24 Abercromby Square
Liverpool
My dear Spencer
I received your letter of March 10th last night. The death of our friends Fison and Howitt so soon after each other has been a great grief to me. But I am very glad to have known and esteemed them both personally as men as well as anthropologists. Their visits to Cambridge were memorable events to me. I was so proud of you four men and happy to think of you as a band of brothers. I knew of no other such band, and now two are gone. You and I, I hope, will try to stick more closely together for the loss, in spite of the distance between us. I have, as you know, the warmest admiration for your work and the fullest confidence in its accuracy and fidelity. I value it all the more by comparison
with the work of others, and it makes me sick to think of the sophistry and misrepresentations of which your facts and Howitt’s have been the object. But I believe that these misrepresentations will pass away like clouds and be forgotten, while your facts and the sound and true inferences which you and Howitt and Fison drew from them will remain. I wish, my dear Spencer, I could see you again and shake hands with you. When is that to be?
I have proposed to Macmillan that they should publish a collected edition of the scattered anthropological papers of Howitt and Fison. It seems to me that these papers contain some things of value which Howitt has not embodied in his book. One striking example of this I communicated to him shortly before his death and published in “Man”. It is the explanation of the classes and subclasses as intended to prevent the marriage, first of brother with sisters & second of parents with children. Since Howitt’s visit to Cambridge I had imagined that the perception of this truth was a discovery of mine, and so he represented it in his book. But in fact he had enunciated the same many years ago. I am glad that I discovered the facts and did him justice both publicly and privately ^ before his death (for I wrote to him at once and the letter reached him in life).
Macmillan has agreed to publish such a volume of collected papers on condition that I am responsible for the selecting and editing of the papers, and that I prefix a biographical notice of both men. The profits, if any, would be divided between the publishers (who would take all risks) and the families of the authors. It might be a little difficult to
apportion the shares between the two families, since the greater part of the work would be Howitt’s.
What do you think of this plan? Do you think that Howitt would have approved of republishing papers, some parts of which he regarded as superseded by his book? And if you approve, please let me know what papers you think should be included. My idea would be to reprint all the papers mentioned by Howitt in the preface to his book (pp. VIII – IX) together with his paper on the Dieri (Journ. Anthrop. Inst. XX), his paper “On the organisation of Australian tribes”’ in Transactions of the Royal Society of Victoria, 1889; and perhaps his “Remarks on the class systems collected by Mr Palmer”’ Journ. Anthrop. Inst. XIII. Also I would include Fison’s articles on Fijian customs in the Journ. Anthrop. Institute. But I do not think it would be desirable to
include the recent controversial papers which Howitt published against Lang.
I am sorry that you and Gillen cannot yet go to West Australia, but I am glad you both have ^the expedition in view; it is one of the pieces of work I have set my heart on seeing done before I die. I told you in my last letter that Sir John Murray of the Challenger has subscribed £ 200 for the expedition.
My new book on totemism is to include, first, a reprint of the old book, second a reprint of my four papers in the Fortnightly, and third a Geographical Survey of Totemism, which will form the bulk of the book. I intend to describe all the principal facts of totemism so far as they are known at present in geographical of ethnographical order I begin with Central and North Central Australia, drawing my materials of course exclusively from you and Gillen: then I take up
South. East Australia, using chiefly Howitt’s facts. That is as far as I have got just now, and ^what I have already printed will make about 450 pages. So you see I am making the “Geographical Survey” pretty full. From what you tell me about Strehlow it seems to me that I cannot safely use his evidence; so I intend to make no use of it. I wish you would publish your reasons for distrusting his evidence, such as you have stated them to me, so that I could refer to them. The shakiness of Strehlow’s facts ought to be known here in Europe. As for the fellow R. H. Mathews, of course I shall not even mention him or any of his multitudinous writings. He wrote to me twice in a tone which shewed the character of the man. I did not answer ^his letters and shall hold no communication with him.
I am sorry that our efforts to procure a Civil List pension for Mrs Fison and her daughters were unsuccessful. I hope that something may be got out of the Victorian Government. But I have already written to you about that.
It is too soon yet to say whether I shall like Liverpool or not. But we have a very comfortable house and I have as excellent study with my books well arranged in it. I intend to lecture very little, indeed only to read a little of what I have ready for publication. I have announced four lectures on totemism in Central Australia, which will be an abstract and digest of your facts such as I have made it for my book.
The deaths of Howitt and Fison are a heavy loss to you. When you have done your work in West Australia, perhaps you will return and settle
in England? I wish for our sakes we had you here, but so long as there is field work to be done in Australia, I suppose that it is better you should stay where you are. Is there much left to be gathered in Queensland? Do you ever think of going there? Why has Roth left it?
With kindest regards from us both I am always, my dear Spencers, yours very sincerely
J. G. Frazer
I hope you will write to me oftener than you have done of late years. I also have been very remiss as a correspondent.
