockey team The Indians and as boy scout my troop was The Squirrels. I f we go historical in Nordic saga we have the Fylgia that was like an unspoken nickname but the troops took emblem like boars and bears. Anyway there is no reason to create and use the biased "totem" globally since we have the neutral "emblem" with no bias except sometimes martial use.

We could understand that religious writers use disparaging worlds like "totem" … and the same counts for snobs of all kind that have the hubris to believe that there is a civilised world better than others. Sorry to say that we have to consider the destruction forces in the so-called civilisation. There is also the biased habit of making enemies once we degrade some group of humans. The civilisation has lost the sense of earlier ages when the elders understood that there must be the mutual agreement of peace and negotiation so that people could live together and respect other people. Nowadays some people/ groups of people tell that they are better than others are and then there is no real peace any more