This is a modern-English version of Primitive culture, vol. 2 (of 2) : Researches into the development of mythology, philosophy, religion, language, art, and custom, originally written by Tylor, Edward B. (Edward Burnett).
It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling,
and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If
you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.
Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.

PRIMITIVE CULTURE
ivPrinted in U.S.A.
ivPrinted in U.S.A.
[Rights of Translation and Reproduction reserved]
[All rights for translation and reproduction are reserved]
CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
ANIMISM (continued).
ANIMISM (continued).
Doctrine of Soul’s Existence after Death; its main divisions, Transmigration and Future Life—Transmigration of Souls: re-birth in Human and Animal Bodies, transference to Plants and Objects—Resurrection of Body: scarcely held in savage religion—Future Life: a general if not universal doctrine of low races—Continued existence, rather than Immortality; second death of Soul—Ghost of Dead remains on earth, especially if corpse unburied; its attachment to bodily remains—Feasts of the Dead 1
Doctrine of the Soul's Existence after Death; its main categories, Reincarnation and Afterlife—Reincarnation of Souls: rebirth in Human and Animal Forms, transfer to Plants and Objects—Resurrection of the Body: rarely accepted in primitive religions—Afterlife: a common if not universal belief among lower cultures—Continuation of existence, rather than Immortality; second death of the Soul—Spirit of the Dead lingers on earth, especially if the body is not buried; its connection to bodily remains—Feasts for the Dead 1
ANIMISM (continued).
ANIMISM (continued).
Journey of the Soul to the Land of the Dead—Visits by the Living to the Regions of Departed Souls—Connexion of such legends with myths of Sunset: the Land of the Dead thus imagined as in the West—Realization of current religious ideas, whether of savage or civilized theology, in narratives of visits to the Regions of Souls—Localization of the Future Life—Distant earthly region: Earthly Paradise, Isles of the Blest—Subterranean Hades or Sheol—Sun, Moon, Stars—Heaven—Historical course of belief as to such localization—Nature of Future Life—Continuance-theory, apparently original, belongs especially to the lower races—Transitional theories—Retribution-theory, apparently derived, belongs especially to the higher races—Doctrine of Moral Retribution as developed in the higher culture—Survey of Doctrine of Future State, from savage to civilized stages—Its practical effect on the sentiment and conduct of Mankind 44
Journey of the Soul to the Afterlife—Visits by the Living to the Realms of Departed Souls—Connection of these legends with myths about Sunset: the Afterlife imagined as in the West—Reflection of current religious beliefs, whether from primitive or advanced theology, in stories of visits to the Realms of Souls—Mapping out the Future Life—Distant earthly places: Earthly Paradise, Isles of the Blessed—Underworld Hades or Sheol—Sun, Moon, Stars—Heaven—Historical development of beliefs regarding such locations—Nature of Future Life—Continuance theory, seemingly original, particularly belongs to lower cultures—Transitional theories—Retribution theory, likely derived, primarily belongs to higher cultures—Doctrine of Moral Retribution as developed in more advanced societies—Overview of the Doctrine of the Afterlife, from primitive to civilized stages—Its practical impact on the feelings and actions of Humanity 44
ANIMISM (continued).
ANIMISM (continued).
Animism, expanding from the Doctrine of Souls to the wider Doctrine of Spirits, becomes a complete Philosophy of Natural Religion—Definition of Spirits similar to and apparently modelled on that of Souls—Transition-stage: classes of Souls passing into good and evil Demons—Manes-Worship—Doctrine of Embodiment of Spirits in human, animal, vegetable, and inert bodies—Demoniacal Possession and Obsession as causes of Disease and Oracle-inspiration—Fetishism—Disease-spirits embodied—Ghost attached to remains of Corpse—Fetish produced by a Spirit embodied in, attached to, or operating through, an Object—Analogues of Fetish-doctrine in Modern Science—Stock-and-Stone-Worship—Idolatry—Survival of Animistic Phraseology in modern Language—Decline of Animistic theory of Nature 108
Animism, evolving from the Doctrine of Souls to the broader Doctrine of Spirits, becomes a comprehensive Philosophy of Natural Religion—definitions of Spirits similar to and seemingly modeled on those of Souls—transition phase: categories of Souls shifting into good and evil Demons—Worship of the Manes—Doctrine of the Embodiment of Spirits in human, animal, vegetable, and inanimate bodies—Demonic Possession and Obsession as sources of Disease and Oracle-inspiration—Fetishism—Disease-spirits embodied—Ghosts attached to the remains of the Corpse—Fetish created by a Spirit embodied in, attached to, or acting through, an Object—Similarities of Fetish-doctrine in Modern Science—Worship of Stocks and Stones—Idolatry—Survival of Animistic Language in modern Speech—Decline of the Animistic theory of Nature 108
ANIMISM (continued).
ANIMISM (continued).
Spirits regarded as personal causes of Phenomena of the World—Pervading Spirits as good and evil Demons affecting man—Spirits manifest in Dreams and Visions: Nightmares; Incubi and Succubi; Vampires; Visionary Demons—Demons of darkness repelled by fire—Demons otherwise manifest: seen by animals; detected by footprints—Spirits conceived and treated as material—Guardian and Familiar Spirits—Nature-Spirits; historical course of the doctrine—Spirits of Volcanos, Whirlpools, Rocks—Water-Worship: Spirits of Wells, Streams, Lakes, &c.—Tree-Worship: Spirits embodied in or inhabiting Trees; Spirits of Groves and Forests—Animal-worship: Animals Worshipped, directly, or as incarnations or representatives of Deities; Totemism; Serpent-Worship—Species-Deities; their relation to Archetypal Ideas 184
Spirits seen as personal causes of worldly phenomena—pervasive spirits as good and evil demons affecting humans—spirits appearing in dreams and visions: nightmares; incubi and succubi; vampires; visionary demons—darkness demons driven away by fire—demons appearing in other ways: seen by animals; detected by footprints—spirits viewed and treated as tangible—guardian and familiar spirits—nature spirits; historical development of the doctrine—spirits of volcanoes, whirlpools, rocks—water worship: spirits of wells, streams, lakes, etc.—tree worship: spirits embodied in or residing in trees; spirits of groves and forests—animal worship: animals revered, either directly or as incarnations or representatives of deities; totemism; serpent worship—species deities; their connection to archetypal ideas 184
ANIMISM (continued).
ANIMISM (continued).
Higher Deities of Polytheism—Human characteristics applied to Deity—Lords of Spiritual Hierarchy—Polytheism: its course of development in lower and higher Culture—Principles of its investigation; classification of Deities according to central conceptions of their significance and function—Heaven-god—Rain god—Thunder-god—Wind-gods—Earth-god—Water god—Sea-god—Fire-god—Sun-god—Moon-god 247
Higher Deities of Polytheism—Human traits assigned to Deity—Lords of Spiritual Hierarchy—Polytheism: its development through lower and higher Culture—Principles of its study; categorization of Deities based on the main ideas of their meaning and role—Heaven-god—Rain god—Thunder-god—Wind-gods—Earth-god—Water god—Sea-god—Fire-god—Sun-god—Moon-god 247
ANIMISM (continued).
ANIMISM (continued).
Polytheism comprises a class of great Deities, ruling the course of Nature and the life of Man—Childbirth-god—Agriculture-god—War-god—God of the Dead—First Man as Divine Ancestor—Dualism; its rudimentary and unethical nature among low races; its development through the course of culture—Good and Evil Deity—Doctrine of Divine Supremacy, distinct from, while tending towards, the doctrine of Monotheism—Idea of a Highest or Supreme Deity evolved in various forms; its place as completion of the Polytheistic system and outcome of the Animistic philosophy; its continuance and development among higher nations—General survey of Animism as a Philosophy of Religion—Recapitulation of the theory advanced as to its development through successive stages of culture; its primary phases best represented among the lower races, while survivals of these among the higher races mark the transition from savage through barbaric to civilized faiths—Transition of Animism in the History of Religion; its earlier and later stages as a Philosophy of the Universe; its later stages as the principle of a Moral Institution 304
Polytheism includes a group of powerful deities that govern the forces of nature and human life—such as the gods of childbirth, agriculture, war, the dead, and the first man as a divine ancestor. It also covers the concept of dualism; its basic and unsophisticated form among primitive cultures; its evolution through cultural advancement—good and evil deities; the idea of divine superiority that is distinct from, yet moves toward, monotheism; the concept of a highest or supreme deity that emerges in various forms; its role as the culmination of the polytheistic system and the result of animistic philosophy; its persistence and evolution among more advanced societies—an overview of animism as a philosophy of religion—summarization of the theory proposed regarding its development through different cultural stages; its initial phases best depicted among less developed cultures, while remnants of these among more advanced societies illustrate the shift from savage to barbaric to civilized beliefs—transition of animism in the history of religion; its earlier and later stages as a philosophy of the universe; its later stages serving as the foundation for a moral institution 304
RITES AND CEREMONIES.
Rituals and ceremonies.
Religious Rites: their purpose practical or symbolic—Prayer: its continuity from low to high levels of Culture; its lower phases Unethical; its higher phases Ethical—Sacrifice: its original Gift-theory passes into the Homage-theory and the Abnegation-theory—Manner of reception of Sacrifice by Deity—Material Transfer to elements, fetish-animals, priests; consumption of substance by deity or idol; offering of blood; transmission by fire; incense—Essential transfer: consumption of essence, savour, &c.—Spiritual Transfer: consumption or transmission of soul of offering—Motive of Sacrificer—Transition from Gift-theory to Homage-theory: insignificant and formal offerings; sacrificial banquets—Abnegation-theory; sacrifice of children, &c.—Sacrifice of Substitutes: part given for whole; inferior life for superior; effigies—Modern survival of Sacrifice in folklore and religion—Fasting, as a means of producing ecstatic vision; its course from lower to higher Culture—Drugs use to produce ecstasy—Swoons and fits induced for religious purposes—Orientation: its relation to Sun-myth and Sun-worship; rules of East and West as to burial of dead, position of worship, and structure of temple—Lustration viiiby Water and Fire: its transition from material to symbolic purification; its connexion with special events of life; its appearance among the lower races—Lustration of new-born children; of women; of those polluted by bloodshed or the dead—Lustration continued at higher levels of Culture—Conclusion 362
Religious Rites: their practical or symbolic purposes—Prayer: its continuity across different levels of Culture; its lower phases Unethical; its higher phases Ethical—Sacrifice: its original Gift-theory transitions to the Homage-theory and the Abnegation-theory—How Sacrifice is received by Deity—Material Transfer to elements, fetish-animals, priests; consumption of substance by deity or idol; offering of blood; transmission by fire; incense—Essential transfer: consumption of essence, flavor, etc.—Spiritual Transfer: consumption or transmission of the soul of the offering—Motive of the Sacrificer—Transition from Gift-theory to Homage-theory: insignificant and formal offerings; sacrificial feasts—Abnegation-theory; sacrifice of children, etc.—Sacrifice of Substitutes: part given for the whole; lesser life for greater; effigies—Modern survival of Sacrifice in folklore and religion—Fasting, as a way to induce ecstatic vision; its progression from lower to higher Culture—Use of drugs to induce ecstasy—Faints and fits for religious purposes—Orientation: its connection to Sun-myth and Sun-worship; rules of East and West regarding burial of the dead, position of worship, and structure of the temple—Lustration by Water and Fire: its transition from physical to symbolic purification; its association with significant life events; its presence among lower societies—Lustration of newborns; of women; of those made impure by bloodshed or the dead—Lustration continues at higher levels of Culture—Conclusion 362
CONCLUSION.
CONCLUSION.
Practical results of the study of Primitive Culture—Its bearing least upon Positive Science, greatest upon Intellectual, Moral, Social, and Political Philosophy—Language—Mythology—Ethics and Law—Religion—Action of the Science of Culture, as a means of furthering progress and removing hindrance, effective in the course of Civilization 443
Practical results of the study of Primitive Culture—its impact is least on Positive Science and greatest on Intellectual, Moral, Social, and Political Philosophy—Language—Mythology—Ethics and Law—Religion—The role of the Science of Culture as a way to promote progress and eliminate obstacles, is significant in the journey of Civilization 443
CHAPTER XII.
ANIMISM (continued).
Doctrine of Soul’s Existence after Death; its main divisions, Transmigration and Future Life—Transmigration of Souls: re-birth in Human and Animal Bodies, transference to Plants and Objects—Resurrection of Body: scarcely held in savage religion—Future Life: a general if not universal doctrine of low races—Continued existence, rather than Immortality; second death of Soul—Ghost of Dead remains on earth, especially if corpse unburied; its attachment to bodily remains—Feasts of the Dead.
Doctrine of the Soul's Existence After Death; its main parts, Rebirth and Afterlife—Rebirth of Souls: reincarnation in Human and Animal Bodies, transfer to Plants and Objects—Resurrection of the Body: rarely accepted in primitive religions—Afterlife: a common if not universal belief among lesser-developed cultures—Ongoing existence, rather than Immortality; a second death of the Soul—Spirit of the Dead remains on earth, especially if the body is unburied; its connection to physical remains—Feasts for the Dead.
Having thus traced upward from the lower levels of culture the opinions of mankind as to the souls, spirits, ghosts, or phantoms, considered to belong to men, to the lower animals, to plants, and to things, we are now prepared to investigate one of the great religious doctrines of the world, the belief in the soul’s continued existence in a Life after Death. Here let us once more call to mind the consideration which cannot be too strongly put forward, that the doctrine of a Future Life as held by the lower races is the all but necessary outcome of savage Animism. The evidence that the lower races believe the figures of the dead seen in dreams and visions to be their surviving souls, not only goes far to account for the comparative universality of their belief in the continued existence of the soul after the death of the body, but it gives the key to many of their speculations on the nature of this existence, speculations 2rational enough from the savage point of view, though apt to seem far-fetched absurdities to moderns in their much changed intellectual condition. The belief in a Future Life falls into two main divisions. Closely connected and even largely overlapping one another, both world-wide in their distribution, both ranging back in time to periods of unknown antiquity, both deeply rooted in the lowest strata of human life which lie open to our observation, these two doctrines have in the modern world passed into wonderfully different conditions. The one is the theory of the Transmigration of Souls, which has indeed risen from its lower stages to establish itself among the huge religious communities of Asia, great in history, enormous even in present mass, yet arrested and as it seems henceforth unprogressive in development; but the more highly educated world has rejected the ancient belief, and it now only survives in Europe in dwindling remnants. Far different has been the history of the other doctrine, that of the independent existence of the personal soul after the death of the body, in a Future Life. Passing onward through change after change in the condition of the human race, modified and renewed in its long ethnic course, this great belief may be traced from its crude and primitive manifestations among savage races to its establishment in the heart of modern religion, where the faith in a future existence forms at once an inducement to goodness, a sustaining hope through suffering and across the fear of death, and an answer to the perplexed problem of the allotment of happiness and misery in this present world, by the expectation of another world to set this right.
Having traced the beliefs of humanity about souls, spirits, ghosts, and phantoms from lower levels of culture, we are now ready to explore one of the major religious beliefs in the world: the idea that the soul continues to exist after death. We should emphasize once again that the belief in an afterlife, as held by less developed societies, is largely a natural outcome of primitive Animism. The evidence that these societies view figures of the dead seen in dreams and visions as their surviving souls not only explains their widespread belief in the soul’s continued existence after the body dies, but also provides insight into their speculations about the nature of that existence—speculations that may seem absurd from a modern perspective but are rational from a primitive viewpoint. The belief in an afterlife can be divided into two main categories. These two doctrines are closely connected, often overlapping, are found worldwide, date back to ancient times, and are deeply rooted in the foundational aspects of human life that we can observe. However, in the modern world, they have evolved into very different realities. One is the theory of the Transmigration of Souls, which has grown from its earlier forms to establish itself among large religious communities in Asia—important historically and significant in size today—but seems to have stagnated in development. In contrast, the more educated world has largely rejected this ancient belief, and it now survives only in diminishing fragments in Europe. The other doctrine, concerning the independent existence of the personal soul after the body’s death, has had a very different trajectory. As humanity has changed, this belief has evolved and adapted over time. We can trace its journey from its simple and primitive expressions among tribal groups to its core place in modern religion, where faith in an afterlife serves as a motivation for goodness, a source of hope in suffering and in the face of death, and an answer to the complicated issues of happiness and suffering in this world, by providing the expectation of another world that will resolve these issues.
In investigating the doctrine of Transmigration, it will be well first to trace its position among the lower races, and afterwards to follow its developments, so far as they extend in the higher civilization. The temporary migration of souls into material substances, from human bodies down to morsels of wood and stone, is a most important part of the lower psychology. But it does not relate to the continued 3existence of the soul after death, and may be more conveniently treated of elsewhere, in connexion with such subjects as dæmoniacal possession and fetish-worship. We are here concerned with the more permanent tenancy of souls for successive lives in successive bodies.
In exploring the idea of Transmigration, it's useful to first look at its role among primitive cultures, and then examine how it has evolved in more advanced societies. The temporary movement of souls into physical forms, from human beings to bits of wood and stone, is a crucial aspect of basic psychology. However, it doesn't pertain to the ongoing existence of the soul after death and can be better discussed in relation to topics like demonic possession and fetish worship. Here, we focus on the more lasting presence of souls in different lives and different bodies.
Permanent transition, new birth, or re-incarnation of human souls in other human bodies, is especially considered to take place by the soul of a deceased person animating the body of an infant. It is recorded by Brebeuf that the Hurons, when little children died, would bury them by the wayside, that their souls might enter into mothers passing by, and so be born again.[1] In North-West America, among the Tacullis, we hear of direct transfusion of soul by the medicine-man, who, putting his hands on the breast of the dying or dead, then holds them over the head of a relative and blows through them; the next child born to this recipient of the departed soul is animated by it, and takes the rank and name of the deceased.[2] The Nutka Indians not without ingenuity accounted for the existence of a distant tribe speaking the same language as themselves, by declaring them to be the spirits of their dead.[3] In Greenland, where the wretched custom of abandoning and even plundering widows and orphans was tending to bring the whole race to extinction, a helpless widow would seek to persuade some father that the soul of a dead child of his had passed into a living child of hers, or vice versâ, thus gaining for herself a new relative and protector.[4] It is mostly ancestral or kindred souls that are thought to enter into children, and this kind of transmigration is therefore from the savage point of view a highly philosophical theory, accounting as it does so well for the general resemblance between parents and children, and even for the more special 4phenomena of atavism. In North-West America, among the Koloshes, the mother sees in a dream the deceased relative whose transmitted soul will give his likeness to the child;[5] and in Vancouver’s Island in 1860 a lad was much regarded by the Indians because he had a mark like the scar of a gun-shot wound on his hip, it being believed that a chief dead some four generations before, who had such a mark, had returned.[6] In Old Calabar, if a mother loses a child, and another is born soon after, she thinks the departed one to have come back.[7] The Wanika consider that the soul of a dead ancestor animates a child, and this is why it resembles its father or mother;[8] in Guinea a child bearing a strong resemblance, physical or mental, to a dead relative, is supposed to have inherited his soul;[9] and the Yorubas, greeting a new-born infant with the salutation, ‘Thou art come!’ look for signs to show what ancestral soul has returned among them.[10] Among the Khonds of Orissa, births are celebrated by a feast on the seventh day, and the priest, divining by dropping rice-grains in a cup of water, and judging from observations made on the person of the infant, determines which of his progenitors has reappeared, and the child generally at least among the northern tribes receives the name of that ancestor.[11] In Europe the Lapps repeat an instructive animistic idea just noticed in America; the future mother was told in a dream what name to give her child, this message being usually given by the very spirit of the deceased ancestor, who was about to be incarnate in her.[12] Among the lower races generally the 5renewal of old family names by giving them to new-born children may always be suspected of involving some such thought. The following is a curious pair of instances from the two halves of the globe. The New Zealand priest would repeat to the infant a long list of names of its ancestors, fixing upon that name which the child by sneezing or crying when it was uttered, was considered to select for itself; while the Cheremiss in Russia would shake the baby till it cried, and then repeat names to it, till it chose itself one by leaving off crying.[13]
Permanent transition, new birth, or reincarnation of human souls in different bodies is particularly seen as the soul of a deceased person entering the body of an infant. Brebeuf noted that the Hurons would bury their little children by the roadside so that their souls could enter passing mothers and be reborn. In North-West America, among the Tacullis, there's a practice where a medicine man directly transfers a soul by placing his hands on the breast of the dying or dead, then holds them over the head of a relative and blows through them. The next child born to this relative is believed to be animated by that soul and inherits the rank and name of the deceased. The Nutka Indians creatively explained the existence of a distant tribe speaking the same language as theirs by saying they were the spirits of their dead. In Greenland, where the cruel practice of abandoning and exploiting widows and orphans was leading to the potential extinction of the race, a helpless widow would try to convince some father that the soul of his dead child had passed into a living child of hers, or vice versa, thereby gaining a new relative and protector. It's mostly ancestral or related souls that are considered to enter children, and from a primitive perspective, this idea of soul migration is a highly philosophical theory, as it nicely accounts for the similarities between parents and children, and even the more specific phenomena of atavism. In North-West America, among the Koloshes, mothers dream of a deceased relative whose soul will be transmitted to their child; in 1860 on Vancouver Island, a boy was highly regarded by the Indians because he had a mark resembling a gunshot scar on his hip, believed to indicate that a chief who died about four generations earlier, and who had such a mark, had returned. In Old Calabar, if a mother loses a child and another is born soon after, she thinks the departed one has come back. The Wanika believe that the soul of a dead ancestor animates a child, explaining why that child resembles its parents; in Guinea, a child who strongly resembles a deceased relative, either physically or mentally, is thought to have inherited that relative's soul; and the Yorubas greet a new-born infant with the salutation, "You have arrived!" and look for signs to indicate which ancestral soul has returned among them. Among the Khonds of Orissa, births are celebrated with a feast on the seventh day, where a priest uses rice grains in a cup of water to divine which ancestor has reappeared; the infant usually receives the name of that ancestor, especially among the northern tribes. In Europe, the Lapps echo a significant animistic idea noticed in America; the future mother is told in a dream what name to give her child, typically communicated by the spirit of the deceased ancestor who is about to be incarnated in her. Generally, among lower races, the renewal of old family names by assigning them to newborn children may imply some such thought. The following are interesting examples from different parts of the world: the New Zealand priest would recite a lengthy list of the child's ancestors, identifying the name the child selected by sneezing or crying when that name was mentioned, while the Cheremiss in Russia would shake the baby until it cried and then mention names until the child chose one by stopping its cries.
The belief in the new human birth of the departed soul, which has even led West African negroes to commit suicide when in distant slavery, that they may revive in their own land, in fact amounts among several of the lower races to a distinct doctrine of an earthly resurrection. One of the most remarkable forms which this belief assumes is when dark-skinned races, wanting some reasonable theory to account for the appearance among them of human creatures of a new strange sort, the white men, and struck with their pallid deathly hue combined with powers that seem those of superhuman spiritual beings, have determined that the manes of their dead must have come back in this wondrous shape. The aborigines of Australia have expressed this theory in the simple formula, ‘Blackfellow tumble down, jump up Whitefellow.’ Thus a native who was hanged years ago at Melbourne expressed in his last moments the hopeful belief that he would jump up Whitefellow, and have lots of sixpences. The doctrine has been current among them since early days of European intercourse, and in accordance with it they habitually regarded the Englishmen as their own deceased kindred, come back to their country from an attachment to it in a former life. Real or imagined likeness completed the delusion, as when 6Sir George Grey was hugged and wept over by an old woman who found in him a son she had lost, or when a convict, recognized as a deceased relative, was endowed anew with the land he had possessed during his former life. A similar theory may be traced northward by the Torres Islands to New Caledonia, where the natives thought the white men to be the spirits of the dead who bring sickness, and assigned this as their reason for wishing to kill white men.[14] In Africa, again, the belief is found among the Western negroes that they will rise again white, and the Bari of the White Nile, believing in the resurrection of the dead on earth, considered the first white people they saw as departed spirits thus come back.[15]
The belief in being reborn after death, which has even driven some West African people to commit suicide while enslaved far from home so they can return to their own land, essentially represents a clear idea of earthly resurrection among several lower races. One of the most striking ways this belief shows up is when dark-skinned groups, puzzled about the sudden appearance of a new type of human, the white people, and astonished by their pale, ghostly appearance along with abilities that seem superhuman, conclude that the souls of their deceased ancestors must have returned in this remarkable form. The native people of Australia have summed up this theory in the simple phrase, ‘Blackfellow tumble down, jump up Whitefellow.’ This was echoed by a native who was hanged years ago in Melbourne, expressing in his final moments the hopeful thought that he would become a Whitefellow and would have many sixpences. This doctrine has been common among them since the early days of European contact, leading them to consistently view the Englishmen as their own deceased relatives, returned to their homeland because of a connection from a previous life. Real or perceived resemblances fueled this belief, as when Sir George Grey was embraced and cried over by an old woman who saw him as her lost son, or when a convict recognized as a dead relative was granted the land he had owned in his past life. A similar theory can be traced northward from the Torres Islands to New Caledonia, where the locals believed that white people were the spirits of the dead who brought disease, and this belief motivated their desire to kill white men.[14] In Africa, once again, Western negroes hold the belief that they will be reborn as white, and the Bari people of the White Nile, who believe in the resurrection of the dead on earth, viewed the first white people they encountered as spirits of the deceased returning.[15]
Next, the lower psychology, drawing no definite line of demarcation between souls of men and of beasts, can at least admit without difficulty the transmission of human souls into the bodies of the lower animals. A series of examples from among the native tribes of America will serve well to show the various ways in which such ideas are worked out. The Ahts of Vancouver’s Island consider the living man’s soul able to enter into other bodies of men and animals, going in and out like the inhabitant of a house. In old times, they say, men existed in the forms of birds, beasts, and fishes, or these had the spirits of the Indians in their bodies; some think that after death they will pass again into the bodies of the animals they occupied in this former state.[16] In an Indian district of North-West 7California, we find natives believing the spirits of their dead to enter into bears, and travellers have heard of a tribe begging the life of a wrinkle-faced old she grizzly bear as the recipient of the soul of some particular grandam, whom they fancied the creature to resemble.[17] So, among the Esquimaux, a traveller noticed a widow who was living for conscience’ sake upon birds, and would not touch walrus-meat, which the angekok had forbidden her for a time, because her late husband had entered into a walrus.[18] Among other North American tribes, we hear of the Powhatans refraining from doing harm to certain small wood-birds which received the souls of their chiefs;[19] of Huron souls turning into turtle-doves after the burial of their bones at the Feast of the Dead;[20] of that pathetic funeral rite of the Iroquois, the setting free a bird on the evening of burial, to carry away the soul.[21] In Mexico, the Tlascalans thought that after death the souls of nobles would animate beautiful singing birds, while plebeians passed into weasels and beetles and such like vile creatures.[22] So, in Brazil, the Içannas say that the souls of the brave will become beautiful birds, feeding on pleasant fruits, but cowards will be turned into reptiles.[23] Among the Abipones we hear of certain little ducks which fly in flocks at night, uttering a mournful hiss, and which fancy associates with the souls of the dead;[24] while in Popayan it is said that doves were not killed, as inspired by departed souls.[25] Lastly, transmigration into brutes is also a received doctrine in South America as when a missionary heard a Chiriquane woman of western 8Brazil say of a fox, ‘May not that be the spirit of my dead daughter?’[26]
Next, the lower psychology, which doesn’t clearly separate the souls of humans from those of animals, can easily accept the idea of human souls moving into the bodies of lower animals. A series of examples from the native tribes of America illustrates the various ways in which such beliefs are expressed. The Ahts of Vancouver’s Island believe that a living person’s soul can enter other people’s or animals’ bodies, moving in and out like someone coming and going from a house. They say that in ancient times, humans existed as birds, beasts, and fish, or that these creatures contained the spirits of the Indians; some think that after death, they will once again inhabit the bodies of the animals they once occupied. In a Native community in North-West California, some locals believe that the spirits of their deceased enter bears, and travelers have reported a tribe pleading for the life of an old grizzly bear, which they thought housed the soul of a specific elder they believed the bear resembled. A traveler among the Eskimos noticed a widow who was, out of principle, only eating birds and avoided walrus meat, which the angekok had temporarily forbidden her from eating because her late husband had entered a walrus. Among other North American tribes, we learn that the Powhatans avoid harming specific small woodland birds believed to contain the souls of their chiefs; Huron souls are said to turn into turtle doves after their bones are buried at the Feast of the Dead; and there is the touching funeral rite of the Iroquois, who release a bird on the evening of a burial to carry away the spirit. In Mexico, the Tlascalans believed that after death, nobles' souls would inhabit beautiful songbirds, while commoners would become weasels, beetles, and other undesirable creatures. Similarly, in Brazil, the Içannas say that the souls of the brave will become beautiful birds that eat sweet fruits, while cowards will be transformed into reptiles. Among the Abipones, there are small ducks that fly in flocks at night, making a mournful hissing sound, which locals associate with the spirits of the dead, while in Popayan, it is believed that doves were not killed because they were inspired by departed souls. Finally, the belief in transmigration into animals is also common in South America, as when a missionary heard a Chiriquane woman from western Brazil remark about a fox, “Could that be the spirit of my dead daughter?”
In Africa, again, mention is made of the Maravi thinking that the souls of bad men became jackals, and of good men snakes.[27] The Zulus, while admitting that a man may turn into a wasp or lizard, work out in the fullest way the idea of the dead becoming snakes, a creature whose change of skin has so often been associated with the thought of resurrection and immortality. It is especially certain green or brown harmless snakes, which come gently and fearlessly into houses, which are considered to be ‘amatongo’ or ancestors, and therefore are treated respectfully, and have offerings of food given them. In two ways, the dead man who has become a snake can still be recognized; if the creature is one-eyed, or has a scar or some other mark, it is recognized as the ‘itongo’ of a man who was thus marked in life; but if he had no mark the ‘itongo’ appears in human shape in dreams, thus revealing the personality of the snake.[28] In Guinea, monkeys found near a graveyard are supposed to be animated by the spirits of the dead, and in certain localities monkeys, crocodiles, and snakes, being thought men in metempsychosis, are held sacred.[29] It is to be borne in mind that notions of this kind may form in barbaric psychology but a portion of the wide doctrine of the soul’s future existence. For a conspicuous instance of this, let us take the system of the Gold-Coast negroes. They believe that the ‘kla’ or ‘kra,’ the vital soul, becomes at death a ‘sisa’ or ghost, which can remain in the house with the body, plague the living, and cause sickness, till it departs or is driven by the sorcerer to the bank of the River Volta, where the ghosts build themselves houses and dwell. But they can and do come back from 9this Land of Souls. They can be born again as souls in new human bodies, and a soul who was poor before will now be rich. Many will not come back as men, but will become animals. To an African mother who has lost her child, it is a consolation to say, ‘He will come again.’[30]
In Africa, it's noted that the Maravi believe the souls of bad people turn into jackals, while the souls of good people become snakes.[27] The Zulus accept that a person can transform into a wasp or lizard, but they fully embrace the idea that the dead can turn into snakes, a creature whose shedding of skin is often associated with resurrection and immortality. Specifically, certain harmless green or brown snakes that calmly and fearlessly enter homes are considered ‘amatongo’ or ancestors, and they're treated with respect, often receiving food offerings. There are two ways to identify a dead person who has become a snake; if the snake is missing an eye or has a scar or other mark, it's recognized as the ‘itongo’ of the person who bore that mark in life. If there's no mark, the ‘itongo’ can appear in human form in dreams, revealing the snake's true identity.[28] In Guinea, monkeys near a graveyard are believed to be possessed by the spirits of the dead, and in certain areas, monkeys, crocodiles, and snakes are thought to be men in reincarnation, thus considered sacred.[29] It's important to remember that these beliefs may be part of the broader understanding of the soul's future existence in their culture. A clear example can be seen in the beliefs of the Gold Coast people. They think that the ‘kla’ or ‘kra,’ the vital soul, becomes a ‘sisa’ or ghost at death, capable of lingering in the house with the body, troubling the living, and causing illness until it leaves or is forced away by a sorcerer to the banks of the River Volta, where the ghosts build homes and live. However, they can and do return from this Land of Souls. They can be reborn as souls in new human bodies, and a soul that was poor before will become rich. Many will not return as humans but will take the form of animals. For an African mother who has lost her child, it’s comforting to say, ‘He will come again.’[30]
In higher levels of culture, the theory of re-embodiment of the soul appears in strong and varied development. Though seemingly not received by the early Aryans, the doctrine of migration was adopted and adapted by Hindu philosophy, and forms an integral part of that great system common to Brahmanism and Buddhism, wherein successive births or existences are believed to carry on the consequences of past and prepare the antecedents of future life. To the Hindu the body is but the temporary receptacle of the soul, which, ‘bound in the chains of deeds’ and ‘eating the fruits of past actions,’ promotes or degrades itself along a series of embodiments in plant, beast, man, deity. Thus all creatures differ rather in degree than kind, all are akin to man, an elephant or ape or worm may once have been human, and may become human again, a pariah or barbarian is at once low-caste among men and high-caste among brutes. Through such bodies migrate the sinful souls which desire has drawn down from primal purity into gross material being; the world where they do penance for the guilt incurred in past existences is a huge reformatory, and life is the long grievous process of developing evil into good. The rules are set forth in the book of Manu how souls endowed with the quality of goodness acquire divine nature, while souls governed by passion take up the human state, and souls sunk in darkness are degraded to brutes. Thus the range of migration stretches downward from gods and saints, through holy ascetics, Brahmans, nymphs, kings, counsellors, to actors, drunkards, birds, dancers, cheats, elephants, horses, Sudras, barbarians, wild beasts, snakes, worms, insects, and inert things. Obscure as the relation mostly is between the crime and its punishment in a new 10life, there may be discerned through the code of penal transmigration an attempt at appropriateness of penalty, and an intention to punish the sinner wherein he sinned. For faults committed in a previous existence men are afflicted with deformities, the stealer of food shall be dyspeptic, the scandal-monger shall have foul breath, the horse-stealer shall go lame, and in consequence of their deeds men shall be born idiots, blind, deaf and dumb, mis-shaped, and thus despised of good men. After expiation of their wickedness in the hells of torment, the murderer of a Brahman may pass into a wild beast or pariah; he who adulterously dishonours his guru or spiritual father shall be a hundred times re-born as grass, a bush, a creeper, a carrion bird, a beast of prey; the cruel shall become blood-thirsty beasts; stealers of grain and meat shall turn into rats and vultures; the thief who took dyed garments, kitchen-herbs, or perfumes, shall become accordingly a red partridge, a peacock, or a musk-rat. In short, ‘in whatever disposition of mind a man accomplishes such and such an act, he shall reap the fruit in a body endowed with such and such a quality.’[31] The recognition of plants as possible receptacles of the transmigrating spirit well illustrates the conception of souls of plants. The idea is one known to lower races in a district of the world which has been under Hindu influence. Thus we hear among the Dayaks of Borneo of the human soul entering the trunks of trees, where it may be seen damp and blood-like, but no longer personal and sentient, or of its being re-born from an animal which has eaten of the bark, flower, or fruit;[32] and the Santals of Bengal are said to fancy that uncharitable men and childless women are eaten eternally by worms and snakes, while the good enter into fruit-bearing trees.[33] But it is an open question how far these and the Hindu 11ideas of vegetable transmigration can be considered as independent. A curious commentary on the Hindu working out of the conception of plant-souls is to be found in a passage in a 17th-century work, which describes certain Brahmans of the Coromandel Coast as eating fruits, but being careful not to pull the plants up by the roots, lest they should dislodge a soul; but few, it is remarked, are so scrupulous as this, and the consideration has occurred to them that souls in roots and herbs are most vile and abject bodies, so that if dislodged they may become better off by entering into the bodies of men or beasts.[34] Moreover, the Brahmanic doctrine of souls transmigrating into inert things has in like manner a bearing on the savage theory of object-souls.[35]
In higher levels of culture, the theory of the soul's re-embodiment shows strong and varied development. While it seems the early Aryans didn’t embrace this idea, Hindu philosophy adopted and adapted the doctrine of migration, which is now a core part of the comprehensive systems of Brahmanism and Buddhism. Here, the belief is that successive births or existences carry the consequences of past actions and shape the future. To Hindus, the body is just a temporary home for the soul, which, "bound by the chains of deeds" and "experiencing the results of past actions," promotes or degrades itself through various forms—plant, animal, human, or deity. Therefore, all creatures differ more by degree than by kind; all are related to humans, and an elephant, ape, or worm may have once been human and may become human again. A pariah or barbarian is low-caste among people but can be high-caste among animals. Through such bodies, the sinful souls, drawn down by desire from their original purity into material existence, migrate; the world where they atone for past wrongs is like a giant reformatory, with life as a long, painful journey of turning evil into good. The rules are detailed in the book of Manu on how souls with good qualities achieve a divine nature, while those driven by passion take on human forms, and souls stuck in darkness regress into animal forms. Consequently, the cycle of migration spans downwards from gods and saints, through holy ascetics, Brahmans, nymphs, kings, and counselors, to actors, drunkards, birds, dancers, cheats, elephants, horses, Sudras, barbarians, wild beasts, snakes, worms, insects, and inanimate objects. Although the connection between crime and punishment in a new life is often obscure, there is an evident effort to make the penalty fitting and to punish the sinner where they sinned. For wrongs committed in previous existences, people are born with deformities; a food thief may suffer digestive issues, a gossip may have bad breath, a horse thief may become lame, and as a consequence of their actions, individuals may be born as idiots, blind, deaf, mute, or misshapen, leading to their disdain by the good. After serving their penance in hell, a murderer of a Brahman may reincarnate as a wild beast or pariah; someone who dishonors their guru or spiritual father may be reborn up to a hundred times as grass, bushes, creepers, carrion birds, or predators; the cruel may turn into bloodthirsty animals; grain and meat thieves may reincarnate as rats or vultures; a thief who stole dyed garments, kitchen herbs, or perfumes shall transform into a red partridge, a peacock, or a musk-rat, respectively. In short, "in whatever state of mind a person performs a certain action, they will reap the consequences in a body with corresponding qualities." The acknowledgment of plants as potential homes for the transmigrating spirit clearly illustrates the idea of plant souls. This belief is found among lower races in parts of the world influenced by Hinduism. For instance, the Dayaks of Borneo speak of the human soul entering tree trunks, where it can be seen moist and blood-like, though no longer personal or aware, or being reborn from an animal that has eaten from the bark, flowers, or fruit; and the Santals of Bengal believe that unkind individuals and childless women are eternally consumed by worms and snakes, while the good are reborn into fruit-bearing trees. However, it remains an open question how far these and Hindu ideas of plant transmigration can be viewed as independent. A curious observation on Hindu ideas about plant souls is found in a 17th-century work describing certain Brahmans from the Coromandel Coast who eat fruits but are careful not to uproot plants to avoid dislocating a soul. But it is noted that few are so cautious, and they have considered that souls in roots and herbs are lowly and abject, so if dislodged, they may improve their situation by entering the bodies of men or animals. Moreover, the Brahmanic belief in souls migrating into inanimate objects also relates to the primitive theory of object souls.
Buddhism, like the Brahmanism from which it seceded, habitually recognized transmigration between superhuman and human beings and the lower animals, and in an exceptional way recognized a degradation even into a plant or a thing. How the Buddhist mind elaborated the doctrine of metempsychosis, may be seen in the endless legends of Gautama himself undergoing his 550 births, suffering pain and misery through countless ages to gain the power of freeing sentient beings from the misery inherent in all existence. Four times he became Maha Brahma, twenty times the dewa Sekra, and many times or few he passed through such stages as a hermit, a king, a rich man, a slave, a potter, a gambler, a curer of snake bites, an ape, an elephant, a bull, a serpent, a snipe, a fish, a frog, the dewa or genius of a tree. At last, when he became the supreme Buddha, his mind, like a vessel overflowing with honey, overflowed with the ambrosia of truth, and he proclaimed his triumph over life:—
Buddhism, like the Brahmanism it branched off from, consistently acknowledged the cycle of rebirth between divine beings, humans, and lower animals, and in a unique way, even acknowledged falling into a plant or an object. The way the Buddhist perspective developed the idea of reincarnation can be seen in the countless stories of Gautama, who experienced 550 lives, enduring pain and suffering for ages to earn the ability to free sentient beings from the suffering that comes with existence. He became Maha Brahma four times, dewa Sekra twenty times, and in various instances, he went through lives as a hermit, a king, a wealthy man, a slave, a potter, a gambler, a healer of snake bites, an ape, an elephant, a bull, a serpent, a snipe, a fish, a frog, and the spirit of a tree. Ultimately, when he achieved the status of the supreme Buddha, his mind, like a cup overflowing with honey, was filled with the nectar of truth, and he declared his victory over life:—
Whether the Buddhists receive the full Hindu doctrine of the migration of the individual soul from birth to birth, or whether they refine away into metaphysical subtleties the notion of continued personality, they do consistently and systematically hold that a man’s life in former existences is the cause of his now being what he is, while at this moment he is accumulating merit or demerit whose result will determine his fate in future lives. Memory, it is true, fails generally to recall these past births, but memory, as we know, stops short of the beginning even of this present life. When King Bimsara’s feet were burned and rubbed with salt by command of his cruel son that he might not walk, why was this torture inflicted on a man so holy? Because in a previous birth he had walked near a dagoba with his slippers on, and had trodden on a priest’s carpet without washing his feet. A man may be prosperous for a time on account of the merit he has received in former births, but if he does not continue to keep the precepts, his next birth will be in one of the hells, he will then be born in this world as a beast, afterwards as a preta or sprite; a proud man may be born again ugly with large lips, or as a demon or a worm. The Buddhist theory of ‘karma’ or ‘action,’ which controls the destiny of all sentient beings, not by judicial reward and punishment, but by the inflexible result of cause into effect, wherein the present is ever determined by the past in an unbroken line of causation, is indeed one of the world’s most remarkable developments of ethical speculation.[36]
Whether Buddhists fully embrace the Hindu belief in the migration of the individual soul from life to life, or whether they dive into metaphysical subtleties regarding the idea of continued personality, they consistently maintain that a person's life in previous existences is what shapes who they are now. At this moment, they are accumulating merit or demerit, which will affect their fate in future lives. It's true that memory generally fails to recall these past births, but memory, as we know, doesn’t even reach back to the very start of this current life. When King Bimsara's feet were burned and rubbed with salt by his cruel son to prevent him from walking, why was this suffering inflicted on such a holy man? Because in a previous life, he walked near a dagoba wearing slippers and stepped onto a priest's carpet without washing his feet first. A person might enjoy prosperity for a time due to the merit earned in past lives, but if they don’t continue to follow the precepts, their next life could be in one of the hells. They may then be reborn in this world as an animal, later as a preta or spirit; a proud person might return as someone ugly with large lips, or as a demon or a worm. The Buddhist theory of 'karma' or 'action' dictates the fate of all sentient beings—not through judicial rewards and punishments, but through the inevitable outcome of cause and effect, where the present is always shaped by the past in an unbroken chain of causation. This is indeed one of the most remarkable developments in ethical thinking in the world.[36]
13Within the classic world, the ancient Egyptians were described as maintaining a doctrine of migration, whether by successive embodiments of the immortal soul through creatures of earth, sea, and air, and back again to man, or by the simpler judicial penalty which sent back the wicked dead to earth as unclean beasts.[37] The pictures and hieroglyphic sentences of the Book of the Dead, however, do not afford the necessary confirmation for these statements, even the mystic transformations of the soul not being of the nature of transmigrations. Thus it seems that the theological centre whence the doctrine of moral metempsychosis may have spread over the ancient cultured religions, must be sought elsewhere than in Egypt. In Greek philosophy, great teachers stood forth to proclaim the doctrine in a highly developed form. Plato had mythic knowledge to convey of souls entering such new incarnations as their glimpse of real existence had made them fit for, from the body of a philosopher or a lover down to the body of a tyrant and usurper; of souls transmigrating into beasts and rising again to man according to the lives they led; of birds that were light-minded souls; of oysters suffering in banishment the penalty of utter ignorance. Pythagoras is made to illustrate in his own person his doctrine of metempsychosis, by recognizing where it hung in Here’s temple the shield he had carried in a former birth, when he was that Euphorbos whom Menelaos slew at the siege of Troy. Afterwards he was Hermotimos, the Klazomenian prophet whose funeral rites were so prematurely celebrated while his soul was out, and after that, as Lucian tells the story, his prophetic soul passed into the body of a cock. Mikyllos asks this cock to tell him about Troy—were things there really as Homer said? But the cock replies, ‘How should Homer have known, O Mikyllos? When the Trojan war was going on, he was a camel in Baktria!’[38]
13 In the ancient world, the Egyptians were seen as following a belief in migration, whether it was through the repeated incarnations of the immortal soul in different creatures or by the simpler punishment that sent wicked souls back to Earth as unclean animals.[37] However, the illustrations and hieroglyphic texts in the Book of the Dead don’t provide the needed evidence for these claims, as the mystical changes of the soul don’t really align with the idea of transmigration. So, it appears that the theological source of the doctrine of moral metempsychosis may actually be found outside of Egypt. In Greek philosophy, prominent thinkers emerged to promote this doctrine in a more advanced form. Plato had profound insights about souls entering new lives based on their experiences of true existence, ranging from the body of a philosopher or a lover to that of a tyrant and usurper; souls could even be reincarnated as animals, returning to human form depending on their past actions; light-hearted souls became birds; and oysters suffered in exile due to their complete ignorance. Pythagoras demonstrated his own doctrine of metempsychosis by recognizing the shield he once carried in a past life, as Euphorbos, who was killed by Menelaus during the Trojan War. Later, he was Hermotimos, the prophet from Klazomenai, whose funeral was held too soon while his soul was away, and afterward, according to Lucian, his prophetic soul took the form of a rooster. Mikyllos asks this rooster about Troy—was it really as Homer described? The rooster responds, “How could Homer have known, O Mikyllos? When the Trojan War was happening, he was a camel in Bactria!”[38]
14In the later Jewish philosophy, the Kabbalists took up the doctrine of migration, the gilgul or ‘rolling on’ of souls, and maintained it by that characteristic method of Biblical interpretation which it is good to hold up from time to time for a warning to the mystical interpreters of our own day. The soul of Adam passed into David, and shall pass into the Messiah, for are not these initials in the very name of Ad(a)m, and does not Ezekiel say that ‘my servant David shall be their prince for ever.’ Cain’s soul passed into Jethro, and Abel’s into Moses, and therefore it was that Jethro gave Moses his daughter to wife. Souls migrate into beasts and birds and vermin, for is not Jehovah ‘the lord of the spirits of all flesh’? and he who has done one sin beyond his good works shall pass into a brute. He who gives a Jew unclean meat to eat, his soul shall enter into a leaf, blown to and fro by the wind; ‘for ye shall be as an oak whose leaf fadeth;’ and he who speaks ill words, his soul shall pass into a dumb stone, as did Nabal’s, ‘and he became a stone.’[39] Within the range of Christian influence the Manichæans appear as the most remarkable exponents of the metempsychosis. We hear of their ideas of sinners’ souls transmigrating into beasts, the viler according to their crimes; that he who kills a fowl or rat will become a fowl or rat himself; that souls can pass into plants rooted in the ground, which thus have not only life but sense; that the souls of reapers pass into beans and barley, to be cut down in their turn, and thus the elect were careful to explain to the bread when they ate it, that it was not they who reaped the corn it was made of; that the souls of the auditors, that is, the spiritually low commonalty who lived a married life, would pass into melons and cucumbers, to finish their purification by being eaten by the elect. But these details come to us from the accounts of bitter theological adversaries, and 15the question is, how much of them did the Manichæans really and soberly believe? Allowing for exaggeration and constructive imputation, there is some reason to consider the account at least founded on fact. The Manichæans appear to have recognized a wandering of imperfect souls, whether or not their composite religion may with its Zarathustrian and Christian elements have also absorbed in so Indian a shape the doctrine of purification of souls by migration into animals and plants.[40] In later times, the doctrine of metempsychosis has been again and again noticed in a district of South-Western Asia. William of Ruysbroek speaks of the notion of souls passing from body to body as general among the mediæval Nestorians, even a somewhat intelligent priest consulting him as to the souls of brutes, whether they could find refuge elsewhere so as not to be compelled to labour after death. Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela records in the 12th century of the Druses of Mount Hermon: ‘They say that the soul of a virtuous man is transferred to the body of a new-born child, whereas that of the vicious transmigrates into a dog, or some other animal.’ Such ideas indeed, seem not yet extinct in the modern Druse nation. Among the Nassairi, also, transmigration is believed in as a penance and purification: we hear of migration of unbelievers into camels, asses, dogs, or sheep, of disobedient Nassairi into Jews, Sunnis, or Christians, of the faithful into new bodies of their own people, a few such changes of ‘shirt’ (i.e. body), bringing them to enter paradise or become stars.[41] An instance of the belief within the limits of modern Christian Europe may be found among the Bulgarians, whose superstition is that Turks who have never eaten pork in life will become wild boars after death. A 16party assembled to feast on a boar has been known to throw it all away, for the meat jumped off the spit into the fire, and a piece of cotton was found in the ears, which the wise man decided to be a piece of the ci-devant Turk’s turban.[42] Such cases, however, are exceptional. Metempsychosis never became one of the great doctrines of Christendom, though not unknown in mediæval scholasticism, and though maintained by an eccentric theologian here and there into our own times. It would be strange were it not so. It is in the very nature of the development of religion that speculations of the earlier culture should dwindle to survivals, yet be again and again revived. Doctrines transmigrate, if souls do not; and metempsychosis, wandering along the course of ages, came at last to animate the souls of Fourier and Soame Jenyns.[43]
14In later Jewish philosophy, the Kabbalists embraced the idea of the migration of souls, known as transmigration or ‘rolling on’, and upheld it using a typical method of Biblical interpretation that serves as a timely reminder for the mystical interpreters of today. The soul of Adam passed into David and will eventually pass into the Messiah, as suggested by the initials in the name Ad(a)m, and Ezekiel states that ‘my servant David shall be their prince forever.’ Cain’s soul transferred to Jethro, and Abel’s to Moses, which is why Jethro gave his daughter to Moses. Souls can migrate into animals, birds, and even pests, since Jehovah is ‘the lord of the spirits of all flesh.’ Someone who goes beyond their good deeds by committing a sin will be reincarnated as a beast. A person who feeds a Jew unclean food will have their soul enter into a leaf, tossed around by the wind; ‘for you shall be like an oak whose leaf fades;’ and anyone who speaks ill will have their soul become a dumb stone, as happened to Nabal, ‘and he became a stone.’[39] Within the influence of Christianity, the Manichæans stand out as significant advocates of metempsychosis. They believed that sinners’ souls can be reincarnated into animals, with the nature of the animal reflecting their crimes; someone who kills a bird or a rat will also become one. They thought that souls could enter plants, which then are considered to have not just life but also awareness; the souls of harvesters would likely transition into beans and barley, thus when the elect consumed bread, they explained that they weren't the ones who harvested the grain it was made from; the souls of the lower spiritual classes living married lives would migrate into melons and cucumbers, finishing their purification by being eaten by the elect. However, these accounts come from their bitter theological opponents, and 15the question remains: how much did the Manichæans truly and seriously believe? Even accounting for exaggeration and hyperbole, there's at least some reason to think their beliefs were based in reality. It seems the Manichæans recognized a wandering of imperfect souls, whether their combined religion drew from both Zarathustrian and Christian elements and absorbed the idea of soul purification through migration into animals and plants.[40] In more recent times, the doctrine of metempsychosis has been noted repeatedly in South-Western Asia. William of Ruysbroek mentioned that the idea of souls migrating from body to body was widespread among the medieval Nestorians, even with a somewhat knowledgeable priest asking him if the souls of animals could find refuge elsewhere to avoid labor after death. Rabbi Benjamin of Tudela noted in the 12th century that the Druses of Mount Hermon believed: ‘They say that the soul of a virtuous man is passed to the body of a newborn child, while that of a wicked person transmigrates into a dog or another animal.’ Such beliefs still seem to persist among the modern Druse community. Among the Nassairi, transmigration is also understood as a form of penance and purification; they speak of unbelievers being reborn as camels, donkeys, dogs, or sheep, of disobedient Nassairi being reborn as Jews, Sunnis, or Christians, and of the faithful returning as new bodies from their own people, with some of these ‘changes of shirt’ (i.e., body) leading them to paradise or turning them into stars.[41] An example of such beliefs within modern Christian Europe can be observed among the Bulgarians, who hold the superstition that Turks who never consumed pork during their lives will become wild boars after death. A group gathered to feast on a boar has been known to throw it all away when the meat leaped off the spit into the fire, and a piece of cotton was discovered in the ears, which a wise man interpreted as part of the former Turk’s turban.[42] However, such instances are rare. Metempsychosis never became a major doctrine in Christianity, although it was not unheard of in medieval scholasticism and continued to be proposed by some eccentric theologians into more recent times. It would be unusual if it were otherwise. It's in the nature of religious development for earlier cultural speculations to fade into remnants that are revived at various points. Doctrines can migrate, even if souls do not; and the concept of metempsychosis, traveling through the ages, ultimately influenced thinkers like Fourier and Soame Jenyns.[43]
Thus we have traced the theory of metempsychosis in stage after stage of the world’s civilization, scattered among the native races of America and Africa, established in the Asiatic nations, especially where elaborated by the Hindu mind into its system of ethical philosophy, rising and falling in classic and mediæval Europe, and lingering at last in the modern world as an intellectual crotchet, of little account but to the ethnographer who notes it down as an item of 17evidence for his continuity of culture. What, we may well ask, was the original cause and motive of the doctrine of transmigration? Something may be said in answer, though not at all enough for full explanation. The theory that ancestral souls return, thus imparting their own likeness of mind and body to their descendants and kindred, has been already mentioned and commended as in itself a very reasonable and philosophical hypothesis, accounting for the phenomenon of family likeness going on from generation to generation. But why should it have been imagined that men’s souls could inhabit the bodies of beasts and birds? As has been already pointed out, savages not unreasonably consider the lower animals to have souls like their own, and this state of mind makes the idea of a man’s soul transmigrating into a beast’s body at least seem possible. But it does not actually suggest the idea. The view stated in a previous chapter as to the origin of the conception of soul in general, may perhaps help us here. As it seems that the first conception of souls may have been that of the souls of men, this being afterwards extended by analogy to the souls of animals, plants, &c., so it may seem that the original idea of transmigration was the straightforward and reasonable one of human souls being re-born in new human bodies, where they are recognized by family likenesses in successive generations. This notion may have been afterwards extended to take in re-birth in bodies of animals, &c. There are some well-marked savage ideas which will fit with such a course of thought. The half-human features and actions and characters of animals are watched with wondering sympathy by the savage, as by the child. The beast is the very incarnation of familiar qualities of man; and such names as lion, bear, fox, owl, parrot, viper, worm, when we apply them as epithets to men, condense into a word some leading feature of a human life. Consistently with this, we see in looking over details of savage transmigration that the creatures often have an evident fitness to the character of the human beings whose souls are to pass into them, so that the savage 18philosopher’s fancy of transferred souls offered something like an explanation of the likeness between beast and man. This comes more clearly into view among the more civilized races who have worked out the idea of transmigration into ethical schemes of retribution, where the appropriateness of the creatures chosen is almost as manifest to the modern critic as it could have been to the ancient believer. Perhaps the most graphic restoration of the state of mind in which the theological doctrine of metempsychosis was worked out in long-past ages, may be found in the writings of a modern theologian whose spiritualism often follows to the extreme the intellectual tracks of the lower races. In the spiritual world, says Emanuel Swedenborg, such persons as have opened themselves for the admission of the devil and acquired the nature of beasts, becoming foxes in cunning, &c., appear also at a distance in the proper shape of such beasts as they represent in disposition.[44] Lastly, one of the most notable points about the theory of transmigration is its close bearing upon a thought which lies very deep in the history of philosophy, the development-theory of organic life in successive stages. An elevation from the vegetable to the lower animal life, and thence onward through the higher animals to man, to say nothing of superhuman beings, does not here require even a succession of distinct individuals, but is brought by the theory of metempsychosis within the compass of the successive vegetable and animal lives of a single being.
Thus, we've traced the idea of metempsychosis throughout different stages of the world's civilization, found among the indigenous people of America and Africa, rooted in the Asian nations—particularly where it was developed by Hindu thinkers into an ethical philosophy—flourishing and declining in classical and medieval Europe, and eventually lingering in the modern world as an intellectual curiosity, of little significance except to the ethnographer who records it as a cultural continuity item. What, we might ask, was the original reason behind the doctrine of reincarnation? There is some response we can provide, though it's not enough for a complete explanation. The idea that ancestral souls return to influence the minds and bodies of their descendants has been previously mentioned as a reasonable and philosophical hypothesis, explaining the phenomenon of family resemblance passed down through generations. But why was it thought that human souls could inhabit the bodies of animals and birds? As noted before, many indigenous people believe that lower animals possess souls similar to their own, and this mindset makes the thought of a person's soul transitioning into an animal’s body at least seem plausible. However, it doesn’t actually generate the idea. The perspective outlined in an earlier chapter regarding the origin of the concept of soul may shed some light on this. If the initial idea of souls originated with human souls, which were later analogously extended to animals, plants, etc., it seems that the original concept of transmigration was simply the straightforward and logical idea of human souls being reborn in new human bodies, recognizable by family similarities through successive generations. This notion may have later been expanded to include rebirth in animal bodies, etc. There are distinct primitive ideas that align with this line of thinking. The half-human traits and behaviors of animals captivate and resonate with the savage, just as they do with a child. Animals embody familiar human qualities; terms like lion, bear, fox, owl, parrot, viper, worm, when used as descriptors for people, capture key aspects of human life. Consistent with this, when examining the specifics of primitive transmigration, it's clear that the animals often relate closely to the traits of the human beings whose souls are to transfer into them, providing the primitive philosopher’s imagination with a semblance of explanation for the similarities between beasts and humans. This becomes even clearer among more civilized cultures that have developed the idea of reincarnation into ethical principles of retribution, where the suitability of the chosen creatures is just as apparent to modern critics as it may have been to ancient believers. Perhaps one of the most vivid expressions of the mindset that produced the theological doctrine of metempsychosis can be found in the writings of a contemporary theologian, whose spiritualism often closely follows the intellectual paths of lower cultures. In the spiritual realm, Emanuel Swedenborg states, individuals who have opened themselves to evil and taken on beast-like qualities, becoming cunning like foxes, also appear in their true form as the animals they embody in character.[44] Finally, one of the most significant aspects of the theory of reincarnation is its connection to a profound thought in the history of philosophy: the developmental theory of organic life progressing through various stages. The transition from plants to lower animal life and then onward through higher animals to humans, not to mention superhuman beings, doesn’t even require a succession of distinct individuals but is encompassed by the theory of metempsychosis within the series of successive plant and animal lives of a single being.
Here a few words may be said on a subject which cannot be left out of sight, connecting as it does the two great branches of the doctrine of future existence, but which it is difficult to handle in definite terms, and much more to trace historically by comparing the views of lower and higher races. This is the doctrine of a bodily renewal or 19resurrection. To the philosophy of the lower races it is by no means necessary that the surviving soul should be provided with a new body, for it seems itself to be of a filmy or vaporous corporeal nature, capable of carrying on an independent existence like other corporeal creatures. Savage descriptions of the next world are often such absolute copies of this, that it is scarcely possible to say whether the dead are or are not thought of as having bodies like the living; and a few pieces of evidence of this class are hardly enough to prove the lower races to hold original and distinct doctrines of corporeal resurrection.[45] Again, attention must be given to the practice, so common among low and high races, of preserving relics of the dead, from mere morsels of bone up to whole mummified bodies. It is well known that the departed soul is often thought apt to revisit the remains of the body, as is seen in the well-known pictures of the Egyptian funeral ritual. But the preservation of these remains, even where it thus involves a permanent connexion between body and soul, does not necessarily approach more closely to a bodily resurrection.[46] In discussing the closely allied doctrine of metempsychosis, I have described the theory of the soul’s transmigration into a new human body as asserting in fact an earthly resurrection. From the same point of view, a bodily resurrection in Heaven or Hades is technically a transmigration of the soul. This is plain among the higher races, in whose religion these doctrines take at once clearer definition and more practical import. There are some distinct mentions of bodily resurrection in the Rig Veda: the dead is spoken of as glorified, putting on his body (tanu); and it is even promised that the pious man shall be born in the next world with his entire body (sarvatanû). In Brahminism 20and Buddhism, the re-births of souls in bodies to inhabit heavens and hells are simply included as particular cases of transmigration. The doctrine of the resurrection appears far back in the religion of Persia, and is thence supposed to have passed into late Jewish belief.[47] In early Christianity, the conception of bodily resurrection is developed with especial strength and fulness in the Pauline doctrine. For an explicit interpretation of this doctrine, such as commended itself to the minds of later theologians, it is instructive to cite the remarkable passage of Origen, where he speaks of ‘corporeal matter, of which matter, in whatever quality placed, the soul always has use, now indeed carnal, but afterwards indeed subtler and purer, which is called spiritual.’[48]
Here a few words can be said about a topic that can’t be overlooked, as it connects the two main aspects of the concept of life after death. However, it’s hard to address clearly and even more challenging to trace historically by comparing the beliefs of less advanced and more advanced cultures. This is the idea of bodily renewal or resurrection. For the philosophy of less advanced cultures, it isn't necessary for the surviving soul to get a new body since it seems to have a thin or vaporous physical nature, capable of existing independently like other physical beings. Descriptions of the afterlife in primitive cultures often mirror this so closely that it’s hard to determine whether the dead are thought to have bodies like the living; and a few pieces of evidence in this regard are hardly enough to prove that these cultures have original and distinct beliefs about bodily resurrection.[45] Again, attention must be given to the common practice among both simple and more developed societies of keeping relics of the dead, from small bits of bone to entire mummified bodies. It’s well known that the departed soul is often believed to revisit the body’s remains, as illustrated in the well-known images of Egyptian funeral rituals. However, preserving these remains, even if it involves a lasting connection between body and soul, doesn’t necessarily imply a closer approach to bodily resurrection.[46] In discussing the related concept of metempsychosis, I’ve described the theory of the soul’s rebirth into a new human body as essentially claiming an earthly resurrection. From this perspective, bodily resurrection in Heaven or Hades is technically a form of soul migration. This is clear among more advanced cultures, where these beliefs are more clearly defined and have more practical significance. There are specific mentions of bodily resurrection in the Rig Veda: the dead is referred to as glorified, putting on his body (tanu); and it’s even promised that a righteous person will be born in the next world with their whole body (sarvatanû). In Brahminism and Buddhism, the reincarnations of souls in bodies for inhabiting heavens and hells are simply seen as specific instances of transmigration. The belief in resurrection appears early on in Persian religion and is thought to have influenced later Jewish beliefs.[47] In early Christianity, the idea of bodily resurrection is particularly strong and fully developed in Pauline doctrine. For a clear interpretation of this belief, as it appealed to the minds of later theologians, it’s useful to cite the notable passage from Origen, where he speaks of ‘corporeal matter, which, no matter its quality, the soul always uses—first in a physical form, but later in a subtler and purer form, which is called spiritual.’[48]
Passing from these metaphysical doctrines of civilized theology, we now take up a series of beliefs higher in practical moment, and more clearly conceived in savage thought. There may well have been, and there may still be, low races destitute of any belief in a Future State. Nevertheless, prudent ethnographers must often doubt accounts of such, for this reason, that the savage who declares that the dead live no more, may merely mean to say that they are dead. When the East African is asked what becomes of his buried ancestors, the ‘old people,’ he can reply that ‘they are ended,’ yet at the same time he fully admits that their ghosts survive.[49] In an account of the religious ideas of the Zulus, taken down from a native, it is explicitly stated that Unkulunkulu the Old-Old-One said that people ‘were to die and never rise again,’ and that he allowed them to ‘die and rise no more.’[50] Knowing so thoroughly as we now do the theology of the Zulus, whose ghosts not only survive in 21the under-world, but are the very deities of the living, we can put the proper sense to these expressions. But without such information, we might have mistaken them for denials of the soul’s existence after death. This objection may even apply to one of the most formal denials of a future life ever placed on record among an uncultured race, a poem of the Dinka tribe of the White Nile, concerning Dendid the Creator:—
Moving away from these complex ideas in traditional theology, let's now look at a set of beliefs that are more directly relevant and easier to understand in primitive cultures. It's possible that some less advanced societies might not believe in an afterlife. However, careful researchers often question reports of this because a person from a primitive society who says that the dead no longer exist may simply mean they are dead. For example, when an East African is asked what happens to his buried ancestors, referred to as the ‘old people,’ he might respond that ‘they are ended,’ but he still acknowledges that their spirits continue to exist.[49] In a description of the Zulu people’s spiritual beliefs, recorded from a local source, it clearly states that Unkulunkulu, the Old-Old-One, said that people ‘were to die and never rise again,’ and that he allowed them to ‘die and rise no more.’[50] Now that we have a solid understanding of Zulu theology, where the spirits not only persist in the underworld but also serve as gods for the living, we can interpret these statements correctly. Without this context, we could easily misinterpret them as outright rejections of the soul’s existence after death. This concern might even apply to one of the most explicit denials of an afterlife recorded among an unrefined society, a poem from the Dinka tribe of the White Nile, about Dendid the Creator:—
It is to be remarked, however, that the close neighbours of these Dinka, the Bari, believe that the dead do return to live again on earth, and the question arises whether it is the doctrine of bodily resurrection, or the doctrine of the surviving ghost-soul, that the Dinka poem denies. The missionary Kaufmann says that the Dinka do not believe the immortality of the soul, that they think it but a breath, and with death all is over; Brun-Rollet’s contrary authority goes to prove that they do believe in another life; both leave it an open question whether they recognize the existence of surviving ghosts.[51]
It should be noted, however, that the Dinka's close neighbors, the Bari, believe that the dead can come back to life on earth. This raises the question of whether the Dinka poem rejects the idea of bodily resurrection or the concept of surviving ghost-souls. Missionary Kaufmann claims that the Dinka don't believe in the immortality of the soul; they see it as just a breath, and believe that everything ends with death. On the other hand, Brun-Rollet offers opposing views, suggesting that they do believe in an afterlife. Both perspectives leave it unclear whether they acknowledge the existence of surviving ghosts.[51]
Looking at the religion of the lower races as a whole, we shall at least not be ill-advised in taking as one of its general and principal elements the doctrine of the soul’s Future Life. But here it is needful to explain, to limit, and to reserve, lest modern theological ideas should lead us to misconstrue more primitive beliefs. In such enquiries the 22phrase ‘immortality of the soul’ is to be avoided as misleading. It is doubtful how far the lower psychology entertains at all an absolute conception of immortality, for past and future fade soon into utter vagueness as the savage mind quits the present to explore them, the measure of months and years breaks down even within the narrow span of human life, and the survivor’s thought of the soul of the departed dwindles and disappears with the personal memory that kept it alive. The doctrine of the surviving soul may indeed be treated as common to all known races, though its acceptance is not unanimous. In savage as in civilized life, dull and careless natures ignore a world to come as too far off, while sceptical intellects are apt to reject its belief as wanting proof. There are even statements on record of whole classes being formally excluded from future life. This may be a matter of social pride. In the Tonga Islands, according to Mariner, it was held that the chiefs and nobles would live hereafter in the happy island of Bolotu, but that the souls of the common people would die with their bodies. So Captain John Smith relates as to the belief of the Virginians, that the chiefs went after death beyond the sunset mountains, there to dance and sing with their predecessors, ‘but the common people they suppose shall not live after death.’ In the record of a missionary examination of the Nicaraguans, they are made to state their belief that if a man lived well, his soul would ascend to dwell among the gods, but if ill it would perish with the body, and there would be an end of it.[52] None of these accounts, however, agree with what is known of the religion of kindred peoples, Polynesian, Algonquin, or Aztec. But granted that the soul survives the death of the body, instance after instance from the records of the lower culture shows this soul to be regarded as a mortal being, liable like the body itself to accident and death. The Greenlanders pitied the poor souls who must pass in winter or in storm the dreadful mountain where 23the dead descend to reach the other world, for then a soul is like to come to harm, and die the other death where there is nothing left, and this is to them the dolefullest thing of all.[53] Thus the Fijians tell of the fight which the ghost of a departed warrior must wage with the soul-killing Samu and his brethren; this is the contest for which the dead man is armed by burying the war-club with his corpse, and if he conquers, the way is open for him to the judgment-seat of Ndengei, but if he is wounded, his doom is to wander among the mountains, and if killed in the encounter he is cooked and eaten by Samu and his brethren. But the souls of unmarried Fijians will not even survive to stand this wager of battle; such try in vain to steal at low water round to the edge of the reef past the rocks where Nangananga, destroyer of wifeless souls, sits laughing at their hopeless efforts, and asking them if they think the tide will never flow again, till at last the rising flood drives the shivering ghosts to the beach, and Nangananga dashes them in pieces on the great black stone, as one shatters rotten firewood.[54] Such, again, were the tales told by the Guinea negroes of the life or death of departed souls. Either the great priest before whom they must appear after death would judge them, sending the good in peace to a happy place, but killing the wicked a second time with the club that stands ready before his dwelling; or else the departed shall be judged by their god at the river of death, to be gently wafted by him to a pleasant land if they have kept feasts and oaths and abstained from forbidden meats, but if not, to be plunged into the river by the god, and thus drowned and buried in eternal oblivion.[55] Even common water can drown a negro ghost, if we may believe the missionary Cavazzi’s story of the Matamba widows being ducked in the river or pond to drown off the 24souls of their departed husbands, who might still be hanging about them, clinging closest to the best-loved wives. After this ceremony, they went and married again.[56] From such details it appears that the conception of some souls suffering extinction at death or dying a second death, a thought still as heretofore familiar to speculative theology, is not unknown in the lower culture.
Looking at the religions of the less advanced societies overall, we can reasonably consider one of its main elements to be the belief in an afterlife. However, it’s important to clarify and narrow down this concept to avoid misunderstanding primitive beliefs through the lens of modern theology. In these inquiries, the term 'immortality of the soul' should be avoided as it can be misleading. It’s uncertain to what extent these simpler societies have a clear idea of immortality, as their thoughts about the past and future quickly become vague when they move away from the present. The concepts of months and years break down even within a human lifetime, and memories of the deceased fade as the personal memories binding them to life diminish. The idea of a surviving soul is indeed common across known cultures, but its acceptance isn’t universal. In both savage and civilized societies, apathetic or indifferent individuals may disregard an afterlife as too distant, while skeptical thinkers often reject it due to a lack of evidence. There are even records of entire groups being formally excluded from the idea of an afterlife. In the Tonga Islands, for example, as Mariner noted, chiefs and nobles were believed to continue living in the blissful island of Bolotu, while the common people’s souls would die with their bodies. Similarly, Captain John Smith noted that the Virginians believed that chiefs went beyond the sunset mountains after death to dance and sing with their ancestors, but that common people would not live on after death. According to a missionary's examination of the Nicaraguans, they believed that if someone lived well, their soul would ascend to be among the gods, but if they lived poorly, it would perish with their body, ending there. None of these accounts, however, align with what is known about the religions of related peoples like the Polynesians, Algonquins, or Aztecs. But assuming the soul survives bodily death, numerous accounts from simpler cultures show that this soul is often viewed as a mortal being, at risk of accidents and death just like the body itself. The Greenlanders felt sorry for the souls that had to navigate the terrifying mountain in winter or during storms to reach the afterlife, as those souls were likely to come to harm and die a second death, which they regarded as the most tragic fate of all. The Fijians tell a story of a deceased warrior's spirit who must fight against the soul-destroying Samu and his kin; this battle is one for which the deceased is prepared by burying their war club with their body. If victorious, they can proceed to the judgment seat of Ndengei, but if injured, they are doomed to wander the mountains, and if killed, they end up cooked and eaten by Samu and his kin. However, the souls of unmarried Fijians don’t even survive this ordeal; they attempt to sneak around the reef where Nangananga, the destroyer of soul-less beings, sits laughing at their futile attempts, challenging them as they wait for the tide to recede. Ultimately, the rising tide forces the shivering souls to the shore, where Nangananga smashes them against a large black stone, like breaking rotten firewood. Similarly, the Guinea Negroes had tales about the fate of departed souls. They believed either that the high priest, who judged them after death, would send the good souls peacefully to a happy place while striking the wicked a second time with a club kept ready outside his home, or that the departed would face judgment from their god at the river of death. Those who had kept feasts, oaths, and avoided forbidden foods would be graciously guided by the god to a pleasant land, while others would be thrown into the river and drowned, buried in eternal oblivion. Even ordinary water could drown a Negro ghost, according to missionary Cavazzi’s story of Matamba widows being submerged in rivers or ponds to rid themselves of the souls of their deceased husbands, who were believed to linger close to the wives they cherished most. After the ritual, they would go on to marry again. From these details, it’s clear that the idea of some souls facing extinction at death or experiencing a second death—a notion still familiar in speculative theology—is recognized in simpler cultures.
The soul, as recognized in the philosophy of the lower races, may be defined as an ethereal surviving being, conceptions of which preceded and led up to the more transcendental theory of the immaterial and immortal soul, which forms part of the theology of higher nations. It is principally the ethereal surviving soul of early culture that has now to be studied in the religions of savages and barbarians and the folk-lore of the civilized world. That this soul should be looked on as surviving beyond death is a matter scarcely needing elaborate argument. Plain experience is there to teach it to every savage; his friend or his enemy is dead, yet still in dream or open vision he sees the spectral form which is to his philosophy a real objective being, carrying personality as it carries likeness. This thought of the soul’s continued existence is, however, but the gateway into a complex region of belief. The doctrines which, separate or compounded, make up the scheme of future existence among particular tribes, are principally these: the theories of lingering, wandering, and returning ghosts, and of souls dwelling on or below or above the earth in a spirit-world, where existence is modelled upon the earthly life, or raised to higher glory, or placed under reversed conditions, and lastly, the belief in a division between happiness and misery of departed souls, by a retribution for deeds done in life, determined in a judgment after death.
The soul, as understood in the philosophy of earlier cultures, can be described as an ethereal being that survives beyond death. This concept evolved into the more advanced idea of the immaterial and immortal soul, which is part of the theology of more developed societies. Primarily, the ethereal surviving soul of early cultures needs to be studied in the religions of indigenous peoples and the folklore of civilized societies. The notion that this soul continues to exist after death hardly requires extensive argument. Simple experience teaches it to every person in a primitive society; whether a friend or an enemy is dead, they still see, in dreams or visions, a spectral form that their philosophy perceives as a real being with personality, just like their resemblance. However, this idea of the soul's continued existence opens the door to a complex belief system. The doctrines that, whether separate or combined, constitute the beliefs about life after death among various tribes mainly include: theories about lingering, wandering, and returning spirits, as well as souls that exist on, below, or above the earth in a spirit world where life resembles earthly existence, is elevated to a higher glory, or is subjected to opposite circumstances. Lastly, there is the belief in a division between the happiness and suffering of departed souls, determined by the actions taken in life, followed by a judgment after death.
‘All argument is against it; but all belief is for it,’ said Dr. Johnson of the apparition of departed spirits. The doctrine that ghost-souls of the dead hover among the 25living is indeed rooted in the lowest levels of savage culture, extends through barbaric life almost without a break, and survives largely and deeply in the midst of civilization. From the myriad details of travellers, missionaries, historians, theologians, spiritualists, it may be laid down as an admitted opinion, as wide in distribution as it is natural in thought, that the two chief hunting-grounds of the departed soul are the scenes of its fleshly life and the burial place of its body. As in North America the Chickasaws believed that the spirits of the dead in their bodily shape moved about among the living in great joy; as the Aleutian islanders fancied the souls of the departed walking unseen among their kindred, and accompanying them in their journeys by sea and land; as Africans think that souls of the dead dwell in their midst, and eat with them at meal times; as Chinese pay their respects to kindred spirits present in the hall of ancestors;[57] so multitudes in Europe and America live in an atmosphere that swarms with ghostly shapes—spirits of the dead, who sit over against the mystic by his midnight fire, rap and write in spirit-circles, and peep over girls’ shoulders as they scare themselves into hysterics with ghost-stories. Almost throughout the vast range of animistic religion, we shall find the souls of the departed hospitably entertained by the survivors on set occasions, and manes-worship, so deep and strong among the faiths of the world, recognizes with a reverence not without fear and trembling those ancestral spirits which, powerful for good or ill, manifest their presence among mankind. Nevertheless death and life dwell but ill together, and from savagery onward there is recorded many a device by which the survivors have sought to rid themselves of household ghosts. Though the unhappy savage custom of deserting houses after a decease may often be connected with other causes, such as horror or abnegation of all things belonging to the dead, there are cases where it 26appears that the place is simply abandoned to the ghost. In Old Calabar it was customary for the son to leave his fathers’ house to decay, but after two years he might rebuild it, the ghost being thought by that time to have departed;[58] the Hottentots abandoned the dead man’s house, and were said to avoid entering it lest the ghost should be within;[59] the Yakuts let the hut fall in ruins where any one had expired, thinking it the habitation of demons;[60] the Karens were said to destroy their villages to escape the dangerous neighbourhood of departed souls.[61] Such proceedings, however, scarcely extend beyond the limits of barbarism, and only a feeble survival of the old thought lingers on into civilization, where from time to time a haunted house is left to fall in ruins, abandoned to a ghostly tenant who cannot keep it in repair. But even in the lowest culture we find flesh holding its own against spirit, and at higher stages the householder rids himself with little scruple of an unwelcome inmate. The Greenlanders would carry the dead out by the window, not by the door, while an old woman, waving a firebrand behind, cried ‘piklerrukpok!’ i.e., ‘there is nothing more to be had here!’;[62] the Hottentots removed the dead from the hut by an opening broken out on purpose, to prevent him from finding the way back;[63] the Siamese, with the same intention, break an opening through the house wall to carry the coffin through, and then hurry it at full speed thrice round the house;[64] in Russia the Chuwashes fling a red-hot stone 27after the corpse is carried out, for an obstacle to bar the soul from coming back;[65] so Brandenburg peasants pour out a pail of water at the door after the coffin, to prevent the ghost from walking; and Pomeranian mourners returning from the churchyard leave behind the straw from the hearse that the wandering soul may rest there, and not come back so far as home.[66] In the ancient and mediæval world, men habitually invoked supernatural aid beyond such material shifts as these, calling in the priest to lay or banish intruding ghosts, nor is this branch of the exorcist’s art even yet forgotten. There is, and always has been, a prevalent feeling that disembodied souls, especially such as have suffered a violent or untimely death, are baneful and malicious beings. As Meiners suggests in his ‘History of Religions,’ they were driven unwillingly from their bodies, and have carried into their new existence an angry longing for revenge. No wonder that mankind should so generally agree that if the souls of the dead must linger in the world at all, their fitting abode should be not the haunts of the living but the resting-places of the dead.
“All argument is against it; but all belief is for it,” Dr. Johnson said about the appearance of spirits. The idea that the souls of the dead linger among the living is rooted in primitive culture, runs through barbaric life almost without interruption, and continues to exist significantly within civilization. From the countless accounts of travelers, missionaries, historians, theologians, and spiritualists, it can be accepted as a common belief, widespread and naturally thought, that the two main places where the souls of the departed roam are the sites of their earthly lives and their burial grounds. Just as in North America, the Chickasaws believed that the spirits of the dead took on their physical forms and joyfully interacted with the living; as the Aleutian islanders imagined the souls of the departed walking invisibly among their relatives and accompanying them on their journeys by sea and land; as Africans believe that the souls of the dead live among them and share meals with the living; and as the Chinese pay tribute to their ancestors' spirits present in the ancestral hall, so many people in Europe and America reside in an environment filled with ghostly figures—spirits of the dead that sit near the mystic by his midnight fire, write messages in spirit circles, and peek over girls’ shoulders as they frighten themselves with ghost stories. Throughout a broad spectrum of animistic religions, we see the souls of the departed welcomed by the living during specific occasions, and the worship of ancestors—a belief deeply rooted in many faiths—acknowledges with both respect and caution those ancestral spirits that can influence the world of the living for better or worse. However, death and life are not easily compatible, and throughout history, there have been many methods by which the living have tried to rid themselves of lingering household ghosts. While the unfortunate savage practice of abandoning homes after a death may often be linked to other reasons, such as horror or rejection of everything associated with the deceased, there are instances where a place is simply left to the ghost. In Old Calabar, it was customary for a son to let his father’s house decay, but after two years, he might reconstruct it, believing that the ghost would have left by then; the Hottentots avoided entering the deceased's house, fearing the ghost might still be there; the Yakuts allowed the hut where someone had died to crumble, considering it a home for demons; the Karens reportedly destroyed their villages to evade the dangerous presence of departed souls. These actions, however, hardly extend beyond barbarism, and only faint remnants of such beliefs persist into civilization, where at times a haunted house might be left to deteriorate, surrendered to a ghostly occupant who cannot maintain it. Yet even in the most primitive cultures, we find the physical realm asserting itself against the spiritual, and at higher levels of society, individuals remove an unwelcome resident without hesitation. The Greenlanders would take the dead out through the window, not the door, while an old woman waved a burning stick behind her, shouting “piklerrukpok!”—which means, “there’s nothing left to be had here!”; the Hottentots removed the dead from the hut through a specially created opening to prevent the spirit from returning; similarly, the Siamese create an opening in the house wall to carry the coffin outside, then rush three times around the house with it; in Russia, the Chuwashes throw a hot stone after the corpse to create an obstacle that would keep the soul from returning; and Brandenburg peasants pour a bucket of water out the door after the coffin to stop the ghost from coming back, while Pomeranian mourners leave behind straw from the hearse after visiting the cemetery so that the wandering soul can rest there and not return home. In ancient and medieval times, people frequently called upon supernatural assistance beyond such material measures, enlisting priests to lay or banish troublesome ghosts, a practice that is not yet forgotten. There has always been a strong belief that disembodied souls, particularly those who have experienced a violent or untimely death, are harmful and vengeful beings. As Meiners points out in his ‘History of Religions,’ these souls were unwillingly forced from their bodies and brought with them into their new existence a bitter desire for revenge. It’s no surprise that humanity collectively holds the view that if the souls of the dead must remain in the world, their appropriate dwelling should be the resting places of the dead, not the domains of the living.
After all, it scarcely seems to the lower animistic philosophy that the connexion between body and soul is utterly broken by death. Various wants may keep the soul from its desired rest, and among the chief of these is when its mortal remains have not had the funeral rites. Hence the deep-lying belief that the ghosts of such will walk. Among some Australian tribes the ‘ingna,’ or evil spirits, human in shape, but with long tails and long upright ears, are mostly souls of departed natives, whose bodies were left to lie unburied or whose death the avenger of blood did not expiate, and thus they have to prowl on the face of the earth, and about the place of death, with no gratification 28but to harm the living.[67] In New Zealand, the ideas were to be found that the souls of the dead were apt to linger near the bodies, and that the spirits of men left unburied or killed in battle and eaten, would wander; and the bringing such malignant souls to dwell within the sacred burial-enclosure was a task for the priest to accomplish with his charms.[68] Among the Iroquois of North America the spirit also stays near the body for a time, and ‘unless the rites of burial were performed, it was believed that the spirits of the dead hovered for a time upon the earth, in a state of great unhappiness. Hence their extreme solicitude to procure the bodies of the slain in battle.’[69] Among Brazilian tribes, the wandering shadows of the dead are said to be considered unresting till burial.[70] In Turanian regions of North Asia, the spirits of the dead who have no resting-place in earth are thought of as lingering above ground, especially where their dust remains.[71] South Asia has such beliefs: the Karens say that the ghosts who wander on earth are not the spirits of those who go to Plu, the land of the dead, but of infants, of such as died by violence, of the wicked, and of those who by accident have not been buried or burned;[72] the Siamese fear as unkindly spirits the souls of such as died a violent death or were not buried with the proper rites, and who desiring expiation, invisibly terrify their descendants.[73] Nowhere in the world had such thoughts a stronger hold than in classic antiquity, where it was the most sacred of duties to give the body its funeral rites, that the shade should not flit moaning near the gates of Hades, nor wander in the dismal crowd 29along the banks of Acheron.[74] An Australian or a Karen would have taken in the full significance of the fatal accusation against the Athenian commanders, that they abandoned the bodies of their dead in the sea-fight of Arginousai. The thought is not unknown to Slavonic folk-lore: ‘Ha! with the shriek the spirit flutters from the mouth, flies up to the tree, from tree to tree, hither and thither till the dead is burned.’[75] In mediæval Europe the classic stories of ghosts that haunt the living till laid by rites of burial pass here and there into new legends, where, under a changed dispensation, the doleful wanderer now asks Christian burial in consecrated earth.[76] It is needless to give here elaborate details of the world-wide thought that when the corpse is buried, exposed, burned, or otherwise disposed of after the accepted custom of the land, the ghost accompanies its relics. The soul stays near the Polynesian or the American Indian burial-place; it dwells among the twigs and listens joyfully to the singing birds in the trees where Siberian tribes suspend their dead; it lingers by the Samoyed’s scaffolded coffin; it haunts the Dayak’s place of burial or burning; it inhabits the little soul-hut above the Malagasy grave, or the Peruvian house of sun-dried bricks; it is deposited in the Roman tomb (animamque sepulchro condimus); it comes back for judgment into the body of the later Israelite and the Moslem; it inhabits, as a divine ancestral spirit, the palace-tombs of the old classic and new Asiatic world; it is kept down by the huge cairn raised over Antar’s body lest his mighty spirit should burst forth, by the iron nails with which the Cheremiss secures the corpse in its coffin, by the stake that pins down the suicide’s body at the four-cross way. And through all the changes of religious thought from first to last in the course of human history, the hovering 30ghosts of the dead make the midnight burial-ground a place where men’s flesh creeps with terror. Not to discuss here the general subject of funeral rites of mankind, of which only part of the multifarious details are directly relevant to the present purpose, a custom may be selected which is admirably adapted for the study of animistic religion, at once from the clear conception it gives of the belief in disembodied souls present among the living, and from the distinct line of ethnographic continuity in which it may be traced onward from the lower to the higher culture. This is the custom of Feasts of the Dead.
After all, it hardly seems to animistic beliefs that the connection between body and soul is completely severed by death. Various needs may keep the soul from its longed-for rest, and one of the main reasons for this is when its physical remains have not received proper funeral rites. This leads to the strong belief that the ghosts of such individuals will roam. In some Australian tribes, the ‘ingna’ or evil spirits, which appear human but have long tails and upright ears, are often the souls of deceased natives whose bodies were left unburied or whose deaths weren't avenged, causing them to wander the earth and linger at the place of death, with the only purpose of harming the living. In New Zealand, the belief exists that the souls of the dead tend to linger close to their bodies, and that spirits of those left unburied or killed in battle and eaten would wander; bringing such malignant souls to reside in the sacred burial area was a task for the priest, who would use charms for this purpose. Among the Iroquois of North America, spirits also stay near the body for a while, and unless the burial rites are performed, it was believed that the spirits of the dead would hover on earth in great distress. This is why they were extremely eager to recover the bodies of those slain in battle. In Brazilian tribes, the wandering shadows of the dead are considered restless until buried. In Turanian regions of North Asia, spirits of the dead without a resting place are thought to linger above ground, particularly where their dust remains. South Asia holds similar beliefs: the Karens believe that the ghosts wandering the earth are not the spirits of those who reach Plu, the land of the dead, but of infants, those who died violently, the wicked, and those who, by accident, were not buried or burned; the Siamese regard as unkindly spirits the souls of those who died violently or weren’t buried with the proper rites, and who, seeking absolution, invisibly frighten their descendants. Nowhere was this belief stronger than in ancient times, where performing funeral rites was seen as the most sacred duty, ensuring that the shade wouldn't moan near the gates of Hades or wander among the gloomy crowd along the banks of Acheron. An Australian or a Karen would have fully understood the grave accusation against the Athenian commanders for abandoning the bodies of their dead after the sea battle at Arginousai. The sentiment is echoed in Slavonic folklore: ‘Ha! with the shriek, the spirit flutters from the mouth, flies up to the tree, from tree to tree, here and there until the dead is burned.’ In medieval Europe, classic stories of ghosts haunting the living until they receive burial rites evolved into new legends, where, under a changed context, the sorrowful wanderer now requests Christian burial in consecrated ground. It is unnecessary to elaborate on the widespread belief that when a corpse is buried, exposed, burned, or otherwise disposed of according to the customs of the land, the ghost follows its remains. The soul lingers near the burial place of Polynesians or American Indians; it resides among the branches and listens joyfully to the singing birds in the trees where Siberian tribes suspend their dead; it hovers by the Samoyed’s scaffolded coffin; it haunts the Dayak’s burial or cremation site; it inhabits the small soul hut above the Malagasy grave, or the Peruvian house of sun-dried bricks; it is placed in the Roman tomb (We place the soul in the tomb.); it returns for judgment into the body of later Israelites and Muslims; it exists, as a divine ancestral spirit, in the palace tombs of the ancient classical and new Asian worlds; it is trapped by the massive cairn built over Antar’s body to prevent his powerful spirit from breaking free, by the iron nails that secure the Cheremiss's corpse in its coffin, by the stake that pins down the body of a suicide at a crossroads. Throughout human history, across the evolution of religious beliefs, the lingering ghosts of the dead make the midnight burial ground a place filled with dread. Without delving into the broader topic of human funeral rites, from which only some parts are directly relevant now, there is a custom that is especially suited for studying animistic religion, granting a clear understanding of the belief in disembodied souls existing among the living and illustrating a distinctive line of ethnographic continuity from lower to higher culture. This is the practice of Feasts of the Dead.
Among the funeral offerings described in the last chapter of which the purpose more or less distinctly appears to be that the departed soul shall take them away in some ghostly or ideal manner, or that they shall by some means be conveyed to him in his distant spirit-home, there are given supplies of food and drink. But the feasts of the dead with which we are now concerned are given on a different principle; they are, so to speak, to be consumed on the premises. They are set out in some proper place, especially near the tombs or in the dwelling-houses, and there the souls of the dead come and satisfy themselves. In North America, among Algonquins who held that one of a man’s two souls abides with the body after death, the provisions brought to the grave were intended for the nourishment of this soul; tribes would make offerings to ancestors of part of any dainty food, and an Indian who fell by accident into the fire would believe that the spirits of his ancestors pushed him in for neglecting to make due offerings.[77] The minds of the Hurons were filled with fancies not less lifelike than this. It seemed to them that the dead man’s soul, in his proper human figure, walked in front of the corpse as they carried it to the burial-ground, there to dwell till the great feast of the dead; but meanwhile it would come and walk by night in the village, and eat the remnants in the kettles, 31wherefore some would not eat of these, nor touch the food at funeral feasts—though some indeed would eat all.[78] In Madagascar, the elegant little upper chamber in King Radama’s mausoleum was furnished with a table and two chairs, and a bottle of wine, a bottle of water, and two tumblers were placed there conformably with the ideas entertained by most of the natives, that the ghost of the departed monarch might occasionally visit the resting-place of his body, meet with the spirit of his father, and partake of what he was known to be fond of in his lifetime.[79] The Wanika of East Africa set a coco-nut shell full of rice and tembo near the grave for the ‘koma’ or shade, which cannot exist without food and drink.[80] In West Africa the Efik cook food and leave it on the table in the little shed or ‘devil-house’ near the grave, and thither not only the spirit of the deceased, but the spirits of the slaves sacrificed at his funeral, come to partake of it.[81] Farther south, in the Congo district, the custom has been described of making a channel into the tomb to the head or mouth of the corpse, whereby to send down month by month the offerings of food and drink.[82]
Among the funeral offerings mentioned in the last chapter, which seem to serve the purpose of allowing the departed soul to take them away in some ghostly or ideal way, or to have them somehow sent to him in his far-off spirit home, there are supplies of food and drink. However, the feasts for the dead that we're focusing on are based on a different principle; they are meant to be consumed on the spot. They are placed in a specific area, especially near the graves or in the homes, where the souls of the dead come to enjoy them. In North America, among the Algonquin people, who believed that one of a person's two souls stays with the body after death, the offerings at the grave were meant to nourish this soul; tribes would give part of any special food as offerings to their ancestors, and an Indian who accidentally fell into the fire would think that the spirits of his ancestors pushed him in for not making the proper offerings.[77] The Hurons also had vivid beliefs. They thought that the dead person's soul, in a human form, walked in front of the corpse as they carried it to the burial ground, where it would stay until the great feast of the dead; but in the meantime, it would come and walk around the village at night, eating leftovers from the pots, 31 which is why some would avoid eating from those pots or touching the food at funeral feasts—although some would eat everything.[78] In Madagascar, the lovely upper room in King Radama’s mausoleum was set up with a table and two chairs, and a bottle of wine, a bottle of water, and two glasses were placed there in line with what most locals believed, that the ghost of the deceased king might occasionally visit his burial site, meet the spirit of his father, and enjoy what he loved during his life.[79] The Wanika of East Africa would place a coconut shell filled with rice and tembo near the grave for the ‘koma’ or shade, which cannot exist without food and drink.[80] In West Africa, the Efik cook food and leave it on a table in a small shed or ‘devil-house’ near the grave, where not only the spirit of the deceased but also the spirits of the slaves sacrificed at his funeral come to partake of it.[81] Further south, in the Congo region, the practice of making a channel into the tomb to the head or mouth of the corpse has been observed, allowing offerings of food and drink to be sent down monthly.[82]
Among rude Asiatic tribes, the Bodo of North-East India thus celebrate the last funeral rites. The friends repair to the grave, and the nearest of kin to the deceased, taking an individual’s usual portion of food and drink, solemnly presents it to the dead with these words, ‘Take and eat, heretofore you have eaten and drunk with us, you can do so no more; you were one of us, you can be so no longer; we come no more to you, come you not to us.’ Thereupon each of the party breaks off a bracelet of thread put on his wrist for this purpose, and casts it on the grave, a speaking symbol of breaking the bond of fellowship, and ‘next the party 32proceed to the river and bathe, and having thus lustrated themselves, they repair to the banquet and eat, drink, and make merry as though they never were to die.’[83] With more continuance of affection, Naga tribes of Assam celebrate their funeral feasts month by month, laying food and drink on the graves of the departed.[84] In the same region of the world, the Kol tribes of Chota Nagpur are remarkable for their pathetic reverence for their dead. When a Ho or Munda has been burned on the funeral pile, collected morsels of his bones are carried in procession with a solemn, ghostly, sliding step, keeping time to the deep-sounding drum, and when the old woman who carries the bones on her bamboo tray lowers it from time to time, then girls who carry pitchers and brass vessels mournfully reverse them to show that they are empty; thus the remains are taken to visit every house in the village, and every dwelling of a friend or relative for miles, and the inmates come out to mourn and praise the goodness of the departed; the bones are carried to all the dead man’s favourite haunts, to the fields he cultivated, to the grove he planted, to the threshing-floor where he worked, to the village dance-room where he made merry. At last they are taken to the grave, and buried in an earthen vase upon a store of food, covered with one of those huge stone slabs which European visitors wonder at in the districts of the aborigines in India. Besides these, monumental stones are set up outside the village to the memory of men of note; they are fixed on an earthen plinth, where the ghost, resting in its walks among the living, is supposed to sit shaded by the pillar. The Kheriahs have collections of these monuments in the little enclosures round their houses, and offerings and libations are constantly made at them. With what feelings such rites are celebrated may be judged from this Ho dirge:—
Among the rough tribes of Asia, the Bodo from North-East India hold unique last funeral rites. Friends gather at the grave, and the closest relative of the deceased takes their usual portion of food and drink, solemnly offering it to the dead with these words: "Take and eat, you have shared meals with us before, but you can do so no more. You were one of us, but you can be so no longer. We won't come to you anymore, so don't come to us." After that, each person breaks off a thread bracelet they wore for this occasion and places it on the grave, symbolizing the break in their bond of fellowship. Next, the group goes to the river to bathe, and after purifying themselves, they return to feast, drink, and celebrate as if they will never die. In a show of deeper affection, the Naga tribes of Assam honor their deceased with monthly funeral feasts, leaving food and drink at the graves. In the same area, the Kol tribes from Chota Nagpur are known for their heartfelt reverence for the dead. After a Ho or Munda is cremated, pieces of their bones are carried in a solemn procession with a slow, ghostly step, synchronized to the deep beat of a drum. When the elderly woman carrying the bones lowers her bamboo tray, young girls carrying pitchers and brass vessels mournfully turn them upside down to indicate they are empty. The remains are taken to every house in the village and every home of friends or relatives nearby, where residents come out to grieve and celebrate the goodness of the departed. The bones are taken to the deceased's favorite spots, including the fields they farmed, the grove they planted, the threshing floor where they worked, and the village dance hall where they used to celebrate. Eventually, they are buried in an earthen vase filled with food and covered with one of those massive stone slabs that European visitors often marvel at in India’s tribal areas. Additionally, monumental stones are erected outside the village in memory of notable individuals, placed on an earthen base where the ghost is believed to rest while mingling with the living, shaded by the pillar. The Kheriahs have collections of these monuments in small enclosures around their homes, where offerings and libations are regularly made. The emotions behind such rituals can be sensed in this Ho dirge:—
Among the Kol tribes this kindly hospitality to ancestral souls passes on into the belief and ceremony of full manes-worship: votive offerings are made to the ‘old folks’ when their descendants go on a journey, and when there is sickness in the family it is generally they who are first propitiated.[85] Among Turanian races, the Chuwash put food and napkins on the grave, saying, ‘Rise at night and eat your fill, and there ye have napkins to wipe your mouths!’ while the Cheremiss simply said, ‘That is for you, ye dead, there ye have food and drink!’ In this Tatar region we hear of offerings continued year after year, and even of messengers sent back by a horde to carry offerings to the tombs of their forefathers in the old land whence they had emigrated.[86]
Among the Kol tribes, this warm hospitality towards ancestral spirits translates into the belief and practice of full manes-worship: offerings are made to the 'old folks' when their descendants embark on a journey, and when there's illness in the family, it’s usually them who are honored first.[85] Among Turanian peoples, the Chuwash place food and napkins on the graves, saying, ‘Rise at night and eat your fill, and there you have napkins to wipe your mouths!’ while the Cheremiss simply say, ‘That is for you, you dead, there you have food and drink!’ In this Tatar region, we hear of offerings continued year after year, and even of messengers sent back by a group to carry offerings to the tombs of their ancestors in the old land from which they emigrated.[86]
Details of this ancient rite are to be traced from the level of these rude races far upward in civilization. South-East Asia is full of it, and the Chinese may stand as its representative. He keeps his coffined parent for years, serving him with meals as if alive. He summons ancestral souls with prayer and beat of drum to feed on the meat and drink set out on special days when they are thought to return home. He even gives entertainments for the benefit of 34destitute and unfortunate souls in the lower regions, such as those of lepers and beggars. Lanterns are lighted to show them the way, a feast is spread for them, and with characteristic fancy, some victuals are left over for any blind or feeble spirits who may be late, and a pail of gruel is provided for headless souls, with spoons for them to put it down their throats with. Such proceedings culminate in the so-called Universal Rescue, now and then celebrated, when a little house is built for the expected visitors, with separate accommodation and bath-rooms for male and female ghosts.[87] The ancient Egyptian would set out his provision of cakes and trussed ducks on reed scaffolds in the tomb, or would even keep the mummy in the house to be present as a guest at the feast, σύνδειπνον καὶ συμπότην ἐποιήσατο, as Lucian says.[88] The Hindu, as of old, offers to the dead the funeral cakes, places before the door the earthen vessels of water for him to bathe in, of milk for him to drink, and celebrates at new and full moon the solemn presentation of rice-cakes made with ghee, with its attendant ceremonies so important for the soul’s release from its twelvemonth’s sojourn with Yama in Hades, and its transition to the Heaven of the Pitaras, the Fathers.[89] In the classic world such rites were represented by funeral feasts and oblations of food.[90]
Details of this ancient ritual can be traced from these primitive societies up to higher levels of civilization. Southeast Asia is rich in these traditions, with the Chinese serving as a key example. They keep their deceased parents in coffins for years, providing them meals as if they were still alive. They call on ancestral spirits with prayers and drumbeats to partake in the food and drink prepared on special days when they are believed to return home. They even host events for the benefit of the less fortunate souls in the afterlife, like lepers and beggars. Lanterns are lit to guide them, a feast is laid out, and with characteristic thoughtfulness, some food is set aside for any late-arriving blind or weak spirits, along with a bucket of gruel and spoons for headless souls to use. Such events peak in the so-called Universal Rescue, celebrated from time to time, where a small house is built for expected visitors, with separate areas and bathrooms for male and female ghosts. The ancient Egyptians would lay out cakes and trussed ducks on reed scaffolds in the tomb, or even keep the mummy at home to be present as a guest at the feast, as Lucian mentions. The Hindus, as in ancient times, offer funeral cakes to the dead, place earthen vessels of water for bathing and milk for drinking at the door, and celebrate during the new and full moons with the solemn presentation of rice cakes made with ghee, along with important ceremonies for the soul’s release from its year-long stay with Yama in Hades and its ascension to the Heaven of the Pitaras, the Fathers. In the classical world, such rituals were marked by funeral feasts and offerings of food.
In Christian times there manifests itself that interesting kind of survival which, keeping up the old ceremony in form, has adapted its motive to new thoughts and feelings. The classic funeral oblations became Christian, the silicernium was succeeded by the feast held at the martyr’s tomb. Faustus inveighs against the Christians for carrying on the ancient rites: ‘Their sacrifices indeed ye have turned into love-feasts, their idols into martyrs whom with like vows ye 35worship; ye appease the shades of the dead with wine and meals, ye celebrate the Gentiles’ solemn days with them, such as calends and solstices,—of their life certainly ye have changed nought,’[91] and so forth. The story of Monica shows how the custom of laying food on the tomb for the manes passed into the ceremony, like to it in form, of setting food and drink to be sanctified by the sepulchre of a Christian saint. Saint-Foix, who wrote in the time of Louis XIV., has left us an account of the ceremonial after the death of a King of France, during the forty days before the funeral when his wax effigy lay in state. They continued to serve him at meal-times as though still alive, the officers laid the table, and brought the dishes, the maître d’hôtel handed the napkin to the highest lord present to be presented to the king, a prelate blessed the table, the basins of water were handed to the royal arm-chair, the cup was served in its due course, and grace was said in the accustomed manner, save that there was added to it the De Profundis.[92] Spaniards still offer bread and wine on the tombs of those they love, on the anniversary of their decease.[93] The conservative Eastern Church still holds to ancient rite. The funeral feast is served in Russia, with its tables for the beggars, laden with fish pasties and bowls of shchi and jugs of kvas, its more delicate dinner for friends and priests, its incense and chants of ‘everlasting remembrance’; and even the repetition of the festival on the ninth, and twentieth, and fortieth day are not forgotten. The offerings of saucers of kutiya or kolyvo are still made in the church; this used to be of parboiled wheat and was deposited over the body, it is now made of boiled rice and raisins, sweetened with honey. In their usual mystic fashion, the Orthodox Christians now explain away into symbolism this remnant of primitive offering to the dead: the honey is heavenly sweetness, the 36shrivelled raisins will be full beauteous grapes, the grain typifies the resurrection, ‘that which thou sowest is not quickened except it die.’[94]
In Christian times, there’s an intriguing form of survival that keeps the old ceremonies intact while adapting their meanings to new thoughts and feelings. The traditional funeral offerings transformed into Christian practices, and the silicernium was replaced by the feast at the martyr’s tomb. Faustus criticizes Christians for continuing ancient rites: “You turned their sacrifices into love feasts, their idols into martyrs whom you worship with the same vows; you appease the spirits of the dead with wine and meals, and you celebrate the Gentiles’ important days along with them, like the calends and solstices—you certainly didn’t change anything about their way of life,” and so on. The story of Monica illustrates how the practice of leaving food on the tomb for the deceased evolved into a ceremony where food and drink are offered to be blessed at the grave of a Christian saint. Saint-Foix, who wrote during the reign of Louis XIV, provided a detailed account of the rituals following the death of a King of France, during the forty days before the funeral when his wax figure was on display. They continued to serve him meals as if he were still alive; officers set the table and brought the dishes, the maître d’hôtel handed the napkin to the highest lord present to present to the king, a prelate blessed the table, water basins were brought to the royal chair, the cup was filled and served as usual, and grace was said in the customary way, except that the De Profundis was added. Spaniards still offer bread and wine at the graves of their loved ones on the anniversary of their passing. The traditional Eastern Church still adheres to ancient rites. The funeral feast is observed in Russia, featuring tables for the beggars loaded with fish pasties, bowls of shchi, and jugs of kvas, as well as a more refined meal for friends and priests, along with incense and chants of “everlasting remembrance.” They also remember to repeat the festival on the ninth, twentieth, and fortieth days. Offerings of saucers filled with kutiya or kolyvo are still made in church; this used to consist of parboiled wheat placed over the body, but now it’s made of boiled rice and raisins, sweetened with honey. In their typical mystic way, Orthodox Christians now interpret this remnant of primitive offerings to the dead as symbolism: the honey represents heavenly sweetness, the shriveled raisins will become beautiful grapes, and the grain symbolizes resurrection, “that which you sow does not come to life unless it dies.”
In the calendar of many a people, differing widely as they may in race and civilization, there are to be found special yearly festivals of the dead. Their rites are much the same as those performed on other days for individuals; their season differs in different districts, but seems to have particular associations with harvest-time and the fall of the year, and with the year’s end as reckoned at midwinter or in early spring.[95] The Karens make their annual offerings to the dead in the ‘month of shades,’ that is, December;[96] the Kocch of North Bengal every year at harvest-home offer fruits and a fowl to deceased parents;[97] the Barea of East Africa celebrate in November the feast of Thiyot, at once a feast of general peace and merry-making, of thanksgiving for the harvest, and of memorial for the deceased, for each of whom a little pot-full of beer is set out two days, to be drunk at last by the survivors;[98] in West Africa we hear of the feast of the dead at the time of yam-harvest;[99] at the end of the year the Haitian negroes take food to the graves for the shades to eat, ‘manger zombi,’ as they say.[100] The Roman Feralia and Lemuralia were held in February 37and May.[101] In the last five or ten days of their year the Zoroastrians hold their feasts for departed relatives, when souls come back to the world to visit the living, and receive from them offerings of food and clothing.[102] The custom of setting empty seats at the St. John’s Eve feast, for the departed souls of kinsfolk, is said to have lasted on in Europe to the seventeenth century. Spring is the season of the time-honoured Slavonic rite of laying food on the graves of the dead. The Bulgarians hold a feast in the cemetery on Palm Sunday, and, after much eating and drinking, leave the remains upon the graves of their friends, who, they are persuaded, will eat them during the night. In Russia such scenes may still be watched on the two appointed days called Parents’ Days. The higher classes have let the rite sink to prayer at the graves of lost relatives, and giving alms to the beggars who flock to the cemeteries. But the people still ‘howl’ for the dead, and set out on their graves a handkerchief for a tablecloth, with gingerbread, eggs, curd-tarts, and even vodka, on it; when the weeping is over, they eat up the food, especially commemorating the dead in Russian manner by partaking of his favourite dainty, and if he were fond of a glass, the vodka is sipped with the ejaculation, ‘The Kingdom of Heaven be his! He loved a drink, the deceased!’[103] When Odilo, Abbot of Cluny, at the end of the tenth century, instituted the celebration of All Souls’ Day (November 2),[104] 38he set on foot one of those revivals which have so often given the past a new lease of life. The Western Church at large took up the practice, and round it there naturally gathered surviving remnants of the primitive rite of banquets to the dead. The accusation against the early Christians, that they appeased the shades of the dead with feasts like the Gentiles, would not be beside the mark now, fifteen hundred years later. On the eve of All Souls’ begins, within the limits of Christendom, a commemoration of the dead which combines some touches of pathetic imagination with relics of savage animism scarcely to be surpassed in Africa or the South Sea Islands. In Italy the day is given to feasting and drinking in honour of the dead, while skulls and skeletons in sugar and paste form appropriate children’s toys. In Tyrol, the poor souls released from purgatory fire for the night may come and smear their burns with the melted fat of the ‘soul light’ on the hearth, or cakes are left for them on the table, and the room is kept warm for their comfort. Even in Paris the souls of the departed come to partake of the food of the living. In Brittany the crowd pours into the churchyard at evening, to kneel bareheaded at the graves of dead kinsfolk, to fill the hollow of the tombstone with holy water, or to pour libations of milk upon it. All night the church bells clang, and sometimes a solemn procession of the clergy goes round to bless the graves. In no household that night is the cloth removed, for the supper must be left for the souls to come and take their part, nor must the fire be put out, where they will come to warm themselves. And at last, as the inmates retire to rest, there is heard at the door a doleful chant—it is the souls, who, borrowing the voices of the parish poor, have come to ask the prayers of the living.[105]
In the calendars of many cultures, which vary greatly in ethnicity and level of development, there are special yearly festivals to honor the dead. Their rituals are quite similar to those performed for individuals on other days; the timing of these festivals varies across regions, but they often align with harvest season and fall, as well as the end of the year during midwinter or early spring.[95] The Karens offer their annual tributes to the dead in the ‘month of shades,’ which is December;[96] the Kocch in North Bengal make offerings of fruits and a chicken every year during harvest time to honor deceased parents;[97] the Barea of East Africa celebrate Thiyot in November, a time of general peace and celebration, thanksgiving for the harvest, and remembrance of the dead, for whom a small pot of beer is placed out for two days, meant to be consumed by the living;[98] in West Africa, there is a feast for the dead during yam harvest;[99] at the end of the year, Haitian people bring food to the graves for the spirits, known as ‘manger zombi.’[100] The Roman Feralia and Lemuralia took place in February and May.37[101] In the last five to ten days of their year, the Zoroastrians celebrate feasts for deceased relatives, believing that souls return to the world to visit the living and receive food and clothing offerings.[102] The tradition of setting empty seats at the St. John’s Eve feast for the souls of relatives is said to have continued in Europe until the seventeenth century. Spring is the time for the traditional Slavonic practice of placing food on the graves of the dead. Bulgarians hold a feast in the cemetery on Palm Sunday, and after eating and drinking, they leave the leftovers on the graves of their friends, believing that the deceased will consume them during the night. In Russia, similar practices can still be observed on designated days known as Parents' Days. The upper class has reduced the rite to praying at the graves of lost relatives and giving donations to the beggars who gather at cemeteries. However, the common people still ‘howl’ for the dead and place a handkerchief as a tablecloth on the graves with gingerbread, eggs, curd-tarts, and even vodka. After their mourning, they consume the food, particularly honoring the deceased by sharing their favorite dish, and if the departed enjoyed drinking, they sip vodka while saying, ‘May the Kingdom of Heaven be his! He loved a drink, the deceased!’[103] When Odilo, Abbot of Cluny, established the celebration of All Souls’ Day (November 2) at the end of the tenth century,[104] 38 he initiated one of those revivals that often breathe new life into traditions. The wider Western Church adopted this practice, which naturally collected surviving elements of the original rite of banquets for the dead. The claim that early Christians appeased the spirits of the dead through feasts similar to those of pagans would not be out of place now, fifteen hundred years later. On the eve of All Souls’ Day, within Christian territories, a commemoration of the dead begins that blends emotional imagination with remnants of primitive belief systems that could hardly be matched in Africa or the South Sea Islands. In Italy, the day is marked by feasting and drinking in memory of the dead, while sugar and paste skulls and skeletons become popular children’s toys. In Tyrol, the souls released from purgatory for the night may come and soothe their burns with the melted fat from the ‘soul light’ on the hearth, or cakes are left for them on the table, and the room is kept warm for their comfort. Even in Paris, the souls of those who have passed come to share in the food of the living. In Brittany, people gather at the churchyard in the evening, kneeling bareheaded at the graves of their relatives, filling the hollows of tombstones with holy water, or pouring milk as offerings. All night long, church bells ring, and occasionally a solemn procession of clergy blesses the graves. In no home is the tablecloth removed that night, as supper must remain out for the souls to partake, and the fire should not be extinguished, as it is where the souls will come to warm themselves. Finally, as the residents settle in for the night, a mournful chant can be heard at the door—it’s the souls, who, borrowing the voices of the local poor, have come to ask for the prayers of the living.[105]
If we ask how the spirits of the dead are in general supposed 39to feed on the viands set before them, we come upon difficult questions, which will be met with again in discussing the theory of sacrifice. Even where the thought is certainly that the departed soul eats, this thought may be very indefinite, with far less of practical intention in it than of childish make-believe. Now and then, however, the sacrificers themselves offer closer definitions of their meaning. The idea of the ghost actually devouring the material food is not unexampled. Thus, in North America, Algonquin Indians considered that the shadow-like souls of the dead can still eat and drink, often even telling Father Le Jeune that they had found in the morning meat gnawed in the night by the souls. More recently, we read that some Potawatomis will leave off providing the supply of food at the grave if it lies long untouched, it being concluded that the dead no longer wants it, but has found a rich hunting-ground in the other world.[106] In Africa, again, Father Cavazzi records of the Congo people furnishing their dead with supplies of provisions, that they could not be persuaded that souls did not consume material food.[107] In Europe the Esths, offering food for the dead on All Souls’, are said to have rejoiced if they found in the morning that any of it was gone.[108] A less gross conception is that the soul consumes 40the steam or savour of the food, or its essence or spirit. It is said to have been with such purpose that the Maoris placed food by the dead man’s side, and some also with him in the grave.[109] The idea is well displayed among the natives in Mexican districts, where the souls who came to the annual feast are described as hovering over and smelling the food set out for them, or sucking out its nutritive quality.[110] The Hindu entreats the manes to quaff the sweet essence of the offered food; thinking on them, he slowly sets the dish of rice before the Brahmans, and while they silently eat the hot food, the ancestral spirits take their part of the feast.[111] At the old Slavonic meals for the dead, we read of the survivors sitting in silence and throwing morsels under the table, fancying that they could hear the spirits rustle, and see them feed on the smell and steam of the viands. One account describes the mourners at the funeral banquet inviting in the departed soul thought to be standing outside the door, and every guest throwing morsels and pouring drink under the table, for him to refresh himself. What lay on the ground was not picked up, but was left for friendless and kinless souls. When the meal was over, the priest rose from table, swept out the house, and hunted out the souls of the dead ‘like fleas,’ with these words, ‘Ye have eaten and drunken, souls, now go, now go!’[112] Many travellers have described the imagination with which the Chinese make such offerings. It is that the spirits of the dead consume the impalpable essence of the food, leaving behind its coarse material substance, wherefore the dutiful sacrificers, having set out sumptuous feasts for ancestral souls, allow them a proper time to satisfy their appetite, and then fall to themselves.[113] The Jesuit Father Christoforo Borri suggestively translates the native idea into his own scholastic phraseology. In Cochin China, 41according to him, people believed ‘that the souls of the dead have need of corporeal sustenance and maintenance, wherefore several times a year, according to their custom, they make splendid and sumptuous banquets, children to their deceased parents, husbands to their wives, friends to their friends, waiting a long while for the dead guest to come and sit down at table to eat.’ The missionaries argued against this proceeding, but were met by ridicule of their ignorance, and the reply ‘that there were two things in the food, one the substance, and the other the accidents of quantity, quality, smell, taste, and the like. The immaterial souls of the dead, taking for themselves the substance of the food, which being immaterial is food suited to the incorporeal soul, left only in the dishes the accidents which corporeal senses perceive; for this the dead had no need of corporeal instruments, as we have said.’ Thereupon the Jesuit proceeds to remark, as to the prospect of conversion of these people, ‘it may be judged from the distinction they make between the accidents and the substance of the food which they prepare for the dead,’ that it will not be very difficult to prove to them the mystery of the Eucharist.[114] Now to peoples among whom prevails the rite of feasts of the dead, whether they offer the food in mere symbolic pretence, or whether they consider the souls really to feed on it in this spiritual way (as well as in the cases inextricably mixed up with these, where the offering is spiritually conveyed away to the world of spirits), it can be of little consequence what becomes of the gross material food. When the Kafir sorcerer, in cases of sickness, declares that the shades of ancestors demand a particular cow, the beast is slaughtered and left shut up for a time for the shades to eat, or for its spirit to go to the land of shades, and then is taken out to be eaten by the sacrificers.[115] So, in more civilized Japan, when the survivors have placed 42their offering of unboiled rice and water in a hollow made for the purpose in a stone of the tomb, it seems to them no matter that the poor or the birds really carry off the grain.[116]
If we consider how the spirits of the dead are generally thought to consume the food placed before them, we encounter complex questions that will arise again when discussing the theory of sacrifice. Even when there is a clear belief that the departed soul eats, this idea can be vague, often resembling childish fantasy more than practical intent. Occasionally, the sacrificers provide more specific explanations of what they mean. The notion of the ghost actually eating the physical food isn’t uncommon. For instance, the Algonquin Indians in North America believed that the shadowy souls of the dead could still eat and drink, even telling Father Le Jeune that they found meat nibbled during the night by these souls. More recently, some Potawatomis have a practice where they stop leaving food at the grave if it remains untouched for a long time, concluding that the dead no longer needs it and has found a plentiful hunting ground in the afterlife.[106] In Africa, Father Cavazzi noted that the people of the Congo provided their dead with food, firmly believing that souls consumed physical nourishment.[107] In Europe, the Esths, who offer food for the dead on All Souls’ Day, are said to be happy if they find that any of it has been eaten by morning.[108] A less literal interpretation is that the soul absorbs the steam, aroma, or essence of the food. The Maoris, for example, placed food beside the dead man and sometimes even buried it with him for this reason.[109] This idea is also evident among the natives in Mexico, where the souls attending the annual feast are said to hover over and smell the food set out for them or to draw out its nourishing quality.[110] Hindus invite their ancestral spirits to enjoy the sweet essence of the offered food; thoughtfully, they place a dish of rice before the Brahmans, and while the Brahmans silently eat the hot dish, the ancestral spirits partake in the feast.[111] At old Slavonic meals for the dead, survivors sat quietly and tossed bits of food under the table, believing they could hear the spirits rustle and see them feeding on the aroma and heat of the dishes. One account describes mourners at a funeral feast inviting the departed soul, thought to be standing outside the door, and every guest tossing tidbits and pouring drinks under the table for him to enjoy. The leftovers were not picked up but left for friendless and kinless souls. After the meal, the priest would rise from the table, clean out the house, and chase away the souls of the dead "like fleas," saying, "You have eaten and drunk, souls, now go, now go!"[112] Many travelers have described how the Chinese imagine such offerings. They believe that the spirits of the dead consume the intangible essence of the food, leaving behind its coarse material form. Therefore, the dutiful sacrificers set sumptuous feasts for their ancestors, allowing sufficient time for the dead to satisfy their appetite before they themselves eat.[113] Jesuit Father Christoforo Borri interprets this native belief into his own elaborate terminology. In Cochin China, according to him, people believe "that the souls of the dead need physical sustenance and support, so several times a year, as is their custom, they host grand banquets, children for their deceased parents, husbands for their wives, friends for their friends, waiting a long time for the dead guest to arrive and join them at the table." The missionaries opposed this practice but were met with ridicule for their ignorance, and the response that "there are two aspects to the food, one the substance, and the other the qualities of quantity, quality, smell, taste, and so on. The immaterial souls of the dead consume the substance of the food, which, being immaterial, is suitable for the incorporeal soul, leaving only the qualities that physical senses perceive; for this, the dead had no need of physical means, as we've said." The Jesuit then remarks that the distinction they make between the qualities and substance of the food they prepare for the dead suggests it won't be very hard to explain the mystery of the Eucharist to them.[114] Now, for cultures with the tradition of feasting for the dead, whether they view the food as a mere symbolic gesture or genuinely believe the souls partake in it spiritually (alongside the intertwined cases where the offering is spiritually transferred to the realm of spirits), it really matters little what happens to the physical food. When a Kafir sorcerer, in cases of illness, claims that the spirits of ancestors want a specific cow, the animal is slaughtered and kept aside for a time for the spirits to consume or for its spirit to reach the land of spirits before it is eventually eaten by the sacrificers.[115] Likewise, in more civilized Japan, when the living place their offerings of uncooked rice and water in a hollow carved out for the purpose in a stone tomb, it doesn't seem to matter if the poor or the birds actually take the grain.[116]
Such rites as these are especially exposed to dwindle in survival. The offerings of meals and feasts to the dead may be traced at their last stage into mere traditional ceremonies, at most tokens of affectionate remembrance of the dead, or works of charity to the living. The Roman Feralia in Ovid’s time were a striking example of such transition, for while the idea was recognized that the ghosts fed upon the offerings, ‘nunc posito pascitur umbra cibo,’ yet there were but ‘parva munera,’ fruits and grains of salt, and corn soaked in wine, set out for their meal in the middle of the road. ‘Little the manes ask, the pious thought stands instead of the rich gift, for Styx holds no greedy gods:’—
Such rituals are particularly prone to fading away. The offerings of meals and feasts for the dead may ultimately become just traditional ceremonies, at best symbols of love and remembrance for those who have passed, or acts of kindness towards the living. The Roman Feralia during Ovid’s time is a clear example of this change, since while people believed that the ghosts fed on the offerings, ‘Now the shadow feeds on food,’ there were only ‘small gifts,’ which included fruits and grains of salt, and corn soaked in wine, placed in the middle of the road for their meal. ‘Little the manes ask, the pious thought stands instead of the rich gift, for Styx holds no greedy gods:’—
Still farther back, in old Chinese history, Confucius had been called on to give an opinion as to the sacrifices to the dead. Maintainer of all ancient rites as he was, he stringently kept up this, ‘he sacrificed to the dead as if they were present,’ but when he was asked if the dead had knowledge of what was done or no, he declined to answer the question; for if he replied yes, then dutiful descendants would injure their substance by sacrifices, and if no, then undutiful children would leave their parents unburied. The evasion was characteristic of the teacher who expressed his theory of worship in this maxim, ‘to give oneself earnestly to the 43duties due to men, and, while respecting spiritual beings, to keep aloof from them, may be called wisdom.’ It is said that in our own time the Taepings have made a step beyond Confucius; they have forbidden the sacrifices to the spirits of the dead, yet keep up the rite of visiting their tombs on the customary day, for prayer and the renewal of vows.[118] How funeral offerings may pass into commemorative banquets and feasts to the poor, has been shown already. If we seek in England for vestiges of the old rite of funeral sacrifice, we may find a lingering survival into modern centuries, doles of bread and drink given to the poor at funerals, and ‘soul-mass cakes’ which peasant girls perhaps to this day beg for at farmhouses with the traditional formula,
Further back in ancient Chinese history, Confucius was asked for his opinion on sacrifices for the dead. As a staunch upholder of traditional rituals, he firmly believed in sacrificing to the dead as if they were present. However, when asked if the dead were aware of these sacrifices, he chose not to answer. If he had said yes, it would have compelled devoted descendants to deplete their resources through sacrifices; if he had said no, it might have led ungrateful children to neglect their parents’ burial rites. This avoidance was typical of a teacher who summed up his teaching on worship with this saying: "to fully dedicate oneself to the duties owed to people, while respecting spiritual beings and keeping a distance from them, can be considered wisdom." It’s said that in modern times, the Taepings have gone further than Confucius; they have prohibited sacrifices to the spirits of the dead but still observe the tradition of visiting graves on the customary day for prayer and renewing vows. How funeral offerings can evolve into commemorative banquets and feasts for the poor has already been illustrated. If we look in England for remnants of the old practice of funeral sacrifice, we might still find traces in modern times, such as giving out bread and drink to the poor at funerals, and "soul-mass cakes" that peasant girls might still ask for at farmhouses using the traditional phrase,
Were it not for our knowledge of the intermediate stages through which these fragments of old custom have come down, it would seem far-fetched indeed to trace their origin back to the savage and barbaric times of the institution of feasts of departed souls.
Were it not for our understanding of the intermediate stages through which these fragments of old customs have come down to us, it would seem quite unlikely to trace their origin back to the primitive and uncivilized times of the tradition of feasting for departed souls.
CHAPTER XIII.
ANIMISM (continued).
Journey of the Soul to the Land of the Dead—Visits by the Living to the Regions of Departed Souls—Connexion of such legends with myths of Sunset: the Land of the Dead thus imagined as in the West—Realization of current religious ideas, whether of savage or civilized theology, in narratives of visits to the Regions of Souls—Localization of the Future Life—Distant earthly region: Earthly Paradise, Isles of the Blest—Subterranean Hades or Sheol—Sun, Moon, Stars—Heaven—Historical course of belief as to such localization—Nature of Future Life—Continuance-theory, apparently original, belongs especially to the lower races—Transitional theories—Retribution-theory, apparently derived, belongs especially to the higher races—Doctrine of Moral Retribution as developed in the higher culture—Survey of Doctrine of Future State, from savage to civilized stages—Its practical effect on the sentiment and conduct of Mankind.
Journey of the Soul to the Land of the Dead—Visits by the Living to the Regions of Departed Souls—Connection of such legends with myths of Sunset: the Land of the Dead envisioned as in the West—Realization of current religious ideas, whether from primitive or advanced theology, in stories about visits to the Regions of Souls—Localization of the Afterlife—Distant earthly region: Earthly Paradise, Isles of the Blessed—Underworld Hades or Sheol—Sun, Moon, Stars—Heaven—Historical development of belief regarding such localization—Nature of the Afterlife—Continuance theory, seemingly original, is particularly associated with lower races—Transitional theories—Retribution theory, seemingly derived, is particularly associated with higher races—Doctrine of Moral Retribution as developed in higher culture—Overview of the Doctrine of the Afterlife, from primitive to civilized stages—Its practical effect on the feelings and behavior of Humanity.
The departure of the dead man’s soul from the world of living men, its journey to the distant land of spirits, the life it will lead in its new home, are topics on which the lower races for the most part hold explicit doctrines. When these fall under the inspection of a modern ethnographer, he treats them as myths; often to a high degree intelligible and rational in their origin, consistent and regular in their structure, but not the less myths. Few subjects have aroused the savage poet’s mind to such bold and vivid imagery as the thought of the hereafter. Yet also a survey of its details among mankind displays in the midst of variety a regular recurrence of episode which brings the ever-recurring question, how far is this correspondence due to transmission of the same thought from tribe to tribe, and how far to similar but independent development in distant lands?
The leaving of a dead person’s soul from the world of the living, its journey to the faraway land of spirits, and the life it will have in its new home are subjects on which many lower races have clear beliefs. When a modern ethnographer examines these beliefs, he sees them as myths; often they are quite understandable and rational in their origins, consistent and organized in their structure, but they remain myths nonetheless. Few topics have inspired the primitive poet’s imagination to such bold and vivid imagery as the idea of the afterlife. However, a look at its details among people reveals that, despite the variety, there is a regular pattern of episodes that raises the ongoing question: how much of this similarity comes from the sharing of the same idea among tribes, and how much comes from similar but independent development in far-off places?
From the savage state up into the midst of civilization, 45the comparison may be carried through. Low races and high, in region after region, can point out the very spot whence the flitting souls start to travel toward their new home. At the extreme western cape of Vanua Levu, a calm and solemn place of cliff and forest, the souls of the Fijian dead embark for the judgement-seat of Ndengei, and thither the living come in pilgrimage, thinking to see their ghosts and gods.[120] The Baperi of South Africa will venture to creep a little way into their cavern of Marimatlé, whence men and animals came forth into the world, and whither souls return at death.[121] In Mexico the cavern of Chalchatongo led to the plains of paradise, and the Aztec name of Mictlan, ‘Land of the Dead,’ now Mitla, keeps up the remembrance of another subterranean temple which opened the way to the sojourn of the blessed.[122] How naturally a dreary place, fit rather for the dead than the living, suggests the thought of an entrance to the land of the departed, is seen in the fictitious travels known under the name of Sir John Mandevill, where the description of the Vale Perilous, adapted from the terrible valley which Friar Odoric had seen full of corpses and heard resound with strange noise of drums, has this appropriate ending: ‘This vale es full of deuilles and all way has bene; and men saise in that cuntree that thare es ane entree to hell.’[123] In more genuine folklore, North German peasants still remember on the banks of the swampy Drömling the place of access to the land of departed souls.[124] To us Englishmen the shores of lake Avernus, trodden daily by our tourists, are more familiar than the Irish analogue of the place, Lough Derg, with its cavern entrance of St. Patrick’s Purgatory leading down to the awful world below. The mass of mystic details 46need not be repeated here of the soul’s dread journey by caverns and rocky paths and weary plains, over steep and slippery mountains, by frail bark or giddy bridge across gulfs or rushing rivers, abiding the fierce onset of the soul-destroyer or the doom of the stern guardian of the other world. But before describing the spirit-world which is the end of the soul’s journey, let us see what the proof is which sustains the belief in both. The lower races claim to hold their doctrines of the future life on strong tradition, direct revelation, and even personal experience. To them the land of souls is a discovered country, from whose bourne many a traveller returns.
From the primitive state up into the heart of civilization, 45 the comparison can be made. Low races and high, in various regions, can identify the exact spot where wandering souls begin their journey to their new home. At the far western tip of Vanua Levu, a peaceful and solemn area of cliffs and forests, the souls of the Fijian dead set off for the judgement-seat of Ndengei, and there the living come on pilgrimage, hoping to encounter their ghosts and gods.[120] The Baperi of South Africa will dare to venture a short distance into their cave of Marimatlé, from where men and animals emerged into the world, and where souls return after death.[121] In Mexico, the cave of Chalchatongo led to the fields of paradise, and the Aztec name Mictlan, ‘Land of the Dead,’ now known as Mitla, keeps alive the memory of another underground temple that opened the path to the resting place of the blessed.[122] How naturally a dismal place, more suitable for the dead than the living, suggests the idea of an entryway to the land of the departed is illustrated in the fictional travels of Sir John Mandeville, where the description of the Vale Perilous, adapted from the dreadful valley that Friar Odoric encountered full of corpses and echoing with eerie drum sounds, concludes appropriately: ‘This vale is full of devils and always has been; and people say in that country that there is an entrance to hell.’[123] In more authentic folklore, North German peasants still recall the spot by the marshy Drömling as the access point to the realm of departed souls.[124] For us Englishmen, the shores of Lake Avernus, visited daily by tourists, are more familiar than the Irish equivalent, Lough Derg, with its cave entrance of St. Patrick’s Purgatory leading down to the terrifying world below. The myriad of mystical details 46 about the soul's dreadful journey through caves and rocky paths, over weary plains, across steep and slippery mountains, by fragile boats or dizzying bridges over chasms or rushing rivers, facing the fierce assault of the soul-destroyer or the fate of the stern guardian of the other world need not be reiterated here. But before diving into a description of the spirit world that concludes the soul's journey, let’s examine the evidence that supports the belief in both. The lower races assert that their doctrines about the afterlife are based on strong tradition, direct revelation, and even personal experience. For them, the land of souls is a known territory, from which many travelers return.
Among the legendary visits to the world beyond the grave, there are some that seem pure myth, without a touch of real personal history. Ojibwa, the eponymic hero of his North American tribe, as one of his many exploits descended to the subterranean world of departed spirits, and came up again to earth.[125] When the Kamchadals were asked how they knew so well what happens to men after death, they could answer with their legend of Haetsh the first man. He died and went down into the world below, and a long while after came up again to his former dwelling, and there, standing above by the smoke-hole, he talked down to his kindred in the house and told them about the life to come; it was then that his two daughters whom he had left below followed him in anger and smote him so that he died a second time, and now he is chief in the lower world, and receives the Italmen when they die and rise anew.[126] Thus, again, in the great Finnish epic, the Kalewala, one great episode is Wainamoinen’s visit to the land of the dead. Seeking the last charm-words to build his boat, the hero travelled with quick steps week after week through bush and wood till he came to the Tuonela river, and saw before him the island of Tuoni the god of death. Loudly he called to Tuoni’s daughter to bring the ferry-boat across:—
Among the famous stories of visits to the afterlife, some feel entirely mythical, lacking any real personal connection. Ojibwa, the namesake hero of his North American tribe, is said to have descended into the underground realm of spirits and then returned to earth. [125] When the Kamchadals were asked how they knew so much about what happens to people after death, they shared their legend of Haetsh, the first man. He died and journeyed to the world below, and a long time later, he returned to his old home. There, standing above the smoke-hole, he spoke down to his family in the house and told them about life after death; it was then that his two daughters, whom he had left below, followed him in anger and struck him so that he died a second time. Now, he is a chief in the underworld, welcoming the Italmen when they die and rise again. [126] Similarly, in the great Finnish epic, the Kalewala, one major episode features Wainamoinen’s trip to the land of the dead. In search of the final charm-words to build his boat, the hero traveled swiftly week after week through the forest and brush until he reached the Tuonela river and saw the island of Tuoni, the god of death, before him. He called out loudly to Tuoni’s daughter to bring the ferry-boat across:—
Wainamoinen replies with lying reasons. Iron brought him, he says, but Tuoni’s daughter answers that no blood drips from his garment; Fire brought him, he says, but she answers that his locks are unsinged, and at last he tells his real mission. Then she ferries him over, and Tuonetar the hostess brings him beer in the two-eared jug, but Wainamoinen can see the frogs and worms within and will not drink, for it was not to drain Manala’s beer-jug he had come. He lay in the bed of Tuoni, and meanwhile they spread the hundred nets of iron and copper across the river that he might not escape; but he turned into a reed in the swamp, and as a snake crept through the meshes:—
Wainamoinen responds with false excuses. He claims that iron brought him, but Tuoni’s daughter points out that there's no blood on his clothes; he then says that fire brought him, but she replies that his hair isn’t singed. Finally, he reveals his true purpose. She then ferries him across, and Tuonetar, the hostess, serves him beer in a jug with two handles, but Wainamoinen notices the frogs and worms inside and refuses to drink, since he didn’t come to sip from Manala’s beer jug. He lies down in Tuoni’s bed, and meanwhile, they spread out a hundred nets made of iron and copper across the river to prevent his escape; however, he turns into a reed in the swamp, and as a snake, he slithers through the gaps in the nets:—
It is enough to name the familiar classic analogues of these mythic visits to Hades,—the descent of Dionysos to bring back Semele, of Orpheus to bring back his beloved Eurydike, of Herakles to fetch up the three-headed Kerberos at the command of his master Eurystheus; above all, the voyage of Odysseus to the ends of the deep-flowing Ocean, to the clouded city of Kimmerian men, where shining Helios looks not down with his rays, and deadly night stretches always over wretched mortals,—thence they passed along the banks to the entrance of the land where the shades of the departed, quickened for a while by the taste of sacrificial blood, talked with the hero and showed him the regions of their dismal home.[128]
It’s enough to mention the well-known classic examples of these mythic journeys to Hades—the descent of Dionysus to bring back Semele, Orpheus going to retrieve his beloved Eurydice, and Heracles fetching the three-headed Cerberus at the command of his master Eurystheus; but especially, Odysseus's voyage to the ends of the deep-flowing Ocean, to the foggy city of the Kimmerians, where shining Helios does not shine down with his rays, and deadly night always hangs over miserable mortals. From there, they traveled along the banks to the entrance of the land where the shades of the departed, briefly revived by the taste of sacrificial blood, spoke with the hero and showed him the regions of their gloomy home.[128]
The scene of the descent into Hades is in very deed enacted day by day before our eyes, as it was before the eyes of the ancient myth-maker, who watched the sun descend to the dark under-world, and return at dawn to the land of living men. These heroic legends lie in close-knit connexion with episodes of solar myth. It is by the simplest poetic adaptation of the Sun’s daily life, typifying Man’s life in dawning beauty, in mid-day glory, in evening death, that mythic fancy even fixed the belief in the religions of the world, that the Land of Departed Souls lies in the Far West or the World Below. How deeply the myth of the Sunset has entered into the doctrine of men concerning a Future State, how the West and the Under-World have become by mere imaginative analogy Regions of the Dead, how the quaint day-dreams of savage poets may pass into 49honoured dogmas of classic sages and modern divines,—all this the crowd of details here cited from the wide range of culture stand to prove.
The scene of the descent into Hades really plays out day by day right before us, just as it did for the ancient myth-maker, who observed the sun sinking into the dark underworld and rising again at dawn to the realm of the living. These heroic legends are closely tied to episodes of solar myth. It's through a simple poetic interpretation of the Sun’s daily journey, representing human life in its early beauty, midday glory, and evening demise, that mythic imagination solidified the belief in various world religions that the Land of Departed Souls is either in the Far West or the Underworld. The extent to which the myth of the Sunset has influenced human beliefs about an Afterlife, how the West and the Underworld have turned into, through mere imaginative comparison, Regions of the Dead, and how the whimsical daydreams of primitive poets can evolve into respected doctrines of classical philosophers and modern theologians—this all stands to be proven by the numerous details highlighted from a broad spectrum of cultures. 49
Moreover, visits from or to the dead are matters of personal experience and personal testimony. When in dream or vision the seer beholds the spirits of the departed, they give him tidings from the other world, or he may even rise and travel thither himself, and return to tell the living what he has seen among the dead. It is sometimes as if the traveller’s material body went to visit a distant land, and sometimes all we are told is that the man’s self went, but whether in body or in spirit is a mere detail of which the story keeps no record. Mostly, however, it is the seer’s soul which goes forth, leaving his body behind in ecstasy, sleep, coma, or death. Some of these stories, as we trace them on from savage into civilized times, are no doubt given in good faith by the visionary himself, while others are imitations of these genuine accounts.[129] Now such visions are naturally apt to reproduce the thoughts with which the seer’s mind was already furnished. Every idea once lodged in the mind of a savage, a barbarian, or an enthusiast, is ready thus to be brought back to him from without. It is a vicious circle; what he believes he therefore sees, and what he sees he therefore believes. Beholding the reflexion of his own mind like a child looking at itself in a glass, he humbly receives the teaching of his second self. The Red Indian visits his happy hunting-grounds, the Tongan his shadowy island of Bolotu, the Greek enters Hades and looks on the Elysian Fields, the Christian beholds the heights of Heaven and the depths of Hell.
Moreover, visits from or to the dead are personal experiences and individual accounts. When the seer sees the spirits of those who have passed on in dreams or visions, they bring him messages from the other side, or he may even journey there himself and return to share what he has witnessed among the dead. Sometimes, it feels like the traveler’s physical body has gone to a faraway place, while other times, we only hear that the person's essence has gone, but whether in body or spirit is just a detail that the story doesn’t focus on. Most of the time, it’s the seer’s soul that ventures out, leaving his body behind in ecstasy, sleep, coma, or death. As we follow these stories from primitive times to modern civilization, it’s clear that some are shared in good faith by the visionary himself, while others are imitations of these authentic accounts. Now, such visions are naturally inclined to reflect the thoughts that the seer’s mind already holds. Any idea once planted in the mind of a primitive, a barbarian, or an enthusiast can be brought back to him from outside. It’s a vicious cycle; what he believes, he sees, and what he sees, he believes. He sees a reflection of his own mind, much like a child looking at itself in a mirror, and humbly accepts the teachings of his second self. The Native American visits his happy hunting grounds, the Tongan journeys to his shadowy island of Bolotu, the Greek enters Hades and gazes upon the Elysian Fields, and the Christian envisions the heights of Heaven and the depths of Hell.
Among the North American Indians, and especially the Algonquin tribes, accounts are not unusual of men whose spirits, travelling in dreams or in the hallucinations of extreme illness to the land of the dead, have returned to reanimate their bodies, and tell what they have seen. 50Their experiences have been in great measure what they were taught in early childhood to expect, the journey along the path of the dead, the monstrous strawberry at which the jebi-ug or ghosts refresh themselves, but which turns to red rock at the touch of their spoons, the bark offered them for dried meat and great puff-balls for squashes, the river of the dead with its snake-bridge or swinging log, the great dog standing on the other side, the villages of the dead beyond.[130] The Zulus of our own day tell of men who have gone down by holes in the ground into the underworld, where mountains and rivers and all things are as here above, and where a man may find his kindred, for the dead live in their villages, and may be seen milking their cattle, which are the cattle killed on earth and come to life anew. The Zulu Umpengula, who told one of these stories to Dr. Callaway, remembered when he was a boy seeing an ugly little hairy man called Uncama, who once, chasing a porcupine that ate his mealies, followed it down a hole in the ground into the land of the dead. When he came back to his home on earth he found that he had been given up for dead himself, his wife had duly burnt and buried his mats and blankets and vessels, and the wondering people at sight of him again shouted the funeral dirge. Of this Zulu Dante it used to be continually said, ‘There is the man who went to the underground people.’[131] One of the most characteristic of these savage narratives is from New Zealand. This story, which has an especial interest from the reminiscence it contains of the gigantic extinct Moa, and which may be repeated at some length as an illustration of the minute detail and lifelike reality which such visionary legends assume in barbaric life, was told to Mr. Shortland by a servant of his named Te Wharewera. An aunt of this 51man died in a solitary hut near the banks of Lake Rotorua. Being a lady of rank she was left in her hut, the door and windows were made fast, and the dwelling was abandoned, as her death had made it tapu. But a day or two after, Te Wharewera with some others paddling in a canoe near the place at early morning saw a figure on the shore beckoning to them. It was the aunt come to life again, but weak and cold and famished. When sufficiently restored by their timely help, she told her story. Leaving her body, her spirit had taken flight toward the North Cape, and arrived at the entrance of Reigna. There, holding on by the stem of the creeping akeake-plant, she descended the precipice, and found herself on the sandy beach of a river. Looking round, she espied in the distance an enormous bird, taller than a man, coming towards her with rapid strides. This terrible object so frightened her, that her first thought was to try to return up the steep cliff; but seeing an old man paddling a small canoe towards her she ran to meet him, and so escaped the bird. When she had been safely ferried across she asked the old Charon, mentioning the name of her family, where the spirits of her kindred dwelt. Following the path the old man pointed out, she was surprised to find it just such a path as she had been used to on earth; the aspect of the country, the trees, shrubs, and plants were all familiar to her. She reached the village and among the crowd assembled there she found her father and many near relations; they saluted her, and welcomed her with the wailing chant which Maoris always address to people met after long absence. But when her father had asked about his living relatives, and especially about her own child, he told her she must go back to earth, for no one was left to take care of his grandchild. By his orders she refused to touch the food that the dead people offered her, and in spite of their efforts to detain her, her father got her safely into the canoe, crossed with her, and parting gave her from under his cloak two enormous sweet potatoes to plant at home for his grandchild’s especial eating. But as she began 52to climb the precipice again, two pursuing infant spirits pulled her back, and she only escaped by flinging the roots at them, which they stopped to eat, while she scaled the rock by help of the akeake-stem, till she reached the earth and flew back to where she had left her body. On returning to life she found herself in darkness, and what had passed seemed as a dream, till she perceived that she was deserted and the door fast, and concluded that she had really died and come to life again. When morning dawned, a faint light entered by the crevices of the shut-up house, and she saw on the floor near her a calabash partly full of red ochre mixed with water; this she eagerly drained to the dregs, and then feeling a little stronger, succeeded in opening the door and crawling down to the beach, where her friends soon after found her. Those who listened to her tale firmly believed the reality of her adventures, but it was much regretted that she had not brought back at least one of the huge sweet-potatoes, as evidence of her visit to the land of spirits.[132] Races of North Asia[133] and West Africa[134] have in like manner their explorers of the world beyond the grave.
Among North American Indians, particularly in the Algonquin tribes, stories are common about men whose spirits, traveling in dreams or during severe illness to the land of the dead, return to revive their bodies and share what they’ve seen. 50 Their experiences largely align with what they were taught to expect as children: the journey along the path of the dead, the giant strawberry where the jebi-ug or ghosts refresh themselves—only to turn to red rock when touched with their spoons—and the bark provided for dried meat and huge puff-balls for squashes, the river of the dead with its snake-bridge or swinging log, the great dog waiting on the other side, and the villages of the dead beyond. [130] Today’s Zulus tell of men who have entered holes in the ground into the underworld, where mountains and rivers exist just like above, and where a person can find their relatives because the dead reside in their villages, seen milking their cattle, which are the cattle killed on earth and brought back to life. The Zulu Umpengula, who shared one of these stories with Dr. Callaway, recalls as a boy seeing a strange little hairy man named Uncama, who once, while chasing a porcupine that was eating his mealies, followed it down a hole into the land of the dead. When he returned home, he found that he had been presumed dead; his wife had burned and buried his mats, blankets, and vessels, and the astonished townspeople shouted the funeral dirge upon seeing him again. People often remarked, ‘There goes the man who visited the underground people.’ [131] One of the most defining savage narratives comes from New Zealand. This story, particularly interesting because it recalls the gigantic extinct Moa, can be shared at length as an example of the intricate detail and vivid reality that such visionary legends take on in tribal life. It was told to Mr. Shortland by his servant Te Wharewera. An aunt of this 51 man died in a solitary hut by Lake Rotorua. Being of noble birth, she was left in her hut, with the door and windows securely closed, and the place was abandoned, as her death made it tapu. But a couple of days later, Te Wharewera and some others paddling in a canoe early in the morning saw a figure on the shore waving to them. It was the aunt brought to life again, but she was weak, cold, and starving. Once she was restored by their timely assistance, she told her story. After leaving her body, her spirit had flown northward, reaching the entrance of Reigna. There, gripping the stem of the climbing akeake plant, she descended a cliff and ended up on the sandy shore of a river. Looking around, she spotted in the distance a gigantic bird, taller than a man, approaching her quickly. This frightening sight made her first instinct to try to climb back up the steep cliff; but spotting an old man paddling a small canoe towards her, she ran to meet him, escaping the bird. After being safely ferried across, she asked the old ferryman, mentioning her family name, where her relatives' spirits lived. Following the path the old man indicated, she was surprised to find it exactly resembling the paths she knew on earth; the scenery, trees, shrubs, and plants were all familiar. She reached the village and there among the crowd gathered, she found her father and many close relatives; they greeted her with the wailing chant that Maoris always use for people met after a long absence. However, when her father asked about his living relatives, particularly her child, he told her she must return to earth, for no one remained to care for his grandchild. Following his instructions, she declined to eat the food offered by the dead, and despite their attempts to hold her back, her father got her safely into the canoe, crossed with her, and just before parting, he handed her two large sweet potatoes from under his cloak to plant at home for his grandchild. However, as she began to climb the cliff again, two young spirits tugged at her, and she narrowly escaped by throwing the roots to them, which they stopped to eat, while she climbed using the akeake stem until she reached the earth and hurried back to her body. Upon returning to life, she found herself in darkness, and what had happened felt like a dream, until she realized she was alone and the door was shut, concluding that she had indeed died and come back to life. When morning arrived, a faint light seeped through the cracks of the abandoned house, and she noticed a calabash partially filled with red ochre mixed with water on the floor near her; she eagerly drank the dregs and, feeling a bit stronger, managed to open the door and crawl down to the beach, where her friends soon found her. Those who heard her story firmly believed her adventures were real, but it was widely lamented that she hadn’t brought back at least one of the giant sweet potatoes as proof of her journey to the land of spirits. [132] Races of North Asia [133] and West Africa [134] similarly have their own explorers of the world beyond the grave.
Classic literature continues the series. Lucian’s graphic 53tales represent the belief of their age, if not of their author. His Eukrates looks down the chasm into Hades, and sees the dead reclining on the asphodel in companies of kinsfolk and friends; among them he recognizes Sokrates with his bald head and pot-belly, and also his own father, dressed in the clothes he was buried in. Then Kleodemos caps this story with his own, how when he was sick, on the seventh day when his fever was burning like a furnace, every one left him, and the doors were shut. Then there stood before him an all-beauteous youth in a white garment, who led him through a chasm into Hades, as he knew by seeing Tantalos and Tityos and Sisyphos; and bringing him to the court of judgement, where were Aiakos and the Fates and the Erinyes, the youth set him before Pluto the King, who sat reading the names of those whose day of life was over. But Pluto was angry, and said to the guide, ‘This one’s thread is not run out, that he should depart, but bring me Demylos the coppersmith, for he is living beyond the spindle.’ So Kleodemos came back to himself free from his fever and announced that Demylos, who was a sick neighbour, would die; and accordingly a little while after there was heard the cry of the mourners wailing for him.[135] Plutarch’s stories, told more seriously, are yet one in type with the mocking Lucian’s. The wicked, pleasure-seeking Thespesios lies three days as dead, and revives to tell his vision of the world below. One Antyllos was sick, and seemed to the doctors to retain no trace of life; till, waking without sign of insanity, he declared that he had been indeed dead, but was ordered back to life, those who brought him being severely chidden by their lord, and sent to fetch Nikander instead, a well-known currier, who was accordingly taken with a fever, and died on the third day.[136] Such stories, old and new, are current among the Hindus at this day. A certain man’s soul, for instance, is carried to the 54realm of Yama by mistake for a namesake, and is sent back in haste to regain his body before it is burnt; but in the meanwhile he has a glimpse of the hideous punishments of the wicked, and of the glorious life of those who had mortified the flesh on earth, and of suttee-widows now sitting in happiness by their husbands.[137] Mutatis mutandis these tales reappear in Christian mythology, as when Gregory the Great records that a certain nobleman named Stephen died, who was taken to the region of Hades, and saw many things he had heard before but not believed; but when he was set before the ruler there presiding, he sent him back, saying that it was this Stephen’s neighbour—Stephen the smith—whom he had commanded to be brought; and accordingly the one returned to life, and the other died.[138]
Classic literature keeps going. Lucian’s vivid stories reflect the beliefs of his time, if not necessarily his own. In his story, Eukrates gazes into the abyss of Hades and sees the dead lounging on the asphodel among family and friends; he recognizes Socrates with his bald head and round belly, and his own father, wearing the burial clothes. Then Kleodemos adds to this tale by sharing his own experience of being sick. On the seventh day, with his fever raging like a furnace, everyone abandoned him, and the doors were closed. Suddenly, a beautiful young man in a white garment appeared, leading him across the chasm into Hades, where he recognized Tantalus, Tityos, and Sisyphus. He was brought before the court of judgment, where Aeacus, the Fates, and the Erinyes were present. The youth placed him in front of King Pluto, who was reading the names of those whose time had come. But Pluto was angry and told the guide, “His life thread isn’t finished, he shouldn’t leave; bring me Demylos the coppersmith, who is living beyond his time.” So, Kleodemos returned to himself, free from fever, and warned that his sick neighbor Demylos would die; sure enough, not long after, the mournful cries of the mourners were heard for him. Plutarch’s stories, while more serious, are similar to Lucian's playful ones. The wicked, pleasure-seeking Thespesios lay dead for three days, only to revive and share his vision of the underworld. One Antyllos was ill and seemed entirely lifeless to the doctors; then, waking up without any signs of madness, he revealed that he had indeed been dead but was sent back to life, scolded by the lord who sent him to fetch Nikander, a well-known currier, who soon fell ill and died on the third day. Such stories, both old and new, are still told among Hindus today. For example, a man's soul is mistakenly taken to the realm of Yama for someone with the same name and is hurried back to reclaim his body before it’s burned; during this time, he sees the terrifying punishments of the wicked and the blissful life of those who had mortified their flesh on earth, alongside suttee-widows happily sitting beside their husbands. These tales, with necessary adjustments, also appear in Christian mythology. For instance, Gregory the Great recounts a nobleman named Stephen who died and was taken to Hades, where he saw many things he had previously heard but never believed. When he was placed before the ruler there, he was sent back, as it was actually his neighbor—Stephen the smith—who was supposed to be brought; thus, one returned to life while the other passed away.
The thought of human visitors revealing the mysteries of the world beyond the grave, which indeed took no slight hold on Christian belief, attached itself in a remarkable way to the doctrine of Christ’s descent into Hades. This dogma had so strongly established itself by the end of the 4th century, that Augustine could ask, ‘Quis nisi infidelis negaverit fuisse apud inferos Christum?’[139] A distinct statement of the dogma was afterwards introduced into the symbol commonly called the ‘Apostles’ Creed:’ ‘Descendit ad inferos,’ ‘Descendit ad inferna,’ ‘He descended into hell.’[140] The Descent into Hades, which had the theological use of providing a theory of salvation applicable to the saints of the old covenant, imprisoned in the limbo of the fathers, is narrated in full in the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus, and is made there to rest upon a legend which belongs to the present group of human visits to the other world. It is related that two sons of Simeon, 55named Charinus and Leucius, rose from their tombs at the Resurrection, and went about silently and prayerfully among men, till Annas and Caiaphas brought them into the synagogue, and charged them to tell of their raising from the dead. Then, making the sign of the cross upon their tongues, the two asked for parchment and wrote their record. They had been set with all their fathers in the depths of Hades, when on a sudden there appeared the colour of the sun like gold, and a purple royal light shining on them; then the patriarchs and prophets, from Adam to Simeon and John the Baptist, rejoicing proclaimed the coming of the light and the fulfilment of the prophecies; Satan and Hades wrangled in strife together; in vain the brazen gates were shut with their iron bars, for the summons came to open the gates that the king of glory may come in, who hath broken the gates of brass and cut the bars of iron in sunder; then the mighty Lord broke the fetters and visited them who sat in darkness and the shadow of death; Adam and his righteous children were delivered from Hades, and led into the glorious grace of Paradise.[141]
The idea of human visitors uncovering the secrets of the afterlife, which held a significant place in Christian belief, became closely linked to the doctrine of Christ’s descent into Hades. By the end of the 4th century, this belief was so firmly established that Augustine could ask, "Who but an unbeliever would deny that Christ was in hell?"[139] A clear statement of this doctrine was later incorporated into what is commonly known as the ‘Apostles’ Creed’: ‘He descended to the underworld,’ ‘He descended to hell,’ ‘He descended into hell.’[140] The Descent into Hades, which served the theological purpose of providing a salvation theory relevant to the saints of the old covenant trapped in the limbo of the fathers, is detailed in the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus, which frames it within a legend of human encounters with the afterlife. It recounts how two sons of Simeon, 55named Charinus and Leucius, rose from their graves at the Resurrection and quietly moved among people in prayer until Annas and Caiaphas brought them to the synagogue and urged them to share their experience of being raised from the dead. Then, making the sign of the cross on their tongues, they requested parchment and wrote down their account. They had been placed with all their ancestors in the depths of Hades when suddenly a light appeared, golden like the sun, along with a royal purple glow; the patriarchs and prophets, from Adam to Simeon and John the Baptist, joyfully proclaimed the arrival of the light and the fulfillment of the prophecies. Satan and Hades argued vigorously; the bronze gates remained shut with their iron bars, but the call came to open the gates for the king of glory to enter, one who had broken the gates of brass and shattered the iron bars; then the mighty Lord broke the chains and visited those who sat in darkness and the shadow of death; Adam and his righteous descendants were freed from Hades and led into the glorious grace of Paradise.[141]
Dante, elaborating in the ‘Divina Commedia’ the conceptions of paradise, purgatory, and hell familiar to the actual belief of his age, describes them once more in the guise of a living visitor to the land of the dead. Echoes in mediæval legend of such exploring expeditions to the world below still linger faintly in the popular belief of Europe. It has been thus with St. Patrick’s Purgatory,[142] the cavern in the island of Lough Derg, in the county Donegal, which even in the seventeenth century O’Sullevan could describe first and foremost in his ‘Catholic History’ as ‘the greatest of all memorable things of Ireland.’ Mediæval visits to the other world were often made in the 56spirit. But like Ulysses, Wainamoinen, and Dante, men could here make the journey in body, as did Sir Owain and the monk Gilbert. When the pilgrim had spent fifteen days in prayer and fasting in the church, and had been led with litanies and sprinkling of holy water to the entrance of the purgatory, and the last warnings of the monks had failed to turn him from his venture, the door was closed upon him, and if found next morning, he could tell the events of his awful journey—how he crossed the narrow bridge that spans the river of death, how he saw the hideous torments of hell, and approached the joys of paradise. Sir Owain, one of King Stephen’s knights, went thither in penance for his life of violence and rapine, and this was one of the scenes he beheld in purgatory:—
Dante, in the ‘Divine Comedy,’ expands on the ideas of heaven, purgatory, and hell that were common beliefs in his time, portraying them as a living visitor to the afterlife. Legends from the medieval period about expeditions to the underworld still faintly echo in Europe’s popular beliefs. One such example is St. Patrick’s Purgatory,[142] the cave on Lough Derg island in County Donegal, which in the seventeenth century O’Sullevan described as ‘the most remarkable place in Ireland’ in his ‘Catholic History.’ Medieval journeys to the other world often took place spiritually. However, similar to Ulysses, Wainamoinen, and Dante, some men could embark on the journey physically, like Sir Owain and the monk Gilbert. After spending fifteen days in prayer and fasting at the church, and being led with litanies and holy water to the entrance of purgatory, if the monk's final warnings couldn’t deter the pilgrim from his mission, the door would close behind him. If found the next morning, he could recount the terrifying events of his journey—how he crossed the narrow bridge over the river of death, witnessed the horrific torments of hell, and drew closer to the joys of paradise. Sir Owain, one of King Stephen’s knights, visited purgatory as penance for his violent and marauding life, and this was one of the sights he encountered there:—
57When Owain had seen the other fields of punishment, with their fiery serpents and toads, and the fires where sinners were hung up by their offending members, and roasted on spits, and basted with molten metal, and turned about on a great wheel of fire, and when he had passed the Devil’s Mouth over the awful bridge, he reached the fair white glassy wall of the Earthly Paradise, reaching upward and upward, and saw before him the beautiful gate, whence issued a ravishing perfume. Then he soon forgot his pains and sorrows.
57Once Owain had seen the different fields of punishment, with their fiery snakes and toads, and the fires where sinners were hung by their offending limbs, roasted on spits, basted with molten metal, and spun around on a huge wheel of fire, and after he crossed the Devil’s Mouth over the terrifying bridge, he arrived at the beautiful white glassy wall of the Earthly Paradise, rising higher and higher, and he saw before him the stunning gate, from which an enchanting fragrance emerged. He quickly forgot his pain and sorrow.
The procession welcomed Owain, and led him about, showing him the beauties of that country:—
The parade welcomed Owain and showed him around, highlighting the beauty of the area:—
The poem, in fifteenth-century English, from which these passages are taken, is a version of the original legend of earlier date, and as such contrasts with a story really dating from early in the fifteenth century—William Staunton’s descent into Purgatory, where the themes of the old sincerely-believed visionary lore are fading into moral allegory, and the traveller sees the gay gold and silver collars and girdles burning into the wearer’s flesh, and the jags that men were clothed in now become adders and dragons, sucking and stinging them, and the fiends drawing down the skin of women’s shoulders into pokes, and smiting into their heads with burning hammers their gay chaplets of gold and jewels turned to burning nails, and so forth. Late in this fifteenth century, St. Patrick’s Purgatory fell into discredit, but even the destruction of the entrance-building, in 1479, by Papal order, did not destroy the ideal road. About 1693, an excavation on the spot brought to light a window with iron stanchions; there was a cry for 59holy water to keep the spirits from breaking out from prison, and the priest smelt brimstone from the dark cavity below, which, however, unfortunately turned out to be a cellar. In still later times, the yearly pilgrimage of tens of thousands of votaries to the holy place has kept up this interesting survival from the lower culture, whereby a communication may still be traced, if not from Earth to Hades, at least from the belief of the New Zealander to that of the Irish peasant.
The poem, written in fifteenth-century English, from which these passages are taken, is a version of an earlier legend and contrasts with a story that really dates back to the early fifteenth century—William Staunton’s journey into Purgatory. In this story, the themes of the previously held visionary beliefs are fading into moral allegory. The traveler sees the shiny gold and silver collars and belts burning into the wearer's flesh, and the rags that people used to wear have transformed into snakes and dragons, biting and stinging them. Fiends are pulling down the skin of women’s shoulders into bags and striking their heads with burning hammers, turning their beautiful crowns of gold and jewels into searing nails, and so on. Late in this fifteenth century, St. Patrick’s Purgatory lost its credibility, but even the destruction of the entrance building in 1479 by Papal order didn’t eliminate the ideal path. Around 1693, an excavation on the site uncovered a window with iron bars; there was a call for holy water to keep the spirits from escaping, and the priest smelled sulfur from the dark pit below, which unfortunately turned out to be just a cellar. In later years, the annual pilgrimage of tens of thousands of worshippers to the holy site has maintained this fascinating remnant from the lower culture, creating a link that can still be traced, if not from Earth to Hades, then at least from the beliefs of New Zealanders to those of Irish peasants.
To study and compare the ideal regions where man has placed the abodes of departed souls is not an unprofitable task. True, geography has now mapped out into mere earth and water the space that lay beyond the narrower sea and land known to the older nations, and astronomy no longer recognizes the flat earth trodden by men as being the roof of subterranean halls, nor the sky as being a solid firmament, shutting out men’s gaze from strata or spheres of empyræan regions beyond. Yet if we carry our minds back to the state of knowledge among the lower races, we shall not find it hard to understand the early conceptions as to the locality of the regions beyond the grave. They are no secrets of high knowledge made known to sages of old; they are the natural fancies which childlike ignorance would frame in any age. The regularity with which such conceptions repeat themselves over the world bears testimony to the regularity of the processes by which opinion is formed among mankind. At the same time, the student who carefully compares them will find in them a perfect illustration of an important principle, widely applicable to the general theory of the formation of human opinion. When a problem has presented itself to mankind at large, susceptible of a number of solutions about equally plausible, the result is that the several opinions thus produced will be found lying scattered in country after country. The problem here is, given the existence of souls of the dead who from time to time visit the living, where is the home of these ghosts? Why men in one district should have preferred 60the earth, in another the under-world, in another the sky, as the abode of departed souls, is a question often difficult to answer. But we may at least see how again and again the question was taken in hand, and how out of the three or four available answers some peoples adopted one, some another, some several at once. Primitive theologians had all the world before them where to choose their place of rest for the departed, and they used to the full their speculative liberty.
Studying and comparing the ideal places where people believe the souls of the departed reside is a worthwhile endeavor. Sure, geography has reduced the vastness beyond familiar seas and lands into simple earth and water, and astronomy no longer sees the flat earth we walk on as the ceiling of underground halls or the sky as a solid barrier that keeps us from viewing other realms beyond. However, if we reflect on the knowledge of earlier cultures, it's easy to comprehend their initial beliefs about where the afterlife might be. These ideas aren't hidden truths revealed to ancient wise men; they are the natural thoughts that innocent minds would create in any era. The consistent way these beliefs appear around the world shows us the regular patterns through which human opinions are formed. At the same time, those who closely examine these beliefs will find a clear example of a significant principle that can be widely applied to how human opinions develop. When a question arises for humanity that can have several equally plausible answers, those differing opinions tend to be found scattered across different regions. The question here is, given the belief in souls of the dead that occasionally visit the living, where do these spirits dwell? Understanding why people in one area might prefer the earth, while others favor the underworld or the sky as the home of departed souls is often challenging. But we can see how this question has been repeatedly addressed and how out of the few options available, some cultures chose one, others chose another, and some embraced several at once. Early theologians had the entire world at their disposal to decide where the departed should rest, and they fully utilized their imaginative freedom.
Firstly, when the land of souls is located on the surface of the earth, there is choice of fit places among wild and cloudy precipices, in secluded valleys, in far-off plains and islands. In Borneo, Mr. St. John visited the heaven of the Idaan race, on the summit of Kina Balu, and the native guides, who feared to pass the night in this abode of spirits, showed the traveller the moss on which the souls of their ancestors fed, and the footprints of the ghostly buffaloes that followed them. On Gunung Danka, a mountain in West Java, there is such another ‘Earthly Paradise.’ The Sajira who dwell in the district indeed profess themselves Mohammedans, but they secretly maintain their old belief, and at death or funeral they enjoin the soul in solemn form to set aside the Moslem Allah, and to take the way to the dwelling-place of his own forefathers’ souls:—
Firstly, when the land of spirits is found on the earth's surface, there are choices of suitable places among wild and cloudy cliffs, in hidden valleys, and in distant plains and islands. In Borneo, Mr. St. John visited the haven of the Idaan people at the peak of Kina Balu, where the local guides, who were afraid to spend the night in this spirit realm, pointed out the moss where their ancestors' souls rested, and the tracks of the spectral buffaloes that followed them. On Gunung Danka, a mountain in West Java, there is another such 'Earthly Paradise.' The Sajira who live in that area claim to be Muslims, but they secretly hold onto their old beliefs, and at death or during funerals, they instruct the soul in a formal way to disregard the Muslim Allah and to journey to the home of their forebears’ souls:—
Mr. Jonathan Rigg had lived ten years among these people, and knew them well, yet had never found out that their paradise was on this mountain. When at last he heard of it, he made the ascent, finding on the top only a few river-stones, forming one of the balai, or sacred cairns, common in the district. But the popular belief, that a tiger would devour the chiefs who permitted a violation of the sacred place, soon received the sort of confirmation which such beliefs receive everywhere, for a tiger killed two children a 61few days later, and the disaster was of course ascribed to Mr. Rigg’s profanation.[143] The Chilians said that the soul goes westward over the sea to Gulcheman, the dwelling-place of the dead beyond the mountains; life, some said, was all pleasure there, but others thought that part would be happy and part miserable.[144] Hidden among the mountains of Mexico lay the joyous garden-land of Tlalocan, where maize, and pumpkins, and chilis, and tomatos never failed, and where abode the souls of children sacrificed to Tlaloc, its god, and the souls of such as died by drowning or thunderstroke, or by leprosy or dropsy, or other acute disease.[145] A survival of such thought may be traced into mediæval civilization, in the legends of the Earthly Paradise, the fire-girt abode of saints not yet raised to highest bliss, localized in the utmost East of Asia, where earth stretches up towards heaven.[146] When Columbus sailed west-ward across the Atlantic to seek ‘the new heaven and the new earth’ he had read of in Isaiah, he found them, though not as he sought. It is a quaint coincidence that he found there also, though not as he sought it, the Earthly Paradise which was another main object of his venturous quest. The Haitians described to the white men their Coaibai, the paradise of the dead, in the lovely Western valleys of their island, where the souls hidden by day among the cliffs came down at night to feed on the delicious fruit of the mamey-trees, of which the living ate but sparingly, lest the souls of their friends should want.[147]
Mr. Jonathan Rigg had spent ten years with these people and knew them well, yet he never discovered that their paradise was on this mountain. When he finally heard about it, he climbed to the top, only to find a few river stones forming one of the balai, or sacred cairns, common in the area. But the widespread belief that a tiger would devour the chiefs who allowed any disrespect to the sacred place soon received the kind of validation that such beliefs often do, as a tiger killed two children a few days later, and of course, the incident was blamed on Mr. Rigg's violation. The Chilians believed that the soul travels westward over the sea to Gulcheman, the home of the dead beyond the mountains; some said life there was all pleasure, while others thought some would be happy and others miserable. Hidden among the mountains of Mexico was the joyful garden-land of Tlalocan, where maize, pumpkins, chilis, and tomatoes never failed, and where the souls of children sacrificed to Tlaloc, its god, and the souls of those who died by drowning, thunderstroke, leprosy, dropsy, or other severe disease resided. Some traces of this belief can be found in medieval civilization, in the legends of the Earthly Paradise, the fire-guarded home of saints who had not yet reached the highest bliss, located in the far East of Asia, where the earth reaches up toward heaven. When Columbus sailed west across the Atlantic in search of "the new heaven and the new earth" he had read about in Isaiah, he found them, though not in the way he expected. It is an interesting coincidence that he also found, though not as he intended, the Earthly Paradise, which was another main goal of his adventurous quest. The Haitians described to the white men their Coaibai, the paradise of the dead, in the beautiful western valleys of their island, where the souls hidden by day among the cliffs came down at night to feast on the delicious fruit of the mamey trees, of which the living ate sparingly, lest the souls of their friends should be in need.
Secondly, there are Australians who think that the spirit of the dead hovers awhile on earth and goes at last toward 62the setting sun, or westward over the sea to the island of souls, the home of his fathers. Thus these rudest savages have developed two thoughts which we meet with again and again far onward in the course of culture—the thought of an island of the dead, and the thought that the world of departed souls is in the West, whither the Sun descends at evening to his daily death.[148] Among the North American Indians, when once upon a time an Algonquin hunter left his body behind and visited the land of souls in the sunny south, he saw before him beautiful trees and plants, but found he could walk right through them. Then he paddled in the canoe of white shining stone across the lake where wicked souls perish in the storm, till he reached the beautiful and happy island where there is no cold, no war, no bloodshed, but the creatures run happily about, nourished by the air they breathe.[149] Tongan legend says that, long ago, a canoe returning from Fiji was driven by stress of weather to Bolotu, the island of gods and souls lying in the ocean north-west of Tonga. That island is larger than all theirs together, full of all finest fruits and loveliest flowers, that fill the air with fragrance, and come anew the moment they are plucked; birds of beauteous plumage are there, and hogs in plenty, all immortal save when killed for the gods to eat, and then new living ones appear immediately to fill their places. But when the hungry crew of the canoe landed, they tried in vain to pluck the shadowy bread-fruit, they walked through unresisting trees and houses, even as the souls of chiefs who met them walked unchecked through their solid bodies. Counselled to hasten home from this land of no earthly food, the men sailed to Tonga, but the deadly air of Bolotu had infected them, and they soon all died.[150]
Secondly, there are Australians who believe that the spirits of the dead linger on earth for a time before eventually heading towards the setting sun or westward over the sea to the island of souls, the place of their ancestors. In this way, these primitive people have developed two concepts that we encounter repeatedly as culture evolves—the idea of an island for the dead and the belief that the realm of departed souls lies in the West, where the Sun descends each evening to its daily end. Among the North American Indians, there's a tale of an Algonquin hunter who, once leaving his body behind, traveled to the land of souls in the sunny south. There, he saw beautiful trees and plants but found he could walk right through them. He then paddled in a canoe made of shining white stone across a lake where wicked souls perish in storms, until he arrived at a lovely and happy island where there’s no cold, no war, and no violence. The creatures there merrily roam around, sustained by the air they breathe. Tongan legend tells that, long ago, a canoe returning from Fiji was blown by bad weather to Bolotu, the island of gods and souls located in the ocean northwest of Tonga. That island is bigger than all of theirs combined, filled with the finest fruits and the most beautiful flowers that scent the air and regrow as soon as they’re picked; there are stunningly plumed birds and plenty of pigs, all immortal except when sacrificed for the gods, and then new living ones appear immediately to take their place. However, when the hungry crew of the canoe landed, they tried in vain to pluck the shadowy breadfruit, walking through trees and houses without resistance, just as the spirits of the chiefs they encountered passed unhindered through their solid bodies. Advised to return quickly from this land devoid of earthly food, the men sailed back to Tonga, but the toxic air of Bolotu had infected them, and they soon all perished.
63Such ideas took strong hold on classic thought, in the belief in a paradise in the Fortunate Islands of the far Western Ocean. Hesiod in the ‘Works and Days’ tells of the half-gods of the Fourth Age, between the Age of Bronze and the Age of Iron. When death closed on this heroic race, Zeus granted them at the ends of Earth a life and home, apart from man and far from the immortals. There Kronos reigns over them, and they dwell careless in the Islands of the Happy, beside deep-eddying Ocean—blest heroes, for whom the grain-giving field bears, thrice blooming yearly, the honey-sweet fruit:—
63These ideas strongly influenced classic thinking, leading to the belief in a paradise located in the Fortunate Islands of the distant Western Ocean. In his 'Works and Days,' Hesiod discusses the demigods of the Fourth Age, which falls between the Age of Bronze and the Age of Iron. When death came for this heroic generation, Zeus granted them a life and home at the ends of the Earth, separate from humans and far from the immortals. There, Kronos rules over them, and they live carefree in the Islands of the Happy, beside the swirling Ocean—blessed heroes, for whom the fertile fields produce sweet fruits three times a year:—
These Islands of the Blest, assigned as the abode of blessed spirits of the dead, came indeed to be identified with the Elysian Fields. Thus Pindar sings of steadfast souls, who through three lives on either side have endured free from injustice; then they pass by the road of Zeus to the tower of Kronos, where the ocean breezes blow round the islands of the happy, blazing with golden flowers of land and water. Thus, also, in the famous hymn of Kallistratos in honour of Harmodios and Aristogeiton, who slew the tyrant Hipparchos:—
These Islands of the Blessed, designated as the home of the righteous spirits of the dead, eventually became associated with the Elysian Fields. Pindar describes steadfast souls who, after living three times on either side, have endured without injustice; they then travel along Zeus's road to Kronos's tower, where ocean breezes sweep around the joyful islands, filled with golden flowers on both land and water. Similarly, in the well-known hymn by Kallistratos honoring Harmodios and Aristogeiton, who killed the tyrant Hipparchos:—
This group of legends has especial interest to us Englishmen, who ourselves dwell, it seems, on such an island of the 64dead. It is not that we or our country are of a more ghostly nature than others, but the idea is geographical we are dwellers in the region of the setting sun, the land of death. The elaborate account by Procopius, the historian of the Gothic War, dates from the 6th century. The island of Brittia, according to him, lies opposite the mouths of the Rhine, some 200 stadia off, between Britannia and Thule, and on it dwell three populous nations, the Angles, Frisians, and Britons. (By Brittia, it appears, he means our Great Britain, his Britannia being the coast-land from modern Brittany to Holland, and his Thule being Scandinavia.) In the course of his history it seems to him needful to record a story, mythic and dreamlike as he thinks, yet which numberless men vouch for as having been themselves witnesses by eye and ear to its facts. This story is that the souls of the departed are conveyed across the sea to the island of Brittia. Along the mainland coast are many villages, inhabited by fishermen and tillers of the soil and traders to this island in their vessels. They are subject to the Franks, but pay no tribute, having from of old had to do by turns the burdensome service of transporting the souls. Those on duty for each night stay at home till they hear a knocking at the doors, and a voice of one unseen calling them to their work. Then without delay rising from their beds, compelled by some unknown power they go down to the beach, and there they see boats, not their own but others, lying ready but empty of men. Going on board and taking the oars, they find that by the burden of the multitude of souls embarked, the vessel lies low in the water, gunwale under within a finger’s breadth. In an hour they are at the opposite shore, though in their own boats they would hardly make the voyage in a night and day. When they reach the island, the vessel becomes empty, till it is so light that only the keel touches the waves. They see no man on the voyage, no man at the landing, but a voice is heard that proclaims the name and rank and parentage of each newly arrived passenger, or if women, those of their 65husbands. Traces of this remarkable legend seem to have survived, thirteen centuries later, in that endmost district of the Britannia of Procopius which still keeps the name of Bretagne. Near Raz, where the narrow promontory stretches westward into the ocean, is the ‘Bay of Souls’ (boé ann anavo); in the commune of Plouguel the corpse is taken to the churchyard, not by the shorter road by land, but in a boat by the ‘Passage de l’Enfer,’ across a little arm of the sea; and Breton folk-lore holds fast to the legend of the Curé de Braspar, whose dog leads over to Great Britain the souls of the departed, when the wheels of the soul-car are heard creaking in the air. These are but mutilated fragments, but they seem to piece together with another Keltic myth, told by Macpherson in the last century, the voyage of the boat of heroes to Flath-Innis, Noble Island, the green island home of the departed, which lies calm amid the storms far in the Western Ocean. With full reason, also, Mr. Wright traces to the situation of Ireland in the extreme West its especial association with legends of descents to the land of shades. Claudian placed at the extremity of Gaul the entrance where Ulysses found a way to Hades—
This group of legends is particularly interesting to us Englishmen, who seem to reside on an island of the dead. It's not that we or our country are more ghostly than others; it's more about geography—we live in the land of the setting sun, the land of death. Procopius, the historian of the Gothic War, gives an elaborate account that dates back to the 6th century. He describes the island of Brittia as lying opposite the mouths of the Rhine, about 200 stadia away, situated between Britannia and Thule, where three populous nations—the Angles, Frisians, and Britons—reside. By Brittia, he refers to our Great Britain, as his Britannia covers the coastline from modern Brittany to Holland, and his Thule refers to Scandinavia. In his history, he feels it's important to record a story that, while he considers it mythic and dreamlike, countless people have vouched for as having witnessed its truths firsthand. The tale claims that the souls of the departed are transported across the sea to the island of Brittia. Along the coast of the mainland, there are many villages inhabited by fishermen, farmers, and traders who journey to the island in their boats. They are subject to the Franks but don’t pay tribute, as they have long taken turns providing the burdensome service of transporting souls. Those assigned for each night stay at home until they hear a knock at their doors, followed by an unseen voice calling them to work. Promptly rising from their beds, they feel compelled by some unknown force to head down to the beach, where they find boats waiting—empty of crew but ready. Once aboard and rowing, they discover that the boat sits low in the water, loaded down by the multitude of embarked souls, barely above the waves. In just an hour, they reach the opposite shore, a journey that would likely take them a day and a night in their own boats. Upon arrival at the island, the vessel becomes light enough to float, only the keel touching the water. They encounter no one during the crossing or upon landing, yet a voice announces the name, rank, and ancestry of each newly arrived passenger, or in the case of women, their husbands’ details. Traces of this remarkable legend seem to have lingered, thirteen centuries later, in the farthest region of Procopius's Britannia, which still bears the name Bretagne. Near Raz, where the narrow promontory extends westward into the ocean, lies the ‘Bay of Souls’ (boé ann anavo); in the commune of Plouguel, the body is taken to the churchyard not by the shorter land route but via a boat across a little stretch of sea known as the ‘Passage de l’Enfer.’ Breton folklore holds onto the tale of the Curé de Braspar, whose dog guides the souls of the departed to Great Britain when the wheels of the soul-car are heard creaking in the air. These are fragmented stories, but they seem to connect with another Celtic myth told by Macpherson in the last century—the voyage of the boat of heroes to Flath-Innis, Noble Island, the tranquil home of the departed that lies calm amid the storms in the far Western Ocean. Mr. Wright aptly traces Ireland's location in the extreme West to its special link with legends of descents to the land of shadows. Claudian placed at the edge of Gaul the entrance where Ulysses found a way to Hades—
No wonder that this spot should have been since identified with St. Patrick’s Purgatory, and that some ingenious etymologist should have found in the name of ‘Ulster’ a corruption of ‘Ulyssisterra,’ and a commemoration of the hero’s visit.[153]
No surprise that this place has been associated with St. Patrick’s Purgatory, and that some clever wordsmith has suggested the name ‘Ulster’ is a twist on ‘Ulyssisterra,’ honoring the hero’s visit.[153]
Thirdly, the belief in a subterranean Hades peopled by the ghosts of the dead is quite common among the lower races. The earth is flat, say the Italmen of Kamchatka, 66for if it were round, people would fall off; it is the wrong side of another heaven, which covers another earth below, whither the dead will go down to their new life, and so, as Steller says, their mundane system is like a tub with three bottoms.[154] In North America, the Tacullis held that the soul goes after death into the bowels of the earth, whence it can come back in human shape to visit friends.[155] In South America, Brazilian souls travel down to the world below in the West, and Patagonian souls will depart to enjoy eternal drunkenness in the caves of their ancestral deities.[156] The New Zealander who says ‘The sun has returned to Hades’ (kua hoki mai te Ra ki te Rua), simply means that it has set. When a Samoan Islander dies, the host of spirits that surround the house, waiting to convey his soul away, set out with him crossing the land and swimming the sea, to the entrance of the spirit-world. This is at the westernmost point of the westernmost island, Savaii, and there one may see the two circular holes or basins where souls descend, chiefs by the bigger and plebeians by the smaller, into the regions of the under-world. There below is a heaven, earth, and sea, and people with real bodies, planting, fishing, cooking, as in the present life; but at night their bodies become like a confused collection of fiery sparks, and in this state during the hours of darkness they come up to revisit their former abodes, retiring at dawn to the bush or to the lower regions.[157] For the state of thought on this subject among rude African tribes, it is enough to cite the Zulus, who at death will descend to live in Hades among their ancestors, the ‘Abapansi,’ the ‘people underground.’[158] Among rude Asiatic tribes, such an example may be taken from the 67Karens. They are not quite agreed where Plu, the land of the dead, is situate; it may be above the earth or beyond the horizon. But the dominant and seemingly indigenous opinion is that it is below the earth. When the sun sets on earth, it rises in the Karen Hades, and when it sets in Hades it rises in this world. Here, again, the familiar belief of the European peasant is found; the spirits of the dead may come up from the land of shades by night, but at daybreak must return.[159]
Thirdly, the belief in an underground Hades inhabited by the spirits of the dead is quite common among lower races. The earth is flat, say the Italmen of Kamchatka, 66 because if it were round, people would fall off; it is the wrong side of another heaven, which covers another earth below, where the dead will go to start their new life, and so, as Steller says, their system is like a tub with three bottoms.[154] In North America, the Tacullis believed that the soul goes after death into the earth's depths, from where it can return in human form to visit friends.[155] In South America, Brazilian souls travel down to the world below in the West, and Patagonian souls will depart to enjoy eternal drunkenness in the caves of their ancestral deities.[156] The New Zealander who says ‘The sun has returned to Hades’ (kua hoki mai te Ra ki te Rua) simply means that it has set. When a Samoan Islander dies, the spirits that surround the house, waiting to take his soul away, set out with him across the land and swimming the sea, to the entrance of the spirit-world. This is at the westernmost point of the westernmost island, Savaii, and there one can see two circular holes or basins where souls descend— chiefs by the bigger one and commoners by the smaller—into the realms of the underworld. Below, there is a heaven, earth, and sea, and people with real bodies planting, fishing, cooking, just like in this life; but at night their bodies turn into a confusing collection of fiery sparks, and in this state during the dark hours, they come back to visit their previous homes, retreating at dawn to the bush or the lower regions.[157] For the beliefs regarding this topic among primitive African tribes, it’s enough to mention the Zulus, who believe that at death they will descend to live in Hades among their ancestors, the ‘Abapansi,’ the ‘people underground.’[158] Among primitive Asian tribes, an example can be taken from the 67Karens. They don't fully agree on where Plu, the land of the dead, is located; it could be above the earth or beyond the horizon. However, the dominant and seemingly indigenous view is that it is below the earth. When the sun sets on earth, it rises in Karen Hades, and when it sets in Hades, it rises in this world. Again, the familiar belief of the European peasant appears; the spirits of the dead can come up from the land of shadows at night, but at daybreak must return.[159]
Such ideas, developed by uncultured races, may be followed up in various detail, through the stage of religion represented by the Mexican and Peruvian nations,[160] into higher ranges of culture. The Roman Orcus was in the bowels of the earth, and when the ‘lapis manalis,’ the stone that closed the mouth of the world below, was moved away on certain solemn days, the ghosts of the dead came up to the world above, and partook of the offerings of their friends.[161] Among the Greeks, the Land of Hades was in the world below, nor was the thought unknown that it was the sunset realm of the Western god (πρὸς ἑσπέρου θεοῦ). What Hades seemed like to the popular mind, Lucian thus describes:—‘The great crowd, indeed, whom the wise call “idiots,” believing Homer and Hesiod, and the other myth-makers about these things, and setting up their poetry as a law, have supposed a certain deep place under the earth, Hades, and that it is vast, and roomy, and gloomy, and sunless, and how thought to be lighted up so as to behold every one within, I know not.’[162] In the ancient Egyptian doctrine of the future life, modelled on solar myth, the region of the departed combines the under-world and the west, Amenti; the dead passes the gate of the setting sun to traverse the roads of darkness, and behold his father Osiris; and with 68this solar thought the Egyptian priests, representing in symbolic ceremony the scenes of the other world, carried the corpse in the sacred boat across to the burial-place, on the western side of the sacred lake.[163] So, too, the cavernous Sheol of the Israelites, the shadowy region of departed souls, lay deep below the earth. Through the great Aryan religious systems, Brahmanism, Zarathustrism, Buddhism, and onward into the range of Islam and of Christianity, subterranean hells of purgatory or punishment make the doleful contrast to heavens of light and glory.
Such ideas, developed by less cultured societies, can be explored in detail, through the religious beliefs represented by the Mexican and Peruvian civilizations,[160] evolving into higher levels of culture. The Roman Orcus was located in the depths of the earth, and when the ‘lapis manalis,’ the stone sealing the entrance to the underworld, was moved on certain solemn days, the spirits of the dead would emerge to the world above and partake of the offerings from their loved ones.[161] Among the Greeks, the Land of Hades was situated below, and it was also believed to be the sunset domain of the Western god (to the evening god). Lucian describes the popular perception of Hades like this:—‘The large crowd, whom the wise refer to as “idiots,” believing Homer and Hesiod, and other myth-makers about these matters, treating their poetry as a law, have imagined a certain deep place underground, Hades, which they think is vast, roomy, gloomy, and sunless. I don’t know how they expect it to be lit up to see everyone inside.’[162] In the ancient Egyptian belief about the afterlife, based on solar myth, the realm of the departed combines the underworld and the west, Amenti; the dead pass through the gate of the setting sun to navigate the paths of darkness and see their father Osiris. The Egyptian priests, through symbolic ceremonies representing the scenes of the afterlife, transported the corpse in a sacred boat across to the burial site on the western side of the sacred lake.[163] Similarly, the deep cavernous Sheol of the Israelites, the shadowy realm of departed souls, lay far beneath the earth. Throughout the major Aryan religious systems, Brahmanism, Zarathustrism, Buddhism, and extending into Islam and Christianity, subterranean hells of purgatory or punishment provide a stark contrast to heavens of light and glory.
It is, however, a point worthy of special notice that the conception of hell as a fiery abyss, so familiar to the religions of the higher civilization, is all but unknown to savage thought, so much so that if met with, its genuineness is doubtful. Captain John Smith’s ‘History of Virginia,’ published in 1624, contains two different accounts of the Indians’ doctrine of a future life. Smith’s own description is of a land beyond the mountains, toward sunset, where chiefs and medicine-men in paint and feathers shall smoke, and sing, and dance with their forefathers, while the common people have no life after death, but rot in their graves. Heriot’s description is of tabernacles of the gods to which the good are taken up to perpetual happiness, while the wicked are carried to ‘Popogusso,’ a great pit which they think to be at the furthest parts of the world where the sun sets, and there burn continually.[164] Now knowing so much as we do of the religion of the Algonquins, to whom these Virginians belonged, we may judge that while the first account is genuinely native, though perhaps not quite correctly understood, the second was borrowed by the Indians from the white men themselves. Yet even here the touch of solar myth is manifest, and the description of the fiery abyss in the region of sunset may be compared with one 69from our own country, in the Anglo-Saxon dialogue of Saturn and Solomon. ‘Saga me forhwan byth seo sunne read on æfen? Ic the secge, forthon heo locath on helle.—Tell me, why is the sun red at even? I tell thee, because she looketh on hell.’[165] To the same belief belongs another striking mythic feature. The idea of volcanos being mouths of the under-world seems not unexampled among the lower races, for we hear of certain New Zealanders casting their dead down into a crater.[166] But in connexion with the thought of a gehenna of fire and brimstone, Vesuvius, Etna, and Hecla had spiritual as well as material terrors to the mind of Christendom, for they were believed to be places of purgatory or the very mouths of the pit where the souls of the damned were cast down.[167] The Indians of Nicaragua used in old times to offer human sacrifices to their volcano Masaya, flinging the corpses into the crater, and in later years, after the conversion of the country, we hear of Christian confessors sending their penitents to climb the mountain, and (as a glimpse of hell) to look down upon the molten lava.[168]
It’s important to note that the idea of hell as a fiery abyss, which is very familiar to the religions of advanced civilizations, is almost completely unknown among primitive beliefs. If it does appear, its authenticity is questionable. Captain John Smith’s ‘History of Virginia,’ published in 1624, includes two different accounts of the Indians’ beliefs about life after death. Smith describes a land beyond the mountains, toward the sunset, where chiefs and medicine men, decorated in paint and feathers, will smoke, sing, and dance with their ancestors, while ordinary people have no afterlife and simply decay in their graves. Heriot's account describes tabernacles for the gods where the good are taken for eternal happiness, while the wicked are sent to ‘Popogusso,’ a huge pit they believe is at the far edge of the world where the sun sets, and there they burn forever.[164] Now, with what we know about the Algonquin religion to which these Virginians belonged, we can judge that while the first account is genuinely native, though maybe not completely accurately understood, the second was likely borrowed by the Indians from the white men. Yet, even here, a connection to solar mythology is clear, and the description of the fiery abyss in the setting sun can be compared to one 69 from our own culture, in the Anglo-Saxon dialogue of Saturn and Solomon. ‘Saga me forhwan byth seo sunne read on æfen? Ic the secge, forthon heo locath on helle.—Tell me, why is the sun red at evening? I tell you, because she looks at hell.’[165] This belief also includes another striking mythic feature. The idea that volcanoes are the mouths of the underworld seems to appear among lower races, as we hear of certain New Zealanders throwing their dead into a crater.[166] But in connection with the concept of a hell of fire and brimstone, Vesuvius, Etna, and Hecla had both spiritual and physical terrors for the Christian mind because they were believed to be places of purgatory or the actual mouths of the pit where the souls of the damned were cast down.[167] The Indians of Nicaragua used to offer human sacrifices to their volcano Masaya, throwing corpses into the crater, and in later years, after converting the country, we hear of Christian confessors advising their penitents to climb the mountain, and (to catch a glimpse of hell) look down into the molten lava.[168]
Fourthly, in old times and new, it has come into men’s minds to fix upon the sun and moon as abodes of departed souls. When we have learnt from the rude Natchez of the Mississippi and the Apalaches of Florida that the sun is the bright dwelling of departed chiefs and braves, and have traced like thoughts on into the theologies of Mexico and Peru, then we may compare these savage doctrines with Isaac Taylor’s ingenious supposition in his ‘Physical Theory of Another Life,’—the sun of each planetary system is the house of the higher and ultimate spiritual corporeity, and the centre of assembly to those who have passed on the planets their preliminary era of corruptible organization. Or perhaps some may prefer the Rev. Tobias Swinden’s 70book, published in the last century, and translated into French and German, which proved the sun to be hell, and its dark spots gatherings of damned souls.[169] And when in South America the Saliva Indians have pointed out the moon, their paradise where no mosquitos are, and the Guaycurus have shown it as the home of chiefs and medicine-men deceased, and the Polynesians of Tokelau in like manner have claimed it as the abode of departed kings and chiefs, then these pleasant fancies may be compared with Plutarch’s description of the virtuous souls who after purification in the middle space gain their footing on the moon, and there are crowned as victors.[170] The converse notion of the moon as the seat of hell, has been elaborated in profoundest bathos by Mr. M. F. Tupper:
Fourth, both in the past and present, people have thought of the sun and moon as homes for departed souls. We learn from the ancient Natchez of the Mississippi and the Apalaches of Florida that the sun is the radiant home of deceased leaders and warriors. We can trace similar ideas throughout the theologies of Mexico and Peru, and then compare these primitive beliefs with Isaac Taylor’s clever theory in his ‘Physical Theory of Another Life,’ where he suggests that the sun of each planetary system is the residence of a higher and ultimate spiritual existence, serving as the gathering place for those who have completed their time on the planets in a physical form. Some may instead prefer the Reverend Tobias Swinden’s book, published in the last century and translated into French and German, which argued that the sun is hell, and its dark spots are where the souls of the damned gather.70 And when the Saliva Indians in South America have pointed to the moon as their paradise free of mosquitoes, and the Guaycurus see it as the resting place of deceased chiefs and shamans, while the Polynesians from Tokelau also claim it as the dwelling of departed kings and leaders, these lovely ideas can be compared to Plutarch’s account of virtuous souls who, after being purified in an intermediate space, can stand on the moon and are crowned as victors.[170] The opposite idea of the moon as a place of hell has been explored in depth by Mr. M. F. Tupper:
Skin for skin, the brown savage is not ill matched in such speculative lore with the white philosopher.
Skin for skin, the brown savage is not poorly paired in such theoretical ideas with the white philosopher.
Fifthly, as Paradise on the face of the earth, and Hades beneath it where the sun goes down, are regions whose existence is asserted or not denied by savage and barbaric science, so it is with Heaven. Among the examples which display for us the real course of knowledge among mankind, and the real relation which primitive bears to later culture, the belief in the existence of a firmament is one of the most 71instructive. It arises naturally in the minds of children still, and in accordance with the simplest childlike thought, the cosmologies of the North American Indians[171] and the South Sea Islanders[172] describe their flat earth arched over by the solid vault of heaven. Like thoughts are to be traced on through such details as the Zulu idea that the blue heaven is a rock encircling the earth, inside which are the sun, moon, and stars, and outside which dwell the people of heaven; the modern negro’s belief that there is a firmament stretched above like a cloth or web; the Finnish poem which tells how Ilmarinen forged the firmament of finest steel, and set in it the moon and stars.[173] The New Zealander, with his notion of a solid firmament, through which the waters can be let down on earth through a crack or hole from the reservoir of rain above, could well explain the passage in Herodotus concerning that place in North Africa where, as the Libyans said, the sky is pierced, as well as the ancient Jewish conception of a firmament of heaven, ‘strong as a molten mirror,’ with its windows through which the rain pours down in deluge from the reservoirs above, windows which late Rabbinical literature tells us were made by taking out two stars.[174] In nations where the theory of the firmament prevails, accounts of bodily journeys or spiritual ascents to heaven are in general meant not as figure, but as fact. Among the lower races, the tendency to localize the region of departed souls above the sky seems less strong than that which leads them to place their world of the dead on or below the earth’s surface. Yet some well-marked descriptions of a savage 72Heaven are on record, the following, and others to be cited presently. Even some Australians seem to think of going up to the clouds at death, to eat and drink, and hunt and fish as here.[175] In North America, the Winnebagos placed their paradise in the sky, where souls travel along that ‘Path of the Dead’ which we call the Milky Way; and working out the ever-recurring solar idea, the modern Iroquois speak of the soul going upward and westward, till it comes out on the beauteous plains of heaven, with people and trees and things as on earth.[176] In South America the Guarayos, representatives in some sort of the past condition of the Guarani race, worship Tamoi the Grandfather, the Ancient of Heaven; he was their first ancestor, who lived among them in old days and taught them to till the ground; then rising to heaven in the East he disappeared, having promised to be the helper of his people on earth, and to transport them, when they died, from the top of a sacred tree into another life, where they shall find their kindred and have hunting in plenty, and possess all that they possessed on earth; therefore it is that the Guarayos adorn their dead, and burn their weapons for them, and bury them with their faces to the East, whither they are to go.[177] Among American peoples whose culture rose to a higher level than that of these savage tribes, we hear of the Peruvian Heaven, the glorious ‘Upper World,’ and of the temporary abode of Aztec warriors on heavenly wooded plains, where the sun shines when it is night on earth, wherefore it was a Mexican saying that the sun goes at evening to lighten the dead.[178] What thoughts of heaven were in the minds of the old Aryan poets, this hymn from the Rig-Veda may show:—
Fifthly, just like Paradise above us and Hades below, which are believed in by primitive and uncivilized science, so is Heaven. Among the examples that illustrate the actual progression of knowledge among people and the relationship that early cultures have with more developed ones, the belief in a firmament is one of the most informative. It still emerges naturally in children's minds, and in line with the simplest childlike thinking, the cosmologies of the North American Indians and the South Sea Islanders depict a flat earth held up by a solid dome of heaven. Similar ideas can be seen in details such as the Zulu belief that the blue sky is a solid ring surrounding the earth, containing the sun, moon, and stars inside, while heavenly beings reside outside; the modern African belief that there is a firmament above that stretches like a cloth or web; and the Finnish poem that tells how Ilmarinen forged the firmament from fine steel and placed the moon and stars in it. The New Zealander, with his concept of a solid sky, could easily explain the passage in Herodotus about a place in North Africa where, according to the Libyans, the sky is pierced, as well as the ancient Jewish view of a strong heaven like a molten mirror, with windows that let the rain pour down from above, windows that later Rabbinical literature says were made by removing two stars. In cultures where the idea of the firmament exists, accounts of physical journeys or spiritual ascensions to heaven are generally taken as literal rather than metaphorical. Among more primitive groups, the tendency to see the afterlife above the sky is less pronounced than the belief in a world of the dead that is located on or below the earth's surface. However, there are some clear descriptions of a savage Heaven on record, including the following and others that will be mentioned shortly. Even some Australians appear to think of ascending to the clouds upon death to feast, hunt, and fish as they do here. In North America, the Winnebagos believed their paradise was in the sky, where souls travel along the 'Path of the Dead' that we know as the Milky Way; reflecting the recurring solar theme, the modern Iroquois describe the soul ascending and moving west until it reaches the beautiful plains of heaven, filled with people, trees, and things just like on earth. In South America, the Guarayos, who in some way represent the earlier phase of the Guarani race, worship Tamoi the Grandfather, the Ancient of Heaven; he was their first ancestor who lived among them long ago and taught them agriculture; then he ascended to heaven in the East, having promised to assist his people on earth and to guide them, after death, from the top of a sacred tree into another life where they would reconnect with their relatives and find plentiful hunting, possessing all that they had in life; this is why the Guarayos adorn their dead, burn their weapons for them, and bury them facing East, the direction they are meant to go. Among the American cultures that developed beyond those of these savage tribes, we hear of the Peruvian Heaven, the magnificent 'Upper World,' and the temporary resting place of Aztec warriors in heavenly wooded meadows, where the sun shines even during the night on earth, leading to the saying in Mexico that the sun goes in the evening to light the dead. What thoughts of heaven filled the minds of the ancient Aryan poets can be seen in this hymn from the Rig-Veda:—
In such bright vague thoughts from the poet’s religion of nature, or in cosmic schemes of ancient astronomy, with their artificial glories of barbaric architecture exaggerated in the skies, or in the raptures of mystic vision, or in the calmer teaching of the theologic doctrine of a future life, descriptions of realms of blessed souls in heaven are to be followed through the religions of the Brahman, the Buddhist, the Parsi, the later Jew, the Moslem, and the Christian.
In these bright, ambiguous ideas from the poet's belief in nature, or in the cosmic plans of ancient astronomy, with their exaggerated, man-made beauties of primitive architecture in the skies, or in the ecstasy of mystical visions, or in the more subdued lessons of theological beliefs about an afterlife, descriptions of heavenly realms inhabited by blessed souls can be found in the religions of the Brahman, the Buddhist, the Parsi, the later Jew, the Muslim, and the Christian.
For the object, not of writing a handbook of religions, but of tracing the relation which the religion of savages bears to the religion of cultured nations, these details are enough to show the general line of human thought regarding the local habitations of departed souls. It seems plain from the most cursory inspection of these various localizations, however much we may consider them as inherited or transmitted from people to people in the complex movements of theological history, that they are at any rate not derived from any single religion accepted among ancient or primæval men. They bear evident traces of independent working out in the varied definition of the region of souls, as on earth among men, on earth in some distant country, below the earth, above or beyond the sky. Similar ideas of this kind are found in different lands, but this similarity 74seems in large measure due to independent recurrence of thoughts so obvious. Not less is independent fancy compatible with the ever-recurring solar myth in such ideas, placing the land of Death in the land of Evening or of Night, and its entrance at the gates of Sunset. Barbaric poets of many a distant land must have gazed into the West to read the tale of Life and Death, and tell it of Man. If, however, we look more closely into the stages of intellectual history to which these theories of the Future World belong, it will appear that the assignment of the realm of departed souls to the three great regions, Earth, Hades, Heaven, has not been uniform. Firstly, the doctrine of a land of souls on Earth belongs widely and deeply to savage culture, but dwindles in the barbaric stage, and survives but feebly into the mediæval. Secondly, the doctrine of a subterranean Hades holds as large a place as this in savage belief, and has held it firmly along the course of higher religions, where, however, this under-world is looked on less and less as the proper abode of the dead, but rather as the dismal place of purgatory and hell. Lastly, the doctrine of a Heaven, floored upon a firmament, or placed in the upper air, seems in early savage belief less common than the other two, but yields to neither of them in its vigorous retention by the thought of modern nations. These local theories appear to be taken, firstly and mostly, in the most absolute literal sense, and although, under the influence of physical science, much that was once distinctly-meant philosophy has now passed among theologians into imagery and metaphor, yet at low levels of knowledge the new canons of interpretation find little acceptance, and even in modern Europe the rude cosmology of the lower races in no small measure retains its place.
For the purpose of not writing a handbook on religions, but rather exploring the connection between the religions of primitive people and those of more advanced cultures, these details are sufficient to illustrate the general thoughts humans have about the places where departed souls reside. It’s clear from even a quick look at these various beliefs, regardless of whether we see them as inherited or passed down through the complicated history of theology, that they do not originate from a single faith recognized by ancient or primitive societies. They clearly show signs of being independently developed in various definitions of the realm of souls, whether that be on earth among people, in distant lands, underground, or in the sky. Similar ideas exist in different cultures, but this similarity mostly seems to arise from the independent emergence of such obvious thoughts. Moreover, independent imagination fits well with the recurring solar myth, which places the land of Death in the land of Evening or Night, with its entrance at Sunset. Poets from many distant regions must have gazed toward the West to read the story of Life and Death and to narrate it about humans. However, if we take a closer look at the stages of intellectual history to which these ideas about the Afterlife belong, it becomes apparent that the classification of the realm of departed souls into three main areas—Earth, Hades, Heaven—has not been consistent. First, the idea of a land of souls on Earth is widely and deeply rooted in primitive culture but diminishes in the barbaric stage and only weakly survives into the medieval period. Second, the belief in a subterranean Hades occupies as significant a place in primitive belief and has firmly persisted through higher religions, although in these contexts, this underground realm is increasingly viewed not as the primary home of the dead but as a grim place of purgatory and hell. Finally, the concept of Heaven, located in the heavens or the upper atmosphere, seems to be less common in early primitive belief compared to the other two, but it has not lost its strength in the thinking of modern nations. These local theories are taken literally at first, and although, influenced by physical science, much of what was once clearly philosophical thought has shifted into imagery and metaphor among theologians, at lower levels of understanding, the new rules of interpretation are not widely accepted. Even in modern Europe, the rough cosmology of less advanced races still holds significant relevance.
Turning now to consider the state of the departed in these their new homes, we have to examine the definitions of the Future Life which prevail through the religions of mankind. In these doctrines there is much similarity caused by the spreading of established beliefs into new 75countries, and also much similarity that is beyond what such transmission can account for. So there is much variety due to local colour and circumstance, and also much variety beyond the reach of such explanation. The main causes of both similarity and variety seem to lie far deeper, in the very origin and inmost meaning of the doctrines. The details of the future life, among the lower races and upwards, are no heterogeneous mass of arbitrary fancies. Classified, they range themselves naturally round central ideas, in groups whose correspondence seems to indicate the special course of their development. Amongst the pictures into which this world has shaped its expectations of the next, two great conceptions are especially to be discerned. The one is that the future life is, as it were, a reflexion of this; in a new world, perhaps of dreamy beauty, perhaps of ghostly gloom, men are to retain their earthly forms and their earthly conditions, to have around them their earthly friends, to possess their earthly property, to carry on their earthly occupations. The other is that the future life is a compensation for this, where men’s conditions are re-allotted as the consequence, and especially as the reward or punishment, of their earthly life. The first of these two ideas we may call (with Captain Burton) the ‘continuance-theory,’ contrasting with it the second as the ‘retribution-theory.’ Separately or combined, these two doctrines are the keys of the subject, and by grouping typical examples under their two headings, it will be possible to survey systematically man’s most characteristic schemes of his life beyond the grave.
Turning now to consider the situation of those who have passed away in their new homes, we need to look at the definitions of the Afterlife as understood by humans across different religions. There is a lot of similarity in these beliefs due to the spread of established ideas into new countries, as well as similarities that go beyond what such spread can explain. At the same time, there is also plenty of variety that stems from local traditions and circumstances, along with additional diversity that can't be easily accounted for. The primary reasons for both the similarities and the differences seem to lie much deeper, in the original significance and fundamental meaning of these beliefs. The concepts of the afterlife, from the most basic societies upwards, are not a random mix of fanciful ideas. When classified, they tend to naturally cluster around central themes, in groups that reflect their unique path of development. Among the visions that have emerged about what comes next, two main concepts stand out. One is that the afterlife is essentially a reflection of this life; in a new world, which might be beautifully dreamlike or hauntingly dark, people are expected to keep their earthly forms and conditions, surrounded by their earthly friends, possessions, and continuing their earthly activities. The other concept portrays the afterlife as a compensation for this life, where people's circumstances are redistributed as a result of their actions here, particularly as rewards or punishments based on their earthly existence. We can refer to the first of these ideas as the ‘continuance theory,’ contrasting it with the second, which we can call the ‘retribution theory.’ Whether considered separately or together, these two doctrines are central to the topic, and by categorizing representative examples under these two headings, we can systematically examine humanity’s most defining perspectives on life beyond death.
To the doctrine of Continuance belongs especially the savage view of the spirit-land, that it is as the dream-land where the souls of the living so often go to visit the souls of the dead. There the soul of the dead Karen, with the souls of his axe and cleaver, builds his house and cuts his rice; the shade of the Algonquin hunter hunts souls of beaver and elk, walking on the souls of his snow-shoes over the soul of the snow; the fur-wrapped 76Kamchadal drives his dog-sledge; the Zulu milks his cows and drives his cattle to kraal; South American tribes live on, whole or mutilated, healthy or sick, as they left this world, leading their old lives, and having their wives with them again, though indeed, as the Araucanians said, they have no more children, for they are but souls.[180] Soul-land is dream-land in its shadowy unreal pictures, for which, nevertheless, material reality so plainly furnished the models, and it is dream-land also in its vivid idealization of the soberer thoughts and feelings of waking life.
To the idea of Continuance belongs especially the primal view of the spirit world, seen as a dream world where the living often go to visit the souls of the dead. There, the soul of the deceased Karen, along with the souls of his axe and cleaver, builds his house and harvests rice; the shade of the Algonquin hunter hunts the souls of beaver and elk, walking on the souls of his snowshoes over the soul of the snow; the fur-clad Kamchadal drives his dog sled; the Zulu milks his cows and herds his cattle to the kraal; South American tribes live on, whole or mutilated, healthy or sick, just as they left this world, leading their previous lives, and reuniting with their wives again, though as the Araucanians noted, they have no more children, for they are just souls. Soul-land is dream-land in its shadowy, unreal images, for which, nevertheless, material reality clearly provided the models, and it is also dream-land in its vivid idealization of the more serious thoughts and emotions of waking life.
Well might the Mohawk Indian describe the good land of paradise, as he had seen it in a dream. The shade of the Ojibwa follows a wide and beaten path that leads toward the West, he crosses a deep and rapid water, and reaching a country full of game and all things the Indian covets, he joins his kindred in their long lodge.[181] So, on the southern continent, the Bolivian Yuracarés will go, all of them, to a future life where there will be plenty of hunting, and Brazilian forest-tribes will find a pleasant forest full of calabash-trees and game, where the souls of the dead will live happily in company.[182] The Greenlanders hoped that their souls—pale, soft, disembodied forms which the living could not grasp—would lead a life better than that of earth, and never ceasing. It might be in heaven, reached by the 77rainbow, where the souls pitch their tents round the great lake rich in fish and fowl, the lake whose waters above the firmament overflowing make rain on earth, and if its banks broke, there would be another deluge. But gaining the most and best of their living from the depths of the sea, they were also apt to think the land of Torngarsuk to be below the sea or earth, and to be entered by the deep holes in the rocks. Perpetual summer is there, ever beauteous sunshine, and no night, good water and superfluity of birds and fish, seals and reindeer to be caught without difficulty, or found alive seething in a great kettle.[183] In the Kimbunda country of South-West Africa, souls live on in ‘Kalunga,’ the world where it is day when it is night here; and with plenty of food and drink, and women to serve them, and hunting and dancing for pastime, they lead a life which seems a corrected edition of this.[184] On comparison of these pictures of the future life with such as have expressed the longings of more cultured nations, there appear indeed different details, but the principle is ever the same—the idealization of earthly good. The Norseman’s ideal is sketched in the few broad touches which show him in Walhalla, where he and the other warriors without number ride forth arrayed each morning and hew each other on Odin’s plain, till the slain have been ‘chosen’ as in earthly battle, and meal-tide comes, and slayers and slain mount and ride home to feast on the everlasting boar, and drink mead and ale with the Æsir.[185] To understand the Moslem’s mind, we must read the two chapters of the Koran where the Prophet describes the faithful in the garden of delights, reclining on their couches of gold and gems, served by children ever young, with bowls of liquor whose fumes will not rise into the drinkers’ heads, living among the thornless lotus-trees and date-palms loaded to the ground, feasting on the fruits they love and the meat of the rarest birds, with the houris near them with beautiful black eyes, like 78pearls in the shell, where no idle or wicked speech is heard, but only the words ‘Peace, Peace.’
Well might the Mohawk Indian describe the good land of paradise, as he had seen it in a dream. The shade of the Ojibwa follows a wide and well-trodden path that leads toward the West; he crosses a deep and swift river and reaches a land full of game and everything the Indian desires, joining his people in their long lodge.[181] So, in the southern continent, the Bolivian Yuracarés all go to a future life where there is plenty of hunting, and the Brazilian forest tribes find a pleasant forest filled with calabash trees and game, where the souls of the dead live happily together.[182] The Greenlanders hoped that their souls—pale, soft, disembodied forms that the living could not hold—would lead a life better than earthly existence, and one that never ends. It might be in heaven, reached by the rainbow, where the souls set up their tents around the great lake teeming with fish and birds, the lake whose waters above the firmament overflow to create rain on earth, and if its banks broke, there would be another flood. But gaining most of their sustenance from the depths of the sea, they were also likely to believe that the land of Torngarsuk is below the sea or earth and can be entered through the deep holes in the rocks. There, it is perpetual summer, always beautiful sunshine, no night, fresh water, and an abundance of birds and fish, seals and reindeer that can be easily caught or found alive bubbling in a large kettle.[183] In the Kimbunda region of South-West Africa, souls continue to exist in 'Kalunga,' the world where it is daytime when it is nighttime here; and with plenty of food and drink, and women serving them, and hunting and dancing for entertainment, they lead a life that seems like an improved version of this one.[184] When comparing these images of the afterlife to those expressed by more cultured nations, there are indeed different details, but the principle remains the same—the idealization of earthly good. The Norseman's ideal is captured in broad strokes showing him in Walhalla, where he and countless other warriors ride out each morning and battle each other on Odin’s plain until the fallen are ‘chosen’ like in earthly combat, and mealtime comes, after which slayers and slain return home to feast on the eternal boar and drink mead and ale with the Æsir.[185] To understand the Moslem’s mindset, we must read the two chapters of the Koran where the Prophet describes the faithful in the garden of delights, reclining on their couches of gold and gems, served by eternally young children, with bowls of drink whose fumes don’t affect the drinkers’ heads, living among thornless lotus trees and date palms weighed down with fruit, feasting on the fruits they love and the meat of the rarest birds, with houris beside them with beautiful black eyes, like 78pearls in a shell, where no idle or wicked speech is heard, but only the words ‘Peace, Peace.’
With these descriptions of Paradise idealized on secular life, it is interesting to compare others which bear the impress of a priestly caste, devising a heaven after their manner. We can almost see the faces of the Jewish rabbis settling their opinions about the high schools in the firmament of heaven, where Rabbi Simeon ben Yochai and the great Rabbi Eliezer teach Law and Talmud as they taught when they were here below, and masters and learners go prosing on with the weary old disputations of cross question and crooked answer that pleased their souls on earth.[187] Nor less suggestively do the Buddhist heavens reflect the minds of the ascetics who devised them. As in their thoughts sensual pleasure seemed poor and despicable in comparison with mystic inward joy, rising and rising till consciousness fades in trance, so, above their heavens of millions of years of mere divine happiness, they raised other ranges of heavens where sensual pain and pleasure cease, and enjoyment 79becomes intellectual, till at a higher grade even bodily form is gone, and after the last heaven of ‘Neither-consciousness-nor-unconsciousness’ there follows Nirwâna, as ecstasy passes into swoon.[188]
With these idealized descriptions of Paradise in secular life, it’s interesting to compare others that reflect a priestly perspective, creating a heaven of their own design. We can almost picture the Jewish rabbis debating their views on the high schools in the sky, where Rabbi Simeon ben Yochai and the great Rabbi Eliezer teach Law and Talmud just as they did when they were alive, while masters and students continue their exhausting old arguments of cross questions and twisted answers that satisfied them on earth.[187] Similarly, the Buddhist heavens reflect the thoughts of the ascetics who imagined them. Since they viewed sensual pleasure as inferior and despicable compared to mystical joy that elevates until consciousness fades into trance, they created layers of heavens beyond mere divine happiness that lasts millions of years, where both sensual pain and pleasure cease, and enjoyment becomes intellectual. At an even higher level, physical form disappears, culminating in the final heaven of ‘Neither-consciousness-nor-unconsciousness’ followed by Nirvana, as ecstasy transitions into a swoon.[188]
But the doctrine of the continuance of the soul’s life has another and a gloomier side. There are conceptions of an abode of the dead characterized not so much by dreaminess as by ghostliness. The realm of shades, especially if it be a cavern underground, has seemed a dim and melancholy place to the dwellers in this ‘white world,’ as the Russian calls the land of the living. One description of the Hurons tells how the other world, with its hunting and fishing, its much-prized hatchets and robes and necklaces, is like this world, yet day and night the souls groan and lament.[189] Thus the region of Mictlan, the subterranean land of Hades whither the general mass of the Mexican nation, high and low, expected to descend from the natural death-bed, was an abode looked forward to with resignation, but scarcely with cheerfulness. At the funeral the survivors were bidden not to mourn too much, the dead was reminded that he had passed and suffered the labours of this life, transitory as when one warms himself in the sun, and he was bidden to have no care or anxiety to return to his kinsfolk now that he has departed for ever and aye, for his consolation must be that they too will end their labours, and go whither he has gone before.[190] Among the Basutos, where the belief in a future life in Hades is general, some imagine in this underworld valleys ever green, and herds of hornless speckled cattle owned by the dead; but it seems more generally thought that the shades wander about in silent calm, experiencing neither joy nor sorrow. Moral retribution there is none.[191] The Hades of the West African seems no 80ecstatic paradise, to judge by Captain Burton’s description: ‘It was said of the old Egyptians that they lived rather in Hades than upon the banks of the Nile. The Dahomans declare that this world is man’s plantation, the next is his home,—a home which, however, no one visits of his own accord. They of course own no future state of rewards and punishment: there the King will be a King, and the slave a slave for ever. Ku-to-men, or Deadman’s land, the Dahoman’s other but not better world, is a country of ghosts, of umbræ, who, like the spirits of the nineteenth century in Europe, lead a quiet life, except when by means of mediums they are drawn into the drawing-rooms of the living.’ With some such hopeless expectation the neighbours of the Dahomans, the Yorubas, judge the life to come in their simple proverb that ‘A corner in this world is better than a corner in the world of spirits.’[192] The Finns, who feared the ghosts of the departed as unkind, harmful beings, fancied them dwelling with their bodies in the grave, or else, with what Castrén thinks a later philosophy, assigned them their dwelling in the subterranean Tuonela. Tuonela was like this upper earth, the sun shone there, there was no lack of land and water, wood and field, tilth and meadow, there were bears and wolves, snakes and pike, but all things were of a hurtful, dismal kind, the woods dark and swarming with wild beasts, the water black, the cornfields bearing seed of snakes’ teeth, and there stern pitiless old Tuoni, and his grim wife and son with the hooked fingers with iron points, kept watch and ward over the dead lest they should escape.[193] Scarce less dismal was the classic ideal of the dark realm below, whither the shades of the dead must go to join the many gone before (ἐς πλεόνων ἱκέσθαι; penetrare ad plures; andare tra i più). The Roman Orcus holds the pallid souls, rapacious Orcus, sparing neither good nor bad. 81Gloomy is the Greek land of Hades, dark dwelling of the images of departed mortals, where the shades carry at once their living features and their dying wounds, and glide and cluster and whisper, and lead the shadow of a life. Like the savage hunter on his ghostly prairie, the great Orion still bears his brazen mace, still chases over the meadows of asphodel the flying beasts he slew of yore in the lonely mountains. Like the rude African of to-day, the swift-footed Achilles scorns such poor, thin, shadowy life; rather would he serve a mean man upon earth than be lord of all the dead.
But the idea that the soul continues to live has a darker side. There are visions of a place for the dead that feels more haunted than dreamlike. The land of spirits, especially if it’s a cave underground, has seemed like a dim and sad place to those living in this "white world," as Russians refer to life. One description of the Hurons describes the other world, with its hunting and fishing, its prized tools, clothing, and jewelry, as similar to this world, yet day and night, the souls groan and mourn.[189] Thus, the realm of Mictlan, the underground land of Hades where most Mexicans—rich and poor—expected to go after natural death, was seen with resignation but hardly with joy. At the funeral, the living were told not to grieve too much; the dead was reminded that he had endured the struggles of this life, fleeting as the warmth of the sun, and was encouraged to feel no worry about returning to his family now that he has departed forever, as his comfort should be that they too will eventually end their toil and join him.[190] Among the Basutos, where belief in life after death in Hades is common, some envision this underworld filled with eternally green valleys and herds of hornless patterned cattle owned by the dead; but generally, it's believed the spirits drift about in silent stillness, feeling neither joy nor sorrow. There is no moral punishment there.[191] The Hades of West Africa doesn’t seem to be an ecstatic paradise, according to Captain Burton’s description: “It was said of the old Egyptians that they lived more in Hades than along the banks of the Nile. The Dahomans claim that this world is for man’s work, while the next is his true home—a home that no one visits willingly. They do not believe in any future rewards and punishments; there the King remains a King, and the slave stays a slave forever. Ku-to-men, or Deadman’s land, the Dahomans’ other but not better world, is a land of ghosts, of shades, who, like European spirits of the nineteenth century, lead a quiet existence, except when they are invited into the living’s drawing rooms through mediums.” With such disheartening expectations, the neighbors of the Dahomans, the Yorubas, view the afterlife through their simple proverb: “A corner in this world is better than a corner in the spirit world.”[192] The Finns, who feared the ghosts of the departed as unkind, harmful beings, believed they lingered with their bodies in the grave or, according to what Castrén thinks is a later belief, lived in the underground Tuonela. Tuonela resembled this earthly realm: the sun shone there, and there was plenty of land and water, forests and fields, but everything felt harmful and gloomy—forests dark and teeming with wild animals, water black, fields producing seeds from snakes’ teeth, guarded by the stern, ruthless old Tuoni, and his grim wife and son with their iron-pointed claws, keeping watch over the dead to prevent their escape.[193] No less dreary was the classic idea of the dark realm below, where the souls of the dead must go to join those who came before (to seek more; reach more; andare tra i più). The Roman Orcus captures the pale souls, greedy Orcus, who shows no mercy to the good or bad. 80Dark is the Greek land of Hades, the somber dwelling of the images of those who have passed away, where the shades carry their living traits and dying wounds, drifting and clustering, whispering as they carry the shadow of a life. Like the savage hunter on his ghostly prairie, the great Orion still wields his bronze club, still hunts the flying beasts he once killed in the lonely mountains across the meadows of asphodel. Like today’s rough African, the swift-footed Achilles rejects such a meager, shadowy existence; he would rather serve a lowly man on earth than be the lord of all the dead.
Where and what was Sheol, the dwelling of the ancient Jewish dead? Of late years the Biblical critic has no longer to depend on passages of the Old Testament for realizing its conception, so plainly is it connected with the seven-circled Irkalla of the Babylonian-Assyrian religion, the gloomy subterranean abode whence there is no return for man, though indeed the goddess Isthar passed through its seven gates, and came back to earth from her errand of saving all life from destruction. In the history of religions, few passages are more instructive than those in which the prophets of the Old Testament recognize the ancestral connexion of their own belief with the national religions of Babylon-Assyria, as united in the doctrine of a gloomy prison of ghosts, through whose gates Jew and Gentile alike must pass. Sheol (שאול from שאל) is, as its name implies, a cavernous recess, yet it is no mere surface-grave or tomb, but an under-world of awful depth: ‘High as Heaven, what doest thou? deeper than Sheol, what knowest thou?’ Asshur and all her company, Elam and all her multitude, the 82mighty fallen of the uncircumcised, lie there. The great king of Babylon must go down:—
Where was Sheol, the place where the ancient Jews believed the dead went? In recent years, biblical scholars no longer have to rely solely on the Old Testament to understand this concept, as it is clearly linked to the seven-circled Irkalla of Babylonian-Assyrian belief, a dark underground realm from which no one returns, though the goddess Ishtar did pass through its seven gates and returned to Earth to save all life from destruction. In the study of religions, few insights are as revealing as those in which the prophets of the Old Testament acknowledge their ancestral ties to the national religions of Babylon-Assyria, particularly in the shared belief in a grim prison for spirits that both Jews and non-Jews must face. Sheol (Saul from שאל) means a deep cavern, but it's not just a simple grave or tomb; it's an underworld of terrifying depth: ‘High as Heaven, what do you do? Deeper than Sheol, what do you know?’ Asshur and all her followers, Elam and all her people, the powerful dead of the uncircumcised, lie there. The great king of Babylon must descend:—
To the Greek Septuagint, Sheol was Hades, and for this the Coptic translators had their long-inherited Egyptian name of Amenti, while the Vulgate renders it as Infernus, the lower regions. The Gothic Ulfilas, translating the Hades of the New Testament, could use Halja in its old German sense of the dim shadowy home of the dead below the earth; and the corresponding word Hell, if this its earlier sense be borne in mind, fairly translates Sheol and Hades in the English version of the Old and New Testament, though the word has become misleading to uneducated ears by being used also in the sense of Gehenna, the place of torment. The early Hebrew historians and prophets, holding out neither the hope of everlasting glory nor the fear of everlasting agony as guiding motives for man’s present life, lay down little direct doctrine of a future state, yet their incidental mentions justify the translators who regard Sheol as Hades. Sheol is a special locality where dead men go to their dead ancestors: ‘And Isaac gave up the ghost, and died, and was gathered unto his people ... and his sons Esau and Jacob buried him.’ Abraham, though not even buried in the land of his forefathers, is thus ‘gathered unto his people;’ and Jacob has no thought of his body being laid with Joseph’s body, torn by wild beasts in the wilderness, when he says, ‘I shall go down to my son mourning to Sheol (‘εἰς ᾅδου’ in the LXX., ‘èpesët èàmenti’ in the Coptic, ‘in infernum’ in the Vulgate). The rephaim, the ‘shades’ of the dead, who dwell in Sheol, love not to be disturbed from their rest by the 83necromancer; ‘And Samuel said to Saul, why hast thou disquieted me to bring me up?’ Yet their quiet is contrasted in a tone of sadness with the life on earth; ‘Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in Sheol, whither thou goest.’[195] Such thoughts of the life of the shades below did not disappear when, in the later years of the Jewish nation, the great change in the doctrine of the future life passed in so large a measure over the Hebrew mind, their earlier thoughts of ghostly continuance giving place to the doctrines of resurrection and retribution. The ancient ideas have even held their place on into Christian thought, in pictures like that of the Limbus Patrum, the Hades where Christ descended to set free the patriarchs.
To the Greek Septuagint, Sheol was Hades, and for this, the Coptic translators used their long-standing Egyptian name of Amenti, while the Vulgate translates it as Infernus, the lower regions. The Gothic Ulfilas, translating the Hades of the New Testament, could use Halja in its old German meaning of the dim, shadowy home of the dead beneath the earth; and the corresponding word Hell, understood in its earlier context, accurately translates Sheol and Hades in the English versions of the Old and New Testament, though the word has become misleading to many due to its additional use to describe Gehenna, the place of torment. The early Hebrew historians and prophets, not offering either the hope of eternal glory or the fear of endless suffering as motivations for living, laid down little explicit doctrine of an afterlife, yet their incidental references support the translators who equate Sheol with Hades. Sheol is a specific place where dead people go to their deceased ancestors: ‘And Isaac breathed his last, died, and was gathered to his people... and his sons Esau and Jacob buried him.’ Abraham, even though not buried in the land of his ancestors, is described as being ‘gathered to his people;’ and Jacob isn’t concerned about his body being laid with Joseph’s body, which was torn by wild animals in the wilderness, when he says, ‘I will go down to my son mourning to Sheol’ (‘to Hades’ in the LXX., ‘èpesēt èàmenti’ in the Coptic, 'in hell' in the Vulgate). The rephaim, the ‘shades’ of the dead who reside in Sheol, dislike being disturbed from their rest by the 83necromancer; ‘And Samuel said to Saul, why have you disturbed me to bring me up?’ Yet their peace is contrasted in a tone of sadness with life on earth; ‘Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with your might; for there is no work, nor thought, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in Sheol, where you are going.’[195] Such thoughts about the existence of the shades below didn’t fade away when, in later years of the Jewish nation, a significant shift in the doctrine of the afterlife took hold of the Hebrew mindset, where earlier ideas of ghostly existence transitioned into doctrines of resurrection and retribution. The ancient concepts have even persisted into Christian thought, as seen in images like that of Limbus Patrum, the Hades where Christ went to free the patriarchs.
The Retribution-theory of the future life comprises in a general way the belief in different grades of future happiness, especially in different regions of the other world allotted to men according to their lives in this. This doctrine of retribution is, as we have already seen, far from universal among mankind, many races recognizing the idea of a spirit outliving the body, without considering the fate of this spirit to depend at all upon the conduct of the living man. The doctrine of retribution indeed hardly seems an original part of the doctrine of the future life. On the contrary, if we judge that men in a primitive state of culture arrived at the notion of a surviving spirit, and that some races, but by no means all, afterwards reached the further stage of recognizing a retribution for deeds done in the body, this theory will not, so far as I know, be discountenanced by facts.[196] Even among the higher savages, however, a connexion 84between man’s life and his happiness or misery after death is often held as a definite article of theology, and thence it is to be traced onward through barbaric religions, and into the very heart of Christianity. Yet the grounds of good and evil in the future life are so far from uniform among the religions of the world, that they may differ widely within what is considered one and the same creed. The result is more definite than the cause, the end than the means. Men who alike look forward to a region of unearthly happiness beyond the grave, hope to reach that happy land by roads so strangely different, that the path of life which leads one nation to eternal bliss may seem to the next the very descent into the pit. In noticing among savage and barbaric peoples the qualifications which determine future happiness, we may with some distinctness define these as being excellence, valour, social rank, religious ordinance. On the whole, however, in the religions of the lower range of culture, unless where they may have been affected by contact with higher religions, the destiny of the man after death seems hardly to turn on judicial reward or punishment for his moral conduct in life. Such difference as is made between the future conditions of different classes of souls, seems more often to belong to a remarkable intermediate doctrine, standing between the earlier continuance-theory and the later retribution-theory. The idea of the next life being similar to this seems to have developed into the idea that what gives prosperity and renown here will give it also there, so that earthly conditions carry on their contrasts into the changed world after death. Thus a man’s condition after death will be a result of, rather than a compensation or retribution for, his condition during life. A comparison of doctrines held at various stages of culture may justify a tentative speculation as to their actual sequence in history, favouring the opinion that 85through such an intermediate stage the doctrine of simple future existence was actually developed into the doctrine of future reward and punishment, a transition which for deep import to human life has scarcely its rival in the history of religion.
The theory of retribution in the afterlife generally involves the belief in different levels of future happiness, particularly in various areas of the afterlife assigned to people based on their lives here. This idea of retribution, as we have already noted, is not universal among humanity; many cultures believe in a spirit that continues after death without linking the fate of that spirit to how one lived. The concept of retribution doesn't seem to be a foundational aspect of the afterlife doctrine. Instead, if we consider that people in a primitive state of culture conceived of a surviving spirit, and that some cultures, but not all, later acknowledged a retribution for actions taken in life, this theory appears to be supported by observations. Even among more developed societies, the connection between a person's life and their happiness or suffering after death is often regarded as a key theological point, which can be traced through various religions and into Christianity itself. However, the grounds for good and evil in the afterlife are far from consistent across the world's religions, with significant variations even within the same belief system. The outcomes are clearer than the reasoning, and the end result is often more evident than the means to get there. People who equally anticipate a place of otherworldly happiness after death believe they will reach that paradise through such vastly different paths that what one group sees as a route to eternal bliss may appear to another as a descent into hell. Among primitive and less developed societies, we can fairly clearly define the traits that determine future happiness as excellence, bravery, social status, and religious practices. Generally, though, in the religions of these lower cultures—unless influenced by contact with more advanced religions—the fate of a person after death does not seem to hinge on a judgment of their moral behavior in life. Any distinction made between the future situations of different groups of souls seems to belong more frequently to a unique intermediate belief that exists between the earlier notion of existence after death and the later idea of retribution. The concept that the next life resembles this one seems to have evolved into the belief that what brings success and honor here will also do so there, meaning that earthly situations continue to reflect their contrasts in the altered world after death. Thus, a person's circumstances after death tend to be a result of, rather than a reward or punishment for, their conditions during life. By comparing beliefs held at various levels of cultural development, we can tentatively speculate about their historical progression, suggesting that through an intermediate stage, the idea of mere future existence actually evolved into the belief in future rewards and punishments—a transition that has significant implications for human life and is nearly unmatched in the history of religion.
The effect of earthly rank on the future life, as looked at by the lower races, brings out this intermediate stage in bold relief. Mere transfer from one life to another makes chiefs and slaves here chiefs and slaves hereafter, and this natural doctrine is very usual. But there are cases in which earthly caste is exaggerated into utter difference in the life to come. The aerial paradise of Raiatea, with its fragrant ever-blooming flowers, its throngs of youths and girls all perfection, its luxurious feasts and merrymakings, were for the privileged orders of Areois and chiefs who could pay the priests their heavy charges, but hardly for the common populace. This idea reached its height in the Tonga islands, where aristocratic souls would pass to take their earthly rank and station in the island paradise of Bolotu, while plebeian souls, if indeed they existed, would die with the plebeian bodies they dwelt in.[197] In Vancouver’s Island, the Ahts fancied Quawteaht’s calm sunny plenteous land in the sky as the resting-place of high chiefs, who live in one great house as the Creator’s guests, while the slain in battle have another to themselves. But otherwise all Indians of low degree go deep down under the earth to the land of Chay-her, with its poor houses and no salmon and small deer, and blankets so small and thin that when the dead are buried the friends often bury blankets with them, to send them to the world below with the departed soul.[198] The expectation of royal dignity in the life after death, distinct from the fate of ordinary mortals, comes well into view among the Natchez of Louisiana, where the sun-descended royal family would in some way return to the Sun; thus 86also in the mightier empire of Peru, where each sun-descended Inca, feeling the approach of death, announced to his assembled vassals that he was called to heaven to rest with his father the Sun.[199] But in the higher religions, the change in this respect from the doctrine of continuance to the doctrine of retribution is wonderful in its completeness. The story of that great lady who strengthened her hopes of future happiness by the assurance, ‘They will think twice before they refuse a person of my condition,’ is a mere jest to modern ears. Yet, like many other modern jest, it is only an archaism which in an older stage of culture had in it nothing ridiculous.
The impact of social status on the afterlife, as viewed by less advanced societies, highlights this middle ground clearly. Simply moving from one existence to another keeps leaders and followers as leaders and followers in the next life, and this idea is quite common. However, there are instances where social class is taken to an extreme, believed to create significant differences in the afterlife. The heavenly paradise of Raiatea, with its fragrant, ever-blooming flowers, crowds of perfect youths and maidens, and extravagant feasts and celebrations, was reserved for the elite Areois and chiefs who could afford the priests’ high fees, but hardly accessible to the average person. This concept peaked in the Tonga islands, where noble spirits would ascend to enjoy their earthly status in the island paradise of Bolotu, while common souls, if they even existed, would perish along with their common bodies.[197] In Vancouver Island, the Ahts imagined Quawteaht’s peaceful, sunny, bountiful land in the sky as a resting place for high chiefs, who resided in one grand house as guests of the Creator, while those who died in battle had a separate dwelling. Conversely, all lesser Indians went deep underground to the land of Chay-her, filled with shabby houses and lacking salmon and small deer, with blankets so thin that friends often buried blankets with the deceased to accompany the soul to the afterlife.[198] The expectation of royal status in the afterlife, distinct from that of ordinary people, is evident among the Natchez of Louisiana, where the royal family, believed to be descended from the sun, would eventually return to the Sun; similarly in the larger empire of Peru, each sun-descended Inca, sensing the end of life, would declare to his gathered subjects that he was summoned to heaven to be reunited with his father, the Sun.[199] However, in more developed religions, the shift from the belief in continuity to the belief in retribution is striking in its totality. The story of that noble woman who bolstered her hopes for future happiness with the thought, ‘They will reconsider before they turn down someone of my status,’ sounds like a mere joke to modern ears. Yet, like many other contemporary jokes, it is just an archaic notion that once held genuine significance in an earlier cultural context.
To the happy land of Torngarsuk the Great Spirit, says Cranz, only such Greenlanders came as have been valiant workers, for other ideas of virtue they have none; such as have done great deeds, taken many whales and seals, borne much hardship, been drowned at sea, or died in childbirth.[200] Thus Charlevoix says of the Indians further south, that their claim to hunt after death on the prairies of eternal spring is to have been good hunters and warriors here. Lescarbot, speaking of the belief among the Indians of Virginia that after death the good will be at rest and the wicked in pain, remarks that their enemies are the wicked and themselves the good, so that in their opinion they are after death much at their ease, and principally when they have well defended their country and slain their enemies.[201] So Jean de Lery said of the rude Tubinambas of Brazil, that they think the souls of such as have lived virtuously, that is to say, who have well avenged themselves and eaten many of their enemies, will go behind the great mountains and dance in beautiful gardens with the souls of their fathers, but the souls of the effeminate and worthless, who 87have not striven to defend their country, will go to Aygnan the Evil Spirit, to incessant torments.[202] More characteristic and probably more genuinely native than most of these expectations, is that of the Caribs, that the braves of their nation should go after death to happy islands, where all good fruits grow wild, there to spend their time in dancing and feasting, and to have their enemies the Arawaks for slaves; but the cowards who feared to go to war should go to serve the Arawaks, dwelling in their waste and barren lands beyond the mountains.[203]
To the happy land of Torngarsuk, the Great Spirit, Cranz states that only Greenlanders who have been brave workers are allowed entry because they have no other understanding of virtue; these are the ones who have accomplished remarkable feats, hunted many whales and seals, endured significant hardships, drowned at sea, or died during childbirth.[200] Similarly, Charlevoix notes about the southern Indians that their right to hunt eternally in the prairies of everlasting spring comes from being good hunters and warriors while alive. Lescarbot discusses the belief among the Indians of Virginia that, after death, the good will find peace and the wicked will suffer, pointing out that they consider their enemies to be wicked while viewing themselves as good. Therefore, they believe they will be quite comfortable after death, especially when they have successfully defended their country and defeated their foes.[201] Jean de Lery commented on the uncivilized Tubinambas of Brazil, noting that they believe the souls of those who lived honorably—essentially those who avenged themselves well and consumed many of their enemies—will travel beyond the great mountains to dance in beautiful gardens with their ancestors' souls. In contrast, the souls of the weak and worthless, who did not fight to protect their land, will go to Aygnan the Evil Spirit, where they will suffer endless torment.[202] More characteristic and likely more authentically native than these expectations is that of the Caribs, who believe that the brave members of their tribe will go after death to blissful islands filled with wild fruits, where they will pass the time dancing and feasting, and will have their enemies, the Arawaks, as slaves. Meanwhile, cowards who were too afraid to go to war will serve the Arawaks, living in their desolate and barren lands beyond the mountains.[203]
The fate of warriors slain in battle is the subject of two singularly contrasted theories. We have elsewhere examined the deep-lying belief that if a man’s body be wounded or mutilated, his soul will arrive in the same state in the other world. Perhaps it is some such idea of the soul being injured with the body by a violent death, that leads the Mintira of the Malay Peninsula, though not believing in a future reward and punishment, to exclude from the happy paradise of ‘Fruit Island’ (Pulo Bua) the souls of such as die a bloody death, condemning them to dwell on ‘Red Land’ (Tana Mera), a desolate barren place, whence they must even go to the fortunate island to fetch their food.[204] In North America, the idea is mentioned among the Hurons that the souls of the slain in war live in a band apart, neither they nor suicides being admitted to the spirit-villages of their tribe. A belief ascribed to certain Indians of California may be cited here, though less as a sample of real native doctrine than to illustrate that borrowing of Christian ideas which so often spoils such evidence for ethnological purposes. They held, it is said, that Niparaya, the Great Spirit, hates war, and will have no warriors in his paradise, but that his adversary Wac, shut up for rebellion in a great cave, takes thither to himself the 88slain in battle.[205] On the other hand, the thought which shows out in such bold relief in the savage mind, that courage is virtue, and battle and bloodshed the hero’s noblest pursuit, leads naturally to a hope of glory for his soul when his body has been slain in fight. Such expectation was not strange in North America, to that Indian tribe, for instance, who talked of the Great Spirit walking in the moonlight on his island in Lake Superior, whither slain warriors will go to him to take their pleasure in the chace.[206] The Nicaraguans declared that men who died in their houses went underground, but the slain in war went to serve the gods in the east, where the sun comes from. This corresponds in part with a remarkable threefold contrast of the future life among their Aztec kinsfolk. Mictlan, the Hades of the general dead, and Tlalocan, the Earthly Paradise, reached by certain special and acute ways of death, have been mentioned here already. But the souls of warriors slain in battle or sacrificed as captives, and of women who died in child-birth, were transported to the heavenly plains; there the heroes, peeping through the holes in their bucklers pierced by arrows in earthly fight, watched the Sun arise and saluted him with shout and clash of arms, and at noon the mothers received him with music and dance to escort him on his western way.[207] In such wise, to the old Norseman, to die the ‘straw-death’ of sickness or old age was to go down into the dismal loathly house of Hela the Death-goddess; if the warrior’s fate on the field of battle were denied him, and death came to fetch him from a peaceful couch, yet at least he could have the scratch of the spear, Odin’s mark, and so contrive to go with a blood-stained soul to the glorious Walhalla. Surely then if ever, says a 89modern writer, the kingdom of heaven suffered violence, and the violent took it by force.[208] Thence we follow the idea onward to the battle-fields of holy war, where the soldier earned with his blood the unfading crown of martyrdom, and Christian and Moslem were urged in mutual onset and upheld in agony by the glimpse of paradise opening to receive the slayer of the infidel.
The fate of warriors killed in battle is the focus of two distinctly different theories. We've previously looked at the deep-rooted belief that if a person's body is injured or disfigured, their soul will arrive in the afterlife in the same condition. Perhaps it's this idea that connects the Mintira of the Malay Peninsula, who, despite not believing in a future reward or punishment, exclude the souls of those who die violent deaths from the blissful paradise of ‘Fruit Island’ (Pulo Bua), sentencing them to reside in ‘Red Land’ (Tana Mera), a desolate wasteland, from which they must go to the fortunate island to gather their food.[204] In North America, the Hurons mention that the souls of those slain in war live in a separate band, as neither they nor suicide victims are allowed in the spirit-villages of their tribe. There's also a belief attributed to certain Indians of California, though it's less representative of true native beliefs and more about showing how Christian ideas often distort such evidence for ethnological study. They believed, it’s said, that Niparaya, the Great Spirit, despises war and won’t allow warriors in his paradise; instead, his enemy Wac, who is imprisoned in a great cave for rebellion, claims the slain in battle for himself.[205] On the other hand, the idea that stands out starkly in the primitive mindset is that courage is a virtue, and that fighting and bloodshed are the noblest pursuits of heroes, which naturally leads to the hope of glory for their souls after their bodies have been killed in battle. This expectation was not unusual among North American tribes, such as the one that spoke of the Great Spirit walking under the moonlight on his island in Lake Superior, where slain warriors would go to him to enjoy hunting.[206] The Nicaraguans believed that men who died in their homes went underground, but those killed in battle went to serve the gods in the east, where the sun rises. This partly aligns with a notable threefold contrast of the afterlife among their Aztec relatives. Mictlan, the Hades for the general dead, and Tlalocan, the Earthly Paradise, which can be reached through certain specific and painful ways of dying, have already been mentioned. However, the souls of warriors killed in battle or sacrificed as captives, and women who died in childbirth, were taken to the heavenly plains; there, the heroes, peeking through the arrow-pierced openings in their shields from earthly conflict, watched the Sun rise and greeted him with shouts and the clashing of weapons, while at noon, the mothers welcomed him with music and dance to guide him on his journey west.[207] Thus, for the old Norseman, dying a ‘straw-death’ from illness or old age meant descending into the grim, loathsome realm of Hela, the Death-goddess; if a warrior's fate in battle were denied him, and death came for him from a peaceful bed, he could still earn Odin’s mark with a spear scratch, allowing him to enter Valhalla with a blood-stained soul. Surely, then, if anything, says a modern writer, the kingdom of heaven has suffered violence, and the violent have taken it by force.[208] From there, we follow the idea onward to the battlefields of holy war, where soldiers earn with their blood the everlasting crown of martyrdom, and both Christians and Muslims are spurred into mutual conflict, driven by the vision of paradise ready to embrace those who slay the infidel.
Such ideas, current among the lower races as to the soul’s future happiness or misery, do not seem, setting aside some exceptional points, to be thoughts adopted or degraded from doctrines of cultured nations. They rather belong to the intellectual stratum in which they are found. If so, we must neither ignore nor exaggerate their standing in the lower ethics. ‘The good are good warriors and hunters,’ said a Pawnee chief; whereupon the author who mentions the saying remarks that this would also be the opinion of a wolf, if he could express it.[209] Nevertheless, if experience has led societies of savage men to fix on certain qualities, such as courage, skill, and industry, as being virtues, then many moralists will say that such a theory is not only ethical, but lying at the very foundation of ethics. And if these savage societies further conclude that such virtues obtain their reward in another world as in this, then their theories of future happiness and misery, destined for what they call good and bad men, may be looked on in this sense as belonging to morality, though at no high stage of development. But many or most writers, when they mention morality, assume a narrower definition of it. This must be borne in mind in appreciating what is meant by the statements of several well-qualified ethnologists, who have, in more or less degree, denied a moral character to the future retribution as conceived in savage religion. Mr. Ellis, describing the Society Islanders, at least gives an explicit definition. When he tried to ascertain whether they connected a person’s condition 90in a future state with his disposition and conduct in this, he never could learn that they expected in the world of spirits any difference in the treatment of a kind, generous, peaceful man, and that of a cruel, parsimonious, quarrelsome one.[210] This remark, it seems to me, applies to savage religion far and wide. Dr. Brinton, commenting on the native religions of America, draws his line in a somewhat different place. Nowhere, he says, was any well-defined doctrine that moral turpitude was judged and punished in the next world. No contrast is discoverable between a place of torments and a realm of joy; at the worst but a negative castigation awaited the liar, the coward, or the niggard.[211] Professor J. G. Müller, in his ‘American Religions,’ yet more pointedly denies any ‘ethical meaning’ in the contrasts of the savage future life, and looks upon what he well calls its ‘light-side’ and ‘shadow-side’ not as recompensing earthly virtue and vice, but rather as carrying on earthly conditions in a new existence.[212]
Such ideas, common among marginalized groups regarding the soul’s future happiness or suffering, don’t seem to be thoughts borrowed from the beliefs of educated societies, except for a few exceptional cases. They instead belong to the intellectual level of the societies from which they come. If this is the case, we shouldn’t ignore or overstate their significance in lower ethics. “The good are good warriors and hunters,” said a Pawnee chief; the author who mentions this remark suggests that this would also be the viewpoint of a wolf if it could express it. Nevertheless, if experience has led primitive societies to value certain qualities, like bravery, skill, and hard work, as virtues, then many moral thinkers argue that this concept is not just ethical, but fundamental to ethics itself. And if these primitive societies further believe that such virtues are rewarded in the afterlife just like they are in this life, then their ideas of future happiness and suffering for what they label as good or bad people may be considered, in some sense, part of morality, even if it isn’t very advanced. However, many writers, when discussing morality, assume a narrower definition of it. This should be kept in mind when interpreting the statements of various qualified ethnologists, who have, to varying degrees, denied a moral dimension to future rewards as understood in primitive religions. Mr. Ellis, when describing the Society Islanders, provides a clear definition. When he tried to find out whether they linked a person's fate in the afterlife to their behavior and character in this life, he could never find out whether they expected any difference in treatment in the spirit world for a kind, generous, peaceful person compared to a cruel, miserly, quarrelsome one. This observation, it seems to me, applies broadly to primitive religions. Dr. Brinton, commenting on the native religions of America, identifies his point of view somewhat differently. He states that nowhere was there a clearly defined belief that immoral behavior was judged and punished in the next world. No distinction can be seen between a place of torment and a realm of happiness; at worst, a liar, coward, or stingy person only faced a negative consequence. Professor J. G. Müller, in his ‘American Religions,’ even more explicitly denies any ‘ethical meaning’ in the contrasts of the savage afterlife, viewing its ‘light-side’ and ‘shadow-side’ not as rewards for earthly virtue and vice but rather as a continuation of earthly conditions in a new existence.
The idea that admission to the happier region depends on the performance of religious rites and the giving of offerings, seems scarcely known to the lowest savages. It is worth while, however, to notice some statements which seem to mark its appearance at the level of high savagery or low barbarism. Thus in the Society Islands, though the destiny of man’s spirit to the region of night or to elysium was irrespective of moral character, we hear of neglect of rites and offerings as being visited by the displeasure of deities.[213] In Florida, the belief of the Sun-worshipping people of Achalaque was thus described: those who had lived well, and well served the Sun, and given many gifts to the poor in his honour, would be happy after 91death and be changed into stars, whereas the wicked would be carried to a destitute and wretched existence among mountain precipices, where fierce wild beasts have their dens.[214] According to Bosman, the souls of Guinea negroes reaching the river of death must answer to the divine judge how they have lived; have they religiously observed the holy days dedicated to their god, have they abstained from all forbidden meats and kept their vows inviolate, they are wafted across to paradise; but if they have sinned against these laws they are plunged in the river and there drowned for ever.[215] Such statements among peoples at these stages of culture are not frequent, and perhaps not very valid as accounts of original native doctrine. It is in the elaborate religious systems of more organized nations, in modern Brahmanism and Buddhism, and degraded forms of Christianity, that the special adaptation of the doctrine of retribution to the purposes of priestcraft and ceremonialism has become a commonplace of missionary reports.
The idea that getting into a happier place depends on performing religious rituals and making offerings seems to be barely recognized among the most primitive tribes. However, it's interesting to point out some observations that indicate its emergence at the stage of high savagery or low barbarism. For example, in the Society Islands, even though a person's spirit's fate—whether it goes to a realm of darkness or a paradise—didn’t depend on their moral character, there's mention of the neglect of rituals and offerings resulting in the displeasure of the gods.[213] In Florida, the Sun-worshipping people of Achalaque believed that those who lived right, served the Sun well, and generously gave to the needy in his honor would be happy after death and transformed into stars, while the wicked would face a miserable existence in rocky mountains, where fierce wild animals make their homes.[214] According to Bosman, the souls of Africans from Guinea who arrive at the river of death must answer to a divine judge about how they lived; if they have faithfully observed the holy days dedicated to their god, avoided forbidden foods, and kept their vows, they are carried over to paradise. However, if they violated these rules, they are thrown into the river and drowned forever.[215] Such claims among people at these cultural stages are rare, and they might not accurately represent original native beliefs. It is within the complex religious systems of more organized societies, like modern Brahmanism and Buddhism, along with distorted forms of Christianity, that the specific adaptation of the idea of retribution to serve the interests of priesthood and rituals has become a common theme in missionary reports.
It is well not to speak too positively on a subject so difficult and doubtful as this of the history of the belief in future retribution. Careful criticism of the evidence is above all necessary. For instance, we have to deal with several statements recorded among low races, explicitly assigning reward or punishment to men after death, according as they were good or bad in life. Here the first thing to be done is to clear up, if possible, the question whether the doctrine of retribution may have been borrowed from some more cultured neighbouring religion, as the very details often show to have been the case. Examples of direct adoption of foreign dogmas on this subject are not uncommon in the world. When among the Dayaks of Borneo it is said that a dead man becomes a spirit and lives in the jungle, or haunts the place of burial or burning, or when some distant mountain-top is pointed to as the abode of spirits of departed friends, it is hardly needful to question 92the originality of ideas so characteristically savage. But one of these Dayak tribes, burning the dead, says that ‘as the smoke of the funeral pile of a good man rises, the soul ascends with it to the sky, and that the smoke from the pile of a wicked man descends, and his soul with it is borne down to the earth, and through it to the regions below.’[216] Did not this exceptional idea come into the Dayak’s mind by contact with Hinduism? In Orissa, again, Khond souls have to leap across the black unfathomable river to gain a footing on the slippery Leaping Rock, where Dinga Pennu, the judge of the dead, sits writing his register of all men’s daily lives and actions, sending virtuous souls to become blessed spirits, keeping back wicked ones and sending them to suffer their penalties in new births on earth.[217] Here the striking myth of the leaping rock is perfectly savage, but the ideas of a judgment, moral retribution, and transmigration, may have come from the Hindus of the plains, as the accompanying notion of the written book unquestionably did. Dr. Mason is no doubt right in taking as the indigenous doctrine of the Karens their notion of an under-world where the ghosts of the dead live on as here, while he sets down to Hindu influence the idea of Tha-ma, the judge of the dead (the Hindu Yama), as allotting their fate according to their lives, sending those who have done deeds of merit to heaven, those who have done wickedness to hell, and keeping in Hades the neither good nor bad.[218] How the theory of moral retribution may be superposed on more primitive doctrines of the future life, comes remarkably into view in Turanian religion. Among the Lapps, Jabme-Aimo, the subterranean ‘home of the dead’ below the earth, where the departed have their cattle and follow their livelihood like Lapps above, though they are richer, wiser, 93stronger folk, and also Saivo-Aimo, a yet happier ‘home of the gods,’ are conceptions thoroughly in the spirit of the lower culture. But in one account the subterranean abode becomes a place of transition, where the dead stay awhile, and then with bodies renewed are taken up to the Heaven-god, or if misdoers, are flung into the abyss. Castrén is evidently right in rejecting this doctrine as not native, but due to Catholic influence. So, at the end of the 16th Rune of the Finnish Kalewala, which tells of Wainamoinen’s visit to the dismal land of the dead, there is put into the hero’s mouth a second speech, warning the children of men to harm not the innocent, for sad payment is in Tuoni’s dwelling—the bed of evil-doers is there, with its glowing red-hot stones below and its canopy of snakes above. But the same critic condemns this moral ‘tag,’ as a later addition to the genuine heathen picture of Manala, the under-world of the dead.[219] Nor did Christianity scorn to borrow details from the religions it abolished. The narrative of a mediæval visit to the other world would be incomplete without its description of the awful Bridge of Death; Acheron and Charon’s bark were restored to their places in Tartarus by the visionary and the poet; the wailing of sinful souls might be heard as they were hammered white-hot in Vulcan’s smithies; and the weighing of good and wicked souls, as we may see it figured on every Egyptian mummy-case, now passed into the charge of St. Paul and the Devil.[220]
It’s wise not to speak too confidently about a topic as complex and uncertain as the history of belief in future punishment and reward. A thorough examination of the evidence is essential. For example, we encounter various claims recorded among primitive tribes, which explicitly attribute reward or punishment to individuals after death, based on whether they lived good or bad lives. The first step is to determine, if possible, whether the idea of retribution was borrowed from a more advanced neighboring religion, as the details often suggest. Direct adoption of foreign beliefs on this topic is relatively common around the world. When the Dayaks of Borneo say that a deceased person becomes a spirit and resides in the jungle, or haunts their burial or cremation site, or when a distant mountain is referenced as the home of spirits of deceased friends, it hardly seems necessary to question the originality of such distinctly primitive ideas. However, one of these Dayak tribes, which practices cremation, states that “as the smoke from the funeral pyre of a good person rises, the soul ascends with it to the sky, while the smoke from the pyre of an evil person descends, taking his soul down to the earth and into the regions below.” Did this unique idea arise in the Dayaks' minds through contact with Hinduism? In Orissa, for instance, Khond souls must leap across a dark and unfathomable river to reach the slippery Leaping Rock, where Dinga Pennu, the judge of the dead, records everyone's daily lives and actions, sending the virtuous to become blessed spirits, while detaining the wicked and condemning them to suffer in new lives on earth. Here, the striking myth of the Leaping Rock is entirely primitive, but the concepts of judgment, moral retribution, and reincarnation may have come from the Hindus of the plains, as certainly did the idea of the written record. Dr. Mason is likely correct in identifying the indigenous belief of the Karens as the notion of an underworld where the deceased exist similarly as they did in life, while attributing to Hindu influence the concept of Tha-ma, the judge of the dead (similar to the Hindu Yama), who assigns destinies based on their actions, sending those who have done good deeds to heaven, those who have done evil to hell, and keeping in Hades those who've been neither good nor bad. The way moral retribution can overlay more primitive views of the afterlife is notably evident in Turanian religion. Among the Lapps, Jabme-Aimo is the subterranean ‘home of the dead’ beneath the earth, where the departed maintain cattle and pursue their livelihoods like the Lapps above, albeit they are richer, wiser, and stronger, while Saivo-Aimo is an even more blessed ‘home of the gods,’ concepts that are thoroughly reflective of lower culture. Yet one account transforms the underground realm into a temporary holding space, where the dead remain for a time before being taken up to the Heaven-god, or if they were wrongdoers, cast into the abyss. Castrén is clearly correct in dismissing this idea as non-native, attributing it to Catholic influence. Similarly, at the end of the 16th Rune of the Finnish Kalewala, which describes Wainamoinen’s visit to the gloomy land of the dead, the hero is made to warn humanity not to harm the innocent, as tragic consequences await in Tuoni’s realm—the bed of wrongdoers is found there, with its blazing red-hot stones beneath and a canopy of snakes above. However, the same critic criticizes this moral 'tag' as a later addition to the authentic pagan portrayal of Manala, the underworld of the dead. Nor did Christianity hesitate to borrow aspects from the religions it replaced. A medieval account of a journey to the afterlife would not be complete without a description of the terrifying Bridge of Death; Acheron and Charon’s boat were reinstated in Tartarus by visionaries and poets; the cries of sinful souls could be heard as they were forged white-hot in Vulcan's forges; and the weighing of good and evil souls, as depicted on every Egyptian mummy case, was now entrusted to St. Paul and the Devil.
The foregoing considerations having been duly weighed, it remains to call attention to the final problem, at what state of religious history the full theological doctrine of judicial retribution and moral compensation in a future life may have arisen. It is hard, however, to define where this development takes place even at a barbaric stage of culture. Thus among the barbaric nations of West Africa, there 94appear such beliefs as that in Nuffi, that criminals who escape their punishment here will receive it in the other world; the division of the Yoruba under-world into an upper and a lower region for the righteous and wicked; the Kru doctrine that only the good will rejoin their ancestors in heaven; the Oji doctrine that only the good will dwell after death in the heavenly house or city of the Deity whom they call the ‘Highest.’[221] How far is all this to be taken as native conception, and how far as due to ages of Christian and Moslem intercourse, to which at any rate few will scruple to refer the last case?
The previous points being carefully considered, it's important to highlight the final issue: at what point in religious history did the complete theological idea of justice and moral balance in an afterlife emerge? However, it's challenging to pinpoint when this change occurred, even in a primitive stage of culture. For example, among the barbaric nations of West Africa, there are beliefs such as the idea in Nuffi that criminals who evade punishment here will face it in the afterlife; the Yoruba division of the underworld into an upper and lower region for the good and the wicked; the Kru belief that only the righteous will reunite with their ancestors in heaven; and the Oji belief that only the good will reside after death in the heavenly home or city of the Deity they refer to as the ‘Highest.’[221] To what extent should this be seen as a native belief, and to what extent is it influenced by centuries of Christian and Muslim contact, which most would agree applies to the last case?
In the lower ranges of civilization, some of the most remarkable doctrines of this class are recorded in North America. Thus they appear in connexion with the fancy of a river or gulf to be passed by the departing soul on its way to the land of the dead, one of the most remarkable traits of the mythology of the world. This seems in its origin a nature-myth, connected probably with the Sun’s passage across the sea into Hades, and in many of its versions it appears as a mere episode of the soul’s journey without any moral sense attached to it. Brebeuf, the same early Jesuit missionary who says explicitly of the Hurons that there is no difference in their future life between the fate of the virtuous and the vicious, mentions also among them the tree-trunk that bridges the river of death; here the dead must cross, the dog that guards it attacks some souls, and they fall. Yet in other versions this myth has a moral sense attached to it, and the passage of the heaven-gulf becomes an ordeal to separate good and wicked. To take but one instance, there is Catlin’s account of the Choctaw souls journeying far westward, to whom the long slippery barkless pine-log, stretching from hill to hill, bridges over the deep and dreadful river; the good pass safely to a beauteous Indian paradise, the wicked fall into the abyss of waters, and go the dark hungry wretched 95land where they are henceforth to dwell.[222] This and many similar beliefs current in the religions of the world, which need not be particularised here, seem best explained as originally nature-myths, afterwards adapted to a religious purpose. A different conception was recorded so early as 1623, by Captain John Smith among the Massachusetts, whose name is still borne by the New England district they once inhabited: They say, at first there was no king but Kiehtan, that dwelleth far westerly above the heavens, whither all good men go when they die, and have plenty of all things. The bad men go thither also and knock at the door, but he bids them go wander in endless want and misery, for they shall not stay there.[223] Lastly, the Salish Indians of Oregon say that the good go to a happy hunting-ground of endless game, while the bad go to a place where there is eternal snow, hunger, and thirst, and are tantalised by the sight of game they cannot kill, and water they cannot drink.[224] If, now, in looking at these records, the doubts which beset them can be put aside, and the accounts of the different fates assigned to the good and wicked can be accepted as belonging to genuine native American religion and if, moreover, it be considered that the goodness and wickedness for which men are to be thus rewarded and punished are moral qualities, however undeveloped in definition, this will amount to an admission that the doctrine of moral retribution at any rate appears within the range of savage theology. Such a view, however, by no means invalidates the view here put forward as to the historical development of the doctrine, but only goes to prove at how early a stage it may have begun to take place. The general mass of evidence still remains to show the savage doctrine of the future state, as originally involving no moral retribution, 96or arriving at this through transitional and rudimentary stages.
In the lower levels of civilization, some of the most interesting beliefs in this area are found in North America. They are linked to the idea of a river or gulf that the soul has to cross on its way to the afterlife, which is one of the most striking features of global mythology. This concept seems to stem from nature, likely associated with the Sun journeying across the sea into the underworld. In many versions, it's merely a part of the soul's journey without any moral implications. Brebeuf, an early Jesuit missionary, specifically mentions the Hurons, stating that there is no distinction in their beliefs about the afterlife between the virtuous and the wicked. He also refers to the tree trunk that serves as a bridge over the river of death; the dead must cross this, while the dog guarding it attacks some souls, causing them to fall. However, in other versions, there is a moral aspect to this myth, and crossing the heavenly gulf becomes a test to distinguish the good from the bad. For example, Catlin describes the Choctaw souls traveling far west, where they encounter a long, slippery, barkless pine log stretching from one hill to another, bridging the terrifying river. The good souls cross safely to a beautiful Indian paradise, while the wicked fall into the depths of the river and head to a dark, hungry, miserable land where they will reside forever. This and many similar beliefs found in religions worldwide, which don’t need detailed explanation here, seem best understood as originally nature-myths that were later adapted for religious purposes. A different idea was noted as early as 1623 by Captain John Smith among the Massachusetts tribe, which still lends its name to the New England region they once inhabited: They say that initially, there was no king except Kiehtan, who lives far to the west above the heavens, where all good people go when they die and have an abundance of everything. The bad people also arrive, but he tells them to roam in endless want and misery, forbidding them to stay. Lastly, the Salish Indians of Oregon believe that the good go to a happy hunting ground full of endless game, while the bad go to a place of perpetual snow, hunger, and thirst, constantly tormented by the sight of game they can't hunt and water they can't drink. If we set aside any doubts while examining these accounts and accept the differing fates of the good and the wicked as part of genuine Native American religion—and consider that the terms 'goodness' and 'wickedness' refer to moral qualities, even if not clearly defined—this would indicate that the idea of moral retribution appears within the realm of primitive theology. However, this perspective does not disprove the argument regarding the historical evolution of this doctrine; it simply illustrates how early this concept may have started. The overall evidence still supports the notion that the primitive beliefs about the afterlife originally did not involve moral retribution or that such beliefs evolved through transitional and basic stages.
In strong contrast with the schemes of savage future existence, I need but set before the reader’s mind a salient point here and there in the doctrine of distinct and unquestionable moral retribution, as held in religions of the higher culture. The inner mystic doctrines of ancient Egypt may perhaps never be extracted now from the pictures and hieroglyphic formulas of the ‘Book of the Dead.’ But the ethnographer may satisfy himself of two important points as to the place which the Egyptian view of the future life occupies in the history of religion. On the one hand, the soul’s quitting and revisiting the corpse, the placing of the image in the tomb, the offering of meat and drink, the fearful journey to the regions of the departed, the renewed life like that on earth, with its houses to dwell in and fields to cultivate—all these are conceptions which connect the Egyptian religion with the religions of the ruder races of mankind. But on the other hand, the mixed ethical and ceremonial standard by which the dead are to be judged adapts these primitive and even savage thoughts to a higher social development, such as may be shown by fragments from that remarkable ‘negative confession’ which the dead must make before Osiris and the forty-two judges in Amenti. ‘O ye Lords of Truth! let me know you!... Rub ye away my faults. I have not privily done evil against mankind.... I have not told falsehoods in the tribunal of Truth.... I have not done any wicked thing. I have not made the labouring man do more than his task daily.... I have not calumniated the slave to his master.... I have not murdered.... I have not done fraud to men. I have not changed measures of the country. I have not injured the images of the gods. I have not taken scraps of the bandages of the dead. I have not committed adultery. I have not withheld milk from the mouths of sucklings. I have not hunted wild animals in the pasturages. I have not netted 97sacred birds.... I am pure! I am pure! I am pure!’[225]
In stark contrast to the harsh realities of a primitive future, I can just highlight a few key points in the belief in clear and undeniable moral justice, as seen in more advanced religions. The deep spiritual teachings of ancient Egypt may never be completely untangled from the images and hieroglyphs found in the 'Book of the Dead.' However, researchers can confirm two important aspects of how the Egyptian perspective on the afterlife fits into the history of religion. On one hand, the idea of the soul leaving and returning to the body, the placement of a statue in the tomb, the offerings of food and drink, the terrifying journey to the land of the dead, and the continuation of life similar to that on earth, complete with homes and fields—these concepts link Egyptian religion to the beliefs of more primitive cultures. On the other hand, the combination of ethical and ritual standards for judging the deceased aligns these ancient and even savage ideas with a more advanced social structure, as evidenced by excerpts from the fascinating 'negative confession' that the dead must recite before Osiris and the forty-two judges in Amenti. ‘O Lords of Truth! let me know you!... Wipe away my faults. I have not secretly done harm to humanity.... I have not lied in the court of Truth.... I have not committed any evil deed. I have not forced laborers beyond their daily tasks.... I have not slandered a servant to his master.... I have not killed.... I have not cheated anyone. I have not mismeasured goods. I have not harmed the idols of the gods. I have not taken fragments of the dead’s wrappings. I have not committed adultery. I have not denied nourishment to infants. I have not hunted wild animals in grazing lands. I have not captured sacred birds.... I am pure! I am pure! I am pure!’[225]
The Vedic hymns, again, tell of endless happiness for the good in heaven with the gods, and speak also of the deep pit where the liars, the lawless, they who give no sacrifice, will be cast.[226] The rival theories of continuance and retribution are seen in instructive coexistence in classic Greece and Rome. What seems the older belief holds its ground in the realm of Hades; that dim region of bodiless, smoke-like ghosts remains the home of the undistinguished crowd in the μέσος βίος, the ‘middle life.’ Yet at the same time the judgment-seat of Minos and Rhadamanthos, the joys of Elysium for the just and good, fiery Tartarus echoing with the wail of the wicked, represent the newer doctrine of a moral retribution. The idea of purgatorial suffering, which hardly seems to have entered the minds of the lower races, expands in immense vigour in the great Aryan religions of Asia. In Brahmanism and Buddhism, the working out of good and evil actions into their necessary consequence of happiness and misery is the very key to the philosophy of life, whether life’s successive transmigrations be in animal, or human, or demon births on earth, or in luxurious heaven-palaces of gold and jewels, or in the agonizing hells where Oriental fancy riots in the hideous inventory of torture—caldrons of boiling oil and liquid fire; black dungeons and rivers of filth; vipers, and vultures, and cannibals; thorns, and spears, and red-hot pincers, and whips of flame. To the modern Hindu, it is true, ceremonial morality seems to take the upper hand, and the question of happiness or misery after death turns rather on ablutions and fasts, on sacrifices and gifts to brahmans, than on purity and beneficence of life. Buddhism in South East Asia, sadly degenerate from its once high 98estate, is apt to work out the doctrine of merit and demerit into debtor and creditor accounts kept in good and bad marks from day to day; to serve out so much tea in hot weather counts 1 to the merit-side, and putting a stop to one’s women scolding for a month counts 1 likewise, but this may be balanced by the offence of letting them keep the bowls and plates dirty for a day, which counts 1 the wrong way; and it appears that giving wood for two coffins, which count 30 marks each, and burying four bones, at 10 marks a-piece, would just be balanced by murdering a child, which counts 100 to the bad.[227] It need hardly be said here that these two great religions of Asia must be judged rather in their records of long past ages, than in the lingering degeneration of their modern reality.
The Vedic hymns describe endless happiness for the righteous in heaven with the gods and also speak of the deep pit where liars, lawbreakers, and those who do not offer sacrifices will be sent.[226] The competing theories of continuity and retribution are clearly present in ancient Greece and Rome. The older belief prevails in the realm of Hades; this dim place of bodiless, smoky ghosts remains the home of the indistinguishable crowd in the average lifespan, the 'middle life.' At the same time, the judgment seat of Minos and Rhadamanthos, the joys of Elysium for the righteous, and the fiery Tartarus, filled with the cries of the wicked, represent the newer belief in moral retribution. The concept of purgatorial suffering, which seems to be absent from the minds of more primitive societies, gains significant strength in the major Aryan religions of Asia. In Brahmanism and Buddhism, the unfolding of good and evil actions and their inevitable consequences of happiness and suffering is central to understanding life, whether through successive reincarnations as animals, humans, or demons on Earth, or in luxurious heavenly palaces filled with gold and jewels, or in torturous hells where the imagination runs wild with horrific descriptions—boiling oil and liquid fire; dark dungeons and filthy rivers; vipers, vultures, and cannibals; thorns, spears, red-hot pincers, and whips of flame. To the modern Hindu, it is true that ceremonial morality seems to take precedence, and the question of happiness or suffering after death tends to focus more on rituals and fasting, as well as sacrifices and donations to Brahmins, rather than on the purity and kindness of life. Buddhism in Southeast Asia, sadly declined from its former greatness, often reduces the idea of merit and demerit to a system of debits and credits with daily good and bad points; serving tea on a hot day earns 1 merit point, and stopping women from scolding for a month earns another, but this can be offset by the offense of leaving bowls and plates dirty for a day, which counts as 1 demerit. It seems that providing wood for two coffins, worth 30 points each, and burying four bones at 10 points each, would balance out against the sin of murdering a child, which counts as 100 demerits.[227] It’s hardly necessary to say that these two major religions of Asia are better assessed through their historical records than through the continuing decline of their modern practices.
In the Khordah-Avesta, a document of the old Persian religion, the fate of good and wicked souls at death is pictured in a dialogue between Zarathustra (Zoroaster), and Ahura-Mazda and Anra-Mainyu (Ormuzd and Ahriman). Zarathustra asks,’Ahura-Mazda, Heavenly, Holiest, Creator of the corporeal world, Pure! When a pure man dies, where does his soul dwell during this night?’ Then answers Ahura-Mazda: ‘Near his head it sits down, reciting the Gâthâ Ustavaiti, praying happiness for itself; “Happiness be to the man who conduces to the happiness of each. May Ahura-Mazda create, ruling after his wish.”’ On this night the soul sees as much joyfulness as the whole living world possesses; and so the second and the third night. When the lapse of the third night turns itself to light, then the soul of the pure man goes forward, recollecting itself by the perfume of plants. A wind blows to meet it from the mid-day regions, a sweet-scented one, more sweet-scented than the other winds, and the soul of the pure man receives it—‘Whence blows this wind, the sweetest-scented which I ever have smelt with the nose?’ Then comes to meet him 99his own law (his rule of life) in the figure of a maiden beautiful, shining, with shining arms, powerful, well-grown, slender, large-bosomed, with praiseworthy body, noble, with brilliant face, one of fifteen years, as fair in her growth as the fairest creatures. Then to her speaks the soul of the pure man, asking, ‘What maiden art thou whom I have seen here as the fairest of maidens in body?’ She answers, ‘I am, O youth, thy good thoughts, words, and works, thy good law, the own law of thine own body. Thou hast made the pleasant yet pleasanter to me, the fair yet fairer, the desirable yet more desirable, the sitting in a high place sitting in a yet higher place.’ Then the soul of the pure man takes the first step and comes to the first paradise, the second and third step to the second and third paradise, the fourth step and arrives at the Eternal Lights. To the soul speaks a pure one deceased before, asking it, ‘How art thou, O pure deceased, come away from the fleshly dwellings, from the corporeal world hither to the invisible, from the perishable world hither to the imperishable. Hail! has it happened to thee long?’ ‘Then speaks Ahura-Mazda: “Ask not him whom thou askest, for he is come on the fearful way of trembling, the separation of body and soul. Bring him hither of the food, of the full fatness, that is the food for a youth who thinks, speaks, and does good, who is devoted to the good law after death—that is the food for a woman who especially thinks good, speaks good, does good, the following, obedient, pure after death.”’ And now Zarathustra asks, when a wicked one dies, where his soul dwells? He is told how, running about near the head, it utters the prayer, Ke maúm:—‘Which land shall I praise, whither shall I go praying, O Ahura-Mazda?’ In this night it sees as much unjoyfulness as the whole living world; and so the second and the third night, and it goes at dawn to the impure place, recollecting itself by the stench. An evil-smelling wind comes towards the dead from the north, and with it the ugly hateful maiden who is his own wicked deeds, and the soul takes the fourth step into 100the darkness without beginning, and a wicked soul asks how long—woe to thee!—art thou come? and the mocking Anra-Mainyu, answering in words like the words of Ahura-Mazda to the good, bids food to be brought—poison, and mixed with poison, for them who think and speak and do evil, and follow the wicked law. The Parsi of our own time, following in obscure tradition the ancient Zoroastrian faith, before he prays for forgiveness for all that he ought to have thought, and said, and done, and has not, for all that he ought not to have thought, and said, and done, and has, confesses thus his faith of the future life:—‘I am wholly without doubt in the existence of the good Mazadayaçnian faith, in the coming of the resurrection and the later body, in the stepping over the bridge Chinvat, in an invariable recompense of good deeds and their reward, and of bad deeds and their punishment.’[228]
In the Khordah-Avesta, a text from the ancient Persian religion, the afterlife of good and bad souls is depicted in a conversation between Zarathustra (Zoroaster) and Ahura-Mazda and Anra-Mainyu (Ormuzd and Ahriman). Zarathustra asks, "Ahura-Mazda, Heavenly, Holiest, Creator of the physical world, Pure! When a pure person dies, where does their soul stay during this night?" Ahura-Mazda responds, "It rests near their head, reciting the Gâthâ Ustavaiti, praying for its own happiness: 'Happiness be to the person who contributes to the happiness of all. May Ahura-Mazda create, ruling as he wishes.'" During this night, the soul experiences as much joy as the entire living world has; this continues for the second and third nights. When the third night turns into dawn, the soul of the pure person moves on, being reminded by the scent of plants. A wind, sweeter than any before, blows toward it from the midday regions, and the soul of the pure person receives it—“Where does this sweetest-scented wind come from that I have ever smelled?” Then, it encounters its own law (its guiding principles) in the form of a beautiful maiden, shining and strong, with a noble presence and a radiant face, appearing as fair as the best of beings. The soul of the pure person asks her, “What maiden are you whom I see as the fairest of all?” She replies, "I am, young one, your good thoughts, words, and deeds; your good law, the law from your own essence. You have made what is pleasant even more delightful, what is beautiful even more beautiful, what is desirable even more desirable, and you have elevated your standing to a higher place." Then, the soul of the pure person takes its first step and reaches the first paradise, the second and third step to the second and third paradise, and the fourth step to the Eternal Lights. A pure spirit who had died earlier speaks to it, asking, "How are you, O pure spirit, come away from your fleshly existence, from the physical world here to the invisible, from the temporary world here to the eternal? Greetings! Has it been a long time for you?" Then Ahura-Mazda speaks: "Do not ask him whom you ask, for he has come along the terrifying path of trembling—the separation of body and soul. Bring him food, the nourishing kind, which is suitable for a person who thinks, speaks, and acts with goodness, who is devoted to the righteous way after death—this is the food for a person who especially thinks good, speaks good, does good, obedient and pure after death." Now, Zarathustra asks about the wicked person's fate when they die, and he is told how, moving around their head, the soul expresses the prayer, Ke maúm:—"Which land should I praise, where should I go praying, O Ahura-Mazda?" During this night, it sees as much despair as the entire living world; this also continues for the second and third nights, and it heads at dawn toward the impure place, being reminded by the stench. A foul wind comes toward the dead from the north, accompanied by the ugly, hateful maiden who represents their own wicked deeds, and the soul steps into the darkness without end. A wicked soul then asks how long—woe to you!—you have come. The mocking Anra-Mainyu, replying in words similar to those of Ahura-Mazda to the good, commands that food be brought—poison mixed with poison, for those who think, speak, and act with evil, and who follow the wicked way. Today's Parsi, following in the faint tradition of the ancient Zoroastrian faith, confesses before praying for forgiveness for everything they should have thought, spoken, and done, but haven’t, and for everything they shouldn’t have thought, spoken, and done, but have. They affirm their belief in the afterlife: "I have no doubt in the existence of the good Mazadayaçnian faith, in the resurrection and the later body, in crossing the Chinvat bridge, and in the consistent rewards for good deeds and their rewards, and for bad deeds and their punishments."[228]
In Jewish theology, the doctrine of future retribution appears after the Babylonish captivity, not in ambiguous terms, but as the strongly-expressed and intensely-felt religious conviction it has since remained among the children of Israel. Not long afterward, it received the sanction of Christianity.
In Jewish theology, the belief in future retribution emerged after the Babylonian captivity, clearly and powerfully articulated as a deeply held religious conviction that has persisted among the Jewish people. Shortly after, it gained the endorsement of Christianity.
A broad survey of the doctrine of the Future Life among the various nations of the world shows at once how difficult and how important is a systematic theory of its development. Looked at ethnographically, the general relations of the lower to the higher culture as to the belief in future existence may be defined somewhat as follows:—If we draw a line dividing civilization at the junction of savagery and barbarism—about where the Carib and New Zealander ends and the Aztec or Tatar begins, we may see clearly the difference of prevalent doctrine on either side. On the savage side, the theory of hovering ghosts is strong, rebirth in human or animal bodies is often thought of, but above all there prevails the expectation of a new life, most 101often located in some distant earthly region, or less commonly in the under-world or on the sky. On the cultured side, the theory of hovering ghosts continues, but tends to subside from philosophy into folklore, the theory of re-birth is elaborated into great philosophic systems, but eventually dies out under the opposition of scientific biology, while the doctrine of a new life after death maintains its place with immense power in the human mind, although the dead have been ousted by geography from any earthly district, and the regions of heaven and hell are more and more spiritualized out of definite locality into vague expressions of future happiness and misery. Again, on the savage side we find the dominant idea to be a continuance of the soul in a new existence, like the present life, or idealized and exaggerated on its model; while on the cultured side the doctrine of judgment and moral retribution prevails with paramount, though not indeed absolute sway. What, then, has been the historical course of theological opinion, to have produced in different stages of culture these contrasted phases of doctrine?
A broad survey of the belief in an afterlife among various nations around the world makes it clear how challenging and crucial it is to have a systematic theory of its development. When looked at from an ethnographic perspective, the general relationship between lower and higher cultures regarding the belief in future existence can be outlined as follows: If we draw a line separating civilization at the point where savagery turns into barbarism—roughly where the Carib and the New Zealander end and the Aztec or Tatar begins—we can clearly see the difference in beliefs on either side. On the savage side, the idea of hovering ghosts is prevalent, rebirth into human or animal bodies is often considered, but above all, there is the expectation of a new life, usually imagined in some distant earthly location, and less often in the underworld or in the sky. On the cultured side, the idea of hovering ghosts continues but tends to transition from philosophical discussions to folklore. The concept of rebirth is further developed into sophisticated philosophical systems, but eventually fades under the challenges of scientific biology, while the belief in a new life after death remains strong in human thought, even though the dead have been pushed out of earthly locations by geography, and the ideas of heaven and hell have become increasingly abstract, turning into vague notions of future happiness and suffering. Again, on the savage side, the dominant belief is that the soul continues in a new existence, similar to the present life, or idealized and exaggerated based on it; whereas on the cultured side, the ideas of judgment and moral retribution hold great influence, though not absolute control. What, then, has been the historical development of theological thought that has led to these contrasting phases of belief in different stages of culture?
In some respects, theories deriving savage from more civilized ideas are tenable. In certain cases, to consider a particular savage doctrine of the future state as a fragmentary, or changed, or corrupted outcome of the religion of higher races, seems as easy as to reverse this view by taking savagery as representing the starting-point. It is open to anyone to suppose that the doctrine of transmigration among American savages and African barbarians may have been degraded from elaborate systems of metempsychosis established among philosophic nations like the Hindus; that the North American and South African doctrine of continued existence in a subterranean world may be derived from similar beliefs held by races at the level of the ancient Greeks; that when rude tribes in the Old or New World assign among the dead a life of happiness to some, and of misery to others, this idea may have been inherited or adopted from cultured nations holding more strongly and 102systematically the doctrine of retribution. In such cases the argument is to a great extent the same, whether the lower race be considered degenerate descendants of a higher nation, or whether the simpler supposition be put forward that they have adopted the ideas of some more cultured people. These views ought to have full attention, for degenerate and borrowed beliefs form no small item in the opinions of uncivilized races. Yet this kind of explanation is more adapted to meet special cases than general conditions; it is rather suited to piecemeal treatment, than to comprehensive study, of the religions of mankind. Worked out on a large scale, it would endeavour to account for the doctrines of the savage world, as being a patchwork of fragments from various religions of high nations, transported by not easily-conceived means from their distant homes and set down in remote regions of the earth. It may be safely said that no hypothesis can account for the varied doctrines current among the lower tribes, without the admission that religious ideas have been in no small measure developed and modified in the districts where they are current.
In some ways, theories that trace their origins from more civilized ideas are valid. In certain situations, viewing a specific primitive belief about the afterlife as a fragmentary, altered, or corrupted version of the religion of more advanced societies seems just as plausible as reversing this perspective and viewing primitivism as the starting point. Anyone can argue that the belief in reincarnation among Native Americans and African tribes may have evolved from the complex ideas of metempsychosis found in philosophical cultures like the Hindus. The beliefs in North America and South Africa about continued existence in an underground world might stem from similar concepts held by societies at the level of ancient Greeks. When primitive tribes in either the Old or New World assign a happy afterlife to some dead individuals and a miserable one to others, this idea could be inherited or borrowed from more cultured societies that have a stronger and more systematic belief in retribution. In these cases, the argument is largely the same, whether we see the lower races as degenerate descendants of an elevated nation or propose the simpler idea that they have adopted concepts from more advanced people. These perspectives deserve significant attention, as degenerated and borrowed beliefs play a considerable role in the views of uncivilized groups. However, this kind of explanation is better suited for specific instances than for general conditions; it is more appropriate for piecemeal analysis than for a comprehensive study of the religions of humanity. If expanded on a larger scale, it would try to explain the beliefs of the primitive world as a patchwork of fragments from various religions of advanced societies, transported by not easily imagined means from their distant origins and settled in remote areas of the earth. It can be safely said that no theory can explain the diverse beliefs among lower tribes without acknowledging that religious ideas have been significantly developed and modified in the areas where they are found.
Now this theory of development, in its fullest scope, combined with an accessory theory of degeneration and adoption, seems best to meet the general facts of the case. A hypothesis which finds the origin of the doctrine of the future life in the primitive animism of the lower races, and thence traces it along the course of religious thought, in varied developments fitted to exacter knowledge and forming part of loftier creeds, may well be maintained as in reasonable accordance with the evidence. Such a theory, as has been sufficiently shown in the foregoing chapters, affords a satisfactory explanation of the occurrence, in the midst of cultured religions, of intellectually low superstitions, such as that of offerings to the dead, and various others. These, which the development theory treats naturally as survivals from a low stage of education lingering on in a higher, are by no means so readily accounted for by the degeneration 103theory. There are more special arguments which favour the priority of the savage to the civilized phases of the doctrine of a future life. If savages did in general receive their views of another existence from the religious systems of cultured nations, these systems can hardly have been such as recognize the dominant doctrines of heaven and hell. For, as to the locality of the future world, savage races especially favour a view little represented in civilized belief, namely, that the life to come is in some distant earthly country. Moreover, the belief in a fiery abyss or Gehenna, which excites so intensely and lays hold so firmly of the imagination of the most ignorant men, would have been especially adapted to the minds of savages, had it come down to them by tradition from an ancestral faith. Yet, in fact, the lower races so seldom recognize such an idea, that even the few cases in which it occurs lie open to suspicion of not being purely native. The proposition that the savage doctrines descend from the more civilized seems thus to involve the improbable supposition, that tribes capable of keeping up traditions of Paradise, Heaven, or Hades, should nevertheless have forgotten or discarded a tradition of Hell. Still more important is the contrast between the continuance-theory and the retribution-theory of the future existence, in the sections of culture where they respectively predominate. On the one hand, the continuance-theory, with its ideas of a ghostly life like this, is directly vouched for by the evidence of the senses in dreams and visions of the dead, and may be claimed as part of the ‘Natural Religion,’ properly so called, of the lower races. On the other hand, the retribution-theory is a dogma which this evidence of apparitions could hardly set on foot, though capable of afterwards supporting it. Throughout the present study of animistic religion, it constantly comes into view that doctrines which in the lower culture are philosophical, tend in the higher to become ethical; that what among savages is a science of nature, passes among civilized nations into a moral engine. Herein lies the distinction 104of deepest import between the two great theories of the soul’s existence after bodily death. According to a development theory of culture, the savage, unethical doctrine of continuance would be taken as the more primitive, succeeded in higher civilization by the ethical doctrine of retribution. Now this theory of the course of religion in the distant and obscure past is conformable with experience of its actual history, so far as this lies within our knowledge. Whether we compare the early Greek with the later Greek, the early Jew with the later Jew, the ruder races of the world in their older condition with the same races as affected by the three missionary religions of Buddhism, Mohammedanism, Christianity, the testimony of history vouches for the like transition towards ethical dogma.
Now this theory of development, in its complete form, along with a related theory of degeneration and adoption, seems to best explain the general facts of the situation. A hypothesis that finds the origin of the belief in an afterlife in the primitive animism of early cultures, and traces it through the evolution of religious thought, adapting to more accurate knowledge and becoming part of higher belief systems, can be reasonably supported by the evidence. As shown in the earlier chapters, this theory provides a satisfying explanation for why, even within advanced religions, we see intellectually simplistic superstitions, like offerings to the dead, and various others. These, which the development theory naturally categorizes as remnants from a lower level of education that persist in a higher one, aren't easily explained by the degeneration theory. There are more specific arguments that back the idea that the beliefs of primitive cultures precede those of civilized ones regarding the idea of an afterlife. If primitive people generally derived their views of another existence from the religious systems of advanced societies, those systems likely wouldn't have recognized the prevalent beliefs about heaven and hell. In fact, regarding the location of the afterlife, primitive cultures often lean toward the belief that the next life exists in some far-off earthly place, a notion that's not commonly found in civilized beliefs. Additionally, the belief in a fiery abyss or Gehenna, which captivates and strongly influences the imagination of the most ignorant people, would particularly resonate with primitive minds, had it been passed down to them through ancestral faith. However, the lower races rarely acknowledge such an idea, and even the few instances where it does appear are questionable in terms of being purely indigenous. The suggestion that primitive beliefs stem from more civilized ones implies the unlikely scenario that tribes capable of maintaining traditions of Paradise, Heaven, or Hades would nonetheless have forgotten or abandoned a belief in Hell. Even more significant is the difference between the continuance theory and the retribution theory of existence after death, in the cultural contexts where each predominates. On one hand, the continuance theory, with its notions of a ghostly life similar to this, is directly supported by sensory evidence in dreams and visions of the deceased, and can be claimed as part of the ‘Natural Religion’ of primitive cultures. On the other hand, the retribution theory is a doctrine that such evidence of apparitions could hardly initiate, although it can later support it. Throughout this study of animistic religion, it is evident that beliefs which are philosophical in lower cultures tend to become ethical in higher ones; what is seen as a science of nature among primitive peoples transitions into a moral framework among civilized nations. This distinction carries significant weight between the two main theories of the soul’s existence after physical death. According to a developmental theory of culture, the primitive, non-ethical belief in continuity would be considered the more basic, followed in higher civilization by the ethical doctrine of retribution. This theory about the trajectory of religion in the distant and unclear past aligns with our experience of its actual history, as far as it lies within our knowledge. Whether we compare the early Greeks with the later Greeks, the early Jews with the later Jews, or the more primitive cultures in their original state with those influenced by the three missionary religions of Buddhism, Islam, and Christianity, historical evidence supports this transition toward ethical belief systems.
In conclusion, though theological argument on the actual validity of doctrines relating to the future life can have no place here, it will be well not to pass by without further remark one great practical question which lies fairly within the province of Ethnography. How, in the various stages of culture, has the character and conduct of the living been affected by the thought of a life to come? If we take the savage beliefs as a starting-point, it will appear that these belong rather to speculative philosophy than to practical rule of life. The lower races hold opinions as to a future state because they think them true, but it is not surprising that men who take so little thought of a contingency three days off, should receive little practical impulse from vague anticipations of a life beyond the grave. Setting aside the consideration of possible races devoid of all thought of a future existence, there unquestionably has been and is a great mass of mankind whose lives are scarcely affected by such expectations of another life as they do hold. The doctrine of continuance, making death as it were a mere journey into a new country, can have little direct action on men’s conduct, though indirectly it has indeed an enormous and disastrous influence on society, leading as it does to the slaughter of wives and slaves, and the destruction of property, 105for the use of the dead in the next world. If this world to come be thought a happier region, the looking forward to it makes men more willing to risk their lives in battle, promotes the habit of despatching the sick and aged into a better life, and encourages suicide when life is very hateful here. When the half-way house between continuance and retribution is reached, and the idea prevails that the manly virtues which give rank and wealth and honour here will lead hereafter to yet brighter glory, then this belief must add new force to the earthly motives which make bold warriors and mighty chiefs. But among men who expect to become hovering ghosts at death, or to depart to some gloomy land of shades, such expectation strengthens the natural horror and hatred of dissolution. They tend toward the state of mind frequent among modern Africans, whose thought of death is that he shall drink no more rum, wear no more fine clothes, have no more wives. The negro of our own day would feel to the utmost the sense of those lines in the beginning of the Iliad, which describe the heroes’ ‘souls’ being cast down to Hades, but ‘themselves’ left a prey to dogs and carrion birds.
In conclusion, while discussing the actual validity of beliefs about the afterlife isn't appropriate here, it's important to address one significant practical question that falls within the field of Ethnography. How has the thought of an afterlife influenced the character and behavior of people at different levels of culture? Starting with primitive beliefs, it seems these ideas are more about speculation than practical guidance for living. Lower societies hold views about an afterlife because they believe them to be true, but it’s not surprising that those who hardly consider a situation just three days away would gain little motivation from vague ideas of life beyond death. Ignoring the possibility of races that completely lack thoughts about a future existence, it's clear that many people’s lives are barely impacted by their expectations of an afterlife. The belief in continuity, viewing death as just a journey to a new place, has little direct effect on how people behave, although it can severely influence society in negative ways, leading to actions like the killing of wives and slaves or the destruction of property for the benefit of the deceased in the next world. If this afterlife is seen as a happier place, anticipating it might make people more willing to risk their lives in battle, promote sending the sick and elderly into a better life, and encourage suicide when life here is unbearable. When the belief in continuation and retribution combines, and the idea develops that the virtues that bring status and wealth here will lead to even greater rewards later, this belief must strengthen earthly motivations for creating brave warriors and powerful leaders. However, among those who expect to become wandering spirits at death or to enter a dark realm of shadows, such beliefs only amplify the natural fear and dislike of death. They often adopt a mindset similar to that seen among some modern African communities, where the thought of death revolves around not being able to drink more alcohol, wear fancy clothes, or have more spouses. Today’s individuals would deeply relate to the lines at the beginning of the Iliad that describe heroes’ souls being sent to Hades while their bodies are left to dogs and scavengers.
Rising to the level of the higher races, we mark the thought of future existence taking a larger and larger place in the convictions of religion, the expectation of a judgment after death gaining in intensity and becoming, what it scarcely seems to the savage, a real motive in life. Yet this change is not to be measured as proceeding throughout in any direct proportion with the development of culture. The doctrine of the future life has hardly taken deeper and stronger root in the higher than in the middle levels of civilization. In the language of ancient Egypt, it is the dead who are emphatically called the ‘living,’ for their life is everlasting, whether in the world of the departed, or nearer home in the tomb, the ‘eternal dwelling.’ The Moslem says that men sleep in life and wake in death; the Hindu likens the body which a soul has quitted to the bed he rises from in the morning. The story of the ancient 106Getæ, who wept at births and laughed at funerals, embodies an idea of the relation of this life to the next which comes to the surface again and again in the history of religion, nowhere perhaps touched in with a lighter hand than in the Arabian Nights’ tale where Abdallah of the Sea indignantly breaks off his friendship with Abdallah of the Land, when he hears that the dwellers on the land do not feast and sing when one of them dies, like the dwellers in the sea, but mourn and weep and tear their garments. Such thoughts lead on into the morbid asceticism that culminates in the life of the Buddhist saint, eating his food with loathing from the alms-bowl that he carries as though it held medicine, wrapping himself in grave-clothes from the cemetery, or putting on his disfigured robe as though it were a bandage to cover a sore, whose looking forward is to death for deliverance from the misery of life, whose dreamiest hope is that after an inconceivable series of successive existences he may find in utter dissolution and not-being a refuge even from heaven.
Rising to the level of higher societies, we see the idea of future existence taking up more space in religious beliefs, with the expectation of judgment after death becoming stronger and turning into a genuine driving force in life. However, this shift doesn’t correlate directly with the advancement of culture. The concept of an afterlife has taken root just as deeply in middle-level civilizations as it has in higher ones. In ancient Egyptian language, the dead are strongly referred to as the ‘living,’ since their life is eternal, whether in the realm of the departed or closer to home in the tomb, the ‘eternal dwelling.’ The Muslim belief is that people sleep during life and awaken in death; the Hindu compares the body left behind by a soul to the bed someone gets out of in the morning. The ancient Getæ, who cried at births and laughed at funerals, represent a perspective on life in relation to the next which reappears throughout religious history, perhaps most lightly captured in an Arabian Nights story where Abdallah of the Sea angrily ends his friendship with Abdallah of the Land upon learning that land dwellers mourn, weep, and tear their clothes at death, unlike the sea dwellers who feast and sing. Such ideas lead to a twisted form of asceticism, seen in the life of a Buddhist saint who eats with disdain from his alms-bowl as if it contained medicine, wraps himself in grave-clothes from the cemetery, or wears a tattered robe as if it were a bandage for a wound, with a focus on death as a release from life's suffering, and whose most distant hope is that after countless lifetimes, he might find refuge in complete oblivion.
The belief in future retribution has been indeed a powerful engine in shaping the life of nations. Powerful both for good and evil, it has been made the servant-of-all-work of many faiths. Priesthoods have used it unscrupulously for their professional ends, to gain wealth and power for their own caste, to stop intellectual and social progress beyond the barriers of their consecrated systems. On the banks of the river of death, a band of priests has stood for ages to bar the passage against all poor souls who cannot satisfy their demands for ceremonies, and formulas, and fees. This is the dark side of the picture. On the bright side, as we study the moral standards of the higher nations, and see how the hopes and fears of the life to come have been brought to enforce their teachings, it is plain that through most widely differing religions the doctrine of future judgment has been made to further goodness and to check wickedness, according to the shifting rules by which men have divided right from wrong. The philosophic schools 107which from classic times onward have rejected the belief in a future existence, appear to have come back by a new road to the very starting-point which perhaps the rudest races of men never quitted. At least this seems true as regards the doctrine of future retribution, which is alike absent from the belief of classes of men at the two extremes of culture. How far the moral standard of life may have been adjusted throughout the higher races with reference to a life hereafter, is a problem difficult of solution, so largely do unbelievers in this second life share ethical principles which have been more or less shaped under its influence. Men who live for one world or for two, have high motives of virtue in common; the noble self-respect which impels them to the life they feel worthy of them; the love of goodness for its own sake and for its immediate results; and beyond this, the desire to do good that shall survive the doer, who will not indeed be in the land of the living to see his work, but who can yet discount his expectations into some measure of present satisfaction. Yet he who believes that his thread of life will be severed once and for ever by the fatal shears, well knows that he wants a purpose and a joy in life, which belong to him who looks for a life to come. Few men feel real contentment in the expectation of vanishing out of conscious existence, henceforth, like the great Buddha, to exist only in their works. To remain incarnate in the memory of friends is something. A few great spirits may enjoy in the reverence of future ages a thousand years or so of ‘subjective immortality;’ though as for mankind at large, the individual’s personal interest hardly extends beyond those who have lived in his time, while his own memory scarce outlives the third and fourth generation. But over and above these secular motives, the belief in immortality extends its powerful influence through life, and culminates at the last hour, when, setting aside the very evidence of their senses, the mourners smile through their tears, and say it is not death but life.
Believing in future consequences has been a significant factor in shaping nations' lives. It's powerful for both good and bad, often exploited by various religions for their own agendas, allowing them to gain wealth and power for their own groups and to stifle intellectual and social progress beyond their established norms. For ages, a group of priests has stood at the river of death, blocking the way for all those who can’t meet their demands for rituals, rules, and payments. This is the dark side of the situation. On the bright side, as we examine the moral standards of advanced societies, it becomes clear that the hopes and fears regarding the afterlife have been harnessed to promote their teachings. Across vastly different religions, the idea of future judgment has encouraged goodness and restrained evil, depending on how people have defined right and wrong. The philosophical schools that have dismissed the belief in an afterlife since ancient times seem to have returned to the same origin that perhaps the simplest human cultures never left. This seems especially true about the belief in future consequences, which is notably absent among both the highest and lowest cultural groups. How much the moral standards of life have been influenced by beliefs in an afterlife among more advanced societies is a complex issue, as non-believers still share ethical principles that have been shaped, to some extent, by such beliefs. People who focus on one life or two often share high motives for virtue; the noble self-respect that drives them to live a life they find worthy, a love of goodness for its own sake and its immediate benefits, and a desire to do good that will outlive them. Though the doer may not be around to witness their efforts, they can still derive some present satisfaction from it. However, those who think their lives will end completely know they seek a purpose and joy in life that belong to those who anticipate an afterlife. Few people feel true contentment with the idea of disappearing from conscious existence, like the great Buddha, aiming to live on only through their works. Remaining alive in the memories of friends is something. A few remarkable individuals may achieve some form of "subjective immortality" through the respect they receive in future generations, lasting maybe a thousand years; but for most, an individual's personal legacy barely reaches beyond their contemporaries, and their memory hardly survives beyond three or four generations. Beyond these earthly motivations, belief in immortality strongly influences life and peaks at the end, when mourners, setting aside their senses, smile through their tears, asserting that it’s not death, but life.
CHAPTER XIV.
ANIMISM (continued).
Animism, expanding from the Doctrine of Souls to the wider Doctrine of Spirits, becomes a complete Philosophy of Natural Religion—Definition of Spirits similar to and apparently modelled on that of Souls—Transition stage: classes of Souls passing into good and evil Demons—Manes-Worship—Doctrine of Embodiment of Spirits in human, animal, vegetable, and inert bodies—Demoniacal Possession and Obsession as causes of Disease and Oracle-inspiration—Fetishism—Disease-spirits embodied—Ghost attached to remains of Corpse—Fetish produced by a Spirit embodied in, attached to, or operating through, an Object—Analogues of Fetish-doctrine in Modern Science—Stock-and-Stone Worship—Idolatry—Survival of Animistic Phraseology in modern Language—Decline of Animistic theory of Nature.
Animism, evolving from the Doctrine of Souls to the broader Doctrine of Spirits, turns into a complete Philosophy of Natural Religion—Definition of Spirits resembling and seemingly influenced by that of Souls—Transition phase: categories of Souls evolving into good and evil Demons—Worship of Manes—Doctrine of Spirits manifesting in human, animal, plant, and inanimate forms—Demonic Possession and Obsession as factors in Disease and Oracle-inspiration—Fetishism—Disease-spirits personified—Ghost linked to the remains of a Corpse—Fetish created by a Spirit associated with, connected to, or acting through, an Object—Parallels of Fetish-doctrine in Modern Science—Worship of Stock-and-Stone—Idolatry—Persistence of Animistic terminology in modern Language—Decline of the Animistic theory of Nature.
The general scheme of Animism, of which the doctrine of souls hitherto discussed forms part, thence expands to complete the full general philosophy of Natural Religion among mankind. Conformably with that early childlike philosophy in which human life seems the direct key to the understanding of nature at large, the savage theory of the universe refers its phenomena in general to the wilful action of pervading personal spirits. It was no spontaneous fancy, but the reasonable inference that effects are due to causes, which led the rude men of old days to people with such ethereal phantoms their own homes and haunts, and the vast earth and sky beyond. Spirits are simply personified causes. As men’s ordinary life and actions were held to be caused by souls, so the happy or disastrous events which affect mankind, as well as the manifold physical operations of the 109outer-world, were accounted for as caused by soul-like beings, spirits whose essential similarity of origin is evident through all their wondrous variety of power and function. Much that the primitive animistic view thus explains, has been indeed given over by more advanced education to the ‘metaphysical’ and ‘positive’ stages of thought. Yet animism is still plainly to be traced onward from the intellectual state of the lower races, along the course of the higher culture, whether its doctrines have been continued and modified into the accepted philosophy of religion, or whether they have dwindled into mere survivals in popular superstition. Though all I here undertake is to sketch in outline such features of this spiritualistic philosophy as I can see plainly enough to draw at all, scarcely attempting to clear away the haze that covers great parts of the subject, yet even so much as I venture on is a hard task, made yet harder by the responsibility attaching to it. For it appears that to follow the course of animism on from its more primitive stages, is to account for much of mediæval and modern opinion whose meaning and reason could hardly be comprehended without the aid of a development-theory of culture, taking in the various processes of new formation, abolition, survival, and revival. Thus even the despised ideas of savage races become a practically important topic to the modern world, for here, as usual, whatever bears on the origin of philosophic opinion, bears also on its validity.
The overall concept of Animism, which includes the previously discussed idea of souls, expands to form a comprehensive philosophy of Natural Religion among humans. In line with that early, childlike philosophy where human life seems to be the key to understanding the larger forces of nature, the primitive view of the universe attributes its phenomena to the deliberate actions of pervasive personal spirits. It was not just a whimsical idea, but a logical conclusion that effects stem from causes, which led ancient people to fill their homes and surroundings, as well as the vast earth and sky, with these ethereal beings. Spirits are essentially personified causes. Just as people believed their everyday lives and actions were driven by souls, the fortunate or unfortunate events that impact humanity, along with the various physical processes of the outer world, were seen as caused by soul-like entities—spirits whose fundamental similarities in origin are clear despite their diverse abilities and roles. Much of what this primitive animistic perspective explains has indeed been taken over by more advanced education into the 'metaphysical' and 'positive' stages of thought. Yet, animism can still be traced from the intellectual state of lower cultures through the development of higher civilizations, whether its beliefs have evolved into accepted religious philosophy, or faded into mere remnants of popular superstition. Though my aim here is just to outline the aspects of this spiritual philosophy that I can clearly delineate, without trying to dispel the confusion surrounding many parts of the topic, this task is still challenging, made tougher by the responsibility it carries. Following the evolution of animism from its more primitive stages helps to explain much of medieval and modern thought, which can hardly be understood without a theory of cultural development that encompasses various processes of creation, dissolution, survival, and revival. Thus, even the ideas of primitive cultures that are often dismissed become significant for the modern world, as whatever informs the origins of philosophical thought also impacts its credibility.
At this point of the investigation, we come fully into sight of the principle which has been all along implied in the use of the word Animism, in a sense beyond its narrower meaning of the doctrine of souls. By using it to express the doctrine of spirits generally, it is practically asserted that the idea of souls, demons, deities, and any other classes of spiritual beings, are conceptions of similar nature throughout, the conceptions of souls being the original ones of the series. It was best, from this point of view, to begin with a careful study of souls, which are the spirits proper to men, 110animals, and things, before extending the survey of the spirit-world to its fullest range. If it be admitted that souls and other spiritual beings are conceived of as essentially similar in their nature, it may be reasonably argued that the class of conceptions based on evidence most direct and accessible to ancient men, is the earlier and fundamental class. To grant this, is in effect to agree that the doctrine of souls, founded on the natural perceptions of primitive man, gave rise to the doctrine of spirits, which extends and modifies its general theory for new purposes, but in developments less authenticated and consistent, more fanciful and far-fetched. It seems as though the conception of a human soul, when once attained to by man, served as a type or model on which he framed not only his ideas of other souls of lower grade, but also his ideas of spiritual beings in general, from the tiniest elf that sports in the long grass up to the heavenly Creator and Ruler of the world, the Great Spirit.
At this point in the investigation, we clearly see the principle that has been implied all along in the use of the term Animism, in a sense that goes beyond its narrower definition of the doctrine of souls. By using it to express the doctrine of spirits in general, it essentially suggests that the ideas of souls, demons, deities, and other types of spiritual beings are similar concepts throughout, with the concept of souls being the original one in the series. From this perspective, it makes the most sense to start with a detailed study of souls, which are the spirits specific to humans, animals, and objects, before expanding our exploration of the spirit world to its fullest extent. If we accept that souls and other spiritual beings are perceived as fundamentally similar in nature, we can reasonably argue that the concept based on the most direct and accessible evidence to ancient people is the earlier and foundational one. Accepting this effectively means agreeing that the doctrine of souls, rooted in the natural perceptions of primitive humans, led to the doctrine of spirits, which extends and modifies its general theory for new purposes, but in ways that are less verified and consistent, more imaginative and far-fetched. It seems that once humans developed the idea of a soul, it became a reference point or model that they used to shape not only their ideas of other, lower-tier souls but also their ideas of spiritual beings in general, from the smallest elf playing in the tall grass to the divine Creator and Ruler of the universe, the Great Spirit.
The doctrines of the lower races fully justify us in classing their spiritual beings in general as similar in nature to the souls of men. It will be incidentally shown here, again and again, that souls have the same qualities attributed to them as other spirits, are treated in like fashion, and pass without distinct breaks into every part of the general spiritual definition. The similar nature of soul and other spirit is, in fact, one of the commonplaces of animism, from its rudest to its most cultured stages. It ranges from the native New Zealanders’ and West Indians’ conceptions of the ‘atua’ and the ‘cemi,’ beings which require special definition to show whether they are human souls or demons or deities of some other class,[229] and so onward to the declaration of Philo Judæus, that souls, demons, and angels differ indeed in name, but are in reality one,[230] and to the state of mind of the modern Roman Catholic priest, who is 111cautioned in the rubric concerning the examination of a possessed patient, not to believe the demon if he pretends to be the soul of some saint or deceased person, or a good angel (neque ei credatur, si dæmon simularet se esse animam alicujus Sancti, vel defuncti, vel Angelum bonum).[231] Nothing can bring more broadly into view the similar nature of souls and other spiritual beings than the existence of a full transitional series of ideas. Souls of dead men are in fact considered as actually forming one of the most important classes of demons and deities.
The beliefs about lower races fully justify grouping their spiritual beings as similar to human souls. It will be shown repeatedly in this text that souls share the same qualities as other spirits, are treated similarly, and seamlessly fit into the broader spiritual definition. The similar nature of souls and other spirits is a well-known concept in animism, from its simplest forms to its most advanced. It spans from the beliefs of native New Zealanders and West Indians about the ‘atua’ and the ‘cemi,’ which need specific definitions to determine whether they are human souls, demons, or deities of another kind,[229] all the way to Philo Judæus's statement that souls, demons, and angels differ in name but are, in reality, the same,[230] and the mindset of the modern Roman Catholic priest, who is 111warned in the guidelines about examining a possessed person not to trust the demon if it claims to be the soul of a saint, a deceased individual, or a good angel (nor should one believe him if a demon pretended to be the soul of a Saint, or a deceased person, or a good Angel).[231] Nothing highlights the similarities between souls and other spiritual beings more than the existence of a full range of transitional ideas. Souls of dead people are actually seen as one of the most significant categories of demons and deities.
It is quite usual for savage tribes to live in terror of the souls of the dead as harmful spirits. Thus Australians have been known to consider the ghosts of the unburied dead as becoming malignant demons.[232] New Zealanders have supposed the souls of their dead to become so changed in nature as to be malignant to their nearest and dearest friends in life;[233] the Caribs said that, of man’s various souls, some go to the seashore and capsize boats, others to the forest to be evil spirits;[234] among the Sioux Indians the fear of a ghost’s vengeance has been found to act as a check on murder;[235] of some tribes in Central Africa it may be said that their main religious doctrine is the belief in ghosts, and that the main characteristic of these ghosts is to do harm to the living.[236] The Patagonians lived in terror of the souls of their wizards, which become evil demons after death;[237] Turanian tribes of North Asia fear their shamans even more when dead than when alive, for they become a special class of spirits who are the hurtfullest in all nature, and who among the Mongols plague the living on 112purpose to make them bring offerings.[238] In China it is held that the multitudes of wretched destitute spirits in the world below, such as souls of lepers and beggars, can sorely annoy the living; therefore at certain times they are to be appeased with offerings of food, scant and beggarly; and a man who feels unwell, or fears a mishap in business, will prudently have some mock-clothing and mock-money burnt for these ‘gentlemen of the lower regions.’[239] Notions of this sort are widely prevalent in Indo-China and India; whole orders of demons there were formerly human souls, especially of people left unburied or slain by plague or violence, of bachelors or of women who died in childbirth, and who henceforth wreak their vengeance on the living. They may, however, be propitiated by temples and offerings, and thus have become in fact a regular class of local deities.[240] Among them may be counted the diabolic soul of a certain wicked British officer, whom native worshippers in the Tinnevelly district still propitiate by offering at his grave the brandy and cheroots he loved in life.[241] India even carried theory into practice by an actual manufacture of demons, as witness the two following accounts. A certain brahman, on whose lands a kshatriya raja had built a house, ripped himself up in revenge, and became a demon of the kind called brahmadasyu, who has been ever since the terror of the whole country, and is the most common village deity in Kharakpur.[242] Toward the close of the last century there were two brahmans, out of whose house a man had wrongfully, as they thought, taken forty rupees; whereupon one of the brahmans proceeded to cut off his own mother’s 113head, with the professed view, entertained by both mother and son, that her spirit, excited by the beating of a large drum during forty days, might haunt, torment, and pursue to death the taker of their money and those concerned with him. Declaring with her last words that she would blast the thief, the spiteful hag deliberately gave up her life to take ghostly vengeance for those forty rupees.[243] By instances like these it appears that we may trace up from the psychology of the lower races the familiar ancient and modern European tales of baleful ghost-demons. The old fear even now continues to vouch for the old belief.
It’s quite common for primitive tribes to live in fear of the souls of the dead, believing they become harmful spirits. For instance, Australians have been known to view the ghosts of those who die unburied as becoming malicious demons.[232] New Zealanders believe that the souls of their deceased change in such a way that they can harm their closest friends who are still alive;[233] the Caribs claimed that among the various souls of humans, some end up at the seashore to capsize boats, while others go into the forest to become evil spirits;[234] among the Sioux Indians, the fear of a ghost’s revenge has been noted to deter murder;[235] in some tribes in Central Africa, it can be said that their primary religious belief is in ghosts, and the main trait of these ghosts is to harm the living.[236] The Patagonians feared the souls of their wizards, believing they turned into evil demons after death;[237] Turanian tribes in North Asia fear their shamans even more in death than in life, as they become a specific class of spirits known to be the most malevolent in nature, and among the Mongols, they torment the living to demand offerings.[238] In China, it is believed that the countless miserable spirits below, such as the souls of lepers and beggars, can greatly disturb the living; thus, at certain times, they must be appeased with meager food offerings, and a person who feels unwell or fears trouble in business typically burns mock-clothing and mock-money for these ‘gentlemen of the lower regions.’[239] Such ideas are widespread in Indo-China and India; entire categories of demons were once human souls, especially those left unburied or killed by plague or violence, bachelors, or women who died in childbirth, and they then seek vengeance on the living. However, they can be placated through temples and offerings, effectively becoming a regular group of local deities.[240] Among these is the malevolent spirit of a particularly wicked British officer, whom local worshippers in the Tinnevelly district still honor by leaving brandy and cheroots at his grave, which he enjoyed in life.[241] India has even turned this theory into practice through the creation of demons, as shown in two following accounts. One brahman, whose land a kshatriya raja had built on, committed suicide in revenge and became a demon known as a brahmadasyu, which has since terrorized the entire region and is the most common village deity in Kharakpur.[242] Toward the end of the last century, there were two brahmans who believed that a man had wrongfully taken forty rupees from their house; one brahman then cut off his own mother’s head, believing that her spirit, stirred by the sound of a large drum for forty days, would haunt, torment, and pursue the thief and his associates to death. As her last words, she declared that she would curse the thief, and the vengeful old woman willingly gave up her life to exact spectral revenge for those forty rupees.[243] Through examples like these, it seems we can connect the psychology of lower races with the familiar ancient and modern European stories of malevolent ghost-demons. The old fear still supports the old belief.
Happily for man’s anticipation of death, and for the treatment of the sick and aged, thoughts of horror and hatred do not preponderate in ideas of deified ancestors, who are regarded on the whole as kindly patron spirits, at least to their own kinsfolk and worshippers. Manes-worship is one of the great branches of the religion of mankind. Its principles are not difficult to understand, for they plainly keep up the social relations of the living world. The dead ancestor, now passed into a deity, simply goes on protecting his own family and receiving suit and service from them as of old; the dead chief still watches over his own tribe, still holds his authority by helping friends and harming enemies, still rewards the right and sharply punishes the wrong. It will be enough to show by a few characteristic examples the general position of manes-worship among mankind, from the lower culture upward.[244] In the two Americas it appears not unfrequently, from the low savage level of the Brazilian Camacans, to the somewhat higher stage of northern Indian tribes whom we hear of as praying to the spirits of their forefathers for good weather or luck in hunting, and fancying when an Indian falls into the fire that the ancestral spirits pushed him in to punish 114neglect of the customary gifts, while the Natchez of Louisiana are said to have even gone so far as to build temples for dead men.[245] Turning to the dark races of the Pacific, we find the Tasmanians laying their sick round a corpse on the funeral pile, that the dead might come in the night and take out the devils that caused the diseases; it is asserted in a general way of the natives, that they believed most implicitly in the return of the spirits of their departed friends or relations to bless or injure them as the case might be.[246] In Tanna, the gods are spirits of departed ancestors, aged chiefs becoming deities after death, presiding over the growth of yams and fruit trees, and receiving from the islanders prayer and offerings of first fruits.[247] Nor are the fairer Polynesians behind in this respect. Below the great mythological gods of Tonga and New Zealand, the souls of chiefs and warriors form a lower but active and powerful order of deities, who in the Tongan paradise intercede for man’s benefit with the higher deities, who direct the Maori war parties on the march, hover over them and give them courage in the fight, and, watching jealously their own tribes and families, punish any violation of the sacred laws of tapu.[248] Thence we trace the doctrine into the Malay islands, where the souls of deceased ancestors are looked to for prosperity in life and help in distress.[249] In Madagascar, the worship of the spirits of the dead is remarkably associated with the Vazimbas, the aborigines of the island, who are said still to survive as a distinct race in the interior, and whose peculiar graves testify to their former occupancy of other districts. These graves, small in size, and distinguished by a cairn and an upright stone slab or altar, 115are places which the Malagasy regard with equal fear and veneration, and their faces become sad and serious when they even pass near. To take a stone or pluck a twig from one of these graves, to stumble against one in the dark, would be resented by the angry Vazimba inflicting disease, or coming in the night to carry off the offender to the region of ghosts. The Malagasy is thus enabled to account for every otherwise unaccountable ailment by his having knowingly or unknowingly given offence to some Vazimba. They are not indeed always malevolent, they may be placable or implacable, or partake of both characters. Thus it comes to pass, that at the altar-slab which long ago some rude native family set up for commemoration or dutiful offering of food to a dead kinsman, a barbaric supplanting race now comes to smear the burnt fat of sacrifice, and set up the heads of poultry and sheep and the horns of bullocks, that the mysterious tenant may be kind, not cruel, with his superhuman powers.[250]
Fortunately for people's awareness of death and for the care of the sick and elderly, feelings of fear and hatred aren't the dominant thoughts when it comes to revered ancestors. Generally, they are seen as benevolent guardian spirits, especially towards their family and followers. Ancestral worship is a significant branch of human religion. Its principles are straightforward, as they clearly maintain the social connections of the living world. A deceased ancestor, who has now become a deity, continues to protect their family and receive the same respect and service from them as before; the dead leader still watches over their tribe, maintains their authority by supporting allies and harming foes, rewards the good deeds, and punishes the wrongdoers. It suffices to present a few notable examples to illustrate the role of ancestral worship among humanity, from primitive cultures to more advanced societies.[244] In both Americas, this practice is found across a spectrum, starting from the lowly savage level of the Brazilian Camacans to the more advanced northern Indian tribes who are known to pray to the spirits of their ancestors for good weather or successful hunts. They believe that if an Indian accidentally falls into the fire, it’s because the ancestral spirits pushed him in as punishment for neglecting the customary offerings. The Natchez people of Louisiana reportedly even built temples for their deceased.[245] In the Pacific, among darker-skinned populations, the Tasmanians would lay their sick beside a corpse on the funeral pyre so that the dead could come at night and drive out the demons that caused their illnesses. Generally, it’s thought the natives believed firmly in the return of the spirits of their departed friends or relatives to either bless or harm them, depending on the situation.[246] In Tanna, the gods are spirits of ancestors who have passed away, with elderly chiefs becoming deities after death, overseeing the growth of yams and fruit trees, and receiving prayers and first-fruit offerings from the islanders.[247] The lighter-skinned Polynesians also practice this. Beneath the major mythological gods of Tonga and New Zealand, the souls of chiefs and warriors form a lower but influential group of deities, who in Tongan paradise advocate for humanity before the higher gods, directing Maori war parties during their marches, encouraging them in battle, and vigilantly watching over their tribes and families, punishing any breaches of the sacred laws of tapu.[248] We can track this belief into the Malay islands, where the spirits of deceased ancestors are sought after for prosperity and aid in difficult times.[249] In Madagascar, the worship of the spirits of the dead is notably tied to the Vazimbas, the island's aboriginal people, who are said to still exist as a distinct group in the interior, and whose unique graves indicate their former presence in other regions. These small graves, marked by a cairn and a standing stone slab or altar, are treated by the Malagasy with both fear and respect, and their expressions turn somber when they pass by. Taking a stone or pulling a twig from one of these graves, or tripping over one in the dark, would anger the Vazimba, leading to illness or nighttime abductions to the land of the dead. Consequently, the Malagasy can explain any mysterious illness as being due to having, knowingly or unknowingly, offended a Vazimba. They are not always malicious; they can be either conciliatory or vengeful, or exhibit both traits. Thus, at the altar-slab that some primitive native family once erected to honor or offer food to a deceased relative, a more barbaric invading race now comes to smear the sacrificial fat and place the heads of chickens, sheep, and horns of cattle, hoping that the otherworldly resident will be kind, rather than cruel, with their supernatural powers.[250]
On the continent of Africa, manes-worship appears with extremest definiteness and strength. Thus Zulu warriors, aided by the ‘amatongo,’ the spirits of their ancestors, conquer in the battle; but if the dead turn their backs on the living, the living fall in the fight, to become ancestral spirits in their turn. In anger the ‘itongo’ seizes a living man’s body and inflicts disease and death; in beneficence he gives health, and cattle, and corn, and all men wish. Even the little children and old women, of small account in life, become at death spirits having much power, the infants for kindness, the crones for malice. But it is especially the head of each family who receives the worship of his kin. Why it is naturally and reasonably so, a Zulu thus explains. ‘Although they worship the many Amatongo of their tribe, making a great fence around them for their protection; yet their father is far before all others when they worship the Amatongo. Their father is a great 116treasure to them even when he is dead. And those of his children who are already grown up know him thoroughly, his gentleness, and his bravery.’ ‘Black people do not worship all Amatongo indifferently, that is, all the dead of their tribe. Speaking generally, the head of each house is worshipped by the children of that house; for they do not know the ancients who are dead, nor their laud-giving names, nor their names. But their father whom they knew is the head by whom they begin and end in their prayer, for they know him best, and his love for his children; they remember his kindness to them whilst he was living; they compare his treatment of them whilst he was living, support themselves by it, and say, “He will still treat us in the same way now he is dead. We do not know why he should regard others besides us; he will regard us only.”’[251] It will be seen in another place how the Zulu follows up the doctrine of divine ancestors till he reaches a first ancestor of man and creator of the world, the primæval Unkulunkulu. In West Africa, manes-worship displays in contrast its two special types. On the one hand, we see the North Guinea negroes transferring the souls of the dead, according to their lives, to the rank of good and evil spirits, and if evil worshipping them the more zealously, as fear is to their minds a stronger impulse than love. On the other hand, in Southern Guinea, we see the deep respect paid to the aged during life, passing into worship when death has raised them to yet higher influence. There the living bring to the images of the dead food and drink, and even a small portion of their profits gained in trade; they look especially to dead relatives for help in the trials of life, and ‘it is no uncommon thing to see large groups of men and women, in times of peril or distress, assembled along the brow of some commanding eminence, or along the skirts of some dense 117forest, calling in the most piteous and touching tones upon the spirits of their ancestors.’[252]
On the continent of Africa, ancestor worship is very clear and strong. For example, Zulu warriors, supported by the ‘amatongo,’ the spirits of their ancestors, achieve victory in battle; but if the dead turn away from the living, those living will fall in combat and become ancestral spirits themselves. In anger, the ‘itongo’ can seize a living person’s body, causing illness and death; but in kindness, it provides health, cattle, crops, and everything people desire. Even the youngest children and the elderly women, often undervalued during life, gain significant power as spirits after death—the infants for their gentleness, and the older women for their bitterness. However, it is primarily the head of each family who receives the reverence of their relatives. A Zulu explains this understandably: ‘Even though they honor many Amatongo of their tribe, building a protective fence around them, their father is the most important during worship. Their father is a great treasure, even in death. Those children who are grown know him well, his kindness, and his courage.’ ‘Black people do not worship all Amatongo equally, nor do they honor all the dead of their tribe. Generally speaking, the head of each household is honored by his children; they do not know the ancestors who have passed away, nor their praised names. But their father, whom they knew, is who they begin and end their prayers with, as they are most familiar with him and his love for them. They remember how kind he was when he was alive; they compare how he treated them then, rely on those memories, and think, “He will still act the same way now that he’s gone. We don’t see why he should care about anyone else but us; he will care only for us.”’[251] It will be shown elsewhere how the Zulu follows this belief of divine ancestors until he reaches the first ancestor of humankind and creator of the world, the primæval Unkulunkulu. In West Africa, ancestor worship also shows its two special types. On one hand, the North Guinea people transfer the souls of the dead into the ranks of good and evil spirits according to how they lived, and, fearing the evil spirits more, they worship them with greater zeal. On the other hand, in Southern Guinea, the deep respect for the elderly during life shifts into worship when death elevates them to a higher status. There, the living offer food and drink to the images of the dead, and even share a small portion of their trade profits; they especially look to deceased relatives for help during life's challenges, and ‘it is not uncommon to see large groups of men and women, during times of danger or distress, gathered along the edge of a significant hill or the edge of a dense forest, calling in the most sorrowful and heartfelt tones to the spirits of their ancestors.’[252]
In Asia, manes-worship comes to the surface in all directions. The rude Veddas of Ceylon believe in the guardianship of the spirits of the dead; these, they say, are ‘ever watchful, coming to them in sickness, visiting them in dreams, giving them flesh when hunting;’ and in every calamity and want they call for aid on the ‘kindred spirits,’ and especially the shades of departed children, the ‘infant spirits.’[253] Among non-Hindu tribes of India, whose religions more or less represent præ-Brahmanic and præ-Buddhistic conditions, wide and deep traces appear of an ancient and surviving cultus of ancestors.[254] Among Turanian tribes spread over the northern regions of the Old World, a similar state of things may be instanced from the Mongols, worshipping as good deities the princely souls of Genghis Khan’s family, at whose head stands the divine Genghis himself.[255] Nor have nations of the higher Asiatic culture generally rejected the time-honoured rite. In Japan the ‘Way of the Kami,’ better known to foreigners as the Sin-tu religion, is one of the officially recognized faiths, and in it there is still kept up in hut and palace the religion of the rude old mountain-tribes of the land, who worshipped their divine ancestors, the Kami, and prayed to them for help and blessing. To the time of these ancient Kami, say the modern Japanese, the rude stone implements belong which are found in the ground in Japan as elsewhere: to modern ethnologists, however, these bear witness not of divine but savage parentage.[256] In Siam the lower orders scruple to 118worship the great gods, lest through ignorance they should blunder in the complex ritual; they prefer to pray to the ‘theparak,’ a lower class of deities among whom the souls of great men take their places at death.[257] In China, as every one knows, ancestor-worship is the dominant religion of the land, and interesting problems are opened out to the Western mind by the spectacle of a great people who for thousands of years have been thus seeking the living among the dead. Nowhere is the connexion between parental authority and conservatism more graphically shown. The worship of ancestors, begun during their life, is not interrupted but intensified when death makes them deities. The Chinese, prostrate bodily and mentally before the memorial tablets that contain the souls of his ancestors, little thinks that he is all the while proving to mankind how vast a power unlimited filial obedience, prohibiting change from ancestral institutions, may exert in stopping the advance of civilization. The thought of the souls of the dead as sharing the happiness and glory of their descendants is one which widely pervades the world, but most such ideas would seem vague and weak to the Chinese, who will try hard for honour in his competitive examination with the special motive of glorifying his dead ancestors, and whose titles of rank will raise his deceased father and grandfather a grade above himself, as though, with us, Zachary Macaulay and Copley the painter should now have viscounts’ coronets officially placed on their tombstones. As so often happens, what is jest to one people is sober sense to another. There are 300 millions of Chinese who would hardly see a joke in Charles Lamb reviling the stupid age that would not read him, and declaring that he would write for antiquity. Had he been a Chinese himself, he might have written his book in all seriousness for the benefit of his great-great-grandfather. Among the Chinese, manes-worship is no rite of mere affection. The living want the help of the ancestral spirits, who reward virtue and punish vice: ‘The exalted 119ancestor will bring thee, O Prince, much good!’—‘Ancestors and fathers will abandon you and give you up, and come not to help, and ye will die.’ If no help comes in time of need, the Chinese will reproach his ancestor, or even come to doubt his existence. Thus in a Chinese ode the sufferers in a dreadful drought cry, ‘Heu-tsi cannot or will not help.... Our ancestors have surely perished.... Father, mother, ancestors, how could you calmly bear this?’ Nor does manes-worship stop short with direct family ties; it is naturally developed to produce, by deification of the heroic dead, a series of superior gods to whom worship is given by the public at large. Thus, according to legend, the War-god or Military Sage was once in human life a distinguished soldier, the Mechanics’ god was a skilful workman and inventor of tools, the Swine-god was a hog-breeder who lost his pigs and died of sorrow, and the Gamblers’ god, a desperate gamester who lost his all and died of want, is represented by a hideous image called a ‘devil gambling for cash,’ and in this shape receives the prayers and offerings of confirmed gamblers, his votaries. The spirits of San-kea Ta-te, and Chang-yuen-sze go to partake of the offerings set out in their temples, returning flushed and florid from their meal; and the spirit of Confucius is present in the temple, where twice a year the Emperor does sacrifice to him.[258]
In Asia, the worship of ancestral spirits is prominent in many places. The simple Veddas of Sri Lanka believe in the guardianship of the spirits of the dead; they say these spirits are "always watchful, coming to them in sickness, visiting them in dreams, giving them meat when they hunt;" and in every disaster and need, they call on their "kindred spirits," especially the shades of deceased children, the "infant spirits." Among non-Hindu tribes in India, whose religions reflect pre-Brahmanic and pre-Buddhistic beliefs, there are clear signs of an ancient and ongoing cult of ancestors. Among Turanian tribes dispersed across northern regions of the Old World, a similar belief can be seen in the Mongols, who worship the noble souls of Genghis Khan's family, with Genghis himself at the top of that list. Higher Asian cultures have not generally rejected this age-old practice. In Japan, the "Way of the Kami," also known to foreigners as Shinto, is one of the officially recognized religions, preserving the beliefs of the primitive mountain tribes who worshipped their divine ancestors, the Kami, and prayed to them for assistance and blessings. Modern Japanese say the primitive stone tools found in Japan belong to the time of these ancient Kami; however, modern ethnologists see them as evidence of savage origins. In Thailand, the lower classes hesitate to worship the great gods, fearing they might accidentally misperform the complex rituals; they prefer to pray to the “theparak,” a lower class of deities where the souls of great people reside after death. In China, as everyone knows, ancestor worship is the dominant religion, providing intriguing questions for the Western mind about how a great people have been seeking the living among the dead for thousands of years. Nowhere is the connection between parental authority and conservatism more clearly demonstrated. The worship of ancestors, which begins during their lives, does not stop but becomes stronger after death turns them into deities. The Chinese, physically and mentally prostrated before the memorial tablets containing the souls of their ancestors, often don’t realize they are showing how powerful unconditional filial obedience can be in preventing change from ancestral traditions, thereby stalling the progress of civilization. The belief that the souls of the dead share in the happiness and glory of their descendants is widespread, but many of these ideas likely seem vague and weak to the Chinese, who strive for honor in their competitive exams with the specific goal of glorifying their deceased ancestors. Their titles of rank can elevate their deceased father and grandfather to a position above them, as if, in our culture, Zachary Macaulay and the painter Copley were to have viscount titles officially etched on their tombstones. Often, what seems like a joke to one culture is serious to another. There are 300 million Chinese who wouldn’t find humor in Charles Lamb criticizing the foolish age that wouldn’t read him and asserting he would write for future generations. Had he been Chinese, he might have written his book with all seriousness for the benefit of his great-great-grandfather. Among the Chinese, ancestor worship is not just an act of affection. The living seek help from ancestral spirits, who reward good deeds and punish wrongdoing: "The esteemed ancestor will bring you, O Prince, much good!"—"Ancestors and fathers may abandon you and fail to help, and you will die." If no help arrives in times of need, the Chinese may blame their ancestors or even question their existence. In one Chinese poem, those suffering from a terrible drought lament, "Heu-tsi cannot or will not help... Our ancestors must surely be gone... Father, mother, ancestors, how could you ignore this?" Ancestor worship extends beyond direct family connections; it naturally leads to the deification of heroic figures, creating a pantheon of superior gods worshipped by the general public. For instance, according to legend, the War-god or Military Sage was once a famous soldier, the Mechanics' god was a skilled craftsman who invented tools, the Swine-god was a pig farmer who lost his pigs and died of sorrow, and the Gamblers' god, a desperate gambler who lost everything and died of poverty, is represented by a grotesque figure known as "the devil gambling for cash," in whose likeness prayers and offerings are made by dedicated gamblers. The spirits of San-kea Ta-te and Chang-yuen-sze partake in the offerings laid out in their temples, returning vibrant and flushed from their meals, while the spirit of Confucius is honored in the temple, where the Emperor sacrifices to him twice a year.
The Hindu unites in some degree with the Chinese as to ancestor-worship, and especially as to the necessity of having a son by blood or adoption, who shall offer the proper sacrifices to him after death. ‘May there be born in our lineage,’ the manes are supposed to say, ‘a man to offer to us, on the thirteenth day of the moon, rice boiled in milk, honey and ghee.’ Offerings made to the divine manes, the ‘pitaras’ (patres, fathers) as they are called, preceded and followed by offerings to the greater deities, give to the worshipper merit 120and happiness.[259] In classic Europe, apotheosis lies part within the limits of myth, where it was applied to fabled ancestors, and part within the limits of actual history, as where Julius and Augustus shared its honours with the vile Domitian and Commodus. The most special representatives of ancestor-worship in Europe were perhaps the ancient Romans, whose word ‘manes’ has become the recognized name for ancestral deities in modern civilized language; they embodied them as images, set them up as household patrons, gratified them with offerings and solemn homage, and counting them as or among the infernal gods, inscribed on tombs D. M., ‘Diis Manibus.’[260] The occurrence of this D. M. in Christian epitaphs is an often-noticed case of religious survival.
The Hindu tradition shares some similarities with Chinese practices regarding ancestor worship, particularly the importance of having a son, either biological or adopted, to perform the necessary rituals after one's death. It is believed that the ancestors, or manes, hope for a descendant to offer them rice boiled in milk, honey, and ghee on the thirteenth day of the lunar month. Making these offerings to the divine manes, known as ‘pitaras’ (or fathers), along with offerings to the greater deities, grants the worshiper merit and happiness. In classical Europe, the concept of apotheosis exists partly in the realm of mythology, where it applied to legendary ancestors, and partly in historical contexts, as seen when Julius and Augustus received such honors alongside notorious figures like Domitian and Commodus. The ancient Romans were perhaps the most notable practitioners of ancestor worship in Europe, as their term ‘manes’ has become the standard term for ancestral deities in modern civilized languages. They created images to represent them, honored them with offerings and rituals, and considered them among the infernal gods, marking tombs with the abbreviation D. M., which stands for ‘Diis Manibus.’ The appearance of this D. M. in Christian tombstones is often mentioned as a case of religious continuity.
Although full ancestor-worship is not practised in modern Christendom, there remains even now within its limits a well-marked worship of the dead. A crowd of saints, who were once men and women, now form an order of inferior deities, active in the affairs of men and receiving from them reverence and prayer, thus coming strictly under the definition of manes. This Christian cultus of the dead, belonging in principle to the older manes-worship, was adapted to answer another purpose in the course of religious transition in Europe. The local gods, the patron gods of particular ranks and crafts, the gods from whom men sought special help in special needs, were too near and dear to the inmost heart of præ-Christian Europe to be done away with without substitutes. It proved easier to replace them by saints who could undertake their particular professions, and even succeed them in their sacred dwellings. The system of spiritual division of labour was in time worked out with wonderful minuteness in the vast array of professional saints, among whom the most familiar to modern English ears are St. Cecilia, patroness of musicians; St. Luke, patron 121of painters; St. Peter, of fishmongers; St. Valentine, of lovers; St. Sebastian, of archers; St. Crispin, of cobblers; St. Hubert, who cures the bite of mad dogs; St. Vitus, who delivers madmen and sufferers from the disease which bears his name; St. Fiacre, whose name is now less known by his shrine than by the hackney-coaches called after him in the seventeenth century. Not to dwell here minutely on an often-treated topic, it will be enough to touch on two particular points. First, as to the direct historical succession of the Christian saint to the heathen deity, the following are two very perfect illustrations. It is well known that Romulus, mindful of his own adventurous infancy, became after death a Roman deity propitious to the health and safety of young children, so that nurses and mothers would carry sickly infants to present them in his little round temple at the foot of the Palatine. In after ages the temple was replaced by the church of St. Theodorus, and there Dr. Conyers Middleton, who drew public attention to its curious history, used to look in and see ten or a dozen women, each with a sick child in her lap, sitting in silent reverence before the altar of the saint. The ceremony of blessing children, especially after vaccination, may still be seen there on Thursday mornings.[261] Again, Sts. Cosmas and Damianus, according to Maury, owe their recognized office to a similar curious train of events. They were martyrs who suffered under Diocletian, at Ægææ in Cilicia. Now this place was celebrated for the worship of Æsculapius, in whose temple incubation, i.e. sleeping for oracular dreams, was practised. It seems as though the idea was transferred on the spot to the two local saints, for we next hear of them as appearing in a dream to the Emperor Justinian, when he was ill at Byzantium. They cured him, he built them a temple, their cultus spread far and wide, and they frequently appeared to the sick to show them what they should do. Legend settled that Cosmas and Damianus were physicians while they lived on earth, 122and at any rate they are patron-saints of the profession of medicine to this day.[262] Second, as to the actual state of hagiolatry in modern Europe, it is obvious on a broad view that it is declining among the educated classes. Yet modern examples may be brought forward to show ideas as extreme as those which prevailed more widely a thousand years ago. In the Church of the Jesuit College at Rome lies buried St. Aloysius Gonzaga, on whose festival it is customary especially for the college students to write letters to him, which are placed on his gaily decorated and illuminated altar, and afterwards burnt unopened. The miraculous answering of these letters is vouched for in an English book of 1870. To the same year belongs an English tract commemorating a late miraculous cure. An Italian lady afflicted with a tumour and incipient cancer of the breast was exhorted by a Jesuit priest to recommend herself to the Blessed John Berchmans, a pious Jesuit novice from Belgium, who died in 1621, and was beatified in 1865. Her adviser procured for her ‘three small packets of dust gathered from the coffin of this saintly innocent, a little cross made of the boards of the room the blessed youth occupied, as well as some portion of the wadding in which his venerable head was wrapped.’ During nine days’ devotion the patient accordingly invoked the Blessed John, swallowed small portions of his dust in water, and at last pressed the cross to her breast so vehemently that she was seized with sickness, went to sleep, and awoke without a symptom of the complaint. And when Dr. Panegrossi the physician beheld the incredible cure, and heard that the patient had addressed herself to the Blessed Berchmans, he bowed his head, saying, ‘When such physicians interfere, we have nothing more to say!’[263] To sum up the whole 123history of manes-worship, it is plain that in our time the dead still receive worship from far the larger half of mankind, and it may have been much the same ever since the remote periods of primitive culture in which the religion of the manes probably took its rise.
Although full ancestor-worship isn't practiced in modern Christianity, there’s still a noticeable veneration of the dead within its bounds. A multitude of saints, who were once ordinary men and women, now serve as a group of lesser deities, actively involved in human affairs and receiving respect and prayers, fitting the definition of manes. This Christian worship of the dead, rooted in older manes-worship, was modified to serve another purpose during Europe’s religious changes. The local gods, the patron deities of specific classes and trades, and the gods whom people turned to for particular help were too precious to the heart of pre-Christian Europe to be completely discarded without replacements. It turned out to be simpler to substitute them with saints who could take on their specific roles and even inhabit their holy spaces. The system of spiritual specialization developed over time with amazing detail in the extensive list of professional saints, the most recognized to modern English speakers being St. Cecilia, patron saint of musicians; St. Luke, patron saint of painters; St. Peter, of fishmongers; St. Valentine, of lovers; St. Sebastian, of archers; St. Crispin, of cobblers; St. Hubert, who treats rabid dog bites; St. Vitus, who helps madmen and those suffering from the disease named after him; and St. Fiacre, whose name is now better known through the hackney-coaches that were named after him in the seventeenth century. Without delving too deeply into a well-explored topic, I’ll just highlight two specific points. First, regarding the historical connection between Christian saints and pagan deities, here are two perfect examples. It’s well-known that Romulus, reflecting on his own adventurous early life, became a Roman god after his death who was favorable to the health and safety of young children, prompting nurses and mothers to bring sickly infants to his small round temple at the foot of the Palatine. Later on, the temple was replaced by the church of St. Theodorus, where Dr. Conyers Middleton, who brought public attention to its intriguing history, would often observe ten or a dozen women, each with a sick child in her lap, sitting in silent reverence before the saint's altar. The practice of blessing children, especially post-vaccination, can still be seen there on Thursday mornings.[261] Again, Sts. Cosmas and Damianus, according to Maury, owe their recognized role to a similarly intriguing series of events. They were martyrs who suffered under Diocletian at Ægææ in Cilicia. This area was famous for the worship of Æsculapius, where incubation, or sleeping for prophetic dreams, was practiced. It appears that the idea transferred to the two local saints, as we next hear about them appearing in a dream to Emperor Justinian while he was ill in Byzantium. They healed him, he built them a temple, their worship spread widely, and they frequently manifested to the sick to show them what to do. Tradition established that Cosmas and Damianus were doctors during their earthly lives, and they are still considered patron saints of the medical profession today.[262] Second, regarding the current state of hagiolatry in modern Europe, it is clear from a broad perspective that it is declining among educated classes. However, modern examples can still be presented, showcasing ideas that are as extreme as those that were more widespread a thousand years ago. In the Church of the Jesuit College in Rome lies the body of St. Aloysius Gonzaga, whose feast day prompts college students to write letters to him, which they place on his beautifully decorated and illuminated altar, later burning them unopened. An English book from 1870 attests to the miraculous responding of these letters. That same year, an English pamphlet recorded a recent miraculous healing. An Italian lady suffering from a tumor and early-stage breast cancer was advised by a Jesuit priest to seek the intercession of Blessed John Berchmans, a devout Jesuit novice from Belgium, who died in 1621 and was beatified in 1865. Her advisor provided her with ‘three small packets of dust taken from the coffin of this saintly person, a little cross made from the wood of the room where the blessed youth lived, and some material from the wrapping of his venerable head.’ During nine days of devotion, the patient accordingly invoked Blessed John, ingested small portions of his dust in water, and eventually pressed the cross against her breast so forcefully that she fell ill, fell asleep, and woke up with no symptoms of her ailment. When Dr. Panegrossi, the physician, witnessed the incredible healing and learned that the patient had called upon Blessed Berchmans, he bowed his head, saying, ‘When such doctors intervene, we have nothing more to say!’[263] To sum up the entire history of manes-worship, it’s clear that even today the dead still receive reverence from a significant portion of humanity, and it likely has been that way since the distant times of primitive culture when the religion of the manes probably first emerged.
It has now been seen that the theory of souls recognizes them as capable either of independent existence, or of inhabiting human, animal, or other bodies. On the principle here maintained, that the general theory of spirits is modelled on the theory of souls, we shall be able to account for several important branches of the lower philosophy of religion, which without such explanation may appear in great measure obscure or absurd. Like souls, other spirits are supposed able either to exist and act flitting free about the world, or to become incorporate for more or less time in solid bodies. It will be well at once to get a secure grasp of this theory of Embodiment, for without it we shall be stopped every moment by a difficulty in understanding the nature of spirits, as defined in the lower animism. The theory of embodiment serves several highly important purposes in savage and barbarian philosophy. On the one hand it provides an explanation of the phenomena of morbid exaltation and derangement, especially as connected with abnormal utterance, and this view is so far extended as to produce an almost general doctrine of disease. On the other hand, it enables the savage either to ‘lay’ a hurtful spirit in some foreign body, and so get rid of it, or to carry about a useful spirit for his service in a material object, to set it up as a deity for worship in the body of an animal, or in a block or stone or image or other thing, which contains the spirit as a vessel contains a fluid: this is the key to strict fetishism, and in no small measure to idolatry. In briefly considering these various branches of the Embodiment-theory, there may be conveniently included certain groups of cases often impossible to distinguish apart. These cases belong theoretically rather to obsession than possession, the spirits not actually inhabiting the bodies, but 124hanging or hovering about them and affecting them from the outside.
It has now been noted that the theory of souls recognizes that they can either exist independently or inhabit human, animal, or other bodies. Based on the idea that the general theory of spirits is modeled on the theory of souls, we can explain several important aspects of the lower philosophy of religion, which might seem pretty obscure or absurd without such clarification. Like souls, other spirits are thought to either exist and act freely in the world or become incorporated for varying periods into solid bodies. It’s important to securely understand this theory of Embodiment because, without it, we’ll be constantly faced with difficulties in grasping the nature of spirits as defined in lower animism. The theory of embodiment serves several crucial purposes in primitive and barbaric philosophy. On one hand, it explains the phenomena of morbid exaltation and mental disturbances, especially regarding abnormal expressions, and this perspective extends so far as to create a nearly universal doctrine of disease. On the other hand, it allows the primitive person to either 'lay' a harmful spirit into some other body to get rid of it or to carry around a beneficial spirit for their service within a material object, setting it up as a deity for worship in the body of an animal or in a block, stone, image, or anything else that contains the spirit like a vessel contains a liquid: this is the key to strict fetishism and significantly contributes to idolatry. In briefly examining these various aspects of the Embodiment theory, we can conveniently include certain groups of cases that are often nearly indistinguishable. These cases theoretically relate more to obsession than possession, as the spirits do not actually inhabit the bodies but instead hang or hover around them, influencing them from the outside.
As in normal conditions the man’s soul, inhabiting his body, is held to give it life, to think, speak, and act through it, so an adaptation of the self-same principle explains abnormal conditions of body or mind, by considering the new symptoms as due to the operation of a second soul-like being, a strange spirit. The possessed man, tossed and shaken in fever, pained and wrenched as though some live creature were tearing or twisting him within, pining as though it were devouring his vitals day by day, rationally finds a personal spiritual cause for his sufferings. In hideous dreams he may even sometimes see the very ghost or nightmare-fiend that plagues him. Especially when the mysterious unseen power throws him helpless on the ground, jerks and writhes him in convulsions, makes him leap upon the bystanders with a giant’s strength and a wild beast’s ferocity, impels him, with distorted face and frantic gesture, and voice not his own nor seemingly even human, to pour forth wild incoherent raving, or with thought and eloquence beyond his sober faculties to command, to counsel, to foretell—such a one seems to those who watch him, and even to himself, to have become the mere instrument of a spirit which has seized him or entered into him, a possessing demon in whose personality the patient believes so implicitly that he often imagines a personal name for it, which it can declare when it speaks in its own voice and character through his organs of speech; at last, quitting the medium’s spent and jaded body, the intruding spirit departs as it came. This is the savage theory of dæmoniacal possession and obsession, which has been for ages, and still remains, the dominant theory of disease and inspiration among the lower races. It is obviously based on an animistic interpretation, most genuine and rational in its proper place in man’s intellectual history, of the actual symptoms of the cases. The general doctrine of disease-spirits and oracle-spirits appears to have its earliest, broadest, and most consistent 125position within the limits of savagery. When we have gained a clear idea of it in this its original home, we shall be able to trace it along from grade to grade of civilization, breaking away piecemeal under the influence of new medical theories, yet sometimes expanding in revival, and at least in lingering survival holding its place into the midst of our modern life. The possession-theory is not merely known to us by the statements of those who describe diseases in accordance with it. Disease being accounted for by attack of spirits, it naturally follows that to get rid of these spirits is the proper means of cure. Thus the practices of the exorcist appear side by side with the doctrine of possession, from its first appearance in savagery to its survival in modern civilization; and nothing could display more vividly the conception of a disease or a mental affection as caused by a personal spiritual being than the proceedings of the exorcist who talks to it, coaxes or threatens it, makes offerings to it, entices or drives it out of the patient’s body, and induces it to take up its abode in some other. That the two great effects ascribed to such spiritual influence in obsession and possession, namely, the infliction of ailments and the inspiration of oracles, are not only mixed up together but often run into absolute coincidence, accords with the view that both results are referred to one common cause. Also that the intruding or invading spirit may be either a human soul or may belong to some other class in the spiritual hierarchy, countenances the opinion that the possession-theory is derived from, and indeed modelled on, the ordinary theory of the soul acting on the body. In illustrating the doctrine by typical examples from the enormous mass of available details, it will hardly be possible to discriminate among the operating spirits, between those which are souls and those which are demons, nor to draw an exact line between obsession by a demon outside and possession by a demon inside, nor between the condition of the demon-tormented patient and the demon-actuated doctor, seer, or priest. In a word, the confusion of these conceptions in the 126savage mind only fairly represents their intimate connexion in the Possession-theory itself.
As in normal circumstances, a person's soul lives within their body to give it life, think, speak, and act through it, a similar principle can explain abnormal conditions of the body or mind. This happens when new symptoms are seen as caused by a second soul-like entity, a strange spirit. The person experiencing possession, overwhelmed by fever, discomforted and strained as if a living creature is tearing or twisting them from within, suffering as if it is consuming them slowly, rationally finds a personal spiritual cause for their pain. In horrific dreams, they may sometimes even see the very ghost or nightmare that torments them. Especially when this mysterious unseen force leaves them helpless on the ground, twisting and jerking them in convulsions, causing them to leap upon bystanders with extraordinary strength and wild ferocity, driving them to speak with a distorted face and frantic gestures, and with a voice that isn't their own, they might cry out wild, incoherent rants or, with unexpected clarity and eloquence, command, advise, or predict events. To those observing and even to themselves, they seem to become a mere instrument of a spirit that has taken over their body, a possessing demon. This person often believes so strongly in this entity that they might even imagine a personal name for it, which it can reveal when it speaks through them. Eventually, the invading spirit, having exhausted the host's body, leaves just as it arrived. This is the primitive theory of demonic possession and obsession, which has existed for ages and continues to be the prevailing theory of illness and inspiration among less developed cultures. It is evidently based on an animistic interpretation, which is quite genuine and logical in its appropriate context in human intellectual history, of the actual symptoms observed. The broader idea of disease spirits and oracle spirits seems to find its earliest, most widespread, and consistent roots in primitive cultures. Once we understand this theory in its original context, we can trace its evolution through different stages of civilization, where it gradually faded under the influence of new medical ideas, yet occasionally resurfaced or lingered on into our modern lives. The possession theory is not only recognized through reports from those who attribute illnesses to it. If illness is believed to be caused by spirit attacks, it's natural to think that driving these spirits away is the correct way to heal. Thus, the practices of exorcists appear alongside the possession doctrine from its earliest days in primitive society to its remnants in today's civilization. Nothing exemplifies more clearly the idea of a disease or mental issue caused by a personal spiritual entity than the actions of an exorcist, who talks to the spirit, persuades or threatens it, makes offerings, entices or drives it out of the patient, and prompts it to reside elsewhere. The two main effects attributed to this spiritual influence, obsession, and possession—namely, causing ailments and delivering oracles—are not only intertwined but often completely overlap, supporting the view that both results stem from the same underlying cause. Additionally, that the invading spirit may either be a human soul or belong to another type within the spiritual hierarchy suggests that the possession theory is derived from, and indeed shaped by, the standard theory of the soul's interaction with the body. When illustrating this doctrine with typical examples from the vast array of details available, it will likely be impossible to distinguish among the spirits at play—between those that are souls and those that are demons, or to draw a clear line between external demon obsession and internal demon possession, or between the state of a demon-afflicted patient and a demon-guided doctor, seer, or priest. In summary, the confusion of these concepts in the primitive mind accurately reflects their close connection within the Possession theory itself.
In the Australian-Tasmanian district, disease and death are ascribed to more or less defined spiritual influences; descriptions of a demon working a sorcerer’s wicked will by coming slyly behind his victim and hitting him with his club on the back of his neck, and of a dead man’s ghost angered by having his name uttered, and creeping up into the utterer’s body to consume his liver, are indeed peculiarly graphic details of savage animism.[264] The theory of disease-spirits is well stated in its extreme form among the Mintira, a low race of the Malay peninsula. Their ‘hantu’ or spirits have among their functions that of causing ailments; thus the ‘hantu kalumbahan’ causes small-pox; the ‘hantu kamang’ brings on inflammation and swellings in the hands and feet; when a person is wounded, the ‘hantu pari’ fastens on the wound and sucks, and this is the cause of the blood flowing. And thus, as the describer says, ‘To enumerate the remainder of the hantus would be merely to convert the name of every species of disease known to the Mintira into a proper one. If any new disease appeared, it would be ascribed to a hantu bearing the same name.’[265] It will help us to an idea of the distinct personality which the disease-demon has in the minds of the lower races, to notice the Orang Laut of this district placing thorns and brush in the paths leading to a part where small-pox had broken out, to keep the demons off; just as the Khonds of Orissa try with thorns, and ditches, and stinking oil poured on the ground, to barricade the paths to their hamlets against the goddess of small-pox, Jugah Pennu.[266] Among the Dayaks of Borneo, ‘to have been smitten by a spirit’ is to be ill; sickness may be caused 127by invisible spirits inflicting invisible wounds with invisible spears, or entering men’s bodies and driving out their souls, or lodging in their hearts and making them raving mad. In the Indian Archipelago, the personal semi-human nature of the disease-spirits is clearly acknowledged by appeasing them with feasts and dances and offerings of food set out for them away in the woods, to induce them to quit their victims, or by sending tiny proas to sea with offerings, that spirits which have taken up their abode in sick men’s bowels may embark and not come back.[267] The animistic theory of disease is strongly marked in Polynesia, where every sickness is ascribed to spiritual action of deities, brought on by the offerings of enemies, or by the victim’s violation of the laws of tapu. Thus in New Zealand each ailment is caused by a spirit, particularly an infant or undeveloped human spirit, which sent into the patient’s body gnaws and feeds inside; and the exorcist, finding the path by which such a disease-spirit came from below to feed on the vitals of a sick relative, will persuade it by a charm to get upon a flax-stalk and set off home. We hear, too, of an idea of the parts of the body—forehead, breast, stomach, feet, &c.—being apportioned each to a deity who inflicts aches and pains and ailments there.[268] So in the Samoan group, when a man was near death, people were anxious to part on good terms with him, feeling assured that if he died with angry feelings towards any one, he would certainly return and bring calamity on that person or some one closely allied to him. This was considered a frequent source of disease and death, the spirit of a departed member of the family returning and taking up his abode in the head, chest, or stomach of a living man, and so causing sickness and death. If a man died suddenly, it was thought that he was 128eaten by the spirit that took him; and though the soul of one thus devoured would go to the common spirit-land of the departed, yet it would have no power of speech there, and if questioned could but beat its breast. It completes this account to notice that the disease-inflicting souls of the departed were the same which possessed the living under more favourable circumstances, coming to talk through a certain member of the family, prophesying future events, and giving directions as to family affairs.[269] Farther east, in the Georgian and Society Islands, evil demons are sent to scratch and tear people into convulsions and hysterics, to torment poor wretches as with barbed hooks, or to twist and knot inside them till they die writhing in agony. But madmen are to be treated with great respect, as entered by a god, and idiots owe the kindness with which they are appeased and coaxed to the belief in their superhuman inspiration.[270] Here, and elsewhere in the lower culture, the old real belief has survived which has passed into a jest of civilized men in the famous phrase of the ‘inspired idiot.’
In the Australian-Tasmanian region, people attribute illness and death to various spiritual influences. There are vivid descriptions of a demon sneaking up on its victim and hitting them on the back of the neck, or a ghost of a dead person getting angry when their name is spoken, creeping into the speaker’s body to consume their liver. These are striking examples of primal animism.[264] The concept of disease spirits is clearly articulated in its extreme form among the Mintira, a low community from the Malay peninsula. Their 'hantu,' or spirits, are believed to cause illnesses; for example, the 'hantu kalumbahan' is responsible for smallpox, and the 'hantu kamang' causes inflammation and swelling in the hands and feet. When someone is wounded, the 'hantu pari' latches onto the wound and sucks, causing the blood to flow. As described, ‘Listing the other hantus would simply turn every known disease among the Mintira into a proper name. If a new disease emerged, it would be attributed to a hantu carrying the same name.’[265] To understand the distinct personality of the disease demon in the minds of lower races, consider the Orang Laut in this area placing thorns and brush in paths leading to a location where smallpox has broken out to ward off the demons. Similarly, the Khonds from Orissa use thorns, ditches, and foul oil poured on the ground to barricade their village paths against the smallpox goddess, Jugah Pennu.[266] Among the Dayaks of Borneo, being ‘struck by a spirit’ means being ill; sickness may come from invisible spirits dealing invisible wounds with invisible spears, or from spirits entering people’s bodies, driving out their souls, or residing in their hearts and causing madness. In the Indian Archipelago, the semi-human aspect of disease spirits is acknowledged, as people attempt to appease them with feasts, dances, and food offerings left in the woods, hoping they will leave their victims alone, or by sending small boats to sea with offerings so the spirits residing in the sick men's bodies can leave and not return.[267] The animistic view of disease is prominent in Polynesia, where every illness is thought to be a result of spiritual actions by deities, triggered by enemies' offerings or a victim's breaches of tapu laws. In New Zealand, each sickness is believed to be caused by a spirit, often a young or undeveloped human spirit, that enters the patient’s body to munch on their insides. An exorcist will trace the route a spirit took from below to consume the insides of a sick relative and will use a charm to persuade it to climb a flax stalk and go home. There’s also a belief that different body parts—like the forehead, chest, stomach, and feet—are linked to various deities who inflict pain and ailments there.[268] In the Samoan islands, when someone is close to death, people are eager to part ways on good terms. They believe that if a person dies with anger towards someone, they'll likely return to bring misfortune to that person or someone close to them. This was seen as a common cause of illness and death, where the spirit of a deceased family member comes back to inhabit the head, chest, or stomach of a living person, causing disease and death. If someone dies suddenly, it was thought that they were devoured by the spirit that took them. Although the soul of a devoured person would go to the communal spirit land of the deceased, it would lose the ability to speak there and would only be able to beat its chest if questioned. Additionally, the souls that cause diseases among the living are the same ones that can possess them under better circumstances, coming back to communicate through a family member to prophesy future events or guide family matters.[269] Further east, in the Georgian and Society Islands, malevolent demons are said to attack people, causing convulsions and hysteria, torturing individuals like they are hooked, or twisting and knotting inside until they die in pain. However, the mad are treated with great respect as they are believed to be inhabited by a god, and idiot individuals receive kindness based on the belief in their superhuman inspiration.[270] Here, as well as in other parts of lower culture, the ancient genuine belief persists, which has been turned into a joke by civilized people in the famous phrase ‘inspired idiot.’
American ethnography carries on the record of rude races ascribing disease to the action of evil spirits. Thus the Dacotas believe that the spirits punish them for misconduct, especially for neglecting to make feasts for the dead; these spirits have the power to send the spirit of something, as of a bear, deer, turtle, fish, tree, stone, worm, or deceased person, which entering the patient causes disease; the medicine-man’s cure consists in reciting charms over him, singing ‘He-le-li-lah, &c.,’ to the accompaniment of a gourd-rattle with beads inside, ceremonially shooting a symbolic bark representation of the intruding creature, sucking over the seat of pain to get the spirit out, and 129firing guns at it as it is supposed to be escaping.[271] Such processes were in full vogue in the West Indies in the time of Columbus, when Friar Roman Pane put on record his quaint account of the native sorcerer pulling the disease off the patient’s legs (as one pulls off a pair of trousers), going out of doors to blow it away, and bidding it begone to the mountain or the sea; the performance concluding with the regular sucking-cure and the pretended extraction of some stone or bit of flesh, or such thing, which the patient is assured that his patron-spirit or deity (cemi) put into him to cause the disease, in punishment for neglect to build him a temple or honour him with prayer or offerings of goods.[272] Patagonians considered sickness as caused by a spirit entering the patient’s body; ‘they believe every sick person to be possessed of an evil demon; hence their physicians always carry a drum with figures of devils painted on it, which they strike at the beds of sick persons to drive out from the body the evil demon which causes the disorder.’[273] In Africa, according to the philosophy of the Basutos and the Zulus, the causes of disease are the ghosts of the dead, come to draw the living to themselves, or to compel them to sacrifice meat-offerings. They are recognized by the diviners, or by the patient himself, who sees in dreams the departed spirit come to torment him. Congo tribes in like manner consider the souls of the dead, passed into the ranks of powerful spirits, to cause disease and death among mankind. Thus, in both these districts, medicine becomes an almost entirely religious matter of propitiatory sacrifice and prayer addressed to the disease-inflicting manes. The 130Barolong give a kind of worship to deranged persons, as being under the direct influence of a deity; while in East Africa the explanation of madness and idiocy is simple and typical—‘he has fiends.’[274] Negroes of West Africa, on the supposition that an attack of illness has been caused by some spiritual being, can ascertain to their satisfaction what manner of spirit has done it, and why. The patient may have neglected his ‘wong’ or fetish-spirit, who has therefore made him ill; or it may be his own ‘kla’ or personal guardian-spirit, who on being summoned explains that he has not been treated respectfully enough, &c.; or it may be a ‘sisa’ or ghost of some dead man, who has taken this means of making known that he wants perhaps a gold ornament that was left behind when he died.[275] Of course, the means of cure will then be to satisfy the demands of the spirit. Another aspect of the negro doctrine of disease-spirits is displayed in the following description from Guinea, by the Rev. J. L. Wilson, the missionary:—‘Demoniacal possessions are common, and the feats performed by those who are supposed to be under such influence are certainly not unlike those described in the New Testament. Frantic gestures, convulsions, foaming at the mouth, feats of supernatural strength, furious ravings, bodily lacerations, gnashing of teeth, and other things of a similar character, may be witnessed in most of the cases which are supposed to be under diabolical influence.’[276] The remark several times made by travellers is no doubt true, that the spiritualistic theory of disease has tended strongly to prevent progress in the medical art among the lower races. Thus among the Bodo and Dhimal of North-East India, who ascribe all diseases to a deity tormenting the patient for some impiety or neglect, the exorcists divine the offended 131god and appease him with the promised sacrifice of a hog; these exorcists are a class of priests, and the people have no other doctors.[277] Where the world-wide doctrine of disease-demons has held sway, men’s minds, full of spells and ceremonies, have scarce had room for thought of drugs and regimen.
American ethnography documents how primitive cultures attribute illness to evil spirits. For instance, the Dacotas believe that spirits punish them for wrongdoing, particularly for failing to hold feasts for the deceased; these spirits can send the essence of various beings, such as a bear, deer, turtle, fish, tree, stone, worm, or a dead person, into the patient, causing illness. The medicine man's treatment involves chanting charms, singing "He-le-li-lah, etc.," while playing a gourd rattle filled with beads, symbolically shooting a representation of the offending creature made of bark, sucking at the painful area to extract the spirit, and shooting guns at it as it supposedly tries to flee. Such practices were also common in the West Indies during Columbus's time, when Friar Roman Pane recorded his unique account of a local sorcerer pulling disease off a patient's legs (as if removing trousers), stepping outside to blow it away, and sending it off to the mountain or sea; the performance would end with a sucking cure and the supposed removal of some stone or flesh that the patient is told his patron spirit or god (cemi) put inside him as punishment for not building him a temple or honoring him with prayers or offerings. Patagonians regard illness as the result of a spirit entering a person's body; they believe every sick person is possessed by an evil demon, which is why their healers carry drums painted with devil figures, banging them at the beds of sick individuals to drive out the evil spirit causing the illness. In Africa, according to the beliefs of the Basutos and the Zulus, disease is caused by the ghosts of the dead coming back to draw the living to them or compel them to make meat offerings. These spirits are recognized by diviners or by the patient who dreams of the departed spirit tormenting him. Congo tribes similarly hold that the souls of the dead, now powerful spirits, cause sickness and death among people. Thus, in these regions, medicine becomes largely a religious matter involving sacrificial offerings and prayers directed towards the vengeful spirits. The Barolong give a form of worship to mentally ill individuals since they see them as being influenced directly by a deity; meanwhile, in East Africa, the explanation for madness and idiocy is straightforward and typical—“he has fiends.” West Africans believe that if a person falls ill, it results from some spiritual entity, and they can usually determine what kind of spirit caused it and why. The patient may have failed to care for his 'wong' or fetish spirit, resulting in illness; it might be his own 'kla' or personal guardian spirit, who, when called upon, explains that he hasn't been respected properly, etc.; or it might be a 'sisa' or ghost of a deceased individual who has used this method to indicate that he desires a gold ornament left behind at his death. The remedy, of course, would be to meet the spirit's demands. Another element of the African belief in disease spirits is illustrated by the following description from Guinea by the missionary Rev. J. L. Wilson: “Demonic possessions are common, and the actions of those believed to be under such influences resemble those described in the New Testament. Frantic gestures, convulsions, frothing at the mouth, supernatural feats of strength, wild raving, self-inflicted injuries, grinding of teeth, and similar occurrences can be seen in most cases thought to be under devilish influence.” The observation made by travelers that the spiritual theory of disease has significantly hindered advancements in medical practice among lower races is likely accurate. For example, among the Bodo and Dhimal of North-East India, who blame all diseases on a deity punishing the patient for some offense or neglect, the exorcists identify the offended god and appease him with a promised offering of a hog; these exorcists are a group of priests, and the community has no other medical practitioners. In places where the belief in disease demons prevails, people's minds, saturated with spells and rituals, have seldom had the opportunity to consider treatments involving drugs and health management.
The cases in which disease-possession passes into oracle-possession are especially connected with hysterical, convulsive, and epileptic affections. Mr. Backhouse describes a Tasmanian native sorcerer, ‘affected with fits of spasmodic contraction of the muscles of one breast, which he attributes, as they do all other diseases, to the devil’; this malady served to prove his inspiration to his people.[278] When Dr. Mason was preaching near a village of heathen Pwo, a man fell down in an epileptic fit, his familiar spirit having come over him to forbid the people to listen to the missionary, and he sang out his denunciations like one frantic. This man was afterwards converted, and told the missionary that ‘he could not account for his former exercises, but that it certainly appeared to him as though a spirit spoke, and he must tell what was communicated.’ In this Karen district flourishes the native ‘wee’ or prophet, whose business is to work himself into the state in which he can see departed spirits, visit their distant home, and even recall them to the body, thus raising the dead; these wees are nervous excitable men, such as would become mediums, and in giving oracles they go into actual convulsions.[279] Dr. Callaway’s details of the state of the Zulu diviners are singularly instructive. Their symptoms are ascribed to possession by ‘amatongo’ or ancestral spirits; the disease is common, from some it departs of its own accord, others have the ghost laid which causes it, and others let the affection take its course and become professional diviners, whose powers of finding hidden things and giving apparently inaccessible 132information are vouched for by native witnesses, who at the same time are not blind to their tricks and their failures. The most perfect description is that of a hysterical visionary, who had ‘the disease which precedes the power to divine.’ This man describes that well-known symptom of hysteria, the heavy weight creeping up within him to his shoulders, his vivid dreams, his waking visions of objects that are not there when he approaches, the songs that come to him without learning, the sensation of flying in the air. This man was ‘of a family who are very sensitive, and become doctors.’[280] Persons whose constitutional unsoundness induces morbid manifestations are indeed marked out by nature to become seers and sorcerers. Among the Patagonians, patients seized with falling sickness or St. Vitus’s dance were at once selected for magicians, as chosen by the demons themselves who possessed, distorted, and convulsed them.[281] Among Siberian tribes, the shamans select children liable to convulsions as suitable to be brought up to the profession, which is apt to become hereditary with the epileptic tendencies it belongs to.[282] Thus, even in the lower culture, a class of sickly brooding enthusiasts begin to have that power over the minds of their lustier fellows, which they have kept in so remarkable a way through the course of history.
The situations where illness-related possession turns into oracle-related possession are particularly linked with hysteria, convulsions, and epilepsy. Mr. Backhouse mentions a Tasmanian native sorcerer who suffers from spasms in one breast, which he attributes, like all other illnesses, to the devil; this condition served to demonstrate his inspiration to his community.[278] When Dr. Mason was preaching near a village of pagan Pwo, a man collapsed in an epileptic fit, his familiar spirit having taken over to warn the people not to listen to the missionary, and he shouted his condemnations like he was out of control. This man later converted and told the missionary that he couldn't explain his earlier episodes, but it seemed to him as if a spirit was speaking, and he had to convey what was communicated. In this Karen area, the local ‘wee’ or prophet thrives, whose role is to enter a state where he can see departed spirits, visit their distant homes, and even bring them back to the body, essentially raising the dead; these wees are excitable, nervous men who can become mediums, and while giving oracles, they actually go into convulsions.[279] Dr. Callaway’s observations on the Zulu diviners are particularly enlightening. Their symptoms are attributed to possession by ‘amatongo’ or ancestral spirits; the affliction is common, some are cured spontaneously, others have the ghost that causes it laid to rest, and some let the condition take its course and become professional diviners, whose abilities to uncover hidden things and provide otherwise unavailable information are confirmed by native witnesses, who are also aware of their tricks and failures. The most accurate description is of a hysterical visionary, who had ‘the disease that precedes the power to divine.’ This man describes the well-known symptom of hysteria, the heavy feeling creeping up within him to his shoulders, his vivid dreams, his waking visions of things that aren't there when he gets closer, the songs that come to him without having to learn them, and the feeling of flying in the air. This man was ‘from a family that is very sensitive, and become doctors.’[280] People whose inherent vulnerabilities lead to unhealthy manifestations are indeed marked by nature to become seers and sorcerers. Among the Patagonians, individuals struck by epilepsy or St. Vitus’s dance were immediately chosen to be magicians, as selected by the demons that possessed, distorted, and convulsed them.[281] Among Siberian tribes, shamans choose children prone to convulsions as suitable for the profession, which tends to become hereditary with the epileptic traits that accompany it.[282] Thus, even within lower cultures, a class of sickly, introspective enthusiasts begins to exert control over the minds of their more vigorous peers, maintaining this influence remarkably throughout history.
Morbid oracular manifestations are habitually excited on purpose, and moreover the professional sorcerer commonly exaggerates or wholly feigns them. In the more genuine manifestations the medium may be so intensely wrought upon by the idea that a possessing spirit is speaking from within him, that he may not only give this spirit’s name and speak in its character, but possibly may in good faith alter his voice to suit the spiritual utterance. This gift of spirit-utterance, which belongs to ‘ventriloquism’ in the ancient and proper sense of the term, of course lapses into sheer 133trickery. But that the phenomena should be thus artificially excited or dishonestly counterfeited, rather confirms than alters the present argument. Real or simulated, the details of oracle-possession alike illustrate popular belief. The Patagonian wizard begins his performance with drumming and rattling till the real or pretended epileptic fit comes on by the demon entering him, who then answers questions from within him with a faint and mournful voice.[283] In Southern India and Ceylon the so-called ‘devil-dancers’ have to work themselves into paroxysms, to gain the inspiration whereby they profess to cure their patients.[284] So, with furious dancing to the music and chanting of the attendants, the Bodo priest brings on the fit of maniacal inspiration in which the deity fills him and gives oracles through him.[285] In Kamchatka the female shamans, when Billukai came down into them in a thunderstorm, would prophesy; or, receiving spirits with a cry of ‘hush!’ their teeth chattered as in fever, and they were ready to divine.[286] Among the Singpho of South-East Asia, when the ‘natzo’ or conjurer is sent for to a sick patient, he calls on his ‘nat’ or demon, the soul of a deceased foreign prince, who descends into him and gives the required answers.[287] In the Pacific Islands, spirits of the dead would enter for a time the body of a living man, inspiring him to declare future events, or to execute some commission from the higher deities. The symptoms of oracular possession among savages have been especially well described in this region of the world. The Fijian priest sits looking steadfastly at a whale’s tooth ornament, amid dead silence. In a few minutes he trembles, slight twitchings of face and limbs come on, which increase to strong convulsions, with swelling of the veins, murmurs and sobs. Now the god has entered 134him, and with eyes rolling and protruding, unnatural voice, pale face and livid lips, sweat streaming from every pore, and the whole aspect of a furious madman, he gives the divine answer, and then, the symptoms subsiding, he looks round with a vacant stare, and the deity returns to the land of spirits. In the Sandwich Islands, where the god Oro thus gave his oracles, his priest ceased to act or speak as a voluntary agent, but with his limbs convulsed, his features distorted and terrific, his eyes wild and strained, he would roll on the ground foaming at the mouth, and reveal the will of the possessing god in shrill cries and sounds violent and indistinct, which the attending priests duly interpreted to the people. In Tahiti, it was often noticed that men who in the natural state showed neither ability nor eloquence, would in such convulsive delirium burst forth into earnest lofty declamation, declaring the will and answers of the gods, and prophesying future events, in well-knit harangues full of the poetic figure and metaphor of the professional orator. But when the fit was over, and sober reason returned, the prophet’s gifts were gone.[288] Lastly, the accounts of oracular possession in Africa show the primitive ventriloquist in perfect types of morbid knavery. In Sofala, after a king’s funeral, his soul would enter into a sorcerer, and speaking in the familiar tones that all the bystanders recognized, would give counsel to the new monarch how to govern his people.[289] About a century ago, a negro fetish-woman of Guinea is thus described in the act of answering an enquirer who has come to consult her. She is crouching on the earth, with her head between her knees and her hands up to her face, till, becoming inspired by the fetish, she snorts and foams and gasps. Then the suppliant may put his question, ‘Will my friend or brother get well of this sickness?’—‘What shall I give thee to set him free from his sickness?’ and so 135forth. Then the fetish-woman answers in a thin, whistling voice, and with the old-fashioned idioms of generations past; and thus the suppliant receives his command, perhaps to kill a white cock and put him at a four-cross way, or tie him up for the fetish to come and fetch him, or perhaps merely to drive a dozen wooden pegs into the ground, so to bury his friend’s disease with them.[290]
Morbid prophetic displays are often deliberately induced, and professional sorcerers frequently exaggerate or completely fake them. In more genuine cases, the medium may be so deeply caught up in the belief that a spirit is speaking through them that they might not only provide the spirit’s name and speak in its voice but may genuinely change their tone to fit the spiritual message. This talent for spirit communication, related to ‘ventriloquism’ in the traditional sense, eventually degenerates into plain trickery. However, the fact that these phenomena are artificially provoked or deceitfully replicated only strengthens the current argument. Whether real or not, the details of oracle possession reflect common beliefs. The Patagonian wizard starts their act with drumming and rattling until they either genuinely or feign an epileptic seizure as a demon takes over, after which the spirit answers questions in a faint, mournful voice. In Southern India and Ceylon, so-called ‘devil-dancers’ must enter trances to gain the inspiration they claim is necessary to heal their patients. Similarly, with frenzied dancing to the music and chants of their followers, the Bodo priest evokes a state of frenzied inspiration in which the deity possesses them and delivers oracles. In Kamchatka, female shamans would prophesy when Billukai entered them during a thunderstorm; upon receiving spirits with a call of ‘hush!’, they would shiver as if in fever and prepare to divine. Among the Singpho in Southeast Asia, when a 'natzo' or conjurer is summoned to a sick person, they call upon their 'nat', the soul of a deceased foreign prince, who descends into them and provides the needed answers. In the Pacific Islands, spirits of the dead would temporarily inhabit a living person, urging them to predict future events or carry out tasks assigned by higher deities. The signs of oracle possession among indigenous people have been particularly well documented in this part of the world. The Fijian priest sits fixated on a whale's tooth pendant in complete silence. After a few minutes, he begins to tremble, experiencing slight facial and limb twitching that escalates into intense convulsions, accompanied by swollen veins, murmurs, and sobs. Now the god has entered him, and with rolling eyes, an unnatural voice, a pale face, livid lips, sweat pouring from every pore, and the demeanor of an enraged madman, he delivers the divine message. Once the symptoms fade, he looks around with a blank stare, and the deity retreats back to the spirit realm. In the Sandwich Islands, where the god Oro revealed his oracles, his priest would cease to act or speak voluntarily. Instead, with convulsed limbs, distorted features, wild and strained eyes, he would roll on the ground, foaming at the mouth, and convey the will of the deity in shrill, chaotic cries, which the attending priests would interpret for the community. In Tahiti, it was often noted that men who normally showed no skill or eloquence would erupt into passionate, elevated speeches during such convulsive episodes, conveying the commands and messages of the gods and forecasting future events in well-structured discourses rich with poetic imagery typical of a skilled orator. However, once the episode ended and clear thinking returned, the prophet's abilities vanished. Finally, accounts of oracle possession in Africa display the basic ventriloquist in clear examples of pathological deceit. In Sofala, following a king's funeral, his spirit would enter a sorcerer, speaking in familiar tones that everyone recognized, offering advice to the new king on how to lead his people. About a century ago, a fetish-woman in Guinea was described while answering an inquiry from someone seeking her counsel. She crouched on the ground with her head between her knees and hands covering her face until, inspired by the fetish, she snorted, foamed, and gasped. Then the petitioner could pose their question, ‘Will my friend or brother recover from this illness?’, ‘What should I do to cure him?’, and so on. The fetish-woman would respond in a thin, whistling voice, using the archaic phrases of past generations. Hence, the petitioner would receive their directive, which could involve sacrificing a white rooster at a crossroads, securing it for the fetish to collect later, or possibly just driving a dozen wooden pegs into the ground to bury their friend's illness with them.
The details of demoniacal possession among barbaric and civilized nations need no elaborate description, so simply do they continue the savage cases.[291] But the state of things we notice here agrees with the conclusion that the possession-theory belongs originally to the lower culture, and is gradually superseded by higher medical knowledge. Surveying its course through the middle and higher civilization, we shall notice first a tendency to limit it to certain peculiar and severe affections, especially connected with mental disorder, such as epilepsy, hysteria, delirium, idiocy, madness; and after this a tendency to abandon it altogether, in consequence of the persistent opposition of the medical faculty. Among the nations of South-East Asia, obsession and possessions by demons is strong at least in popular belief. The Chinese attacked with dizziness, or loss of the use of his limbs, or other unaccountable disease, knows that he has been influenced by a malignant demon, or punished for some offence by a deity whose name he will mention, or affected by his wife of a former existence, whose spirit has after a long search discovered him. Exorcism of course exists, and when the evil spirit or influence is expelled, it is especially apt to enter some person standing near; hence the common saying, ‘idle spectators should not be present at an exorcism.’ Divination by possessed mediums is usual in China: among such is the professional woman who sits at a table in contemplation, till the soul of a deceased person from whom 136communication is desired enters her body and talks through her to the living; also the man into whom a deity is brought by invocations and mesmeric passes, when, assuming the divine figure and attitude, he pronounces the oracle.[292] In Burma, the fever-demon of the jungle seizes trespassers on his domain, and shakes them in ague till he is exorcised, while falls and apoplectic fits are the work of other spirits. The dancing of women by demoniacal possession is treated by the doctor covering their heads with a garment, and thrashing them soundly with a stick, the demon and not the patient being considered to feel the blows; the possessing spirit may be prevented from escaping by a knotted and charmed cord hung round the bewitched person’s neck, and when a sufficient beating has induced it to speak by the patient’s voice and declare its name and business, it may either be allowed to depart, or the doctor tramples on the patient’s stomach till the demon is stamped to death. For an example of invocation and offerings, one characteristic story told by Dr. Bastian will suffice. A Bengali cook was seized with an apoplectic fit, which his Burmese wife declared was but a just retribution, for the godless fellow had gone day after day to market to buy pounds and pounds of meat, yet in spite of her remonstrances would never give a morsel to the patron-spirit of the town; as a good wife, however, she now did her best for her suffering husband, placing near him little heaps of coloured rice for the ‘nat,’ and putting on his fingers rings with prayers addressed to the same offended being—‘Oh ride him not!’—‘Ah let him go!’—‘Grip him not so hard!’—‘Thou shalt have rice!’—‘Ah, how good that tastes!’ How explicitly Buddhism recognizes such ideas, may be judged from one of the questions officially put to candidates for admission as monks or talapoins—‘Art thou afflicted by madness or the other ills caused by giants, witches, or evil demons of the forest and mountain?’[293] Within our own domain of British India, 137the possession-theory and the rite of exorcism belonging to it may be perfectly studied to this day. There the doctrine of sudden ailment or nervous disease being due to a blast or possession by a ‘bhut,’ or being, that is, a demon, is recognized as of old; there the old witch who has possessed a man and made him sick or deranged, will answer spiritually out of his body and say who she is and where she lives; there the frenzied demoniac may be seen raving, writhing, tearing, bursting his bonds, till, subdued by the exorcist, his fury subsides, he stares and sighs, falls helpless to the ground, and comes to himself; and there the deities caused by excitement, singing, and incense to enter into men’s bodies, manifest their presence with the usual hysterical or epileptic symptoms, and speaking in their own divine name and personality, deliver oracles by the vocal organs of the inspired medium.[294]
The details of demonic possession among both primitive and advanced societies don't need extensive explanation, as they consistently reflect savage cases. [291] However, the situation we're observing aligns with the idea that the theory of possession originally belongs to lower cultures and is gradually being replaced by more developed medical knowledge. Looking at its progression through middle and advanced civilizations, we first notice a trend to restrict it to certain specific and severe conditions, particularly related to mental disorders like epilepsy, hysteria, delirium, insanity, and madness; and after that, a trend to completely abandon it due to ongoing pushback from the medical community. In Southeast Asia, the belief in demon possession and obsession remains strong among the people. A Chinese person experiencing dizziness, loss of mobility, or other unexplained illness believes they are being affected by a malevolent demon or punished by a deity, whose name they will share, or that they are impacted by a wife from a past life, whose spirit has found them after a long search. Exorcism is practiced, and when the evil spirit or influence is expelled, it often tends to enter someone standing nearby; hence the common saying, "idle spectators should not be present at an exorcism." In China, divination by possessed mediums is common: this includes professional women who sit at a table in meditation until the spirit of a deceased person they want to communicate with enters her body and speaks through her to the living; as well as men who bring a deity into themselves through invocations and mesmerizing gestures, and who, assuming the divine demeanor, deliver oracles. [292] In Burma, the fever-demon of the jungle attacks those who trespass into his territory, shaking them with chills until they are exorcised, while falls and stroke are attributed to other spirits. The doctor treats the frantic dancing of women possessed by demons by covering their heads with a cloth and beating them soundly with a stick, with the belief that the demon, not the patient, feels the blows; the possessing spirit can be prevented from escaping by a knotted and enchanted cord tied around the bewitched person's neck, and once a sufficient beating has compelled it to reveal its name and purpose through the patient's voice, it can either be allowed to leave, or the doctor may stomp on the patient's stomach until the demon is killed. For an example of invocation and offerings, a characteristic story told by Dr. Bastian suffices. A Bengali cook suffered a stroke, which his Burmese wife claimed was deserved punishment, as he had insisted on going to the market day after day to buy large amounts of meat but, despite her protests, never offered any to the town's patron spirit; as a devoted wife, she now did her best for her ill husband, placing little piles of colored rice near him for the ‘nat,’ and putting prayer rings on his fingers addressed to the same offended being—“Oh don’t let him ride him!”—“Ah, let him go!”—“Don’t hold him so tightly!”—“You’ll get rice!”—“Ah, how good that tastes!” Buddhism’s recognition of such ideas is evident in one of the questions officially asked to candidates for monastic admission—“Are you afflicted by madness or other ailments caused by giants, witches, or evil forest and mountain demons?” [293] In British India, the theory of possession and the rite of exorcism associated with it can still be perfectly observed today. The belief that sudden illness or nerve issues stem from being struck or possessed by a ‘bhut,’ or spirit, recognized as a demon, has deep roots; there, the old witch who has possessed and made a man sick or insane can spiritually respond outside his body, revealing her identity and whereabouts; there, the frenzied possessed individual can be seen raving, writhing, breaking free of their restraints until subdued by the exorcist, after which their rage calms, leaving them staring, sighing, and collapsing helplessly until they return to themselves; and there, the deities prompted by excitement, music, and incense enter people’s bodies, showing their presence through typical hysterical or epileptic symptoms, and speaking in their own divine names and identities, delivering oracles through the speech of the inspired medium. [294]
In the Ancient Babylonian-Assyrian texts, the exorcism-formulas show the doctrine of disease-demons in full development, and similar opinions were current in ancient Greece and Rome, to whose languages indeed our own owes the technical terms of the subject, such as ‘demoniac’ and ‘exorcist.’ Homer’s sick men racked with pain are tormented by a hateful demon (στυγερὸς δέ οἱ ἔχραε δαίμων). ‘Epilepsy’ (ἐπίληψις) was, as its name imports, the ‘seizure’ of the patient by a superhuman agent: the agent being more exactly defined in ‘nympholepsy,’ the state of being seized or possessed by a nymph, i.e., rapt or entranced (νυμφόληπτος, lymphatus). The causation of mental derangement and delirious utterance by spiritual possession was an accepted tenet of Greek philosophy. To be insane was simply to have an evil spirit, as when Sokrates said of those who denied demonic or spiritual knowledge, that they 138themselves were demoniac (δαιμονᾶν ἔφη), and Alexander ascribed to the influence of offended Dionysos the ungovernable drunken fury in which he killed his friend Kleitos; raving madness was obsession or possession by an evil demon (κἀκοδαιμονία). So the Romans called madmen ‘larvati,’ ‘larvarum pleni,’ full of ghosts. Patients possessed by demons stared and foamed, and the spirits spoke from within them by their voices. The craft of the exorcist was well known. As for oracular possession, its theory and practice remained in fullest vigour through the classic world, scarce altered from the times of lowest barbarism. Could a South Sea Islander have gone to Delphi to watch the convulsive struggles of the Pythia, and listen to her raving, shrieking utterances, he would have needed no explanation whatever of a rite so absolutely in conformity with his own savage philosophy.[295]
In the ancient Babylonian-Assyrian texts, the exorcism formulas show the fully developed belief in disease demons, and similar ideas were present in ancient Greece and Rome, which are the origins of many technical terms we use today, such as ‘demoniac’ and ‘exorcist.’ Homer’s sick characters, plagued by pain, are tormented by a hateful demon (The grim fate overtook him.). ‘Epilepsy’ (ἐπίληψις) literally means the ‘seizure’ of the patient by a superhuman force: this force is more specifically described in ‘nympholepsy,’ the condition of being seized or possessed by a nymph, meaning to be entranced or rapt (νυμφόληπτος, lymphatics). The belief that mental illness and delirious speech were caused by spiritual possession was an established concept in Greek philosophy. To be seen as insane simply meant to have an evil spirit, as Socrates noted about those who rejected the idea of demonic or spiritual knowledge, claiming they themselves were demoniac (πέθανε, είπε). Alexander attributed his uncontrollable drunken rage, where he killed his friend Cleitus, to the wrath of Dionysus; madness was seen as obsession or possession by an evil demon (κἀκοδαιμονία). Likewise, the Romans referred to madmen as ‘larvati,’ ‘larvarum full,’ meaning they were full of ghosts. Patients believed to be possessed would stare blankly and foam at the mouth, with the spirits speaking through them. The skills of the exorcist were well recognized. As for the practice of oracular possession, its theory and approach remained robust throughout the classical world, hardly changing since the times of primitive barbarism. If a South Sea Islander had traveled to Delphi to observe the convulsive struggles of the Pythia and listen to her frenzied, shrieking proclamations, he would have needed no explanation for a rite that aligned perfectly with his own primal beliefs.[295]
The Jewish doctrine of possession[296] at no time in its long course exercised a direct influence on the opinion of the civilized world comparable to that produced by the mentions of demoniacal possession in the New Testament. It is needless to quote here even a selection from the familiar passages of the Gospels and Acts which display the manner in which certain described symptoms were currently accounted for in public opinion. Regarding these documents from an ethnographic point of view, it need only be said that they prove, incidentally but absolutely, that Jews and Christians at that time held the doctrine which had prevailed for ages before, and continued to prevail for ages after, referring to possession and obsession by spirits the symptoms of mania, epilepsy, dumbness, delirious and oracular utterance, and other morbid conditions, mental and bodily.[297] Modern missionary works, such as have been cited 139here, give the most striking evidence of the correspondence of these demoniac symptoms with such as may still be observed among uncivilized races. During the early centuries of Christianity, demoniacal possession indeed becomes peculiarly conspicuous, perhaps not from unusual prevalence of the animistic theory of disease, but simply because a period of intense religious excitement brought it more than usually into requisition. Ancient ecclesiastical records describe, under the well-known names of ‘dæmoniacs’ (δαιμονιζόμενοι), ‘possessed’ (κατεχόμενοι), ‘energumens’ (ἐνεργούμενοι), the class of persons whose bodies are seized or possessed by an evil spirit; such attacks being frequently attended with great commotions and vexations and disturbances of the body, occasioning sometimes frenzy and madness, sometimes epileptic fits, and other violent tossings and contortions. These energumens formed a recognised part of an early Christian congregation, a standing-place apart being assigned to them in the church. The church indeed seems to have been the principal habitation of these afflicted creatures, they were occupied out of service-time in such work as sweeping, daily food was provided for them, and they were under the charge of a special order of clergy, the exorcists, whose religious function was to cast out devils by prayer and adjuration and laying on of hands. As to the usual symptoms of possession, Justin, Tertullian, Chrysostom, Cyril, Minucius, Cyprian, and other early Fathers, give copious descriptions of demons entering into the bodies of men, disordering their health and minds, driving them to wander among the tombs, forcing them to writhe and wallow and rave and foam, howling and declaring their own diabolical names by the patients’ voices, but when overcome by conjuration or by blows administered to their victims, quitting the bodies they had entered, and acknowledging the pagan deities to be but devils.[298]
The Jewish belief in possession[296] has never had a direct impact on the civilized world's views like the references to demonic possession found in the New Testament. There's no need to quote even a selection from the well-known passages in the Gospels and Acts, which show how the symptoms described were commonly understood by the public at the time. Looking at these documents from an ethnographic perspective, it is evident that both Jews and Christians then adhered to a belief that had been around for centuries, which continued into the future, regarding possession and obsession by spirits. This belief encompassed symptoms of mania, epilepsy, muteness, delirium, prophetic speech, and other mental and physical ailments.[297] Modern missionary work, as cited139, provides striking evidence of the similarities between these demonic symptoms and those observed in uncivilized cultures today. In the early centuries of Christianity, demonic possession became especially noticeable, not necessarily due to a rise in the belief in disease as a result of spirit possession, but simply because a period of intense religious fervor brought it into focus. Ancient church records refer to those believed to be afflicted by evil spirits using terms like ‘dæmoniacs’ (demon-possessed), ‘possessed’ (occupied), and ‘energumens’ (working), describing people whose bodies were overtaken by evil spirits. Such episodes often led to significant commotion, physical disturbances, and could result in fits of madness, epilepsy, and other extreme behaviors. These energumens were recognized as a part of the early Christian community, with designated areas in churches for them. The church appeared to have been their main residence; they were given tasks like cleaning, provided daily meals, and were overseen by a special group of clergy known as exorcists, whose role was to expel demons through prayer, religious rituals, and laying on of hands. Regarding the typical symptoms of possession, early Church Fathers like Justin, Tertullian, Chrysostom, Cyril, Minucius, Cyprian, and others provided detailed accounts of demons entering humans, disrupting their health and sanity, causing them to roam graveyards, writhe, rave, and foam at the mouth, loudly revealing their infernal names through the afflicted, and eventually leaving the bodies they had invaded when confronted by exorcisms or physical force, while recognizing that pagan deities were merely devils.[298]
140On a subject so familiar to educated readers I may be excused from citing at length a vast mass of documents, barbaric in nature and only more or less civilized in circumstance, to illustrate the continuance of the doctrine of possession and the rite of exorcism through the middle ages and into modern times. A few salient examples will suffice. For a type of medical details, we may instance the recipes in the ‘Early English Leechdoms’: a cake of the ‘thost’ of a white hound baked with meal is to be taken against the attack by dwarves (i.e. convulsions); a drink of herbs worked up off clear ale with the aid of garlic, holy water, and singing of masses, is to be drunk by a fiend-sick patient out of a church bell. Philosophical argument may be followed in the dissertations of the ‘Malleus Maleficarum,’ concerning demons substantially inhabiting men and causing illness in them, enquiries which may be pursued under the auspices of Glanvil in the ‘Saducismus Triumphatus.’ Historical anecdote bears record of the convulsive clairvoyant demon who possessed Nicola Aubry, and under the Bishop of Laon’s exorcism testified in an edifying manner to the falsity of Calvinism; of Charles VI. of France, who was possessed, and whose demon a certain priest tried in vain to transfer into the bodies of twelve men who were chained up to receive it; of the German woman at Elbingerode who in a fit of toothache wished the devil might enter into her teeth, and who was possessed by six demons accordingly, which gave their names as Schalk der Wahrheit, Wirk, Widerkraut, Myrrha, Knip, Stüp; of George Lukins of Yatton, whom seven devils threw into fits and talked and sang and barked out of, and who was delivered by a solemn exorcism by seven clergymen at the Temple Church at Bristol in the year 1788.[299] A strong 141sense of the permanence of the ancient doctrine may be gained from accounts of the state of public opinion in Europe, from Greece and Italy to France, where within the last century derangement and hysteria were still popularly ascribed to possession and treated by exorcism, just as in the dark ages.[300] In the year 1861, at Morzine, at the south of the Lake of Geneva, there might be seen in full fury an epidemic of diabolical possession worthy of a Red Indian settlement or a negro kingdom of West Africa, an outburst which the exorcisms of a superstitious priest had so aggravated that there were a hundred and ten raving demoniacs in that single village.[301] The following is from a letter written in 1862 by Mgr. Anouilh, a French missionary-bishop in China. ‘Le croiriez-vous? dix villages se sont convertis. Le diable est furieux et fait les cent coups. Il y a eu, pendant les quinze jours que je viens de prêcher, cinq ou six possessions. Nos catéchumènes avec l’eau bénite chassent les diables, guérissent les malades. J’ai vu des choses merveilleuses. Le diable m’est d’un grand secours pour convertir les païens. Comme au temps de Notre-Seigneur, quoique père du mensonge, il ne peut s’empêcher de dire la vérité. Voyez ce pauvre possédé faisant mille contorsions et disant à grands cris: “Pourquoi prêches-tu la vraie religion? Je ne puis souffrir que tu m’enlèves mes disciples.”—“Comment t’appelles-tu?” lui demande le catéchiste. Après quelques refus: “Je suis l’envoyé de Lucifer”—“Combien êtes-vous?”—“Nous sommes vingt-deux.” “L’eau bénite et le signe de la croix ont délivré ce possédé.”’[302] To conclude the series with a modern spiritualistic instance, 142one of those where the mediums feel themselves entered and acted through by a spirit other than their own soul. The Rev. Mr. West of Philadelphia describes how a certain possessed medium went through the sword exercise, and fell down senseless; when he came to himself again, the spirit within him declared itself to be the soul of a deceased ancestor of the minister’s, who had fought and died in the American War.[303] We in England now hardly hear of demoniacal possession except as a historical doctrine of divines. We have discarded from religious services the solemn ceremony of casting out devils from the bodies of the possessed, a rite to this day officially retained in the Rituals of the Greek and Roman Churches. Cases of diabolical influence alleged from time to time among ourselves are little noticed except by newspaper paragraphs on superstition and imposture. If, however, we desire to understand the doctrine of possession, its origin and influence in the world, we must look beyond countries where public opinion has passed into this stage, and must study the demoniac theory as it still prevails in lower and lowest levels of culture.
140Since this topic is well-known among educated readers, I won’t overwhelm you with a lot of documents—often brutal and only somewhat civilized—to show how the belief in possession and the practice of exorcism continued from the Middle Ages into modern times. A few key examples will do. For instance, in the 'Early English Leechdoms,' there are recipes suggesting that taking a cake made from the ashes of a white dog baked with flour can help fight off attacks from dwarves (which refers to convulsions). There’s also a drink made from herbs mixed with clear ale, garlic, holy water, and prayers, which should be given to a person sick due to a demon, and they should drink it from a church bell. You can find philosophical discussions in the ‘Malleus Maleficarum’ which talks about demons residing in people and causing illnesses, as discussed by Glanvil in the 'The Triumph of Saducism.' Historical accounts include the story of the clairvoyant demon that possessed Nicola Aubry; during an exorcism by the Bishop of Laon, the demon claimed to disprove Calvinism. There’s the story of Charles VI. of France, who was possessed, and how a priest unsuccessfully tried to transfer the demon into twelve chained men. Then there was a German woman in Elbingerode who, during a toothache, wished the devil would enter her teeth and ended up possessed by six demons, which named themselves Schalk der Wahrheit, Wirk, Widerkraut, Myrrha, Knip, Stüp. Lastly, George Lukins from Yatton, who was tormented by seven devils that caused him to have fits, sang, and barked, was freed through a solemn exorcism performed by seven clergymen at the Temple Church in Bristol in 1788.[299] A strong sense of the enduring nature of this ancient belief can be gathered from public opinion across Europe—from Greece and Italy to France—where, until recently, mental disturbances and hysteria were still commonly attributed to possession and treated through exorcism, just as in medieval times.[300] In 1861, in Morzine, south of Lake Geneva, there was an epidemic of demonic possession that looked like something out of a Red Indian settlement or a West African kingdom, an outbreak that was worsened by the exorcisms of a superstitious priest, resulting in a hundred and ten wildly possessed individuals in that one village.[301] The following is from a letter written in 1862 by Mgr. Anouilh, a French missionary-bishop in China. "Can you believe it? Ten villages have converted. The devil is furious and causing chaos. During the fifteen days I preached, there were five or six possessions. Our catechumens use holy water to expel demons and heal the sick. I've seen incredible things. The devil really helps in converting the pagans. Just like in the time of Our Lord, even though he is the father of lies, he can't help but speak the truth. Look at this poor possessed person writhing and shouting, 'Why are you preaching the true religion? I can't stand you taking away my followers.' — 'What's your name?' the catechist asks. After some reluctance: 'I am the envoy of Lucifer.' — 'How many of you are there?' — 'We are twenty-two.' 'The holy water and the sign of the cross freed this possessed person.'"[302] To finish with a modern spiritualist example, consider instances where mediums feel they're being taken over by a spirit outside of their own soul. The Rev. Mr. West from Philadelphia describes an experience with a possessed medium who performed sword exercises and then collapsed. When the medium regained consciousness, they said the spirit within claimed to be the soul of an ancestor of the minister who had fought and died in the American War.[303] Nowadays in England, we hardly hear about demonic possession except as an old teaching from religious scholars. We have removed the formal ceremony of casting out demons from religious services, a rite still practiced in the Greek and Roman Churches. Occasionally, reports of alleged demonic influence surface but are barely noticed, often dismissed as stories about superstition or fraud in the newspapers. However, if we want to truly understand the belief in possession—its origins and its impact on the world—we need to look beyond places where public perception has evolved, and examine how the theory of demonic influence still exists at lower levels of culture.
It has to be thoroughly understood that the changed aspect of the subject in modern opinion is not due to disappearance of the actual manifestations which early philosophy attributed to demoniacal influence. Hysteria and epilepsy, delirium and mania, and such like bodily and mental derangement, still exist. Not only do they still exist, but among the lower races, and in superstitious districts among the higher, they are still explained and treated as of old. It is not too much to assert that the doctrine of demoniacal possession is kept up, substantially the same theory to account for substantially the same facts, by half the human race, who thus stand as consistent representatives of their forefathers back into primitive antiquity. It is in the civilized world, under the influence of the medical doctrines which have been developing since classic times, that the early animistic theory of these morbid phenomena has been 143gradually superseded by views more in accordance with modern science, to the great gain of our health and happiness. The transition which has taken place in the famous insane colony of Gheel in Belgium is typical. In old days, the lunatics were carried there in crowds to be exorcised from their demons at the church of St. Dymphna; to Gheel they still go, but the physician reigns in the stead of the exorcist. Yet wherever, in times old or new, demoniacal influences are brought forward to account for affections which scientific physicians now explain on a different principle, care must be taken not to misjudge the ancient doctrine and its place in history. As belonging to the lower culture it is a perfectly rational philosophical theory to account for certain pathological facts. But just as mechanical astronomy gradually superseded the animistic astronomy of the lower races, so biological pathology gradually supersedes animistic pathology, the immediate operation of personal spiritual beings in both cases giving place to the operation of natural processes.
It’s important to understand that the shift in how people view this topic today is not because the actual occurrences that early philosophers attributed to demonic influence have disappeared. Hysteria, epilepsy, delirium, mania, and other similar physical and mental disorders still exist. Not only do they persist, but in less developed societies and in superstitious areas among more advanced cultures, they are still explained and treated as they were in the past. It’s fair to say that the belief in demonic possession remains, largely unchanged, to explain largely the same phenomena, by about half of the world's population, who continue to represent their ancestors back to ancient times. In the civilized world, influenced by medical theories that have been evolving since classical times, the early animistic explanation of these medical conditions has been gradually replaced by views that align more closely with modern science, significantly benefiting our health and well-being. The change that has occurred in the well-known mental health community in Gheel, Belgium, is a perfect example. In the past, people with mental illness were brought there in groups to have their demons exorcised at the church of St. Dymphna; they still go to Gheel, but now the doctor has taken the place of the exorcist. However, whenever demonic influences are cited to explain conditions that scientific doctors now interpret differently, we need to be careful not to misinterpret the ancient beliefs and their historical context. As part of lower culture, it was a perfectly reasonable philosophical explanation for certain medical facts. Just as mechanical astronomy eventually replaced the animistic astronomy of less developed cultures, so biological pathology is gradually replacing animistic pathology, with the direct action of personal spiritual beings in both instances giving way to natural processes.
We now pass to the consideration of another great branch of the lower religion of the world, a development of the same principles of spiritual operation with which we have become familiar in the study of the possession-theory. This is the doctrine of Fetishism. Centuries ago, the Portuguese in West Africa, noticing the veneration paid by the negroes to certain objects, such as trees, fish, plants, idols, pebbles, claws of beasts, sticks and so forth, very fairly compared these objects to the amulets or talismans with which they were themselves familiar, and called them feitiço or ‘charm,’ a word derived from Latin factitius, in the sense of ‘magically artful.’ Modern French and English adopted this word from the Portuguese as fétiche, fetish, although curiously enough both languages had already possessed the word for ages in a different sense, Old French faitis, ‘well made, beautiful,’ which Old English adopted as fetys, ‘well made, neat.’ It occurs in the commonest of all quotations from Chaucer:
We now turn to another significant aspect of the lower religions around the world, a development of the same spiritual principles we've encountered in our study of possession theory. This is the concept of Fetishism. Centuries ago, the Portuguese in West Africa observed the reverence that the local people showed towards certain objects, such as trees, fish, plants, idols, pebbles, and animal claws, and compared these objects to the amulets or talismans they were familiar with. They called them spell or ‘charm,’ a term derived from the Latin fake, meaning ‘magically crafted.’ Modern French and English adopted this word from Portuguese as fetish, fetish, although interestingly, both languages had used the word for centuries in a different context: Old French faitis, meaning ‘well made, beautiful,’ which Old English took as fetys, ‘well made, neat.’ It appears in one of the most well-known quotes from Chaucer:
The President de Brosses, a most original thinker of the 18th century, struck by the descriptions of the African worship of material and terrestrial objects, introduced the word Fétichisme as a general descriptive term,[304] and since then it has obtained great currency by Comte’s use of it to denote a general theory of primitive religion, in which external objects are regarded as animated by a life analogous to man’s. It seems to me, however, more convenient to use the word Animism for the doctrine of spirits in general, and to confine the word Fetishism to that subordinate department which it properly belongs to, namely, the doctrine of spirits embodied in, or attached to, or conveying influence through, certain material objects. Fetishism will be taken as including the worship of ‘stocks and stones,’ and thence it passes by an imperceptible gradation into Idolatry.
The President de Brosses, a highly original thinker of the 18th century, was struck by the descriptions of African worship of physical and earthly objects. He introduced the term Fétichisme as a general descriptive label,[304] and since then, it has gained popularity through Comte’s use of it to refer to a general theory of primitive religion, where external objects are seen as having a life similar to that of humans. However, I find it more convenient to use the term Animism for the belief in spirits in general, and to limit the term Fetishism to the specific area it rightly belongs to, which is the belief in spirits that are embodied in, attached to, or exert influence through certain material objects. Fetishism will encompass the worship of ‘stocks and stones,’ and then it subtly transitions into Idolatry.
Any object whatsoever may be a fetish. Of course, among the endless multitude of objects, not as we should say physically active, but to which ignorant men ascribe mysterious power, we are not to apply indiscriminately the idea of their being considered vessels or vehicles or instruments of spiritual beings. They may be mere signs or tokens set up to represent ideal notions or ideal beings, as fingers or sticks are set up to represent numbers. Or they may be symbolic charms working by imagined conveyance of their special properties, as an iron ring to give firmness, or a kite’s foot to give swift flight. Or they may be merely regarded in some undefined way as wondrous ornaments or curiosities. The tendency runs through all human nature to collect and admire objects remarkable in beauty, form, quality, or scarceness. The shelves of ethnological museums show heaps of the objects which the lower races treasure up 145and hang about their persons—teeth and claws, roots and berries, shells and stones, and the like. Now fetishes are in great measure selected from among such things as these, and the principle of their attraction for savage minds is clearly the same which still guides the superstitious peasant in collecting curious trifles ‘for luck.’ The principle is one which retains its force in far higher ranges of culture than the peasant’s. Compare the Ostyak’s veneration for any peculiar little stone he has picked up, with the Chinese love of collecting curious varieties of tortoise-shell, or an old-fashioned English conchologist’s delight in a reversed shell. The turn of mind which in a Gold-Coast negro would manifest itself in a museum of monstrous and most potent fetishes, might impel an Englishman to collect scarce postage-stamps or queer walking-sticks. In the love of abnormal curiosities there shows itself a craving for the marvellous, an endeavour to get free from the tedious sense of law and uniformity in nature. As to the lower races, were evidence more plentiful as to the exact meaning they attach to objects which they treat with mysterious respect, it would very likely appear more often and more certainly than it does now, that these objects seem to them connected with the action of spirits, so as to be, in the strict sense in which the word is here used, real fetishes. But this must not be taken for granted. To class an object as a fetish, demands explicit statement that a spirit is considered as embodied in it or acting through it or communicating by it, or at least that the people it belongs to do habitually think this of such objects; or it must be shown that the object is treated as having personal consciousness and power, is talked with, worshipped, prayed to, sacrificed to, petted or ill-treated with reference to its past or future behaviour to its votaries. In the instances now selected, it will be seen that in one way or another they more or less satisfy such conditions. In investigating the exact significance of fetishes in use among men, savage or more civilized, the peculiar difficulty is to know whether the effect of the object is 146thought due to a whole personal spirit embodied in or attached to it, or to some less definable influence exerted through it. In some cases this point is made clear, but in many it remains doubtful.
Any object can be a fetish. Among the countless objects in existence, there are some that, even though they don't physically act, are given mysterious power by those who lack knowledge. We shouldn't automatically think of these objects as vessels, vehicles, or instruments of spiritual beings. They could simply be signs or tokens representing ideal notions or beings, similar to how fingers or sticks represent numbers. They might also be symbolic charms, believed to convey their special properties—like an iron ring for strength or a kite's foot for speed. They may also just be seen as fascinating ornaments or curiosities. Humans naturally tend to collect and admire objects that are remarkable in beauty, shape, quality, or rarity. Ethnological museums feature many items that less developed cultures cherish and wear—like teeth, claws, roots, berries, shells, stones, and the like. Fetishes are often chosen from such items, and the reason they attract primitive minds is the same reason superstitious peasants collect oddities "for luck." This tendency continues in more advanced cultures beyond that of the peasant. For example, compare the Ostyak’s reverence for a unique stone he finds with the Chinese fascination for various tortoise-shells or an old-fashioned English collector's joy in a rare shell. The mindset that leads a Gold Coast person to showcase impressive and powerful fetishes could inspire an Englishman to collect rare postage stamps or unusual walking sticks. The appreciation for strange curiosities reflects a desire for the marvelous and an escape from the monotonous rules of nature. Regarding less developed cultures, if we had more evidence about what they truly believe regarding the objects they treat with mysterious respect, we might find they often connect these objects to spirit activity, making them real fetishes in the strict sense used here. However, we shouldn't assume that. To label an object as a fetish, you need to clearly state that it's viewed as embodying, acting through, or communicating with a spirit, or at least that the people who possess it habitually think this way. It's also necessary to show that the object is treated as if it has personal awareness and power, that it is engaged with, worshipped, prayed to, sacrificed to, cherished, or mistreated based on its expected behavior towards its devotees. In the cases selected here, it will be evident that they meet these criteria to varying degrees. When examining the true meaning of fetishes used by people, whether primitive or more civilized, the challenge lies in determining if the object's effect is ascribed to an entire personal spirit manifested in or connected to it or if it's due to a less identifiable influence operating through it. In some instances, this distinction is clear, but in many, it remains uncertain.
It will help us to a clearer conception of the nature of a fetish, to glance at a curious group of nations which connect a disease at once with spiritual influence, and with the presence of some material object. They are a set of illustrations of the savage principle, that a disease or an actual disease-spirit may exist embodied in a stick or stone or such-like material object. Among the natives of Australia, one hears of the sorcerers extracting from their own bodies by passes and manipulations a magical essence called ‘boylya,’ which they can make to enter the patient’s body like pieces of quartz, which causes pain there and consumes the flesh, and may be magically extracted either as invisible or in the form of a bit of quartz. Even the spirit of the waters, ‘nguk-wonga,’ which had caused an attack of erysipelas in a boy’s leg (he had been bathing too long when heated) is declared to have been extracted by the conjurers from the affected part in the shape of a sharp stone.[305] The Caribs, who very distinctly referred diseases to the action of hostile demons or deities, had a similar sorcerer’s process of extracting thorns or splinters from the affected part as the peccant causes, and it is said that in the Antilles morsels of stone and bone so extracted were wrapped up in cotton by the women, as protective fetishes in childbirth.[306] The Malagasy, considering all diseases as inflicted by an evil spirit, consult a diviner, whose method is often to remove the disease by means of a ‘faditra;’ this is some object, such as a little grass, ashes, a sheep, a pumpkin, the water the patient has rinsed his mouth with, or what not, and when the priest has counted on it the evils 147that may injure the patient, and charged the faditra to take them away for ever, it is thrown away, and the malady with it.[307] Among those strong believers in disease-spirits, the Dayaks of Borneo, the priest, waving and jingling charms over the affected part of the patient, pretends to extract stones, splinters, and bits of rag, which he declares are spirits; of such evil spirits he will occasionally bring half-a-dozen out of a man’s stomach, and as he is paid a fee of six gallons of rice for each, he is probably disposed (like a chiropodist under similar circumstances) to extract a good many.[308] The most instructive accounts of this kind are those which reach us from Africa. Dr. Callaway has taken down at length a Zulu account of the method of stopping out disease caused by spirits of the dead. If a widow is troubled by her late husband’s ghost coming and talking to her night after night as though still alive, till her health is affected and she begins to waste away, they find a ‘nyanga’ or sorcerer who can bar out the disease. He bids her not lose the spittle collected in her mouth while she is dreaming, and gives her medicine to chew when she wakes. Then he goes with her to lay the ‘itongo,’ or ghost; perhaps he shuts it up in a bulb of the inkomfe plant, making a hole in the side of this, putting in the medicine and the dream-spittle, closing the hole with a stopper, and re-planting the bulb. Leaving the place, he charges her not to look back till she gets home. Thus the dream is barred; it may still come occasionally, but no longer infests the woman; the doctor prevails over the dead man as regards that dream. In other cases the cure of a sick man attacked by the ancestral spirits may be effected with some of his blood put into a hole in an anthill by the doctor, who closes the hole with a stone, and departs without looking back; or the patient may be scarified over the painful place, and the blood put into the mouth of a frog, caught for the purpose and carried back. So the disease is barred out from the 148man.[309] In West Africa, a case in point is the practice of transferring a sick man’s ailment to a live fowl, which is set free with it, and if any one catches the fowl, the disease goes to him.[310] Captain Burton’s account from Central Africa is as follows. Disease being possession by a spirit or ghost, the ‘mganga’ or sorcerer has to expel it, the principal remedies being drumming, dancing, and drinking, till at last the spirit is enticed from the body of the patient into some inanimate article, technically called a ‘keti’ or stool for it. This may be an ornament, such as a peculiar bead or a leopard’s claw, or it may be a nail or rag, which by being driven into or hung to a ‘devil’s tree’ has the effect of laying the disease-spirit. Or disease-spirits may be extracted by chants, one departing at the end of each stave, when a little painted stick made for it is flung on the ground, and some patients may have as many as a dozen ghosts extracted, for here also the fee is so much apiece.[311] In Siam, the Laos sorcerer can send his ‘phi phob’ or demon into a victim’s body, where it turns into a fleshy or leathery lump, and causes disease ending in death.[312] Thus, on the one hand, the spirit-theory of disease is seen to be connected with that sorcerer’s practice prevalent among the lower races, of pretending to extract objects from the patient’s body, such as stones, bones, balls of hair, &c., which are declared to be causes of disease conveyed by magical means into him; of this proceeding I have given a detailed account elsewhere, under the name of the ‘sucking-cure.’[313] On the other hand, there appears among the lower races that well-known conception of a disease or evil influence as an individual being, which may be not merely conveyed by an infected object (though this of course may have much to do with the idea), but may be 149removed by actual transfer from the patient into some other animal or object. Thus Pliny informs us how pains in the stomach may be cured by transmitting the ailment from the patient’s body into a puppy or duck, which will probably die of it;[314] it is considered baneful to a Hindu woman to be a man’s third wife, wherefore the precaution is taken of first betrothing him to a tree, which dies in her stead;[315] after the birth of a Chinese baby, its father’s trousers are hung in the room wrong side up, that all evil influences may enter into them instead of into the child.[316] Modern folklore still cherishes such ideas. The ethnographer may still study in the ‘white witchcraft’ of European peasants the arts of curing a man’s fever or headache by transferring it to a crawfish or a bird, or of getting rid of ague or gout or warts by giving them to a willow, elder, fir, or ash-tree, with suitable charms, ‘Goe morgen, olde, ick geef oe de Kolde,’ ‘Goden Abend, Herr Fleder, hier bring ick mien Feber, ick bind em di an und gah davan,’ ‘Ash-tree, ashen tree, pray buy this wart of me,’ and so forth; or of nailing or plugging an ailment into a tree-trunk, or conveying it away by some of the patient’s hair or nail-parings or some such thing, and so burying it. Looking at these proceedings from a moral point of view, the practice of transferring the ailment to a knot or a lock of hair and burying it is the most harmless, but another device is a very pattern of wicked selfishness. In England, warts may be touched each with a pebble, and the pebbles in a bag left on the road to church, to give up their ailments to the unlucky finder; in Germany, a plaister from a sore may be left at a cross-way to transfer the disease to a passer-by; I am told on medical authority that the bunches of flowers which children offer to travellers in Southern Europe are sometimes intended for the ungracious purpose of sending some disease away from their homes.[317] One case of this 150group, mentioned to me by Mr. Spottiswoode, is particularly interesting. In Thuringia it is considered that a string of rowan-berries, a rag, or any small article, touched by a sick person and then hung on a bush beside some forest path, imparts the malady to any person who may touch this article in passing, and frees the sick person from the disease. This gives great probability to Captain Burton’s suggestion that the rags, locks of hair, and what not, hung on trees near sacred places by the superstitious from Mexico to India and from Ethiopia to Ireland, are deposited there as actual receptacles of disease; the African ‘devil’s trees’ and the sacred trees of Sindh, hung with rags through which votaries have transferred their complaints, being typical cases of a practice surviving in lands of higher culture.
It will help us to have a clearer understanding of what a fetish is to look at a fascinating group of nations that link disease with spiritual influences as well as the presence of a physical object. They illustrate the primitive idea that a disease or a spirit causing disease may be embodied in a stick, stone, or any similar material object. Among the Aboriginal people of Australia, one hears about sorcerers extracting a magical essence called ‘boylya’ from their own bodies using passes and manipulations, which they can then make enter the patient's body like pieces of quartz, causing pain and consuming flesh. This essence may be extracted either invisibly or as a physical piece of quartz. Even the spirit of the waters, known as ‘nguk-wonga,’ which caused a boy to suffer from erysipelas in his leg (after he bathed for too long while overheated), is said to have been extracted by conjurers from the affected area in the form of a sharp stone.[305] The Caribs, who clearly associated diseases with the actions of hostile demons or deities, had a similar process for extracting thorns or splinters from the affected area as the actual cause of the illness. It is reported that in the Antilles, pieces of stone and bone extracted were wrapped in cotton by women as protective fetishes during childbirth.[306] The Malagasy believe all diseases are caused by evil spirits and consult a diviner. The method often involves removing the disease with a ‘faditra’—an object like a piece of grass, ash, a sheep, a pumpkin, or even the water that the patient rinsed their mouth with. After the priest has listed the evils that may harm the patient and charged the faditra to take them away forever, it is tossed away along with the illness.[307] Among the strong believers in disease spirits, the Dayaks of Borneo have a priest who, waving and jingling charms over the affected area, pretends to extract stones, splinters, and bits of cloth, claiming they are spirits. He might extract as many as six from a man's stomach—he is compensated with six gallons of rice for each, likely encouraging him (like a podiatrist in similar situations) to extract many.[308] The most informative accounts come from Africa. Dr. Callaway recorded a detailed Zulu method for stopping diseases caused by the spirits of the dead. If a widow is disturbed by the ghost of her late husband talking to her night after night until her health declines, they find a ‘nyanga’ or sorcerer who can banish the disease. He instructs her not to lose the spit collected in her mouth during dreams and gives her medicine to chew when she wakes up. Then he takes her to lay the ‘itongo,’ or ghost; he may imprison it in a bulb of the inkomfe plant, making a hole in its side, inserting the medicine and the dream-spit, sealing the hole with a stopper, and replanting it. After leaving, he tells her not to look back until she gets home. This way, the dream is blocked; while it might still occur occasionally, it no longer haunts the woman; the doctor has triumphed over the dead man regarding that dream. In other cases, to cure a sick person afflicted by ancestral spirits, the doctor may place some of their blood into a hole in an anthill, sealing it with a stone before leaving without looking back; or the patient may be scarred over the painful area, and the blood put into the mouth of a frog, caught for that purpose and carried back. Thus, the illness is banished from the individual.[309] In West Africa, a prevalent practice involves transferring a sick person’s ailment to a live bird, which is then released. If someone catches the bird, the disease transfers to them.[310] Captain Burton’s observations from Central Africa indicate that diseases result from possession by a spirit or ghost, which the ‘mganga’ or sorcerer has to expel, using remedies like drumming, dancing, and drinking until the spirit is coaxed out of the patient into an inanimate object, referred to as a ‘keti’ or stool. This could be an ornament, like a unique bead or a leopard’s claw, or something like a nail or rag, which, when attached to a ‘devil’s tree,’ serves to lay the disease-spirit to rest. Disease-spirits may also be extracted through chants, with one departing at the end of each verse, as a little painted stick, created for that purpose, is thrown on the ground; some patients may have a dozen spirits extracted, as here, too, the fee is per extraction.[311] In Siam, a Laos sorcerer can send his ‘phi phob’ or demon into a victim’s body, where it transforms into a fleshy or leathery lump, causing illness that can lead to death.[312] Thus, we see the spirit theory of disease linked to the sorcerer's practice, common among primitive cultures, of pretending to extract objects from the patient's body, like stones, bones, or balls of hair, which are claimed to be the causes of illness transferred into the person by magical means; I have detailed this elsewhere, referring to it as the ‘sucking cure.’[313] Additionally, the idea that a disease or evil influence is seen as an individual being appears among lower cultures. It may be conveyed not just by an infected object (though that certainly may play a role), but could also be transferred from the patient to another animal or object. Pliny noted that stomach pains could be cured by transferring the ailment from the patient's body to a puppy or duck, which would likely die from it;[314] it is deemed harmful for a Hindu woman to be a man's third wife, so the precaution is taken to first betroth him to a tree, which dies in her place;[315] after the birth of a Chinese baby, the father's trousers are hung in the room inside out to ensure that all evil influences enter them instead of the child.[316] Modern folklore still holds onto such ideas. Ethnographers can observe in the "white witchcraft" of European peasants methods such as transferring a person's fever or headache to a crawfish or bird, or eliminating ague, gout, or warts by giving them to a willow, elder, fir, or ash tree, using appropriate charms, like "Goe morgen, olde, ick geef oe de Kolde," "Goden Abend, Herr Fleder, hier bring ick mien Feber, ick bind em di an und gah davan," "Ash-tree, ashen tree, pray buy this wart of me," and similar phrases; or by nailing or plugging an ailment into a tree trunk, or relocating it with some of the patient’s hair or nail clippings by burying them. From a moral standpoint, the practice of transferring an ailment to a knot or lock of hair and burying it is the least harmful, but another method is clearly an example of selfishness. In England, warts can be touched with pebbles, while the pebbles are left on the road to church, ready to transfer their ailments to any unlucky passerby; in Germany, a plaster from a sore might be left at a crosswalk to pass the disease to someone walking by; medical sources have informed me that the bouquets that children offer to travelers in Southern Europe sometimes serve the less gracious purpose of sending some illness away from their homes.[317] One particularly interesting case from this group, shared by Mr. Spottiswoode, involves Thuringia, where it is believed that a string of rowan-berries, a rag, or any small item touched by a sick person, when hung on a bush along a forest path, imparts the illness to anyone who might touch it in passing, thereby freeing the sick individual from the disease. This strongly supports Captain Burton’s suggestion that the rags, locks of hair, and similar items hung on trees near sacred sites by the superstitious from Mexico to India and from Ethiopia to Ireland are placed there as actual carriers of disease; the African ‘devil’s trees’ and the sacred trees of Sindh, adorned with rags through which devotees have transferred their ailments, are prime examples of a practice that persists in cultures with higher sophistication.
The spirits which enter or otherwise attach themselves to objects may be human souls. Indeed one of the most natural cases of the fetish-theory is when a soul inhabits or haunts what is left of its former body. It is plain enough that by a simple association of ideas the dead person is imagined to keep up a connexion with his remains. Thus we read of the Mandan women going year after year to take food to the skulls of their dead kinsfolk, and sitting by the hour to chat and jest in their most endearing strain with the relics of a husband or child;[318] thus the Guinea negroes, who keep the bones of parents in chests, will go to talk with them in the little huts which serve for their tombs.[319] And thus, from the savage who keeps and carries with his household property the cleaned bones of his forefathers,[320] to 151the mourner among ourselves who goes to weep at the grave of one beloved, imagination keeps together the personality and the relics of the dead. Here, then, is a course of thought open to the animistic thinker, leading him on from fancied association to a belief in the real presence of a spiritual being in a material object. Thus there is no difficulty in understanding how the Karens thought the spirits of the dead might come back from the other world to reanimate their bodies;[321] nor how the Marian islanders should have kept the dried bodies of their dead ancestors in their huts as household gods, and even expected them to give oracles out of their skulls;[322] nor how the soul of a dead Carib might be thought to abide in one of his bones, taken from the grave and carefully wrapped in cotton, in which state it could answer questions, and even bewitch an enemy if a morsel of his property were wrapped up with it;[323] nor how the dead Santal should be sent to his fathers by the ceremony of committing to the sacred river morsels of his skull from the funeral-pile.[324] Such ideas are of great interest in studying the burial rites of mankind, especially the habit of keeping relics of the dead as vehicles of superhuman power, and of even preserving the whole body as a mummy, as in Peru and Egypt. The conception of such human relics becoming fetishes, inhabited or at least acted through by the souls which formerly belonged to them, will give a rational explanation of much relic-worship otherwise obscure.
The spirits that enter or attach themselves to objects may be human souls. One of the most straightforward examples of the fetish theory is when a soul inhabits or haunts what remains of its former body. It’s clear that through simple association, the dead person is imagined to maintain a connection with their remains. For instance, we read about Mandan women who go year after year to bring food to the skulls of their deceased relatives, spending hours talking and joking affectionately with the remains of a husband or child; thus, the Guinea people, who keep their parents' bones in chests, will visit and talk to them in the small huts that serve as their tombs. Similarly, from the person who keeps and carries the cleaned bones of their ancestors with their household belongings, to the mourner among us who goes to grieve at the grave of a loved one, imagination links the personality and relics of the dead. Here lies an idea for those who think animistically, leading them from imagined connections to a belief in the real presence of a spiritual being in a physical object. Therefore, it’s easy to understand how the Karens believed that the spirits of the dead could return from the afterlife to reanimate their bodies; or how the Marian islanders kept the dried bodies of their deceased ancestors in their homes as household gods, even expecting them to provide oracles from their skulls; or how the soul of a dead Carib might be thought to reside in one of his bones, taken from the grave and carefully wrapped in cotton, capable of answering questions or bewitching an enemy if a piece of his property was included; or how the dead Santal should be sent to his ancestors through a ceremony of casting pieces of his skull into the sacred river from the funeral pyre. These ideas are particularly fascinating when studying human burial rites, especially the practice of keeping relics of the dead as vehicles of supernatural power, or even preserving the entire body as a mummy, as seen in Peru and Egypt. The idea that such human relics become fetishes, inhabited or at least influenced by the souls that once belonged to them, provides a rational explanation for much relic-worship that might otherwise seem obscure.
A further stretch of imagination enables the lower races to associate the souls of the dead with mere objects, a practice which may have had its origin in the merest childish make-believe, but which would lead a thorough savage animist straight on to the conception of the soul entering 152the object as a body. Mr. Darwin saw two Malay women in Keeling Island who held a wooden spoon dressed in clothes like a doll; this spoon had been carried to the grave of a dead man, and becoming inspired at full moon, in fact lunatic, it danced about convulsively like a table or a hat at a modern spirit-séance.[325] Among the Salish Indians of Oregon, the conjurers bring back men’s lost souls as little stones or bones or splinters, and pretend to pass them down through the tops of their heads into their hearts, but great care must be taken to remove the spirits of any dead people that may be in the lot, for the patient receiving one would die.[326] There are indigenous Kol tribes of India who work out this idea curiously in bringing back the soul of a deceased man into the house after the funeral, apparently to be worshipped as a household spirit; while some catch the spirit re-embodied in a fowl or fish, the Binjwar of Raepore bring it home in a pot of water, and the Bunjia in a pot of flour.[327] The Chinese hold such theories with extreme distinctness, considering one of a man’s three spirits to take up its abode in the ancestral tablet, where it receives messages and worship from the survivors; while the long keeping of the dead man’s gilt and lacquered coffin, and the reverence and offerings continued at the tomb, are connected with the thought of a spirit lingering about the corpse. Consistent with these quaint ideas are ceremonies in vogue in China, of bringing home in a cock (live or artificial) the spirit of a man deceased in a distant place, and of enticing into a sick man’s coat the departing spirit which has already left his body, and so conveying it back.[328] Tatar folklore illustrates the idea of soul-embodiment in the quaint but intelligible story of the demon-giant who could not be slain, for he did not keep his soul in his body, but in a twelve-headed 153snake carried in a bag on his horse’s back; the hero finds out the secret and kills the snake, and then the giant dies too. This tale is curious, as very likely indicating the original sense of a well-known group of stories in European folklore, the Scandinavian one, for instance, where the giant cannot be made an end of, because he keeps his heart not in his body, but in a duck’s egg in a well far away; at last the young champion finds the egg and crushes it, and the giant bursts.[329] Following the notion of soul-embodiment into civilized times, we learn that ‘A ghost may be laid for any term less than an hundred years, and in any place or body, full or empty; as, a solid oak—the pommel of a sword—a barrel of beer, if a yeoman or simple gentleman—or a pipe of wine, if an esquire or a justice.’ This is from Grose’s bantering description in the 18th century of the art of ‘laying’ ghosts,[330] and it is one of the many good instances of articles of serious savage belief surviving as jests among civilized men.
A further stretch of imagination allows the lower races to link the souls of the dead with everyday objects. This practice may have originated from childish make-believe, but it could lead a truly primitive animist to the idea of a soul entering an object as if it were a body. Mr. Darwin observed two Malay women on Keeling Island holding a wooden spoon dressed like a doll; this spoon was taken to the grave of a deceased man and, during a full moon, it became animated and danced around like a table or a hat at a modern séance. Among the Salish Indians of Oregon, shamans retrieve lost souls as small stones, bones, or splinters, pretending to pass them through the tops of their heads into their hearts. However, they must be careful to remove any spirits of the dead that might be present, as the person receiving one would die. There are indigenous Kol tribes in India that express this idea in a unique way by bringing the soul of a deceased man into the house after the funeral, seemingly to be worshipped as a household spirit. Some embody the spirit in a bird or fish, while the Binjwar of Raepore bring it home in a pot of water, and the Bunjia in a pot of flour. The Chinese have clear beliefs surrounding this, considering one of a man’s three spirits to dwell in the ancestral tablet, where it receives messages and worship from the living. The prolonged keeping of the dead man’s gilded coffin, along with the reverence and offerings at the tomb, is tied to the idea of a spirit lingering near the corpse. Consistent with these peculiar beliefs are practices in China where a live or artificial rooster is used to bring home the spirit of a man who died far away, and where attempts are made to invite the departing spirit, which has already left a sick man’s body, back into his coat. Tatar folklore illustrates the concept of soul-embodiment in the interesting story of a demon-giant who cannot be killed because he doesn’t keep his soul in his body but in a twelve-headed snake hidden in a bag on his horse’s back. The hero learns this secret, kills the snake, and the giant dies too. This tale is fascinating, likely reflecting the original meaning of a familiar set of stories in European folklore, such as the Scandinavian tale where a giant cannot be defeated because his heart is not in his body but inside a duck’s egg in a distant well; ultimately, the young hero discovers and crushes the egg, which causes the giant to burst. Following the idea of soul-embodiment into modern times, we discover that “a ghost can be laid for any term less than one hundred years, and in any space or body, full or empty; like a solid oak, the pommel of a sword, a barrel of beer if it’s a common person, or a pipe of wine if it’s a squire or a justice.” This is taken from Grose’s humorous account in the 18th century of the art of “laying” ghosts, and it serves as a notable example of ancient serious beliefs persisting as jokes among civilized people.
Thus other spiritual beings, roaming free about the world, find fetish-objects to act through, to embody themselves in, to present them visibly to their votaries. It is extremely difficult to draw a distinct line of separation between the two prevailing sets of ideas relating to spiritual action through what we call inanimate objects. Theoretically we can distinguish the notion of the object acting as it were by the will and force of its own proper soul or spirit, from the notion of some foreign spirit entering its substance or acting on it from without, and so using it as a body or instrument. But in practice these conceptions blend almost inextricably. This state of things is again a confirmation of the theory of animism here advanced, which treats both sets of ideas as similar developments of the same original 154idea, that of the human soul, so that they may well shade imperceptibly into one another. To depend on some typical descriptions of fetishism and its allied doctrines in different grades of culture, is a safer mode of treatment than to attempt too accurate a general definition.
So other spiritual beings, moving freely around the world, find objects to use, to embody themselves in, allowing them to be visibly presented to their followers. It’s really hard to clearly separate the two main ideas about spiritual action through what we call inanimate objects. Theoretically, we can distinguish between an object acting as if by the will and force of its own spirit, and the idea of a foreign spirit entering it or influencing it from the outside, using it as a body or tool. But in practice, these concepts blend almost seamlessly. This situation further supports the animism theory presented here, which views both ideas as similar developments of the same original concept—the human soul—allowing them to overlap imperceptibly. Relying on typical descriptions of fetishism and related beliefs across various cultures is a more reliable approach than trying to create an overly precise general definition.
There is a quaint story, dating from the time of Columbus, which shows what mysterious personality and power rude tribes could attach to lifeless matter. The cacique Hatuey, it is related, heard by his spies in Hispaniola that the Spaniards were coming to Cuba. So he called his people together, and talked to them of the Spaniards—how they persecuted the natives of the islands, and how they did such things for the sake of a great lord whom they much desired and loved. Then, taking out a basket with gold in it, he said, ‘Ye see here their lord whom they serve and go after; and, as ye have heard, they are coming hither to seek this lord. Therefore let us make him a feast, that when they come he may tell them not to do us harm.’ So they danced and sang from night to morning before the gold-basket, and then the cacique told them not to keep the Christian’s lord anywhere, for if they kept him in their very bowels they would have to bring him out; so he bade them cast him to the bottom of the river, and this they did.[331] If this story be thought too good to be true, at any rate it does not exaggerate authentic savage ideas. The ‘maraca’ or ceremonial rattle, used by certain rude Brazilian tribes, was an eminent fetish. It was a calabash with a handle and a hole for a mouth, and stones inside; yet to its votaries it seemed no mere rattle, but the receptacle of a spirit that spoke from it when shaken; therefore the Indians set up their maracas, talked to them, set food and drink and burned incense before them, held annual feasts in their honour, and would even go to war with their neighbours to satisfy the rattle-spirits’ demand for human victims.[332] Among the North American Indians, the fetish-theory seems involved in that 155remarkable and general proceeding known as getting ‘medicine.’ Each youth obtains in a vision or dream a sight of his medicine, and considering how thoroughly the idea prevails that the forms seen in visions and dreams are spirits, this of itself shows the animistic nature of the matter. The medicine thus seen may be an animal, or part of one, such as skin or claws, feather or shell, or such a thing as a plant, a stone, a knife, a pipe; this object he must obtain, and thenceforward through life it becomes his protector. Considered as a vehicle or receptacle of a spirit, its fetish-nature is shown in many ways; its owner will do homage to it, make feasts in its honour, sacrifice horses, dogs, and other valuable objects to it or its spirit, fast to appease it if offended, have it burned with him to conduct him as a guardian-spirit to the happy hunting-grounds. Beside these special protective objects, the Indians, especially the medicine-men (the word is French, ‘médecin,’ applied to these native doctors or conjurers, and since stretched to take in all that concerns their art), use multitudes of other fetishes as means of spiritual influence.[333] Among the Turanian tribes of Northern Asia, where Castrén describes the idea of spirits contained in material objects, to which they belong, and wherein they dwell in the same incomprehensible way as the souls in a man’s body, we may notice the Ostyak’s worship of objects of scarce or peculiar quality, and also the connexion of the shamans or sorcerers with fetish-objects, as where the Tatars consider the innumerable rags and tags, bells and bits of iron, that adorn the shaman’s magic costume, to contain spirits helpful to their owner in his magic craft.[334] John Bell, in his journey across Asia in 1719, relates a story which well illustrates Mongol ideas as to the action of self-moving objects. A certain Russian merchant told him that once some pieces of damask 156were stolen out of his tent. He complained, and the Kutuchtu Lama ordered the proper steps to be taken to find out the thief. One of the Lamas took a bench with four feet, and after turning it several times in different directions, at last it pointed directly to the tent where the stolen goods lay concealed. The Lama now mounted astride the bench, and soon carried it, or, as was commonly believed, it carried him, to the very tent, where he ordered the damask to be produced. The demand was directly complied with: for it is vain in such cases to offer any excuse.[335]
There’s a charming story from the time of Columbus that illustrates the mysterious significance and power that primitive tribes could attribute to inanimate objects. The chief Hatuey learned from his spies in Hispaniola that the Spaniards were coming to Cuba. He gathered his people and talked to them about the Spaniards—how they mistreated the native people of the islands and how they did this for a great lord whom they greatly desired and adored. Then, taking out a basket filled with gold, he said, ‘Here is the lord they serve and seek; as you’ve heard, they’re coming here to find this lord. So let’s prepare a feast for him, so when they come, he can tell them not to harm us.’ They danced and sang throughout the night before the gold basket, after which the chief advised them not to keep the Christian’s lord anywhere close, for if they kept him within them, they would eventually have to bring him out; so he instructed them to toss him to the bottom of the river, and they did just that.[331] If this tale seems too incredible to be true, it nonetheless doesn’t exaggerate the authentic beliefs of these tribes. The ‘maraca’ or ceremonial rattle used by certain primitive Brazilian tribes was a notable fetish. It was a gourd with a handle and a mouth hole, filled with stones; yet to its believers, it was not just a rattle, but a vessel containing a spirit that spoke when shaken. Thus, the Indians set up their maracas, talked to them, offered food and drink, burned incense before them, held annual feasts in their honor, and would even go to war with their neighbors to meet the rattle-spirits’ demand for human sacrifices.[332] Among the North American Indians, the fetish theory seems related to the remarkable and widespread practice known as obtaining ‘medicine.’ Every young person experiences a vision or dream revealing their medicine, and considering how strongly the belief persists that the forms seen in these dreams and visions are spirits, this alone indicates the animistic nature of the concept. The medicine they see may be an animal or part of one, such as skin or claws, feathers or shells, or objects like a plant, a stone, a knife, or a pipe; they must find this item, which will then serve as their protector throughout life. As a vessel or container of a spirit, its fetish-like nature is apparent in various ways; its owner will honor it, hold feasts in its name, sacrifice horses, dogs, and other valuable items to it or its spirit, fast to appease it if offended, and have it burned with them to guide them as a guardian spirit to the happy hunting grounds. In addition to these special protective objects, the Indians, particularly the medicine men (the term is French, 'doctor,' applied to these native doctors or conjurers, and has since expanded to cover all that relates to their practice), utilize many other fetishes as means of spiritual influence.[333] Among the Turanian tribes of Northern Asia, where Castrén describes the belief in spirits residing in material objects, which they inhabit in a manner similar to souls within a human body, we can observe the Ostyak’s worship of objects that are rare or peculiar, along with the connection between shamans or sorcerers and fetish objects. This is evident in how the Tatars regard the countless rags, bells, and bits of iron that adorn the shaman’s magical attire, seeing them as containing spirits that assist the owner in their magical practices.[334] John Bell, on his journey across Asia in 1719, recounts a story that illustrates Mongol beliefs about the actions of self-moving objects. A Russian merchant once told him that some damask fabric had been stolen from his tent. He complained, and the Kutuchtu Lama ordered an investigation to find the thief. One of the Lamas took a bench with four legs, turned it in various directions, and eventually, it pointed directly to the tent where the stolen items were hidden. The Lama then mounted the bench, and soon it either carried him, or as was commonly believed, he was carried by it to the very tent, where he demanded the damask be produced. The request was immediately fulfilled, for it’s pointless to make excuses in such situations.[335]
A more recent account from Central Africa may be placed as a pendant to this Asiatic account of divination by a fetish-object. The Rev. H. Rowley says of the Manganja, that they believed the medicine-men could impart a power for good or evil to objects either animate or inanimate, which objects the people feared, though they did not worship them. This missionary once saw this art employed to detect the thief who had stolen some corn. The people assembled round a large fig-tree. The magician, a wild-looking man, produced two sticks, like our broomsticks, which after mysterious manipulation and gibberish he delivered to four young men, two holding each stick. A zebra-tail and a calabash-rattle were given to a young man and a boy. The medicine-man rolled himself about in hideous fashion, and chanted an unceasing incantation; the bearers of the tail and rattle went round the stick-holders, and shook these implements over their heads. After a while the men with the sticks had spasmodic twitchings of the arms and legs, these increased nearly to convulsions, they foamed at the mouth, their eyes seemed starting from their heads, they realized to the full the idea of demoniacal possession. According to the native notion, it was the sticks which were possessed primarily, and through them the men, who could hardly hold them. The sticks whirled and dragged the men round and round like mad, through bush and thorny shrub, and over every obstacle, nothing stopped them, their bodies 157were torn and bleeding; at last they came back to the assembly, whirled round again, and rushed down the path to fall panting and exhausted in the hut of one of a chief’s wives, the sticks rolling to her very feet, denouncing her as the thief. She denied it, but the medicine-man answered, ‘The spirit has declared her guilty, the spirit never lies.’ However, the ‘muavi’ or ordeal-poison was administered to a cock, as deputy for the woman; the bird threw it up, and she was acquitted.[336]
A more recent account from Central Africa can be compared to this Asian story of divination using a fetish object. The Rev. H. Rowley mentions that the Manganja believed medicine men could give objects, whether alive or not, the power to do good or harm. People feared these objects but didn't worship them. This missionary once witnessed this practice being used to identify a thief who had stolen corn. The community gathered around a large fig tree. The magician, looking quite wild, took two sticks that resembled broomsticks, and after some mysterious moves and mumbling, he handed them to four young men, two holding each stick. A young man and a boy were given a zebra tail and a calabash rattle. The medicine man rolled around grotesquely and chanted continuously. The bearers of the tail and rattle circled around the stick holders, shaking these items above their heads. Eventually, the men with the sticks started having spasms in their arms and legs, and these twitches escalated to near convulsions. They foamed at the mouth, and it looked like their eyes might pop out; they fully embodied the concept of being possessed by a demon. According to the local belief, it was the sticks that were possessed, and through them, the men struggled to maintain control. The sticks spun and dragged the men wildly through bushes and thorny plants, overcoming every obstacle. Nothing could stop them, and their bodies were torn and bleeding. Finally, they returned to the gathering, twirled one more time, and ran down the path, collapsing in the hut of one of the chief’s wives, with the sticks rolling right to her feet, accusing her of theft. She denied it, but the medicine man said, "The spirit has declared her guilty; the spirit never lies." However, the ‘muavi’ or ordeal poison was given to a cock as a substitute for the woman; the bird rejected it, and she was found innocent.[336]
Fetishism in the lower civilization is thus by no means confined to the West African negro with whom we specially associate the term. Yet, what with its being in fact extremely prevalent there, and what with the attention of foreign observers having been particularly drawn to it, the accounts from West Africa are certainly the fullest and most minute on record. The late Professor Waitz’s generalization of the principle involved in these is much to the purpose. He thus describes the negro’s conception of his fetish. ‘According to his view, a spirit dwells or can dwell in every sensible object, and often a very great and mighty one in an insignificant thing. This spirit he does not consider as bound fast and unchangeably to the corporeal thing it dwells in, but it has only its usual or principal abode in it. The negro indeed in his conception not uncommonly separates the spirit from the sensible object which it inhabits, he even sometimes contrasts the one with the other, but most usually combines the two as forming a whole, and this whole is (as the Europeans call it) the “fetish,” the object of his religious worship.’ Some further particulars will show how this principle is worked out. Fetishes (native names for them are ‘grigri,’ ‘juju,’ &c.) may be mere curious mysterious objects that strike a negro’s fancy, or they may be consecrated or affected by a priest or fetish-man; the theory of their influence is that they belong to or are made effectual by a spirit or demon yet they have to stand the test of experience, and if they 158fail to bring their owner luck and safety, he discards them for some more powerful medium. The fetish can see and hear and understand and act, its possessor worships it, talks familiarly with it as a dear and faithful friend, pours libations of rum over it, and in times of danger calls loudly and earnestly on it as if to wake up its spirit and energy. To give an idea of the sort of things which are chosen as fetishes, and of the manner in which they are associated with spiritual influences, Römer’s account from Guinea about a century ago may serve. In the fetish-house, he says, there hang or lie thousands of rubbishy trifles, a pot with red earth and a cock’s feather stuck in it, pegs wound over with yarn, red parrots’ feathers, men’s hair, and so forth. The principal thing in the hut is the stool for the fetish to sit on, and the mattress for him to rest on, the mattress being no bigger than a man’s hand and the stool in proportion, and there is a little bottle of brandy always ready for him. Here the word fetish is used as it often is, to denote the spirit which dwells in this rudimentary temple, but we see that the innumerable quaint trifles which we call fetishes were associated with the deity in his house. Römer once peeped in at an open door, and found an old negro caboceer sitting amid twenty thousand fetishes in his private fetish-museum, thus performing his devotions. The old man told him he did not know the hundredth part of the use they had been to him; his ancestors and he had collected them, each had done some service. The visitor took up a stone about as big as a hen’s egg, and its owner told its history. He was once going out on important business, but crossing the threshold he trod on this stone and hurt himself. Ha ha! thought he, art thou here? So he took the stone, and it helped him through his undertaking for days. In our own time, West Africa is still a world of fetishes. The traveller finds them on every path, at every ford, on every house-door, they hang as amulets round every man’s neck, they guard against sickness or inflict it if neglected, they bring rain, they fill the sea with fishes 159willing to swim into the fisherman’s net, they catch and punish thieves, they give their owner a bold heart and confound his enemies, there is nothing that the fetish cannot do or undo, if it be but the right fetish. Thus the one-sided logic of the barbarian, making the most of all that fits and glossing over all that fails, has shaped a universal fetish-philosophy of the events of life. So strong is the pervading influence, that the European in Africa is apt to catch it from the negro, and himself, as the saying is, ‘become black.’ Thus even yet some traveller, watching a white companion asleep, may catch a glimpse of some claw or bone or such-like sorcerer’s trash secretly fastened round his neck.[337]
Fetishism in lower civilizations isn't limited to the West African people we usually associate with the term. However, since it's particularly widespread there and has attracted considerable attention from outsiders, the detailed accounts from West Africa are certainly the most comprehensive on record. The late Professor Waitz's summary of the principle behind this is quite relevant. He describes the African's understanding of his fetish: ‘From his perspective, a spirit resides or can reside in every tangible object, often even a very significant spirit in something seemingly trivial. He doesn’t see this spirit as permanently tied to the physical object it inhabits; rather, it has its main or usual dwelling there. In fact, the African often distinguishes between the spirit and the physical object it occupies. He sometimes opposes the two, but more frequently views them as a single entity, which Europeans refer to as the “fetish,” the focus of his religious devotion.’ Further details will illustrate how this principle is applied. Fetishes (local names include ‘grigri,’ ‘juju,’ etc.) can be odd mysterious objects that intrigue an African or can be consecrated or influenced by a priest or fetish-man. The belief in their power is that they are connected to or made effective by a spirit or demon, yet they must prove their value through experience. If they fail to bring luck or safety to their owner, he discards them for a more powerful alternative. The fetish is believed to see, hear, understand, and act; its owner worships it, talks to it as a dear and loyal friend, pours rum over it, and in times of danger calls out to it earnestly, almost as if to awaken its spirit and power. To illustrate what kinds of objects are selected as fetishes and how they are linked to spiritual forces, Römer’s account from Guinea about a century ago is insightful. He notes that in the fetish house, thousands of trivial items hang or lie around—a pot filled with red earth and a cock’s feather, pegs wrapped in yarn, red parrot feathers, human hair, and so on. The main feature in the hut is the stool for the fetish to sit on and a small mattress for it to rest on, the mattress being no larger than a man’s hand, and the stool similarly sized, along with a small bottle of brandy always on hand for it. Here, the term fetish is often used to refer to the spirit residing in this basic temple, but we see that all the numerous odd items we call fetishes are connected with the deity in its dwelling. Römer once peeked into an open door and saw an elderly black caboccer sitting amid twenty thousand fetishes in his personal fetish museum, engaged in his religious practices. The old man told Römer he didn’t know a fraction of their uses; his ancestors and he had gathered each one, and each had served a purpose. The visitor picked up a stone roughly the size of a hen’s egg, and its owner recounted its story. He had once been heading out on important business, but as he crossed the threshold, he stepped on this stone and hurt himself. Ha ha! he thought, are you here? So he kept the stone, and it helped him succeed in his task for days. Even today, West Africa remains a land of fetishes. Travelers encounter them along every path, at every crossing, on every door; they hang as amulets around every person’s neck, warding off illness or causing it if ignored. They bring rain, fill the sea with fish eager to swim into the fishermen’s nets, catch and punish thieves, grant their owners courage, and confuse their enemies—there’s nothing a fetish can’t accomplish or undo, provided it’s the right one. Thus, the simplistic reasoning of the unsophisticated, making the best of all that aligns and glossing over failures, has crafted a universal fetish-philosophy regarding the events of life. The pervasive influence is so strong that Europeans in Africa often catch it from the locals, and they themselves, as the saying goes, ‘become black.’ Even now, a traveler observing a white companion asleep may notice some claw, bone, or similar sorcerer's trinket secretly attached around his neck.
European life, lastly, shows well-marked traces of the ancient doctrine of spirits or mysterious influences inhabiting objects. Thus a mediæval devil might go into an old sow, a straw, a barleycorn, or a willow-tree. A spirit might be carried about in a solid receptacle for use:—
European life, finally, clearly shows signs of the ancient belief in spirits or mysterious forces living in objects. For example, in medieval times, a devil could inhabit an old pig, a straw, a barley grain, or a willow tree. A spirit could be contained in a solid object for use:—
Modern peasant folklore knows that spirits must have some animal body or other object to dwell in, a feather, a bag, a bush, for instance. The Tyrolese object to using grass for toothpicks because of the demons that may have taken up their abode in the straws. The Bulgarians hold it a great sin not to fumigate the flour when it is brought from the mill (particularly if the mill be kept by a Turk) in order to prevent the devil from entering into it.[338] Amulets are still carried in the most civilized countries of the world, by the 160ignorant and superstitious with real savage faith in their mysterious virtues, by the more enlightened in quaint survival from the past. The mental and physical phenomena of what is now called ‘table-turning’ belong to a class of proceedings which have here been shown to be familiar to the lower races, and accounted for by them on a theory of extra-human influence which is in the most extreme sense spiritualistic.
Modern peasant folklore recognizes that spirits need to inhabit some kind of animal body or object, like a feather, a bag, or a bush. People in Tyrol avoid using grass for toothpicks because they believe demons might be residing in the straws. Bulgarians consider it a serious sin not to fumigate flour when it's brought from the mill (especially if the mill is operated by a Turk) to keep the devil from entering it.[338] Amulets are still carried in the most advanced countries by the ignorant and superstitious, who genuinely believe in their mysterious powers, and by the more educated as a quirky remnant of the past. The mental and physical phenomena of what we now call ‘table-turning’ are similar to practices known among lower cultures, which they explain through a theory of extra-human influence that is deeply spiritualistic.
In giving its place in the history of mental development to the doctrine of the lower races as to embodiment in or penetration of an object by a spirit or an influence, there is no slight interest in comparing it with theories familiar to the philosophy of cultured nations. Thus Bishop Berkeley remarks on the obscure expressions of those who have described the relation of power to the objects which exert it. He cites Torricelli as likening matter to an enchanted vase of Circe serving as a receptacle of force, and declaring that power and impulse are such subtle abstracts and refined quintessences, that they cannot be enclosed in any other vessels but the inmost materiality of natural solids; also Leibnitz as comparing active primitive power to soul or substantial form. Thus, says Berkeley, must even the greatest men, when they give way to abstraction, have recourse to words having no certain signification, and indeed mere scholastic shadows.[339] We may fairly add that such passages show the civilized metaphysician falling back on such primitive conceptions as still occupy the minds of the rude natives of Siberia and Guinea. To go yet farther, I will venture to assert that the scientific conceptions current in my own schoolboy days, of heat and electricity as invisible fluids passing in and out of solid bodies, are ideas which reproduce with extreme closeness the special doctrine of Fetishism.
In placing its significance in the history of mental development on the belief of lower races regarding spirits or influences embodying or penetrating objects, there's an interesting comparison to be made with theories known in the philosophy of advanced societies. Bishop Berkeley notes the vague terminology used by those who discuss the relationship between power and the objects that exert it. He references Torricelli, who compares matter to an enchanted vase of Circe that holds force, declaring that power and impulse are such delicate abstractions that they can only be contained within the very essence of natural solids. He also mentions Leibnitz comparing active primitive power to the soul or substantial form. Berkeley suggests that even the greatest minds, when they indulge in abstraction, revert to terms that lack clear meaning, essentially becoming mere scholastic shadows.[339] We can reasonably argue that these passages demonstrate the civilized metaphysician returning to primitive concepts that still occupy the thoughts of the uncivilized people in Siberia and Guinea. To take it further, I would dare to claim that the scientific ideas popular during my school days, seeing heat and electricity as invisible fluids moving in and out of solid objects, closely mirror the specific doctrine of Fetishism.
Under the general heading of Fetishism, but for convenience’ sake separately, may be considered the worship of ‘stocks and stones.’ Such objects, if merely used as 161altars, are not of the nature of fetishes, and it is first necessary to ascertain that worship is actually addressed to them. Then arises the difficult question, are the stocks and stones set up as mere ideal representatives of deities, or are these deities considered as physically connected with them, embodied in them, hovering about them, acting through them? In other words, are they only symbols, or have they passed in the minds of their votaries into real fetishes? The conceptions of the worshippers are sometimes in this respect explicitly stated, may sometimes be fairly inferred from the circumstances, and are often doubtful.
Under the broader category of Fetishism, but for convenience's sake considered separately, we can look at the worship of 'stocks and stones.' If these objects are just used as altars, they aren’t actually fetishes, and it’s essential to confirm that worship is genuinely directed towards them. This leads to the tricky question: are the stocks and stones merely symbolic representations of deities, or are these deities thought to be physically linked to them, embodied in them, present around them, or acting through them? In other words, are they just symbols, or have they become true fetishes in the minds of their worshippers? The beliefs of the worshippers in this regard are sometimes clearly stated, can often be reasonably inferred from the context, and are frequently ambiguous.
Among the lower races of America, the Dacotas would pick up a round boulder, paint it, and then, addressing it as grandfather, make offerings to it and pray to it to deliver them from danger;[340] in the West India Islands, mention is made of three stones to which the natives paid great devotion—one was profitable for the crops, another for women to be delivered without pain, the third for sunshine and rain when they were wanted;[341] and we hear of Brazilian tribes setting up stakes in the ground, and making offerings before them to appease their deities or demons.[342] Stone-worship held an important place in the midst of the comparatively high culture of Peru, where not only was reverence given to especial curious pebbles and the like, but stones were placed to represent the penates of households and the patron-deities of villages. It is related by Montesinos that when the worship of a certain sacred stone was given up, a parrot flew from it into another stone, to which adoration was paid: and though this author is not of good credit, he can hardly have invented a story which, as we shall see, so curiously coincides with the Polynesian idea of a bird conveying to and from an idol the spirit which embodies itself in it.[343]
Among the indigenous peoples of America, the Dacotas would pick up a round boulder, paint it, and then, referring to it as grandfather, make offerings and pray to it to protect them from danger; [340] in the West Indies, it's noted that the natives revered three stones—one was for good crops, another for women to give birth painlessly, and the third for sunshine and rain when needed; [341] and we hear about Brazilian tribes setting up stakes in the ground and making offerings in front of them to appease their gods or demons. [342] Stone worship played a significant role among the relatively advanced culture of Peru, where not only did they show reverence for unique pebbles and similar objects, but stones were also placed to represent the household gods and the patron deities of villages. Montesinos recounts that when the worship of a certain sacred stone ceased, a parrot flew from it to another stone, which was then revered; and although this author is not very credible, he likely couldn't have invented such a story, especially since it interestingly aligns with the Polynesian belief that a bird carries the spirit to and from an idol. [343]
162In Africa, stock-and-stone worship is found among the Damaras of the South, whose ancestors are represented at the sacrificial feasts by stakes cut from trees or bushes consecrated to them, to which stakes the meat is first offered;[344] among the Dinkas of the White Nile, where the missionaries saw an old woman in her hut offering the first of her food and drink before a short thick staff planted in the ground, that the demon might not hurt her;[345] among the Gallas of Abyssinia, a people with a well-marked doctrine of deities, and who are known to worship stones and logs, but not idols.[346] In the island of Sambawa, the Orang Dongo attribute all supernatural or incomprehensible force to the sun, moon, trees, &c., but especially to stones, and when troubled by accident or disease, they carry offerings to certain stones to implore the favour of their genius or dewa.[347] Similar ideas are to be traced through the Pacific islands, both among the lighter and the darker races. Thus in the Society Islands, rude logs or fragments of basalt columns, clothed in native cloth and anointed with oil, received adoration and sacrifice as divinely powerful by virtue of the atua or deity which had filled them.[348] So in the New Hebrides worship was given to water-worn pebbles,[349] while Fijian gods and goddesses had their abodes or shrines in black stones like smooth round milestones, and there received their offerings of food.[350] The curiously anthropomorphic idea of stones being husbands and wives, and even having children, is familiar to the Fijians as it is to the Peruvians and the Lapps.
162 In Africa, stock-and-stone worship is seen among the Damaras of the South, whose ancestors are represented at sacrificial feasts by stakes made from trees or bushes that are dedicated to them, to which the meat is first offered;[344] among the Dinkas of the White Nile, where missionaries observed an old woman in her hut offering the first of her food and drink before a short, thick staff planted in the ground, so that the demon wouldn’t harm her;[345] among the Gallas of Abyssinia, a people with a clear belief in deities, who are known to worship stones and logs, but not idols.[346] On the island of Sambawa, the Orang Dongo attribute all supernatural or mysterious power to the sun, moon, trees, etc., but especially to stones, and when faced with accidents or illness, they offer gifts to certain stones to seek the favor of their genius or dewa.[347] Similar beliefs can be found throughout the Pacific islands, among both lighter and darker-skinned peoples. In the Society Islands, rough logs or pieces of basalt columns, wrapped in native cloth and anointed with oil, are worshipped and sacrificed to as powerful because of the atua or deity that inhabits them.[348] In the New Hebrides, worship is given to water-worn pebbles,[349] while Fijian gods and goddesses have their homes or shrines in black stones like smooth round milestones, where they receive offerings of food.[350] The oddly human-like idea of stones being husbands and wives, and even having children, is familiar to the Fijians as it is to the Peruvians and the Lapps.
The Turanian tribes of North Asia display stock-and-stone worship in full sense and vigour. Not only were 163stones, especially curious ones and such as were like men or animals, objects of veneration, but we learn that they were venerated because mighty spirits dwelt in them. The Samoyed travelling ark-sledge, with its two deities, one with a stone head, the other a mere black stone, both dressed in green robes with red lappets, and both smeared with sacrificial blood, may serve as a type of stone-worship. And as for the Ostyaks, had the famous King Log presented himself among them, they would without more ado have wrapped his sacred person in rags, and set him up for worship on a mountain-top or in the forest.[351] The frequent stock-and-stone worship of modern India belongs especially to races non-Hindu or part-Hindu in race and culture. Among such may serve as examples the bamboo which stands for the Bodo goddess Mainou, and for her receives the annual hog, and the monthly eggs offered by the women;[352] the stone under the great cotton-tree of every Khond village, shrine of Nadzu Pennu the village deity;[353] the clod or stone under a tree, which in Behar will represent the deified soul of some dead personage who receives worship and inspires oracles there;[354] the stone kept in every house by the Bakadâra and Betadâra, which represents their god Bûta, whom they induce by sacrifice to restrain the demon-souls of the dead from troubling them;[355] the two rude stones placed under a shed among the Shanars of Tinnevelly, by the medium of which the great god and goddess receive sacrifice, but which are thrown away or neglected when done with.[356] The remarkable groups of standing-stones in India are, in many cases at least, set up for each stone to represent 164or embody a deity. Mr. Hislop remarks that in every part of Southern India, four or five stones may often be seen in the ryot’s field, placed in a row and daubed with red paint, which they consider as guardians of the field and call the five Pândus; he reasonably takes these Hindu names to have superseded more ancient native appellations. In the Indian groups it is a usual practice to daub each stone with red paint, forming as it were a great blood-spot where the face would be if it were a shaped idol.[357] In India, moreover, the rites of stone-worship are not unexampled among the Hindus proper. Shashtî, protectress of children, receives worship, vows, and offerings, especially from women; yet they provide her with no idol or temple, but her proper representative is a rough stone as big as a man’s head, smeared with red paint and set at the foot of the sacred vata-tree. Even Siva is worshipped as a stone, especially that Siva who will afflict a child with epileptic fits, and then, speaking by its voice, will announce that he is Panchânana the Five-faced, and is punishing the child for insulting his image; to this Siva, in the form of a clay idol or of a stone beneath a sacred tree, there are offered not only flowers and fruits, but also bloody sacrifices.[358]
The Turanian tribes of North Asia fully embrace stone worship. Not only do they venerate stones, especially unusual ones that resemble humans or animals, but they also believe that powerful spirits inhabit these stones. The Samoyed's traveling ark-sledge, which includes two deities—one with a stone head and the other a simple black stone—dressed in green robes with red accents and smeared with sacrificial blood, exemplifies stone worship. If the famous King Log were to appear among the Ostyaks, they would have no hesitation in wrapping him in rags and setting him up for worship on a mountaintop or in the forest. The frequent stock-and-stone worship seen in modern India primarily belongs to non-Hindu or partially Hindu ethnic groups. Examples include the bamboo that represents the Bodo goddess Mainou, who receives an annual hog and monthly egg offerings from women; the stone beneath the great cotton tree in every Khond village, which serves as the shrine for Nadzu Pennu, the village deity; the clod or stone under a tree in Bihar that stands in for the deified soul of a deceased person, receiving worship and providing oracles; the stone kept in every home by the Bakadâra and Betadâra, representing their god Bûta, whom they sacrifice to in order to prevent the souls of the dead from troubling them; and the two rough stones under a shed among the Shanars of Tinnevelly, which are used for sacrifices to the great god and goddess but are discarded or neglected afterward. The notable groups of standing stones in India are often erected so that each stone represents or embodies a deity. Mr. Hislop notes that throughout Southern India, four or five stones can often be seen lined up in a ryot's field, coated with red paint, which they consider as guardians of the field and call the five Pândus; he suggests that these Hindu names have replaced older native terms. It is common in India to cover each stone with red paint, creating a large blood-like spot where a face would be if it were a carved idol. Additionally, the practices of stone worship are not uncommon among proper Hindus. Shashtî, the protector of children, is worshipped with vows and offerings, particularly by women; however, instead of an idol or temple, she is represented by a rough stone about the size of a man's head, covered in red paint and placed at the foot of a sacred vata tree. Even Siva is worshipped as a stone, particularly the version of Siva who causes children to have epileptic fits and who, speaking through the child, claims to be Panchânana, the Five-faced, punishing the child for insulting his image. To this Siva, whether in the form of a clay idol or as a stone beneath a sacred tree, offerings of not only flowers and fruits but also bloody sacrifices are made.
This stone-worship among the Hindus seems a survival of a rite belonging originally to a low civilization, probably a rite of the rude indigenes of the land, whose religion, largely incorporated into the religion of the Aryan invaders, has contributed so much to form the Hinduism of to-day. It is especially interesting to survey the stock-and-stone worship of the lower culture, for it enables us to explain by the theory of survival the appearance in the Old World, in the very midst of classic doctrine and classic art, of the 165worship of the same rude objects, whose veneration no doubt dated from remote barbaric antiquity. As Mr. Grote says, speaking of Greek worship, ‘The primitive memorial erected to a god did not even pretend to be an image, but was often nothing more than a pillar, a board, a shapeless stone or a post, receiving care and decoration from the neighbourhood, as well as worship.’ Such were the log that stood for Artemis in Eubœa, the stake that represented Pallas Athene, ‘sine effigie rudis palus, et informe lignum,’ the unwrought stone (λίθος ἀργός) at Hyettos which ‘after the ancient manner’ represented Herakles, the thirty such stones which the Pharæans in like archaic fashion worshipped for the gods, and that one which received such honour in Bœotian festivals as representing the Thespian Eros. Theophrastus, in the 4th century B.C., depicts the superstitious Greek passing the anointed stones in the streets, taking out his phial and pouring oil on them, falling on his knees to adore, and going his way. Six centuries later, Arnobius could describe from his own heathen life the state of mind of the stock-and-stone worshipper, telling how when he saw one of the stones anointed with oil, he accosted it in flattering words, and asked benefits from the senseless thing as though it contained a present power.[359] The ancient and graphic passage in the book of Isaiah well marks stone-worship within the range of the Semitic race:
This stone-worship among Hindus appears to be a remnant of a ritual that originally belonged to a less advanced civilization, likely a practice of the indigenous people of the region, whose beliefs were largely absorbed into the religion of the Aryan invaders and have significantly shaped modern Hinduism. It's particularly fascinating to look at the worship of natural objects among lower cultures, as it helps explain the presence of similar practices in the ancient world, right in the midst of classic beliefs and classic art, regarding the same crude objects, whose reverence undoubtedly dates back to ancient barbaric times. As Mr. Grote mentions when discussing Greek worship, ‘The primitive memorial erected to a god didn’t even try to be an image, but was often just a pillar, a board, a shapeless stone, or a post, receiving care and decoration from the local community, as well as worship.’ Examples include the log that symbolized Artemis in Euboea, the stake that stood for Pallas Athene, the crude unwrought stone at Hyettos that ‘in the ancient manner’ represented Herakles, the thirty stones that the Pharæans worshipped in a similarly archaic way for their gods, and that one which received honor in Bœotian festivals as representing the Thespian Eros. Theophrastus, in the 4th century B.C., depicts the superstitious Greek passing by the anointed stones in the streets, taking out his vial and pouring oil on them, kneeling in worship, and then going on his way. Six centuries later, Arnobius could describe from his own experiences as a pagan the mindset of the stock-and-stone worshipper, recounting how when he saw one of the stones anointed with oil, he approached it with flattering words, asking for favors from the lifeless object as if it held some real power. The ancient and vivid passage in the book of Isaiah clearly illustrates stone-worship within the scope of the Semitic race:
Long afterwards, among the local deities which Mohammed 166found in Arabia, and which Dr. Sprenger thinks he even acknowledged as divine during a moment when he well-nigh broke down in his career, were Manah and Lât, the one a rock, the other a stone or a stone idol; while the veneration of the black stone of the Kaaba, which Captain Burton thinks an aërolite, was undoubtedly a local rite which the Prophet transplanted into his new religion, where it flourishes to this day.[361] The curious passage in Sanchoniathon which speaks of the Heaven-god forming the ‘bætyls, animated stones’ (θεὸς Οὐρανὸς Βαιτύλια, λίθους ἐμψύχους, μηχανησάμενος) perhaps refers to meteorites or supposed thunderbolts fallen from the clouds. To the old Phœnician religion, which made so deep a contact with the Jewish world on the one side and the Greek and Roman on the other, there belonged the stone pillars of Baal and the wooden ashera-posts, but how far these objects were of the character of altars, symbols, or fetishes, is a riddle.[362] We may still say with Tacitus, describing the conical pillar which stood instead of an image to represent the Paphian Venus—‘et ratio in obscuro.’
Long after, among the local gods that Mohammed found in Arabia, which Dr. Sprenger believes he even recognized as divine during a moment when he nearly faltered in his journey, were Manah and Lât; one was a rock and the other was a stone or a stone idol. The reverence for the black stone of the Kaaba, which Captain Burton thinks is a meteorite, was definitely a local ritual that the Prophet incorporated into his new religion, where it continues to thrive today. The interesting passage in Sanchoniathon that mentions the Heaven-god creating the ‘bætyls, animated stones’ (θεὸς Οὐρανὸς Βαιτύλια, λίθους ἐμψύχους, μηχανησάμενος) might refer to meteorites or so-called thunderbolts that fell from the sky. The ancient Phoenician religion, which had significant ties with the Jewish world on one side and the Greek and Roman worlds on the other, included the stone pillars of Baal and the wooden ashera-posts, but it's unclear to what extent these objects served as altars, symbols, or fetishes. We can still echo Tacitus when describing the conical pillar that stood in place of an image to represent Paphian Venus— ‘et ratio in obscuro.’
There are accounts of formal Christian prohibitions of stone-worship in France and England, reaching on into the early middle ages,[363] which show this barbaric cultus as then distinctly lingering in popular religion. Coupling this fact with the accounts of the groups of standing-stones set up to represent deities in South India, a corresponding explanation has been suggested in Europe. Are the menhirs, cromlechs, &c., idols, and circles and lines of idols, worshipped by remotely ancient dwellers in the land as representatives or embodiments of their gods? The question at least deserves consideration, although the ideas with which 167stone-worship is carried on by different races are multifarious, and the analogy may be misleading. It is remarkable to what late times full and genuine stone-worship has survived in Europe. In certain mountain districts of Norway, up to the end of the last century, the peasants used to preserve round stones, washed them every Thursday evening (which seems to show some connection with Thor), smeared them with butter before the fire, laid them in the seat of honour on fresh straw, and at certain times of the year steeped them in ale, that they might bring luck and comfort to the house.[364] In an account dating from 1851, the islanders of Inniskea, off Mayo, are declared to have a stone carefully wrapped in flannel, which is brought out and worshipped at certain periods, and when a storm arises it is supplicated to send a wreck on the coast.[365] No savage ever showed more clearly by his treatment of a fetish that he considered it a personal being, than did these Norwegians and Irishmen. The ethnographic argument from the existence of stock-and-stone worship among so many nations of comparatively high culture seems to me of great weight as bearing on religious development among mankind. To imagine that peoples skilled in carving wood and stone, and using these arts habitually in making idols, should have gone out of their way to invent a practice of worshipping logs and pebbles, is not a likely theory. But on the other hand, when it is considered how such a rude object serves to uncultured men as a divine image or receptacle, there is nothing strange in its being a relic of early barbarism holding its place against more artistic models through ages of advancing civilization, by virtue of the traditional sanctity which belongs to survival from remote antiquity.
There are records of formal Christian bans on stone-worship in France and England that continued into the early Middle Ages,[363] which show this primitive practice lingering in popular religion. When we combine this fact with accounts of groups of standing stones set up to represent deities in South India, a similar explanation has been put forward for Europe. Are menhirs, cromlechs, etc., idols, along with circles and lines of idols, worshipped by ancient inhabitants of the land as symbols or embodiments of their gods? This question is worth considering, although the meanings behind stone-worship among different cultures are varied, and the comparison may be misleading. It is striking how long authentic stone-worship has persisted in Europe. In some mountain regions of Norway, up until the end of the last century, peasants would keep round stones, wash them every Thursday evening (which seems linked to Thor), smear them with butter before the fire, place them in a position of honor on fresh straw, and at certain times of the year soak them in ale to bring luck and comfort to their homes.[364] In an account from 1851, the inhabitants of Inniskea, off the coast of Mayo, are said to have a stone carefully wrapped in flannel, which is brought out and revered at certain times, and when a storm arises, they ask it to send a shipwreck to the coast.[365] No savage ever demonstrated more clearly through his treatment of a fetish that he viewed it as a personal being than these Norwegians and Irishmen did. The ethnographic argument concerning the existence of stone and wood worship among so many nations with a relatively high level of culture seems to carry significant weight regarding the religious development of humankind. It’s hard to believe that peoples skilled in carving wood and stone, who habitually used these crafts to create idols, would deliberately choose to invent a practice of worshipping logs and pebbles. However, when we consider how such a crude object serves uncultured people as a divine image or receptacle, it isn’t surprising that it’s a remnant of early barbarism holding its place against more artistic models through ages of advancing civilization, thanks to the traditional sanctity that comes with survival from ancient times.
168By a scarcely perceptible transition, we pass to Idolatry. A few chips or scratches or daubs of paint suffice to convert the rude post or stone into an idol. Difficulties which complicate the study of stock-and-stone worship disappear in the worship of even the rudest of unequivocal images, which can no longer be mere altars, and if symbols must at least be symbols of a personal being. Idolatry occupies a remarkable district in the history of religion. It hardly belongs to the lowest savagery, which simply seems not to have attained to it, and it hardly belongs to the highest civilization, which has discarded it. Its place is intermediate, ranging from the higher savagery where it first clearly appears, to the middle civilization where it reaches its extreme development, and thenceforward its continuance is in dwindling survival and sometimes expanding revival. The position thus outlined is, however, very difficult to map exactly. Idolatry does not seem to come in uniformly among the higher savages; it belongs, for instance, fully to the Society Islanders, but not to the Tongans and Fijians. Among higher nations, its presence or absence does not necessarily agree with particular national affinities or levels of culture—compare the idol-worshipping Hindu with his ethnic kinsman the idol-hating Parsi, or the idolatrous Phœnician with his ethnic kinsman the Israelite, among whose people the incidental relapse into the proscribed image-worship was a memory of disgrace. Moreover, its tendency to revive is ethnographically embarrassing. The ancient Vedic religion seems not to recognize idolatry, yet the modern Brahmans, professed followers of Vedic doctrine, are among the greatest idolators of the world. Early Christianity by no means abrogated the Jewish law against image-worship, yet image-worship became and still remains widely spread and deeply rooted in Christendom.
168By a barely noticeable shift, we move to Idolatry. A few chips, scratches, or splashes of paint are enough to turn a simple post or stone into an idol. The complexities that make studying the worship of materials difficult vanish when it comes to even the simplest clear images, which can no longer just be altars; if they are symbols, they must represent a personal being at the very least. Idolatry holds a unique place in the history of religion. It doesn’t seem to belong to the most primitive forms of savagery, which seem not to have reached it, nor does it fit into the highest levels of civilization, which have rejected it. Its position is in between, stretching from the higher forms of savagery where it first appears clearly to the middle levels of civilization where it reaches its fullest development, and afterward, it continues in a gradual decline with some instances of growth. However, this outlined position is very challenging to pinpoint precisely. Idolatry doesn’t appear consistently among higher savage cultures; it is fully present among the Society Islanders, for example, but not among the Tongans and Fijians. Among more advanced nations, whether idolatry is present or absent doesn’t necessarily align with specific national ties or cultural levels—consider the idol-worshipping Hindu alongside his ethnic relative, the idol-hating Parsi, or the idolatrous Phoenician with his ethnic relative, the Israelite, where the occasional return to the banned worship of images was seen as a disgraceful memory. Furthermore, its tendency to resurge is ethnographically puzzling. The ancient Vedic religion seems to not recognize idolatry, yet modern Brahmins, who claim to follow Vedic teachings, are among the world’s leading idolaters. Early Christianity did not abolish the Jewish law against image worship, yet image worship became widespread and remains deeply embedded in Christendom.
Of Idolatry, so far as its nature is symbolic or representative, I have given some account elsewhere.[366] The old and 169greatest difficulty in investigating the general subject is this, that an image may be, even to two votaries kneeling side by side before it, two utterly different things; to the one it may be only a symbol, a portrait, a memento; while to the other it is an intelligent and active being, by virtue of a life or spirit dwelling in it or acting through it. In both cases Image-worship is connected with the belief in spiritual beings, and is in fact a subordinate development of animism. But it is only so far as the image approximates to the nature of a material body provided for a spirit, that Idolatry comes properly into connexion with Fetishism. It is from this point of view that it is proposed to examine here its purpose and its place in history. An idol, so far as it belongs to the theory of spirit-embodiment, must combine the characters of portrait and fetish. Bearing this in mind, and noticing how far the idol is looked on as in some way itself an energetic object, or as the very receptacle enshrining a spiritual god, let us proceed to judge how far, along the course of civilization, the idea of the image itself exerting power or being personally animate has prevailed in the mind of the idolater.
Of idolatry, to the extent that it is symbolic or representative, I have discussed in another place.[366] The main challenge in exploring this subject is that an image can mean two completely different things to two worshippers kneeling side by side in front of it; for one, it might be just a symbol, a portrait, or a reminder, while for the other, it represents an intelligent and active being, due to a life or spirit residing in it or acting through it. In both instances, image-worship is linked to the belief in spiritual beings and is actually a lesser form of animism. However, idolatry only truly connects with fetishism when an image resembles a physical body intended for a spirit. It is from this perspective that we will examine its purpose and place in history. An idol, as it relates to the theory of spirit embodiment, must combine the qualities of both portrait and fetish. Keeping this in mind, and observing how the idol is perceived as an energetic object or as the actual vessel housing a spiritual god, let's assess how the idea of the image itself possessing power or being personally alive has influenced the mindset of the worshipper throughout the course of civilization.
As to the actual origin of idolatry, it need not be supposed that the earliest idols made by man seemed to their maker living or even active things. It is quite likely that the primary intention of the image was simply to serve as a sign or representative of some soul or deity, and certainly this original character is more or less maintained in the world through the long history of image-worship. At a stage succeeding this original condition, it may be argued, the tendency to identify the symbol and the symbolized, a tendency so strong among children and the ignorant everywhere, led to the idol being treated as a living powerful being, and thence even to explicit doctrines as to the manner of its energy or animation. It is, then, in this secondary stage, where the once merely representative image is passing into the active image-fetish, that we are particularly concerned to understand it. 170Here it is reasonable to judge the idolater by his distinct actions and beliefs. A line of illustrative examples will carry the personality of the idol through grade after grade of civilization. Among the lower races, such thoughts are displayed by the Kurile islander throwing his idol into the sea to calm the storm; by the negro who feeds ancestral images and brings them a share of his trade profits, but will beat an idol or fling it into the fire if it cannot give him luck or preserve him from sickness; by famous idols of Madagascar, of which one goes about of himself or guides his bearers, and another answers when spoken to—at least, they did this till they were ignominiously found out a few years ago. Among Tatar peoples of North Asia and Europe, conceptions of this class are illustrated by the Ostyak, who clothes his puppet and feeds it with broth, but if it brings him no sport will try the effect of a good thrashing on it, after which he will clothe and feed it again; by the Lapps, who fancied their uncouth images could go about at will; or the Esths, who wondered that their idols did not bleed when Dieterich the Christian priest hewed them down. Among high Asiatic nations, what could be more anthropomorphic than the rites of modern Hinduism, the dances of the nautch-girls before the idols, the taking out of Jagannath in procession to pay visits, the spinning of tops before Krishna to amuse him? Buddhism is a religion in its principles little favourable to idolatry. Yet, from setting up portrait-statues of Gautama and other saints, there developed itself the full worship of images, and even of images with hidden joints and cavities, which moved and spoke as in our own middle ages. In China, we read stories of worshippers abusing some idol that has failed in its duty. ‘How now,’ they say, ‘you dog of a spirit; we have given you an abode in a splendid temple, we gild you and feed you and fumigate you with incense, and yet you are so ungrateful that you won’t listen to our prayers!’ So they drag him in the dirt, and then, if they get what they want, it is but to clean him and set him up again, with 171apologies and promises of a new coat of gilding. There is what appears a genuine story of a Chinaman who had paid an idol priest to cure his daughter, but she died; whereupon the swindled worshipper brought an action at law against the god, who for his fraud was banished from the province. The classic instances, again, are perfect—the dressing and anointing of statues, feeding them with delicacies and diverting them with raree-shows, summoning them as witnesses; the story of the Arkadian youths coming back from a bad day’s hunting and revenging themselves by scourging and pricking Pan’s statue, and the companion tale of the image which fell upon the man who ill-treated it; the Tyrians chaining the statue of the Sun-god that he might not abandon their city; Augustus chastising in effigy the ill-behaved Neptune; Apollo’s statue that moved when it would give an oracle; and the rest of the images which brandished weapons, or wept, or sweated, to prove their supernatural powers. Such ideas continued to hold their place in Christendom, as was natural, considering how directly the holy image or picture took the place of the household god or the mightier idol of the temple. The Russian boor covering up the saint’s picture that it may not see him do wrong; the Mingrelian borrowing a successful neighbour’s saint when his own crop fails, or when about to perjure himself choosing for the witness of his deceitful oath a saint of mild countenance and merciful repute; the peasant of Southern Europe, alternately coaxing and trampling on his special saint-fetish, and ducking the Virgin or St. Peter for rain; the winking and weeping images that are worked, even at this day, to the greater glory of God, or rather to the greater shame of Man—these are but the extreme instances of the worshipper’s endowment of the sacred image with a life and personality modelled on his own.[367]
As for the true origin of idolatry, we shouldn’t assume that the earliest idols created by humans appeared to their makers as living or even active entities. It’s quite likely that the initial purpose of the image was simply to serve as a sign or representation of some soul or deity, and this original function has been somewhat preserved throughout the long history of image worship. In a later stage, it can be argued that the strong tendency to equate the symbol with what it symbolizes—common among children and the uninformed everywhere—led to treating the idol as a living being with power, and later even to specific beliefs about how it was animated. Thus, in this secondary stage, where the once purely representative image transitions into the active image-fetish, we particularly seek to understand it. 170 Here it makes sense to evaluate the idolater based on his distinct actions and beliefs. A series of illustrative examples will showcase how the personality of the idol evolves through various levels of civilization. Among simpler societies, such ideas are seen in the Kurile islander who throws his idol into the sea to calm a storm; the Black man who feeds ancestral images and offers them a share of his profits, but will beat an idol or toss it into the fire if it fails to bring him luck or protect him from illness; the famous idols of Madagascar, one of which walks on its own or guides its bearers, and another which responds when spoken to—at least, this was the case until they were embarrassingly exposed a few years ago. Among Tatar groups in North Asia and Europe, similar beliefs are illustrated by the Ostyak, who dresses his puppet and feeds it with broth, but will punish it if it doesn’t bring him enjoyment, after which he will clothe and feed it again; by the Lapps, who believed their rough images could wander at will; and by the Esths, who were puzzled that their idols didn’t bleed when Dieterich the Christian priest chopped them down. Among high Asian nations, what could be more anthropomorphic than the rituals of modern Hinduism, the dances of nautch girls before the idols, the procession of Jagannath to pay visits, or spinning tops before Krishna to entertain him? Buddhism, in its principles, is not very conducive to idolatry. Yet, from the establishment of portrait statues of Gautama and other saints, there emerged a full-blown worship of images, even those with concealed joints and cavities that moved and spoke as in our own Middle Ages. In China, we find stories of worshippers chastising an idol that failed them. “How now,” they say, “you ungrateful spirit; we’ve given you a home in a beautiful temple, we gild you, feed you, and bomb you with incense, and yet you won’t listen to our prayers!” So, they drag it through the dirt, and then, if they get what they want, it’s just to clean it up and put it back in place, with apologies and promises of a new layer of gold paint. There’s a seemingly genuine story of a Chinese man who paid an idol priest to heal his daughter, but she died; as a result, the cheated worshipper took legal action against the god, who was then exiled from the province for his deception. The classic examples are striking—the dressing and anointing of statues, feeding them gourmet food, entertaining them with shows, calling them as witnesses; the tale of the Arcadian youths returning from a bad hunting day and exacting revenge by whipping and stabbing Pan's statue, and the related story of the statue collapsing on the man who mistreated it; the Tyrians chaining the statue of the Sun-god so it wouldn't abandon their city; Augustus punishing in effigy the misbehaving Neptune; Apollo’s statue that moved when it was about to deliver a prophecy; and other images that brandished weapons, or cried, or sweated, to demonstrate their supernatural powers. Such beliefs continued to be prevalent in Christendom, as it was natural, considering how directly the holy image or picture replaced the household god or the greater idol of the temple. The Russian peasant covering the saint’s picture so it won’t witness his wrongdoings; the Mingrelian borrowing his neighbor's successful saint when his own crops fail, or when preparing to lie, choosing a saint with a gentle face and a good reputation as the witness for his deceitful oath; the Southern European peasant alternately coaxing and trampling on his personal saint-fetish, and dipping the Virgin or St. Peter for rain; the winking and weeping images still used today for the greater glory of God—or rather for the greater embarrassment of Man—these are merely the extreme examples of how the worshipper attributes life and personality to the sacred image based on his own. [367]
172The appearance of idolatry at a grade above the lowest of known human culture, and its development in extent and elaborateness under higher conditions of civilization, are well displayed among the native races of America. ‘Conspicuous by its absence’ among many of the lower tribes, image-worship comes plainly into view toward the upper levels of savagery, as where, for instance, Brazilian native tribes set up in their huts, or in the recesses of the forest, their pygmy heaven-descended figures of wax or wood;[368] or where the Mandans, howling and whining, made their prayers before puppets of grass and skins; or where the spiritual beings of the Algonquins (manitu) or the Hurons (oki) were represented by, and in language identified with, the carved wooden heads or more complete images to which worship and sacrifice were offered. Among the Virginians and other of the more cultured Southern tribes, these idols even had temples to dwell in.[369] The discoverers of the New World found idolatry an accepted institution among the islanders of the West Indies. These strong animists are recorded to have carved their little images in the shapes in which they believed the spirits themselves to have appeared to them; and some human figures bore the names of ancestors in memory of them. The images of such ‘cemi’ or spirits, some animal, but most of human type, were found by thousands; and it is even declared that an island near Hayti had a population of idol-makers, who especially made images of nocturnal spectres. The spirit could be conveyed with the image, both were called ‘cemi,’ and in the local accounts of sacrifices, oracles, and miracles, the deity and the idol are mixed together in a way which at least shows the extreme closeness of their connexion in the native 173mind.[370] If we pass to the far higher culture of Peru, we find idols in full reverence, some of them complete figures, but the great deities of Sun and Moon figured by discs with human countenances, like those which to this day represent them in symbol among ourselves. As for the conquered neighbouring tribes brought under the dominion of the Incas, their idols were carried, half trophies and half hostages, to Cuzco, to rank among the inferior deities of the Peruvian Pantheon.[371] In Mexico, idolatry had attained to its full barbaric development. As in the Aztec mind the world swarmed with spiritual deities, so their material representatives, the idols, stood in the houses at the corners of the streets, on every hill and rock, to receive from passers-by some little offering—a nosegay, a whiff of incense, a drop or two of blood; while in the temples more huge and elaborate images enjoyed the dances and processions in their honour, were fed by the bloody sacrifice of men and beasts, and received the tribute and reverence paid to the great national gods.[372] Up to a certain point, such evidence bears upon the present question. We learn that the native races of the New World had idols, that those idols in some sort represented ancestral souls and other deities, and for them received adoration and sacrifice. But whether the native ideas of the connexion of spirit and image were obscure, or whether the foreign observers did not get at these ideas, or partly for both reasons, there is a general want of express statement how far the idols of America remained mere symbols or portraits, or how far they had come to be considered the animated bodies of the gods.
172Idolatry appears more advanced than the most basic levels of known human culture, showing its development and complexity under more sophisticated civilizations among native American races. While many lower tribes lack it, image-worship becomes evident among higher savage cultures. For example, Brazilian tribes create tiny, heaven-sent figures made of wax or wood in their huts or forests. The Mandans, in their rituals, prayed to puppets made of grass and skin, and the Algonquins (manitu) or Hurons (oki) identified their spiritual beings with carved wooden heads or more detailed images that received worship and sacrifices. Among the Virginians and other more developed Southern tribes, these idols even had temples. The first explorers of the New World found that idolatry was a common practice among the islanders of the West Indies. These strong animists are noted for carving small images resembling the forms in which they believed spirits had appeared, with some human figures named after ancestors to honor them. Thousands of these ‘cemi’ or spirit images—some animal and most human—were found, and it is said that one island near Haiti was home to a population of idol-makers, particularly crafting images of nocturnal spirits. The spirit and the image were both referred to as ‘cemi,’ and accounts of sacrifices, oracles, and miracles often blurred the lines between deity and idol, indicating a tight connection in the native perspective. 173If we look at the much more advanced culture of Peru, we see idols held in great reverence, some represented as full figures, with major deities like the Sun and Moon depicted as discs with human faces, similar to how we symbolize them today. The conquered neighboring tribes under the Incas had their idols taken to Cuzco as both trophies and hostages, placed among the lesser deities of the Peruvian Pantheon. In Mexico, idolatry reached a peak of barbaric expression. In the Aztec worldview, the world was filled with spiritual deities, and their physical representations, the idols, were positioned in homes, street corners, hills, and rocks to receive small offerings—a flower, a whiff of incense, or blood; meanwhile, bigger, more elaborate images in temples enjoyed dances and processions in their honor, fed on the bloody sacrifices of humans and animals, and received the tributes and respect paid to the great national gods. Up to a point, this evidence relates to our current discussion. We learn that the native races of the New World had idols that represented ancestral souls and other deities, receiving adoration and sacrifice. However, it's unclear whether the natives' understanding of the connection between spirit and image was vague, or if foreign observers failed to grasp these concepts, or perhaps both factors contributed to the general lack of explicit statements regarding whether the idols of America were merely symbols or portraits, or if they were regarded as the living bodies of the gods.
It is not always thus, however. In the island regions of 174the Southern Hemisphere, while image-worship scarcely appears among the Andaman islanders, Tasmanians, or Australians, and is absent or rare in various Papuan and Polynesian districts, it prevails among the majority of the island tribes who have attained to middle and high savage levels. In Polynesian islands, where the meaning of the native idolatry has been carefully examined, it is found to rest on the most absolute theory of spirit-embodiment. Thus, New-Zealanders set up memorial idols of deceased persons near the burial-place, talking affectionately to them as if still alive, and casting garments to them when they passed by, also they preserve in their houses small carved wooden images, each dedicated to the spirit of an ancestor. It is distinctly held that such an atua or ancestral deity enters into the substance of an image in order to hold converse with the living. A priest can by repeating charms cause the spirit to enter into the idol, which he will even jerk by a string round its neck to arrest its attention; it is the same atua or spirit which will at times enter not the image but the priest himself, throw him into convulsions, and deliver oracles through him; while it is quite understood that the images themselves are not objects of worship, nor do they possess in themselves any virtue, but derive their sacredness from being the temporary abodes of spirits.[373] In the Society Islands, it was noticed in Captain Cook’s exploration that the carved wooden images at burial-places were not considered mere memorials, but abodes into which the souls of the departed retired. In Mr. Ellis’s account of the Polynesian idolatry, relating as it seems especially to this group, the sacred objects might be either mere stocks and stones, or carved wooden images, from six or eight feet long down to as many inches. Some of these were to represent ‘tii,’ divine manes or spirits of the dead, while others were to represent ‘tu,’ or deities of higher rank and power. At certain seasons, or in answer to the prayers of the priests, these spiritual beings entered into the idols, 175which then became very powerful, but when the spirit departed, the idol remained only a sacred object. A god often came to and passed from an image in the body of a bird, and spiritual influence could be transmitted from an idol by imparting it by contact to certain valued kinds of feathers, which could be carried away in this ‘inhabited’ state, and thus exert power elsewhere, and transfer it to new idols. Here then we have the similarity of souls to other spirits shown by the similar way in which both become embodied in images, just as these same people consider both to enter into human bodies. And we have the pure fetish, which here is a feather or a log or stone, brought together with the more elaborate carved idol, all under one common principle of spirit-embodiment.[374] In Borneo, notwithstanding the Moslem prohibition of idolatry, not only do images remain in use, but the doctrine of spirit-embodiment is distinctly applied to them. Among the tribes of Western Sarawak the priestesses have made for them rude figures of birds, which none but they may touch. These are supposed to become inhabited by spirits, and at the great harvest feasts are hung up in bunches of ten or twenty in the long common room, carefully veiled with coloured handkerchiefs. Again, among some Dayak tribes, they will make rude figures of a naked man and woman, and place these opposite to one another on the path to the farms. On their heads are head-dresses of bark, by their sides is the betel-nut basket, and in their hands a short wooden spear. These figures are said to be inhabited each by a spirit who prevents inimical influences from passing on to the farms, and likewise from the farms to the village, and evil betide the profane wretch who lifts his hand against them—violent fever and sickness would be sure to follow.[375]
It doesn’t always work this way, though. In the island regions of 174the Southern Hemisphere, while image-worship is hardly seen among the Andaman islanders, Tasmanians, or Australians, and is absent or rare in various Papuan and Polynesian areas, it is widespread among most island tribes that have reached intermediate and advanced savage levels. In the Polynesian islands, where the significance of native idolatry has been closely studied, it turns out to be based on a very strict theory of spirit embodiment. For example, New Zealanders create memorial idols for deceased individuals near their burial sites, speaking to them affectionately as if they were still alive, and offering garments as they pass by. They also keep small carved wooden images in their homes, each dedicated to the spirit of an ancestor. It is firmly believed that such an atua, or ancestral deity, inhabits the image to communicate with the living. A priest can invoke the spirit into the idol by reciting charms, even pulling it by a string around its neck to get its attention; it is the same atua or spirit that might occasionally enter the priest himself, causing convulsions and delivering messages through him. It is clearly understood that the images are not objects of worship themselves and have no intrinsic power, but are considered sacred because they temporarily house spirits.[373] In the Society Islands, Captain Cook noted during his explorations that the carved wooden images at burial sites were viewed not just as memorials but as places where the souls of the departed resided. In Mr. Ellis’s account of Polynesian idolatry, particularly related to this group, sacred objects could be either simple logs or stones or carved wooden images, ranging from six or eight feet long down to just a few inches. Some represented ‘tii,’ divine spirits of the dead, while others represented ‘tu,’ deities of greater rank and power. During specific seasons or in response to the prayers of priests, these spiritual beings would enter the idols, 175which would then become very powerful. However, once the spirit departed, the idol would revert to being simply a sacred object. A deity might travel to and from an image in the form of a bird, and spiritual power could be transferred from an idol to certain prized feathers through touch, allowing them to be carried away in this ‘inhabited’ state and exert influence elsewhere, thereby bestowing it upon new idols. Here we see the similarity between souls and other spirits, shown by the way both become embodied in images, just as these people believe both can inhabit human bodies. We also see the pure fetish, which can be a feather, log, or stone, combined with more intricately carved idols, all under one common principle of spirit embodiment.[374] In Borneo, despite the Muslim prohibition of idolatry, images are still widely used, and the concept of spirit embodiment is clearly applied to them. Among the tribes of Western Sarawak, priestesses create crude figures of birds that only they are permitted to touch. These figures are believed to be inhabited by spirits, and during major harvest celebrations, they are hung in bunches of ten or twenty in the communal longhouse, carefully covered with colorful handkerchiefs. Similarly, some Dayak tribes create crude figures of a naked man and woman and place them facing each other along the path to the farms. They wear bark headdresses, have betel-nut baskets at their sides, and hold short wooden spears. It is said that each of these figures is inhabited by a spirit that protects the farms from harmful influences and vice versa, and anyone who disrespects them will face dire consequences—inevitable fever and illness would follow.[375]
West Africa naturally applies its familiar fetish-doctrine 176of spirit-embodiment to images or idols. How an image may be considered a receptacle for a spirit, is well shown here by the straw and rag figures of men and beasts made in Calabar at the great triennial purification, for the expelled spirits to take refuge in, whereupon they are got rid of over the border.[376] As to positive idols, nothing could be more explicit than the Gold-Coast account of certain wooden figures called ‘amagai,’ which are specially treated by a ‘wong-man’ or priest, and have a ‘wong’ or deity in connexion with them; so close is the connexion conceived between spirit and image, that the idol is itself called ‘wong.’[377] So in the Ewe district, the same ‘edro’ or deity who inspires the priest is also present in the idol, and ‘edro’ signifies both god and idol.[378] Waitz sums up the principles of West African idolatry in a distinct theory of embodiment, as follows: ‘The god himself is invisible, but the devotional feeling and especially the lively fancy of the negro demands a visible object to which worship may be directed. He wishes really and sensibly to behold the god, and seeks to shape in wood or clay the conception he has formed of him. Now if the priest, whom the god himself at times inspires and takes possession of, consecrates this figure to him, the idea has only to follow that the god may in consequence be pleased to take up his abode in the figure, to which he may be specially invited by the consecration, and thus image-worship is seen to be comprehensible enough. Denham found that even to take a man’s portrait was dangerous and caused mistrust, from the fear that a part of the living man’s soul might be conveyed by magic into the artificial figure. The idols are not, as Bosman thinks, deputies of the gods, but merely objects in which the god loves to place himself, and which at the same time display him in sensible presence to his adorers. The 177god is also by no means bound fast to his dwelling in the image, he goes out and in, or rather is present in it sometimes with more and sometimes with less intensity.’[379]
West Africa naturally applies its familiar belief system regarding spirit embodiment to images or idols. The idea that an image can serve as a container for a spirit is clearly demonstrated by the straw and rag figures of humans and animals created in Calabar during the large triennial purification, which expelled spirits take refuge in before being sent away. When it comes to actual idols, the Gold Coast provides a clear example with wooden figures known as ‘amagai.’ These figures are specially treated by a ‘wong-man’ or priest and are associated with a ‘wong’ or deity. The connection between the spirit and the image is so strong that the idol itself is referred to as ‘wong.’ In the Ewe region, the same ‘edro’ or deity that inspires the priest also resides within the idol, and ‘edro’ means both god and idol. Waitz summarizes the principles of West African idolatry in a distinct theory of embodiment, stating: ‘The god himself is invisible, but the devotional feeling and especially the vivid imagination of the person seeking connection demands a visible object for worship. They genuinely want to see the god and try to create in wood or clay their conception of him. If the priest, who is sometimes inspired and possessed by the god, sanctifies this figure to him, it follows that the god may choose to dwell in the figure, especially if invited in through the consecration, making the act of image-worship understandable. Denham found that even taking a person's portrait could be risky and lead to mistrust, as there was a fear that part of the living person's soul could be magically transferred into the artificial figure. The idols, contrary to Bosman's view, are not representatives of the gods but rather objects where the god likes to inhabit, presenting himself visibly to his worshippers. The god is not confined to the idol; he can enter and exit, often being present in the idol with varying degrees of intensity.’
Castrén’s wide and careful researches among the rude Turanian tribes of North Asia led him to form a similar conception of the origin and nature of their idolatry. The idols of these people are uncouth objects, often mere stones or logs with some sort of human countenance, or sometimes more finished images, even of metal; some are large, some mere dolls; they belong to individuals, or families, or tribes; they may be kept in the yurts for private use, or set up in sacred groves or on the steppes or near the hunting and fishing places they preside over, or they may even have special temple-houses; some open-air gods are left naked, not to spoil good clothes, but others under cover are decked out with all an Ostyak’s or Samoyed’s wealth of scarlet cloths and costly furs, necklaces and trinkets; and lastly, to the idols are made rich offerings of food, clothes, furs, kettles, pipes, and the rest of the inventory of Siberian nomade riches. Now these idols are not to be taken as mere symbols or portraits of deities, but the worshippers mostly imagine that the deity dwells in the image or, so to speak, is embodied in it, whereby the idol becomes a real god capable of giving health and prosperity to man. On the one hand, the deity becomes serviceable to the worshipper by being thus contained and kept for his use, and on the other hand, the god profits by receiving richer offerings, failing which it would depart from its receptacle. We even hear of numerous spirits being contained in one image, and flying off at the death of the shaman who owned it. In Buddhist Tibet, as in West Africa, the practice of conjuring into puppets the demons which molest men is a recognized rite; while in Siam the making of clay puppets to be exposed on trees or by the roadside, or set adrift with food-offerings 178in baskets, is a recognized manner of expelling disease-spirits.[380] In the image-worship of modern India, there crop up traces of the embodiment-theory. It is possible for the intelligent Hindu to attach as little real personality to a divine image, as to the man of straw which he makes in order to celebrate the funeral rites of a relative whose body cannot be recovered. He can even protest against being treated as an idolater at all, declaring the images of his gods to be but symbols, bringing to his mind thoughts of the real deities, as a portrait reminds one of a friend no longer to be seen in the body. Yet in the popular religion of his country, what could be more in conformity with the fetish-theory than the practice of making temporary hollow clay idols by tens of thousands, which receive no veneration for themselves, and only become objects of worship when the officiating brahman has invited the deity to dwell in the image, performing the ceremony of the ‘adhivâsa’ or inhabitation, after which he puts in the eyes and the ‘prâna,’ i.e., breath, life, or soul.[381]
Castrén’s extensive and careful studies among the primitive Turanian tribes of North Asia led him to develop a similar understanding of the roots and nature of their idol worship. The idols of these people are awkward objects, often just stones or logs that resemble human faces, or sometimes more detailed figures, even made of metal; they can be large or just small dolls; they belong to individuals, families, or tribes; they might be kept in yurts for personal use, displayed in sacred groves, on the steppes, or near the hunting and fishing areas they oversee, or they might even have dedicated temple houses; some outdoor gods are left bare, to avoid damaging good clothes, while others that are sheltered are adorned with all the wealth of scarlet cloths and expensive furs, necklaces, and trinkets that an Ostyak or Samoyed can muster; finally, these idols receive rich offerings of food, clothes, furs, kettles, pipes, and other possessions of Siberian nomadic wealth. These idols are not merely symbols or representations of deities, but worshippers generally believe that the deity lives in the image or, in a sense, is embodied in it, making the idol a real god capable of granting health and prosperity to humans. On one hand, the deity serves the worshipper by being held within and kept for their use, and on the other hand, the god benefits from receiving more generous offerings; without them, it might leave its repository. There are even accounts of multiple spirits residing in one image and flying away when the shaman who owned it dies. In Buddhist Tibet, as in West Africa, the practice of invoking demons into puppets that trouble people is an established ritual; whereas in Siam, crafting clay puppets to be displayed on trees, by roadsides, or sent adrift with food offerings in baskets is a recognized way to drive away disease spirits. In the image worship of modern India, elements of the embodiment theory appear. An understanding Hindu can attach very little real personality to a divine image, much like the scarecrow he makes to perform funeral rites for a relative whose body cannot be found. He might even argue that he shouldn't be considered an idolater at all, claiming that the images of his gods are merely symbols that remind him of the actual deities, similar to how a portrait evokes memories of a dear friend no longer seen in person. Yet in the folk religion of his country, what could align more closely with fetish theory than the practice of creating temporary hollow clay idols by the thousands, which receive no reverence on their own, and only become objects of worship once the officiating brahman has invited the deity to inhabit the image, performing the ritual of ‘adhivâsa’ or inhabitation, after which he puts in the eyes and the ‘prâna,’ meaning breath, life, or soul.
Nowhere, perhaps, in the wide history of religion, can we find definitions more full and absolute of the theory of deities actually animating their images, than in those passages from early Christian writers which describe the nature and operation of the heathen idols. Arnobius introduces the heathen as declaring that it is not the bronze or gold and silver material they consider to be gods, but they worship in them those beings which sacred dedication introduces, and causes to inhabit the artificial images.[382] Augustine cites as follows the opinions attributed to Hermes Trismegistus. This Egyptian, he tells us, considers some gods as made by the highest Deity, and some by men; ‘he asserts the visible and tangible images to be as it were bodies of 179gods, for there are within them certain invited spirits, of some avail for doing harm or for fulfilling certain desires of those who pay them divine honours and rites of worship. By a certain art to connect these invisible spirits with visible objects of corporeal matter, that such may be as it were animated bodies, effigies dedicate and subservient to the spirits—this is what he calls making gods, and men have received this great and wondrous power.’ And further, this Trismegistus is made to speak of ‘statues animated with sense and full of spirit, doing so great things; statues prescient of the future, and predicting it by lots, by priests, by dreams, and by many other ways.’[383] This idea, as accepted by the early Christians themselves, with the qualification that the spiritual beings inhabiting the idols were not beneficent deities but devils, is explicitly stated by Minucius Felix, in a passage in the ‘Octavius,’ which gives an instructive account of the animistic philosophy of Christianity towards the beginning of the third century: ‘Thus these impure spirits or demons, as shown by the magi, by the philosophers, and by Plato, are concealed by consecration in statues and images, and by their afflatus obtain the authority as of a present deity when at times they inspire priests, inhabit temples, occasionally animate the filaments of the entrails, govern the flight of birds, guide the falling of lots, give oracles enveloped in many falsehoods ... also secretly creeping into (men’s) bodies as thin spirits, they feign diseases, terrify minds, distort limbs, in order to compel men to their worship; that fattening on the steam of altars or their offered victims from the flocks, they may seem to have cured the ailments which they had constrained. And these are the madmen whom ye see rush forth into 180public places; and the very priests without the temple thus go mad, thus rave, thus whirl about.... All these things most of you know, how the very demons confess of themselves, so often as they are expelled by us from the patients’ bodies with torments of word and fires of prayer. Saturn himself, and Serapis, and Jupiter, and whatsoever demons ye worship, overcome by pain declare what they are; nor surely do they lie concerning their iniquity, above all when several of you are present. Believe these witnesses, confessing the truth of themselves, that they are demons. For adjured by the true and only God, they shudder reluctant in the wretched bodies; and either they issue forth at once, or vanish gradually, according as the faith of the patient aids, or the grace of the curer favours.’[384]
Nowhere, perhaps, in the extensive history of religion, can we find more complete and absolute definitions of the theory of gods actually inhabiting their images than in those passages from early Christian writers that describe the nature and functioning of pagan idols. Arnobius mentions that the pagans claim it's not the bronze or gold and silver materials they view as gods, but rather, they worship the beings that sacred rituals invite to dwell within the crafted images.[382] Augustine quotes the views attributed to Hermes Trismegistus. This Egyptian, he tells us, believes that some gods are created by the highest Deity and others by humans; 'he claims the visible and tangible images to be, in a way, bodies of gods, for there are spirits within them that can do harm or fulfill the desires of those who pay them divine honors and perform acts of worship. Through a certain method, these invisible spirits are connected with physical objects, allowing them to appear as animated bodies, figures dedicated to serving the spirits—this is what he means by creating gods, and humans have received this remarkable power.' Furthermore, this Trismegistus speaks of 'statues that are animated, full of spirit, doing great things; statues that can foresee the future and predict it through lots, priests, dreams, and many other means.'[383] This concept, accepted by the early Christians themselves with the understanding that the spiritual beings inhabiting the idols were not benevolent deities but demons, is clearly expressed by Minucius Felix in a passage from the ‘Octavius,’ which provides a valuable account of the animistic perspective of Christianity from the beginning of the third century: ‘Thus these unclean spirits or demons, as shown by the magi, philosophers, and Plato, are hidden in statues and images through consecration, and by their inspiration gain authority as if they were present deities when they sometimes inspire priests, inhabit temples, occasionally animate the organs of living creatures, control the flight of birds, guide the casting of lots, and deliver oracles filled with many falsehoods... They also sneak into (people's) bodies as thin spirits, pretending to cause diseases, frightening minds, twisting limbs, to compel people to worship them; by feeding on the smoke of altars or on the victims offered from the herds, they may seem to cure the ailments they themselves inflicted. And these are the madmen you see rushing into public spaces; even the priests outside the temple go mad, rave, and whirl around.... Most of you know how the demons confess their true nature whenever we expel them from the bodies of the afflicted through the torment of words and the heat of prayer. Saturn, Serapis, Jupiter, and any demons you worship, overcome by pain, reveal their true identity; they certainly do not lie about their wickedness, especially when many of you are present. Trust these witnesses, confessing their own truth, that they are demons. For when compelled by the one true God, they tremble and resist within the miserable bodies; they either leave immediately or vanish slowly, depending on the faith of the afflicted or the favor of the healer.’[384]
The strangeness with which such words now fall upon our ears is full of significance. It is one symptom of that vast quiet change which has come over animistic philosophy in the modern educated world. Whole orders of spiritual beings, worshipped in polytheistic religion, and degraded in early Christendom to real but evil demons, have since passed from objective to subjective existence, have faded from the Spiritual into the Ideal. By the operation of similar intellectual changes, the general theory of spirit-embodiment, having fulfilled the great work it had for ages to do in religion and philosophy, has now dwindled within the limits of the educated world to near its vanishing-point. The doctrines of Disease-possession and Oracle-possession, once integral parts of the higher philosophy, and still maintaining a vigorous existence in the lower culture, seem to be dying out within the influence of the higher into dogmatic survival, conscious metaphor, and popular superstition. The doctrine of spirit-embodiment in objects, Fetishism, now scarcely appears outside barbaric regions 181save in the peasant folklore which keeps it up amongst us with so many other remnants of barbaric thought. And the like theory of spiritual influence as applied to Idolatry, though still to be studied among savages and barbarians, and on record in past ages of the civilized world, has perished so utterly amongst ourselves, that few but students are aware of its ever having existed.
The oddness of these words now strikes our ears with great significance. It's a sign of the major quiet changes that have taken place in animistic philosophy in today's educated society. Entire groups of spiritual beings, once worshipped in polytheistic religions and later downgraded in early Christianity to mere evil demons, have shifted from being something objective to something subjective, fading from the Spiritual to the Ideal. Due to similar intellectual changes, the general idea of spirit-embodiment, which once played a significant role in religion and philosophy, has now shrunk to near extinction within educated circles. The ideas of Disease-possession and Oracle-possession, once key components of higher philosophy and still robust in lower cultures, seem to be fading away under the influence of higher thinking, relegated to dogmatic survival, conscious metaphor, and popular superstition. The concept of spirit-embodiment in objects, known as Fetishism, hardly exists outside primitive areas except in the peasant folklore that preserves it among us alongside many other vestiges of primitive thought. Similarly, the concept of spiritual influence in relation to Idolatry, while still relevant in the study of primitive cultures and documented in the civilized world’s past, has been so completely lost to us that only a few scholars even realize it ever existed. 181
To bring home to our minds the vastness of the intellectual tract which separates modern from savage philosophy, and to enable us to look back along the path where step by step the mind’s journey was made, it will serve us to glance over the landmarks which language to this day keeps standing. Our modern languages reach back through the middle ages to classic and barbaric times, where in this matter the transition from the crudest primæval animism is quite manifest. We keep in daily use, and turn to modern meaning, old words and idioms which carry us home to the philosophy of ancient days. We talk of ‘genius’ still, but with thought how changed. The genius of Augustus was a tutelary demon, to be sworn by and to receive offerings on an altar as a deity. In modern English, Shakspere, Newton, or Wellington, is said to be led and prompted by his genius, but that genius is a shrivelled philosophic metaphor. So the word ‘spirit’ and its kindred terms keep up with wondrous pertinacity the traces which connect the thought of the savage with its hereditary successor, the thought of the philosopher. Barbaric philosophy retains as real what civilized language has reduced to simile. The Siamese is made drunk with the demon of the arrack that possesses the drinker, while we with so different sense still extract the ‘spirit of wine.’[385] Look at the saying ascribed to Pythagoras, and mentioned by Porphyry. ‘The sound indeed which is given by striking brass, is the voice of a certain demon contained in that brass.’ These might have been the representative words of some savage animistic 182philosopher; but with the changed meaning brought by centuries of philosophizing, Oken hit upon a definition almost identical in form, that ‘What sounds, announces its spirit’ (‘Was tönt, gibt seinen Geist kund’).[386] What the savage would have meant, or Porphyry after him did mean, was that the brass was actually animated by a spirit of the brass apart from its matter, but when a modern philosopher takes up the old phrase, all he means is the qualities of the brass. As in other animistic phrases of thought and feeling such as ‘animal spirits,’ or being in ‘good and bad spirits,’ the term only recalls with an effort the long-past philosophy which it once expressed. The modern theory of the mind considers it capable of performing even exalted and unusual functions without the intervention of prompting or exciting demons; yet the old recognition of such beings crops up here and there in phrases which adapt animistic ideas to commonplaces of human disposition, as when a man is still said to be animated by a patriotic spirit, or possessed by a spirit of disobedience. In old times the ἐγγαστρίμυθος, or ‘ventriloquus’ was really held to have a spirit rumbling or talking from inside his body, as when Eurykles the soothsayer was inspired by such a familiar; or when a certain Patriarch mentioning a demon heard to speak out of a man’s belly, remarks on the worthy place it had chosen to dwell in. In the time of Hippokrates, the giving of oracular responses by such ventriloquism was practised by certain women as a profession. To this day in China one may get an oracular response from a spirit apparently talking out of a medium’s stomach, for a fee of about twopence-halfpenny. How changed a philosophy it marks, that among ourselves the word ‘ventriloquist’ should have sunk to its present meaning.[387] Nor is that 183change less significant which, starting with the conception of a man being really ἔνθεος, possessed by a deity within him, carries on a metamorphosed relic of this thorough animistic thought, from ἐνθουσιασμός to ‘enthusiasm.’ With all this, let it not be supposed that such change of opinion in the educated world has come about through wanton incredulity or decay of the religious temperament. Its source is the alteration in natural science, assigning new causes for the operations of nature and the events of life. The theory of the immediate action of personal spirits has here, as so widely elsewhere, given place to ideas of force and law. No indwelling deity now regulates the life of the burning sun, no guardian angels drive the stars across the arching firmament, the divine Ganges is water flowing down into the sea to evaporate into cloud and descend again in rain. No deity simmers in the boiling pot, no presiding spirits dwell in the volcano, no howling demon shrieks from the mouth of the lunatic. There was a period of human thought when the whole universe seemed actuated by spiritual life. For our knowledge of our own history, it is deeply interesting that there should remain rude races yet living under the philosophy which we have so far passed from, since Physics, Chemistry, Biology, have seized whole provinces of the ancient Animism, setting force for life and law for will.
To help us understand the vast difference between modern and primitive philosophy, and to reflect on how the mind has evolved over time, it’s useful to look at the enduring phrases that language retains. Our modern languages trace back through the medieval period to ancient and primitive times, clearly showing the transition from the most basic form of animism. We still use old words and expressions in our daily lives that connect us to ancient philosophies, often with new meanings. We still speak of 'genius,' but its meaning has shifted. The genius of Augustus was viewed as a protective spirit, requiring oaths and offerings like a deity. In modern English, figures like Shakespeare, Newton, or Wellington are said to be inspired and guided by their genius, but that notion has become a dry philosophical metaphor. Similarly, the term 'spirit' and related words stubbornly maintain links between primitive thought and philosophical thought. Where barbaric philosophy views spirits as real, civilized language has transformed them into mere metaphors. A Siamese person might get drunk on the arrack spirit that overtakes the drinker, while we talk about extracting the 'spirit of wine.' Look at the saying attributed to Pythagoras, mentioned by Porphyry: “The sound produced by striking brass is the voice of a certain spirit contained within that brass.” These could represent the ideas of some primitive animist philosopher; however, after centuries of philosophical reflection, Oken came to a similar definition, stating that “What sounds reveals its spirit.” What the primitive might have meant, and what Porphyry implied, was that the brass was alive with a spirit distinct from its matter, but for the modern philosopher, the phrase simply refers to the qualities of the brass itself. In other animistic expressions such as ‘animal spirits’ or being in ‘good and bad spirits,’ the terms now only remind us of the long-gone philosophies they originally represented. Today's understanding of the mind suggests it can perform remarkable and extraordinary functions without the influence of spirits or invoking demons; however, remnants of those old ideas occasionally appear in phrases that mold animistic concepts into commonplace human experiences, like when someone is said to be filled with a patriotic spirit or driven by a spirit of disobedience. In ancient times, a ventriloquist was truly believed to have a spirit speaking or rumbling from inside him, as when the soothsayer Eurykles was inspired by such a spirit, or when a certain Patriarch commented on a demon speaking from a man's belly, noting the unusual place it had chosen to inhabit. During Hippocrates' era, oracular responses given through ventriloquism were practiced by certain women as a profession. Even today in China, you can receive an oracular response from a spirit seemingly speaking from a medium's stomach, for a small fee. How different our understanding is today that the term ‘ventriloquist’ has come to mean what it does now. Nor is it less significant that the idea of a person being truly ‘possessed’ by a god has evolved into the concept of ‘enthusiasm.’ With all this, it should not be assumed that the educated world has changed its views due to reckless disbelief or a decline in religious feeling. This shift arises from changes in natural science, which has provided new explanations for natural phenomena and life events. The belief in the direct action of personal spirits, as in many other areas, has been replaced by ideas of force and law. No longer does a deity govern the life of the blazing sun, nor do guardian angels guide the stars across the sky; the sacred Ganges is just water flowing into the sea, evaporating into clouds, and falling back as rain. No god simmers in the boiling pot, no spirits inhabit the volcano, and no wailing demon emerges from the mouth of a madman. There was a time when humanity believed the entire universe was alive with spiritual energy. It’s quite fascinating for our understanding of history that there are still some crude societies living under the beliefs we have largely moved away from, as Physics, Chemistry, and Biology have claimed vast areas of ancient animism, establishing force as life and law as will.
CHAPTER XV.
ANIMISM (continued).
Spirits regarded as personal causes of Phenomena of the World—Pervading Spirits as good and evil Demons affecting man—Spirits manifest in Dreams and Visions: Nightmares; Incubi and Succubi; Vampires; Visionary Demons—Demons of darkness repelled by fire—Demons otherwise manifest: seen by animals; detected by footprints—Spirits conceived and treated as material—Guardian and Familiar Spirits—Nature-Spirits; historical course of the doctrine—Spirits of Volcanoes, Whirlpools, Rocks—Water-Worship: Spirits of Wells, Streams, Lakes, &c.—Tree-Worship: Spirits embodied in or inhabiting Trees; Spirits of Groves and Forests—Animal-Worship: Animals worshipped, directly, or as incarnations or representatives of Deities; Totem-Worship; Serpent-Worship—Species-Deities; their relation to Archetypal Ideas.
Spirits seen as personal causes of the world's phenomena—Pervasive spirits as good and evil demons influencing humans—Spirits appearing in dreams and visions: nightmares; incubi and succubi; vampires; visionary demons—Demons of darkness driven away by fire—Demons appearing in other ways: seen by animals; detected by footprints—Spirits viewed and treated as physical entities—Guardian and familiar spirits—Nature spirits; historical development of the belief—Spirits of volcanoes, whirlpools, and rocks—Water worship: spirits of wells, streams, lakes, etc.—Tree worship: spirits residing in or connected to trees; spirits of groves and forests—Animal worship: animals revered directly or as incarnations or representations of deities; totem worship; serpent worship—Species deities; their connection to archetypal ideas.
We have now to enter on the final topic of the investigation of Animism, by completing the classified survey of spiritual beings in general, from the myriad souls, elves, fairies, genii, conceived as filling their multifarious offices in man’s life and the world’s, up to the deities who reign, few and mighty, over the spiritual hierarchy. In spite of endless diversity of detail, the general principles of this investigation seem comparatively easy of access to the enquirer, if he will use the two keys which the foregoing studies supply: first, that spiritual beings are modelled by man on his primary conception of his own human soul, and second, that their purpose is to explain nature on the primitive childlike theory that it is truly and throughout ‘Animated Nature.’ If, as the poet says, ‘Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas,’ then rude tribes of ancient men had within them this source of happiness, that they could explain to their own content the causes of things. For to 185them spiritual beings, elves and gnomes, ghosts and manes, demons and deities, were the living personal causes of universal life. ‘The first men found everything easy, the mysteries of nature were not so hidden from them as from us,’ said Jacob Böhme the mystic. True, we may well answer, if these primitive men believed in that animistic philosophy of nature which even now survives in the savage mind. They could ascribe to kind or hostile spirits all good and evil of their own lives, and all striking operations of nature; they lived in familiar intercourse with the living and powerful souls of their dead ancestors, with the spirits of the stream and grove, plain and mountain, they knew well the living mighty Sun pouring his beams of light and heat upon them, the living mighty Sea dashing her fierce billows on the shore, the great personal Heaven and Earth protecting and producing all things. For as the human body was held to live and act by virtue of its own inhabiting spirit-soul, so the operations of the world seemed to be carried on by the influence of other spirits. And thus Animism, starting as a philosophy of human life, extended and expanded itself till it became a philosophy of nature at large.
We now need to dive into the final topic of our study on Animism, by wrapping up our categorized look at spiritual beings in general. This includes everything from the countless souls, elves, fairies, and genies believed to play various roles in human life and the world, to the few powerful deities that rule over the spiritual hierarchy. Despite the endless variety of details, the main ideas behind this investigation seem relatively straightforward for those looking into it, as long as they use the two keys provided by the previous studies: first, that spiritual beings are shaped by humans based on their basic understanding of their own human soul, and second, that their role is to explain nature according to the primitive, childlike idea that it is truly an 'Animated Nature.' If, as the poet puts it, "Happy is the one who could understand the causes of things," then early tribes of ancient humans had a source of happiness in that they could explain to their satisfaction the reasons behind things. For them, spiritual beings—elves, gnomes, ghosts, manes, demons, and deities—were the living, personal causes of all universal life. "The first men found everything easy; the mysteries of nature were not as hidden from them as they are from us," said the mystic Jacob Böhme. We might respond that if these primitive people believed in that animistic philosophy of nature, which still exists in some aspects of the savage mind, they could attribute all the good and bad in their lives, as well as the remarkable events of nature, to kind or hostile spirits. They lived in close connection with the vibrant and powerful souls of their deceased ancestors, as well as with the spirits of streams and groves, plains and mountains. They were well aware of the powerful living Sun casting its light and heat upon them, and the fierce living Sea crashing its waves onto the shore, with the great personal Heaven and Earth protecting and nurturing everything. Just as the human body was considered to live and act because of its own inhabiting spirit-soul, the workings of the world seemed to be driven by the influence of other spirits. Thus, Animism, which began as a philosophy of human life, expanded until it became a philosophy of nature as a whole.
To the minds of the lower races it seems that all nature is possessed, pervaded, crowded, with spiritual beings. In seeking by a few types to give an idea of this conception of pervading Spirits in its savage and barbaric stage, it is not indeed possible to draw an absolute line of separation between spirits occupied in affecting for good and ill the life of Man, and spirits specially concerned in carrying on the operations of Nature. In fact these two classes of spiritual beings blend into one another as inextricably as do the original animistic doctrines they are based on. As, however, the spirits considered directly to affect the life and fortune of Man lie closest to the centre of the animistic scheme, it is well to give them precedence. The description and function of these beings extend upwards from among the rudest human tribes. Milligan writes of the Tasmanians: ‘They were 186polytheists; that is, they believed in guardian angels or spirits, and in a plurality of powerful but generally evil-disposed beings, inhabiting crevices and caverns of rocky mountains, and making temporary abode in hollow trees and solitary valleys; of these a few were supposed to be of great power, while to the majority were imputed much of the nature and attributes of the goblins and elves of our native land.’[388] Oldfield writes of the aborigines of Australia, ‘The number of supernatural beings, feared if not loved, that they acknowledge, is exceedingly great; for not only are the heavens peopled with such, but the whole face of the country swarms with them; every thicket, most watering-places, and all rocky places abound with evil spirits. In like manner, every natural phenomenon is believed to be the work of demons, none of which seem of a benign nature, one and all apparently striving to do all imaginable mischief to the poor black fellow.’[389] It must be indeed an unhappy race among whom such a demonology could shape itself, and it is a relief to find that other people of low culture, while recognizing the same spiritual world swarming about them, do not hold its main attribute to be spite against themselves. Among the Algonquin Indians of North America, Schoolcraft finds the very groundwork of their religion in the belief ‘that the whole visible and invisible creation is animated with various orders of malignant or benign spirits, who preside over the daily affairs and over the final destinies of men.’[390] Among the Khonds of Orissa, Macpherson describes the greater gods and tribal manes, and below these the order of minor and local deities: ‘They are the tutelary gods of every spot on earth, having power over the functions of nature which operate there, and over everything relating to human life in it. Their number is 187unlimited. They fill all nature, in which no power or object, from the sea to the clods of the field, is without its deity. They are the guardians of hills, groves, streams, fountains, paths, and hamlets, and are cognizant of every human action, want, and interest in the locality, where they preside.’[391] Describing the animistic mythology of the Turanian tribes of Asia and Europe, Castrén has said that every land, mountain, rock, river, brook, spring, tree, or whatsoever it may be, has a spirit for an inhabitant; the spirits of the trees and stones, of the lakes and brooks, hear with pleasure the wild man’s pious prayers and accept his offerings.[392] Such are the conceptions of the Guinea negro, who finds the abodes of his good and evil spirits in great rocks, hollow trees, mountains, deep rivers, dense groves, echoing caverns, and who passing silently by these sacred places leaves some offering, if it be but a leaf or a shell picked up on the beach.[393] Such are examples which not unfairly picture the belief of the lower races in a world of spirits on earth, and such descriptions apply to the state of men’s minds along the course of civilization.
To the minds of lower races, it seems that all of nature is filled, permeated, and crowded with spiritual beings. When trying to outline this idea of pervasive spirits in its early and primitive form, it’s hard to draw a clear line between spirits that impact human life for better or worse, and those that are specifically focused on nature's processes. In reality, these two groups of spiritual beings are intertwined just as closely as the original animistic beliefs they stem from. However, since the spirits that directly affect human life and fortune are central to the animistic framework, it's useful to prioritize them. The description and role of these beings extend from the most basic human tribes. Milligan notes that the Tasmanians were polytheists; they believed in guardian angels or spirits and in many powerful but mostly malevolent beings living in crevices and caves of rocky mountains, occasionally residing in hollow trees and secluded valleys. Some of these were believed to possess great power, while most were thought to have many characteristics of the goblins and elves from our homeland. Oldfield mentions that the Australian aborigines recognize an immense number of supernatural beings, feared if not loved, filling the heavens and the landscape alike; all thickets, many water sources, and rocky areas are populated with evil spirits. Additionally, every natural occurrence is viewed as the work of demons, none of which seem to be friendly; they all appear to want to inflict harm on the unfortunate individuals. It's certainly a dismal existence for a race that would develop such a system of demons, and it’s comforting to realize that other cultures of lower development, while acknowledging the same pervasive spiritual world around them, don’t see its primary characteristic as spite against themselves. Among the Algonquin Indians of North America, Schoolcraft finds that the foundation of their religion is the belief that the entire visible and invisible creation is filled with various orders of good or evil spirits, overseeing daily affairs and the ultimate fates of people. Among the Khonds of Orissa, Macpherson describes the major gods and tribal spirits, and beneath these are minor and local deities: "They are the guardian deities of every location on earth, possessing power over the natural functions occurring there, and everything related to human life within it. Their numbers are countless. They inhabit all of nature, where no force or object, from the sea to the farmland, lacks its deity. They guard hills, groves, streams, springs, roads, and villages, and are aware of every human action, need, and interest in the areas where they hold sway." Describing the animistic mythology of the Turanian tribes in Asia and Europe, Castrén has stated that every land, mountain, rock, river, creek, spring, tree, or anything else has a spirit residing within it; the spirits of trees, stones, lakes, and streams listen joyfully to the wild man's sincere prayers and accept his offerings. Such are the beliefs of the Guinea negro, who finds the homes of his benevolent and malevolent spirits in large rocks, hollow trees, mountains, deep rivers, dense groves, and echoing caves, and who, passing quietly by these sacred places, leaves some offering, even if it's just a leaf or a shell picked up on the beach. These examples fairly represent the beliefs of lower races in a spirit-filled world on earth, and such descriptions reflect the state of human thinking throughout the course of civilization.
The doctrine of ancient philosophers such as Philo[394] and Iamblichus,[395] of spiritual beings swarming through the atmosphere we breathe, was carried on and developed in special directions in the discussions concerning the nature and functions of the world-pervading host of angels and devils, in the writings of the early Christian Fathers.[396] Theologians of modern centuries have for the most part seen reason to reduce within comparatively narrow limits the action ascribed to external spiritual beings on mankind; 188yet there are some who retain to the full the angelology and demonology of Origen and Tertullian. These two views may be well contrasted by setting side by side the judgments of two ecclesiastics of the Roman Church, as to the belief in pervading demons prevalent in uncivilized countries. The celebrated commentator, Dom Calmet, lays down in the most explicit terms the doctrine of angels and demons, as a matter of dogmatic theology. But he is less inclined to receive unquestioned the narratives of particular manifestations in the mediæval and modern world. He mentions indeed the testimony of Louis Vivez, that in the newly discovered countries of America, nothing is more common than to see spirits which appear at noon-day, not only in the country but in towns and villages, speaking, commanding, sometimes even striking men; and the account by Olaus Magnus of the spectres or spirits seen in Sweden and Norway, Finland and Lapland, which do wonderful things, some even serving men as domestics and driving the cattle out to pasture. But what Calmet remarks on these stories, is that the greater ignorance prevails in a country, the more superstition reigns there.[397] It seems that in our own day, however, the tendency is to encourage less sceptical views. Monsignor Gaume’s book on ‘Holy Water,’ which not long since received the special and formal approval of Pius IX., appears ‘at an epoch when the millions of evil angels which surround us are more enterprising than ever;’ and here Olaus Magnus’ story of the demons infesting Northern Europe is not only cited but corroborated.[398] On the whole, the survey of the doctrine of pervading spirits through all the grades of culture is a remarkable display of intellectual continuity. Most justly does Ellis the missionary, depicting the South Sea Islanders’ world crowded with its innumerable pervading spirits, point out the closeness of correspondence here between doctrines of the savage and the 189civilized animist, expressed as both may be in Milton’s familiar lines:—
The beliefs of ancient philosophers like Philo[394] and Iamblichus,[395] about spiritual beings filling the atmosphere we live in were further explored in discussions about the nature and roles of the widespread presence of angels and demons, especially in the writings of early Christian thinkers.[396] Modern theologians have generally tended to limit the influence attributed to external spiritual beings on humanity, 188but some still fully embrace the angelology and demonology of Origen and Tertullian. These two perspectives can be well contrasted by examining the views of two Catholic Church figures regarding the belief in pervasive demons found in uncivilized regions. The well-known commentator, Dom Calmet, clearly establishes the doctrine of angels and demons as a part of dogmatic theology. However, he is less willing to accept the narratives of specific manifestations in the medieval and modern worlds without question. He does mention the testimony of Louis Vivez, which claims that in the newly discovered lands of America, it is common to see spirits appearing in broad daylight, not just in the countryside but also in cities and villages, speaking, commanding, and sometimes even attacking people; and the account from Olaus Magnus about the spectres or spirits seen in Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Lapland, doing remarkable things, with some even serving as helpers to people and guiding cattle to pasture. Yet, Calmet points out that the greater the ignorance in a country, the more prevalent superstition tends to be.[397] It seems that today, however, there is a trend toward less skeptical attitudes. Monsignor Gaume’s book on ‘Holy Water,’ which recently received formal approval from Pius IX., appears ‘at a time when the millions of evil angels surrounding us are more active than ever;’ and here, Olaus Magnus' account of the demons infesting Northern Europe is not only mentioned but also supported.[398] Overall, the exploration of the belief in pervasive spirits across different stages of culture shows a notable continuity of thought. Ellis, the missionary, accurately portrays the South Sea Islanders’ world as filled with countless spirits, highlighting the close similarity between the beliefs of primitive and 189civilized animists, both expressed in Milton’s well-known lines:—
As with souls, so with other spirits, man’s most distinct and direct intercourse is had where they become actually present to his senses in dreams and visions. The belief that such phantoms are real and personal spirits, suggested and maintained as it is by the direct evidence of the senses of sight, touch, and hearing, is naturally an opinion usual in savage philosophy, and indeed elsewhere, long and obstinately resisting the attacks of the later scientific doctrine. The demon Koin strives to throttle the dreaming Australian;[400] the evil ‘na’ crouches on the stomach of the Karen;[401] the North American Indian, gorged with feasting, is visited by nocturnal spirits;[402] the Caribs, subject to hideous dreams, often woke declaring that the demon Maboya had beaten them in their sleep, and they could still feel the pain.[403] These demons are the very elves and nightmares that to this day in benighted districts of Europe ride and throttle the snoring peasant, and whose names, not forgotten among the educated, have only made the transition from belief to jest.[404] A not less distinct product of the savage animistic theory of dreams as real visits from personal spiritual beings, lasted on without a shift or break into the belief of mediæval Christendom. This is the doctrine of the incubi and succubi, those male and female nocturnal demons which consort sexually with men and women. We may set out 190with their descriptions among the islanders of the Antilles, where they are the ghosts of the dead, vanishing when clutched;[405] in New Zealand, where ancestral deities ‘form attachments with females and pay them repeated visits,’ while in the Samoan Islands such intercourse of mischievious inferior gods caused ‘many supernatural conceptions;’[406] and in Lapland, where details of this last extreme class have also been placed on record.[407] From these lower grades of culture the idea may be followed onward. Formal rites are specified in the Hindu Tantra, which enable a man to obtain a companion-nymph by worshipping her and repeating her name by night in a cemetery.[408] Augustine, in an instructive passage, states the popular notions of the visits of incubi, vouched for, he tells us, by testimony of such quantity and quality that it may seem impudence to deny it; yet he is careful not to commit himself to a positive belief in such spirits.[409] Later theologians were less cautious, and grave argumentation on nocturnal intercourse with incubi and succubi was carried on till, at the height of mediæval civilization, it is found accepted in full belief by ecclesiastics and lawyers. Nor is it to be counted as an ugly but harmless superstition, when for example it is set forth in the Bull of Pope Innocent VIII. in 1484, as an 191accepted accusation against ‘many persons of both sexes, forgetful of their own salvation, and falling away from the Catholic faith.’ The practical outcome of this belief is known to students who have traced the consequence of the Papal Bull in the legal manual of the witchcraft tribunals, drawn up by the three appointed Inquisitors, the infamous Malleus Maleficarum; and have followed the results of this again into those dreadful records which relate in their bald matter-of-fact phraseology the confessions of the crime of diabolic intercourse, wrung from the wretched victims worked on by threat and persuasion in the intervals of the rack, till enough evidence was accumulated for clear judgment, and sentence of the stake.[410] I need not dwell on the mingled obscenity and horror of these details, which here only have their bearing on the history of animism. But it will aid the ethnographer to understand the relation of modern to savage philosophy, if he will read Richard Burton’s seriously believing account in the ‘Anatomy of Melancholy,’ where he concludes with acquiescence in a declaration lately made by Lipsius, that on the showing of daily narratives and judicial sentences, in no age had these lecherous demons appeared in such numbers as in his own time—and this was about A.D. 1600.[411]
As with souls, so with other spirits, a person's most unique and direct interaction happens when they genuinely appear to their senses in dreams and visions. The belief that such phantoms are real and personal spirits—supported by direct evidence through sight, touch, and hearing—is naturally a common view in primitive thought, and indeed elsewhere, stubbornly resisting the challenges posed by later scientific ideas. The demon Koin tries to suffocate the dreaming Australian; the evil ‘na’ crouches on the stomach of the Karen; the North American Indian, stuffed from feasting, is visited by night spirits; the Caribs, plagued by terrifying dreams, often woke up claiming that the demon Maboya had beaten them in their sleep, and they could still feel the pain. These demons are the same elves and nightmares that, even today in areas of Europe lacking enlightenment, torment the snoring peasant, and whose names, not forgotten among the educated, have merely transitioned from belief to joke. A distinct aspect of the primitive animistic theory of dreams as real encounters with personal spiritual beings persisted unchanged into the beliefs of medieval Christianity. This is the idea of incubi and succubi, those male and female night demons that have sexual relations with men and women. We can begin with their descriptions among the islanders of the Antilles, where they are the ghosts of the dead, disappearing when grabbed; in New Zealand, where ancestral deities "form attachments with females and pay them repeated visits," and in the Samoan Islands, where such interactions with mischievous lesser gods resulted in "many supernatural conceptions;" and in Lapland, where accounts of this extreme category have also been documented. From these lower levels of culture, the concept can be traced onward. Specific rituals are outlined in the Hindu Tantra, allowing a man to gain a female nymph by worshipping her and repeating her name at night in a cemetery. Augustine, in an informative passage, recounts the popular beliefs regarding the visits of incubi, which he tells us is supported by so much credible testimony that it might seem audacious to deny it; yet he is careful not to commit to a firm belief in such spirits. Later theologians were less cautious, and serious arguments regarding nocturnal interactions with incubi and succubi continued until, at the height of medieval civilization, these ideas were fully accepted by religious figures and legal authorities. This should not be dismissed as merely an ugly but harmless superstition, as evidenced in the Bull of Pope Innocent VIII in 1484, presenting it as an accepted accusation against "many people of both sexes, forgetting their own salvation and straying from the Catholic faith." The practical implications of this belief are well known to scholars who have traced the effects of the Papal Bull in the legal manuals of witchcraft tribunals, formulated by the three appointed Inquisitors, the notorious Malleus Maleficarum; and have followed the outcomes into those horrific records that plainly document the confessions of the crime of diabolic intercourse, wrung from the miserable victims under threat and coercion during torture, until enough evidence was gathered for a clear verdict, leading to sentences of death by fire. I won’t dwell on the disturbing mixture of obscenity and horror in these accounts, which only relate to the history of animism. However, it will help ethnographers to understand the connection between modern and primitive thought if they read Richard Burton’s seriously believing account in the 'Anatomy of Melancholy,' where he agrees with a recent statement made by Lipsius, that according to continuous narratives and legal decisions, there had never been such a proliferation of these lascivious demons as in his own time—and this was around A.D. 1600.
In connexion with the nightmare and the incubus, another variety of nocturnal demon requires notice, the vampire. Inasmuch as certain patients are seen becoming day by day, without apparent cause, thin, weak, and bloodless, savage animism is called upon to produce a satisfactory explanation, and does so in the doctrine that there exist certain demons which eat out the souls or hearts or suck the blood of their victims. The Polynesians said that it was the 192departed souls (tii) which quitted the graves and grave-idols to creep by night into the houses, and devour the heart and entrails of the sleepers, and these died.[412] The Karens tell of the ‘kephu,’ which is a wizard’s stomach going forth in the shape of a head and entrails, to devour the souls of men, and they die.[413] The Mintira of the Malay Peninsula have their ‘hantu penyadin;’ he is a water-demon, with a dog’s head and an alligator’s mouth, who sucks blood from men’s thumbs and great toes, and they die.[414] It is in Slavonia and Hungary that the demon blood-suckers have their principal abode, and to this district belongs their special name of vampire, Polish upior, Russian upir. There is a whole literature of hideous vampire-stories, which the student will find elaborately discussed in Calmet. The shortest way of treating the belief is to refer it directly to the principles of savage animism. We shall see that most of its details fall into their places at once, and that vampires are not mere creations of groundless fancy, but causes conceived in spiritual form to account for specific facts of wasting disease. As to their nature and physical action, there are two principal theories, but both keep close to the original animistic idea of spiritual beings, and consider these demons to be human souls. The first theory is that the soul of a living man, often a sorcerer, leaves its proper body asleep and goes forth, perhaps in the visible form of a straw or fluff of down, slips through keyholes and attacks its sleeping victim. If the sleeper should wake in time to clutch this tiny soul-embodiment, he may through it have his revenge by maltreating or destroying its bodily owner. Some say these ‘mury’ come by night to men, sit upon their breasts and suck their blood, while others think it is only children’s blood they suck, they being to grown people mere nightmares. Here we have the actual phenomenon of nightmare, adapted to a particular purpose. The second 193theory is that the soul of a dead man goes out from its buried corpse and sucks the blood of living men. The victim becomes thin, languid, and bloodless, falls into a rapid decline and dies. Here again is actual experience, but a new fancy is developed to complete the idea. The corpse thus supplied by its returning soul with blood, is imagined to remain unnaturally fresh and supple and ruddy; and accordingly the means of detecting a vampire is to open his grave, where the reanimated corpse may be found to bleed when cut, and even to move and shriek. One way to lay a vampire is to stake down the corpse (as with suicides and with the same intention); but the more effectual plan is to behead and burn it. This is the substance of the doctrine of vampires. Still, as one order of demons is apt to blend into others, the vampire-legends are much mixed with other animistic folklore. Vampires appear in the character of the poltergeist or knocker, as causing those disturbances in houses which modern spiritualism refers in like manner to souls of the departed. Such was the ghost of a certain surly peasant who came out of his grave in the island of Mycone in 1700, after he had been buried but two days; he came into the houses, upset the furniture, put the lamps out, and carried on his tricks till the whole population went wild with terror. Tournefort happened to be there and was present at the exhumation; his account is curious evidence of the way an excited mob could persuade themselves, without the least foundation of fact, that the body was warm and its blood red. Again, the blood-sucker is very generally described under the Slavonic names of werewolf (wilkodlak, brukolaka, &c.); the descriptions of the two creatures are inextricably mixed up, and a man whose eyebrows meet, as if his soul were taking flight like a butterfly, to enter some other body, may be marked by this sign either as a werewolf or a vampire. A modern account of vampirism in Bulgaria well illustrates the nature of spirits as conceived in such beliefs as these. A sorcerer armed with a saint’s picture will hunt 194a vampire into a bottle containing some of the filthy food that the demon loves; as soon as he is fairly inside he is corked down, the bottle is thrown into the fire, and the vampire disappears for ever.[415]
In connection with the nightmare and the incubus, another type of nocturnal demon needs to be mentioned: the vampire. Certain patients are observed becoming progressively thinner, weaker, and bloodless without any clear reason, leading to the invocation of savage animism for an explanation. This tradition holds that there are demons that consume the souls or hearts or suck the blood of their victims. The Polynesians believed that it was the departed souls (tii) that left their graves and grave idols to sneak into homes at night and devour the hearts and entrails of the sleepers, causing their deaths. The Karens talk about the ‘kephu,’ which is a wizard's spirit taking the form of a head and entrails to consume the souls of men, resulting in their demise. The Mintira of the Malay Peninsula describe their ‘hantu penyadin,’ a water-demon with a dog's head and an alligator's mouth, who sucks blood from men's thumbs and big toes, leading to death. In Slavonia and Hungary, the demon bloodsuckers have their main territory, and this area is associated with the name vampire, Polish upior, Russian vampire. There is an extensive literature of gruesome vampire stories, which are discussed in detail by Calmet. The most straightforward way to explain the belief is to link it directly to the principles of savage animism. We will see that many of its details come together easily and that vampires are not just figments of imagination but are conceptualized as spiritual beings accounting for specific cases of wasting illness. Regarding their nature and actions, there are two main theories, both closely tied to the original animistic concept of spirits and consider these demons to be human souls. The first theory suggests that the soul of a living person, often a sorcerer, leaves its body while it sleeps and may take the visible shape of a piece of straw or down, slipping through keyholes to attack its sleeping victim. If the sleeper manages to wake up in time to grab this tiny soul-like entity, they may take revenge on its physical owner by mistreating or destroying them. Some say these ‘mury’ come at night to people, sit on their chests, and suck their blood, while others believe they only prey on children’s blood, being mere nightmares for adults. This reflects the phenomenon of nightmares adapted for a specific purpose. The second theory posits that the soul of a dead person escapes from its buried corpse and feeds on the blood of the living. The victim becomes thin, weak, and bloodless, rapidly declines, and ultimately dies. Again, this is based on real experiences, but a new notion emerges to complete the idea. The corpse, allegedly supplied with blood by its returning soul, is thought to stay unnaturally fresh, supple, and red; hence, the way to identify a vampire is to open its grave, where the revived corpse may bleed when cut, and may even move and scream. One method of neutralizing a vampire is to stake the corpse down (similar to the treatment for suicides and with the same goal); however, a more effective method is to behead and burn it. This encapsulates the vampire doctrine. Still, as one type of demon can blend with others, vampire legends are often mixed with other animistic folklore. Vampires can also appear as poltergeists, causing disturbances in homes that modern spiritualism attributes to the souls of the deceased. For instance, the ghost of a grumpy peasant emerged from his grave on the island of Mycone in 1700, just two days after his burial; he entered houses, overturned furniture, extinguished lamps, and carried out his antics until the entire community was terrified. Tournefort was present during the exhumation, and his account provides curious evidence of how an excited crowd could convince themselves, without any factual basis, that the body was warm and its blood red. Additionally, bloodsuckers are commonly described using the Slavonic terms for werewolf (wilkodlak, brukolaka, etc.); the descriptions of the two creatures become intertwined, and a person with a unibrow, as if their soul were about to depart like a butterfly to inhabit another body, may be identified as either a werewolf or a vampire. A contemporary account of vampirism in Bulgaria illustrates the nature of spirits as understood in such beliefs. A sorcerer equipped with a saint’s picture will chase a vampire into a bottle containing some of the vile food the demon loves; once the vampire is trapped inside, the bottle is corked, thrown into the fire, and the vampire disappears forever.[415]
As to the savage visionary and the phantoms he beholds, the Greenlander preparing for the profession of sorcerer may stand as type, when, rapt in contemplation in his desert solitude, emaciated by fasting and disordered by fits, he sees before him scenes with figures of men and animals, which he believes to be spirits. Thus it is interesting to read the descriptions by Zulu converts of the dreadful creatures which they see in moments of intense religious exaltation, the snake with great eyes and very fearful, the leopard creeping stealthily, the enemy approaching with his long assagai in his hand—these coming one after another to the place where the man has gone to pray in secret, and striving to frighten him from his knees.[416] Thus the visionary temptations of the Hindu ascetic and the mediæval saint are happening in our own day, though their place is now rather in the medical handbook than in the record of miracle. Like the disease-demons and the oracle-demons, these spiritual groups have their origin not in fancy, but in real phenomena interpreted on animistic principles.
As for the wild dreamer and the visions he sees, the Greenlander getting ready to become a sorcerer serves as an example. Lost in thought in his isolated surroundings, weakened from fasting and disturbed by convulsions, he envisions images of people and animals that he believes are spirits. It's also fascinating to read how Zulu converts describe the terrifying creatures they encounter during moments of extreme religious fervor: a snake with large, frightening eyes, a leopard moving quietly, and an enemy approaching with a long spear in hand—these figures appearing one after another at the spot where the person has gone to pray in private, trying to scare him away from his prayers.[416] In the same way, the mystical experiences of Hindu ascetics and medieval saints are happening today, although now they are more likely found in medical literature than in stories of miracles. Just like the demons of disease and the demons of oracles, these spiritual experiences come from real phenomena interpreted through animistic beliefs.
In the dark especially, harmful spirits swarm. Round native Australian encampments, Sir George Grey used to see the bush dotted with little moving points of fire; these were the firesticks carried by the old women sent to look after the young ones, but who dared not quit the firelight without a brand to protect them from the evil spirits.[417] So South American Indians would carry brands or torches for fear of evil demons when they ventured into the dark.[418] 195Tribes of the Malay Peninsula light fires near a mother at childbirth, to scare away the evil spirits.[419] Such notions extend to higher levels of civilization. In Southern India, where for fear of pervading spirits only pressing need will induce a man to go abroad after sundown, the unlucky wight who has to venture into the dark will carry a fire-brand to keep off the spectral foes. Even in broad daylight, the Hindu lights lamps to keep off the demons,[420] a ceremony which is to be noticed again at a Chinese wedding.[421] In Europe, the details of the use of fire to drive off demons and witches are minute and explicit. The ancient Norse colonists in Iceland carried fire round the lands they intended to occupy, to expel the evil spirits. Such ideas have brought into existence a whole group of Scandinavian customs, still remembered in the country, but dying out in practice. Till a child is baptized, the fire must never be let out, lest the trolls should be able to steal the infant; a live coal must be cast after the mother as she goes to be churched, to prevent the trolls from carrying her off bodily or bewitching her; a live coal is to be thrown after a troll-wife or witch as she quits a house, and so forth.[422] Into modern times, the people of the Hebrides continued to protect the mother and child from evil spirits, by carrying fire round them.[423] In modern Bulgaria, on the Feast of St. Demetrius, lighted candles are placed in the stables and the wood-shed, to prevent evil spirits from entering into 196the domestic animals.[424] Nor did this ancient idea remain a mere lingering notion of peasant folklore. Its adoption by the Church is obvious in the ceremonial benediction of candles in the Roman Ritual: ‘Ut quibuscumque locis accensæ, sive positæ fuerint, discedant principes tenebrarum, et contremiscant, et fugiant pavidi cum omnibus ministris suis ab habitationibus illis, &c.’ The metrical translation of Naogeorgus shows perfectly the retention of primitive animistic ideas in the middle ages:—
In the dark, harmful spirits gather. Around native Australian camps, Sir George Grey noticed little moving points of fire dotted throughout the bush; these were firesticks carried by the old women who were sent to watch over the young ones, but who wouldn’t dare leave the light without something to protect them from evil spirits.[417] Similarly, South American Indians would carry brands or torches out of fear of evil demons when they went into the dark.[418] 195 Tribes in the Malay Peninsula light fires near a mother giving birth to scare away evil spirits.[419] These beliefs extend to more advanced societies. In Southern India, where only urgent necessity will persuade a man to go out after dark due to fear of lurking spirits, the unfortunate soul who has to brave the darkness carries a firebrand to fend off imaginary threats. Even in broad daylight, Hindus light lamps to ward off demons,[420] a ritual also seen at Chinese weddings.[421] In Europe, the practices of using fire to drive off demons and witches are very detailed. The ancient Norse settlers in Iceland would carry fire around the lands they wished to claim to expel evil spirits. These beliefs have led to a variety of Scandinavian customs that are still remembered in the region, though they are fading in practice. Until a child is baptized, the fire must never be extinguished, lest trolls steal the infant; a live coal must be thrown after the mother as she leaves to be churched, to prevent trolls from abducting or enchanting her; a live coal is also tossed after a troll-wife or witch as she departs from a home, and so on.[422] Even into modern times, people in the Hebrides continued to safeguard mothers and children from evil spirits by carrying fire around them.[423] In present-day Bulgaria, on the Feast of St. Demetrius, lit candles are set in stables and wood-sheds to stop evil spirits from getting into the animals.[424] This ancient idea has not simply faded into folk belief. Its adoption by the Church is evident in the ceremonial blessing of candles in the Roman Ritual: "Wherever they are lit or placed, let the rulers of darkness depart, tremble, and flee in fear along with all their ministers from those dwellings, etc." The metrical translation of Naogeorgus perfectly illustrates how primitive animistic beliefs persisted in the Middle Ages:—
Animals stare and startle when we see no cause; is it that they see spirits invisible to man? Thus the Greenlander says that the seals and wildfowl are scared by spectres, which no human eye but the sorcerer’s can behold;[426] and thus the Khonds hold that their flitting ethereal gods, invisible to man, are seen by beasts.[427] The thought holds no small place in the folklore of the world. Telemachos could not discern Athene standing near him, for not to all do the gods visibly appear; but Odysseus saw her, and the dogs, and they did not bark, but with low whine slunk across the dwelling to the further side.[428] So in old Scandinavia, the dogs could see Hela the death-goddess move unseen by men;[429] so Jew and Moslem, hearing the dogs howl, know that they have seen the Angel of Death come on his awful errand;[430] while the 197beliefs that animals see spirits, and that a dog’s melancholy howl means death somewhere near, are still familiar to our own popular superstition.
Animals stare and get startled when we can’t see a reason; could it be that they sense spirits we can’t see? That’s what the Greenlander says about seals and wild birds being frightened by ghosts, which only a sorcerer can see;[426] and the Khonds believe that their fleeting ethereal gods, invisible to humans, are visible to animals.[427] This idea has a significant place in world folklore. Telemachos couldn't see Athene standing next to him, as the gods don’t always appear visibly to everyone; but Odysseus saw her, and the dogs didn’t bark, instead they slunk quietly across the house to the other side with a low whine.[428] In ancient Scandinavia, dogs could see Hela, the goddess of death, moving unseen by humans;[429] similarly, Jews and Muslims recognize that when the dogs howl, it means they’ve seen the Angel of Death on his dreadful mission;[430] and the belief that animals can see spirits, along with the idea that a dog's mournful howl signifies death nearby, is still common in our own popular superstitions.
Another means by which men may detect the presence of invisible spirits, is to adopt the thief-catcher’s well-known device of strewing ashes. According to the ideas of a certain stage of animism, a spirit is considered substantial enough to leave a footprint. The following instances relate sometimes to souls, sometimes to other beings. The Philippine islanders expected the dead to return on the third day to his dwelling, wherefore they set a vessel of water for him to wash himself clean from the grave-mould, and strewed ashes to see footprints.[431] A more elaborate rite forms part of the funeral customs of the Hos of North-East India. On the evening of a death, the near relatives perform the ceremony of calling the dead. Boiled rice and a pot of water are placed in an inner room, and ashes sprinkled from thence to the threshold. Two relatives go to the place where the body was burnt, and walk round it beating ploughshares and chanting a plaintive dirge to call the spirit home; while two others watch the rice and water to see if they are disturbed, and look for the spirit-footsteps in the ashes. If a sign appears, it is received with shivering horror and weeping, the mourners outside coming in to join. Till the survivors are thus satisfied of the spirit’s return, the rite must be repeated.[432] In Yucatan there is mention of the custom of leaving a child alone at night in a place strewn with ashes; if the footprint of an animal were found next morning, this animal was the guardian deity of the child.[433] Beside this may be placed the Aztec ceremony at the second festival of the Sun-god Tezcatlipoca, when they sprinkled maize-flour before his sanctuary, and his 198high-priest watched till he beheld the divine footprints, and then shouted to announce, ‘Our great god is come.’[434] Among such rites in the Old World, the Talmud contains a salient instance; there are a great multitude of devils, it is said; and he who will be aware of them let him take sifted ashes and strew them by his bed, and in the early morning he shall see as it were marks of cocks’ feet.[435] This is an idea that has widely spread in the modern world, as where in German folklore the little ‘earth-men’ make footprints like a duck’s or goose’s in the strewn ashes. Other marks, too, betoken the passage of spirit-visitors;[436] and as for ghosts, our own superstition is among the most striking of the series. On St. Mark’s Eve, ashes are to be sifted over the hearth, and the footprints will be seen of any one who is to die within the year; many a mischievous wight has made a superstitious family miserable by slily coming down stairs and marking the print of some one’s shoe.[437] Such details as these may justify us in thinking that the lower races are apt to ascribe to spirits in general that kind of ethereal materiality which we have seen they attribute to souls. Explicit statements on the subject are scarce till we reach the level of early Christian theology. The ideas of Tertullian and Origen, as to the thin yet not immaterial substance of angels and demons, probably represent the conceptions of primitive animism far more clearly than the doctrine which Calmet lays down with the weight of theological dogma, that angels, demons, and disembodied souls are pure immaterial spirit; but that when by divine permission spirits appear, act, speak, walk, eat, they must produce tangible bodies by either condensing the air, or substituting 199other terrestrial solid bodies capable of performing these functions.[438]
Another way that people can sense the presence of invisible spirits is by using the well-known trick of scattering ashes, much like a thief-catcher does. According to certain beliefs from a specific stage of animism, a spirit is considered substantial enough to leave a footprint. The following examples sometimes refer to souls and sometimes to other beings. In the Philippines, islanders believed that the dead would return on the third day to their home, so they would set out a vessel of water for the deceased to wash off the grave dirt and scatter ashes to look for footprints.[431] A more detailed ritual is part of the funeral customs of the Hos people in North-East India. On the evening of a death, close relatives perform a ceremony to call the dead. They place boiled rice and a pot of water in a private room, then sprinkle ashes from there to the threshold. Two relatives walk to the spot where the body was cremated, walk around it banging ploughshares and singing a mournful dirge to call the spirit home, while two others keep an eye on the rice and water to see if they are disturbed and watch for spirit footsteps in the ashes. If any sign appears, it's met with trembling horror and tears, drawing the mourning family inside to join. The rite must be repeated until the survivors are convinced of the spirit’s return.[432] In Yucatan, there's a tradition of leaving a child alone at night in a spot covered in ashes; if an animal's footprint is found the next morning, that animal is considered the child's guardian deity.[433] Additionally, there is the Aztec ceremony during the second festival for the Sun-god Tezcatlipoca, when they would sprinkle maize flour in front of his sanctuary, and his high priest would keep watch until he saw the divine footprints, then shout to announce, ‘Our great god has come.’[434] Among such rituals in the Old World, the Talmud provides a notable example; it states that there are many devils, and whoever wishes to see them should sprinkle sifted ashes by their bed, and in the morning they will find marks resembling chicken footprints.[435] This idea has become widespread in the modern world, such as in German folklore where little 'earth-men' leave footprints resembling those of ducks or geese in the scattered ashes. Other marks also indicate the presence of spirit visitors;[436] and regarding ghosts, our own superstition is among the most notable of these. On St. Mark’s Eve, ashes are sprinkled over the hearth, and footprints of anyone who is to die within the year are said to appear; many a mischievous person has ruined a superstitious family's peace by slyly coming down the stairs and leaving marks of someone’s shoe.[437] Details like these suggest that less developed societies tend to attribute a certain type of ethereal materiality to spirits, similar to the way we have noted their belief about souls. Explicit statements on this topic are rare until we reach the realm of early Christian theology. The ideas of Tertullian and Origen regarding the thin but not immaterial substance of angels and demons probably reflect primitive animism more clearly than Calmet’s solid theological doctrine, which claims that angels, demons, and disembodied souls are purely immaterial spirits; and that when spirits appear, act, speak, or eat with divine permission, they must create tangible bodies by either condensing air or using other earthly solid bodies capable of performing these functions.[438]
No wonder that men should attack such material beings by material means, and even sometimes try to rid themselves by a general clearance from the legion of ethereal beings hovering around them. As the Australians annually drive from their midst the accumulated ghosts of the last year’s dead, so the Gold Coast negroes from time to time turn out with clubs and torches to drive the evil spirits from their towns; rushing about and beating the air with frantic howling, they drive the demons into the woods, and then come home and sleep more easily, and for a while afterwards enjoy better health.[439] When a baby was born in a Kalmuk horde, the neighbours would rush about crying and brandishing cudgels about the tents, to drive off the harmful spirits who might hurt mother and child.[440] Keeping up a closely allied idea in modern Europe, the Bohemians at Pentecost, and the Tyrolese on Walpurgisnacht, hunt the witches, invisible and imaginary, out of house and stall.[441]
It's no surprise that people attack physical threats with physical means and sometimes even try to clear out the hosts of supernatural beings surrounding them. Just like Australians drive away the ghosts from the previous year, the people of the Gold Coast often take up clubs and torches to chase evil spirits from their communities; running around and swinging their arms while howling, they force the demons into the woods, then return home and sleep more soundly, and for a time afterwards, experience better health.[439] When a baby is born in a Kalmuk community, neighbors quickly rush around, yelling and waving sticks near the tents to keep harmful spirits from endangering the mother and child.[440] Reflecting a similar idea in modern Europe, the Bohemians at Pentecost and the Tyroleans on Walpurgis Night chase invisible and imaginary witches out of their homes and barns.[441]
Closely allied to the doctrine of souls, and almost rivalling it in the permanence with which it has held its place through all the grades of animism, is the doctrine of patron, guardian, or familiar spirits. These are beings specially attached to individual men, soul-like in their nature, and sometimes considered as actually being human souls. These beings have, like all others of the spiritual world as originally conceived, their reason and purpose. The special functions which they perform are twofold. First, while man’s own proper soul serves him for the ordinary purposes of life and thought, there are times when powers 200and impressions out of the course of the mind’s normal action, and words that seem spoken to him by a voice from without, messages of mysterious knowledge, of counsel or warning, seem to indicate the intervention of as it were a second superior soul, a familiar demon. And as enthusiasts, seers, sorcerers, are the men whose minds most often show such conditions, so to these classes more than to others the informing and controlling patron-spirits are attached. Second, while the common expected events of daily life pass unnoticed as in the regular course of things, such events as seem to fall out with especial reference to an individual, demand an intervening agent; and thus the decisions, discoveries, and deliverances, which civilized men variously ascribe to their own judgment, to luck, and to special interposition of Providence, are accounted for in the lower culture by the action of the patron-spirit or guardian-genius. Not to crowd examples from all the districts of animism to which this doctrine belongs, let us follow it by a few illustrations from the lower grades of savagery upward. Among the Watchandis of Australia, it is held that when a warrior slays his first man, the spirit of the dead enters the slayer’s body and becomes his ‘woorie’ or warning spirit; taking up its abode near his liver, it informs him by a scratching or tickling sensation of the approach of danger.[442] In Tasmania, Dr. Milligan heard a native ascribe his deliverance from an accident to the preserving care of his deceased father’s spirit, his guardian angel.[443] That the most important act of the North American Indian’s religion is to obtain his individual patron genius or deity, is well known. Among the Esquimaux, the sorcerer qualifies for his profession by getting a ‘torngak’ or spirit which will henceforth be his familiar demon, and this spirit may be the soul of a deceased parent.[444] In Chili, as to guardian spirits, it has been remarked 201that every Araucanian imagines he has one in his service; ‘I keep my amchi-malghen (guardian nymph) still,’ being a common expression when they succeed in any undertaking.[445] The Caribs display the doctrine well in both its general and special forms. On the one hand, there is a guardian deity for each man, which accompanies his soul to the next life; on the other hand, each sorcerer has his familiar demon, which he evokes in mysterious darkness by chants and tobacco-smoke; and when several sorcerers call up their familiars together, the consequence is apt to be a quarrel among the demons, and a fight.[446] In Africa, the negro has his guardian spirit—how far identified with what Europeans call soul or conscience, it may be hard to determine; but he certainly looks upon it as a being separate from himself, for he summons it by sorcery, builds a little fetish-hut for it by the wayside, rewards and propitiates it by libations of liquor and bits of food.[447] In Asia, the Mongols, each with his patron genius,[448] and the Laos sorcerers who can send their familiar spirits into others’ bodies to cause disease,[449] are examples equally to the purpose.
Closely connected to the belief in souls, and almost as enduring through all levels of animism, is the idea of patron, guardian, or familiar spirits. These are beings specifically linked to individual people, soul-like in nature and sometimes thought of as actual human souls. These beings, like others from the spiritual world as originally imagined, have their own reasons and purposes. They carry out two main functions. First, while a person's own soul helps with the usual aspects of life and thought, there are times when powers and feelings outside of the ordinary thought process emerge, along with words that seem to come from an outside voice—messages of hidden knowledge, advice, or warning—indicating the involvement of a second superior soul, a familiar demon. Enthusiasts, visionaries, and sorcerers often experience these states of mind more than others, and these groups are more closely linked to their informing and controlling patron-spirits. Secondly, while common daily events go unnoticed as part of the normal flow of life, events that seem particularly relevant to an individual call for an intervening agent; thus, decisions, discoveries, and rescues that civilized people attribute to their own judgment, luck, or divine intervention are explained in lower cultures by the actions of the patron-spirit or guardian-genius. Without overwhelming you with examples from all the branches of animism related to this belief, let’s consider a few from the lower levels of savagery moving upward. Among the Watchandis of Australia, it’s believed that when a warrior kills his first enemy, the spirit of the deceased enters the slayer's body and becomes his 'woorie' or warning spirit, residing near his liver and alerting him to danger through a scratching or tickling sensation.[442] In Tasmania, Dr. Milligan heard a native attribute his escape from an accident to the protective care of his deceased father's spirit, his guardian angel.[443] It's well known that the key act of the North American Indian's religion is to find his individual patron genius or deity. Among the Esquimaux, a sorcerer qualifies for his role by acquiring a 'torngak' or spirit, which becomes his familiar demon, potentially the soul of a deceased parent.[444] In Chile, regarding guardian spirits, it's noted that every Araucanian believes they have one serving them; 'I keep my amchi-malghen (guardian nymph) close,' is a common saying when they achieve something.[445] The Caribs illustrate this belief well in both its general and specific forms. On one hand, each man has a guardian deity that accompanies his soul to the afterlife; on the other, each sorcerer has a familiar demon that he calls upon in mysterious darkness through chants and tobacco smoke; when several sorcerers summon their familiars together, it often leads to conflicts among the demons, resulting in fights.[446] In Africa, a Black person has their guardian spirit—it's hard to say how closely it's identified with what Europeans call the soul or conscience, but they certainly view it as a separate being; they summon it through sorcery, build a small fetish hut for it by the roadside, and offer it drinks and bits of food as sacrifices.[447] In Asia, the Mongols each have their patron genius,[448] and the Laos sorcerers can send their familiar spirits into other people's bodies to cause illness,[449] both serving as relevant examples.
Among the Aryan nations of Northern Europe,[450] the old doctrine of man’s guardian spirit may be traced, and in classic Greece and Rome it renews with philosophic eloquence and cultured custom the ideas of the Australian and the African. The thought of the spiritual guide and protector of the individual man is happily defined by Menander, who calls the attendant genius, which each man has from the hour of birth, the good mystagogue (i.e. the novice’s guide to the mysteries) of this life.
Among the Aryan nations of Northern Europe,[450] the ancient idea of a guardian spirit can be seen, and in classical Greece and Rome, it is expressed with philosophical eloquence and cultured customs, reflecting the beliefs of Australia and Africa. The concept of a spiritual guide and protector for each individual is well articulated by Menander, who refers to the personal genius each person has from the moment they are born as the good mystagogue (meaning the novice’s guide to the mysteries) of this life.
The divine warning voice which Sokrates used to hear, is a salient example of the mental impressions leading to the belief in guardian spirits.[451] In the Roman world, the doctrine came to be accepted as a philosophy of human life. Each man had his ‘genius natalis,’ associated with him from birth to death, influencing his action and his fate, standing represented by its proper image as a lar among the household gods; and at weddings and joyous times, and especially on the anniversary of the birthday when genius and man began their united career, worship was paid with song and dance to the divine image, adorned with garlands, and propitiated with incense and libations of wine. The demon or genius was, as it were, the man’s companion soul, a second spiritual ego. The Egyptian astrologer warned Antonius to keep far from the young Octavius, ‘for thy demon,’ said he, ‘is in fear of his;’ and truly in after years that genius of Augustus had become an imperial deity, by whom Romans swore solemn oaths, not to be broken.[452] The doctrine which could thus personify the character and fate of the individual man, proved capable of a yet further development. Converting into animistic entities the inmost operations of the human mind, a dualistic philosophy conceived as attached to every mortal a good and an evil genius, whose efforts through life drew him backward and forward toward virtue and vice, happiness and misery. It was the kakodaimōn of Brutus 203which appeared to him by night in his tent: ‘I am thy evil genius,’ it said, ‘we meet again at Philippi.’[453]
The divine warning that Socrates used to hear is a clear example of the mental impressions that led to the belief in guardian spirits.[451] In the Roman world, this idea became accepted as a philosophy of human life. Each person had their ‘guardian spirit,’ tied to them from birth to death, influencing their actions and fate, represented by its image as a lar among the household gods. At weddings, celebrations, and especially on birthdays—when the guardian spirit and the person began their journey together—worship was given with songs and dances to the divine image, decorated with garlands and offered incense and wine. The spirit or guardian was, in a sense, the person's companion soul, a second spiritual self. The Egyptian astrologer warned Antony to stay away from the young Octavius, saying, ‘for your spirit is afraid of his;’ and indeed, in later years, that spirit of Augustus became an imperial deity, by whom Romans swore solemn oaths that were not to be broken.[452] The idea that could personify the character and fate of an individual was capable of even further development. By turning the deepest operations of the human mind into spiritual entities, a dualistic philosophy proposed that each mortal had a good and an evil spirit, whose influences in life pulled them towards virtue and vice, happiness and misery. It was the evil spirit of Brutus203 that appeared to him one night in his tent: ‘I am your evil spirit,’ it said, ‘we meet again at Philippi.’[453]
As we study the shapes which the attendant spirits of the individual man assumed in early and mediæval Christendom, it is plain that the good and evil angels contending for man from birth to death, the guardian angel watching and protecting him, the familiar spirit giving occult knowledge or serving with magic art, continue in principle, and even in detail, the philosophy of earlier culture. Such beings even take visible form. St. Francisca had a familiar angel, not merely that domestic one that is given as a guardian to every man, but this was as it were a boy of nine years old, with a face more splendid than the sun, clad in a little white tunic; it was in after years that there came to her a second angel, with a column of splendour rising to the sky, and three golden palm-branches in his hands. Or such attendant beings, though invisible, make their presence evident by their actions, as in Calmet’s account of that Cistercian monk whose familiar genius waited on him, and used to get his chamber ready when he was coming back from the country, so that people knew when to expect him home.[454] There is a pleasant quaintness in Luther’s remark concerning guardian angels, that a prince must have a greater, stronger, wiser angel than a count, and a count than a common man.[455] Bishop Bull, in one of his vigorous sermons, thus sums up a learned argument: ‘I cannot but judge it highly probable, that every faithful person at least hath his particular good Genius or Angel, appointed by God over him, as the Guardian and Guide of his Life.’ But he 204will not insist on the belief, provided that the general ministry of angels be accepted.[456] Swedenborg will go beyond this. ‘Every man,’ he says, ‘is attended by an associate spirit; for without such an associate, a man would be incapable of thinking analytically, rationally, and spiritually.’[457] Yet in the modern educated world at large, this group of beliefs has passed into the stage of survival. The conception of the good and evil genius contending for man through life, indeed, perhaps never had much beyond the idealistic meaning which art and poetry still give it. The traveller in France may hear in our own day the peasant’s salutation, ‘Bonjour à vous et à votre compagnie!’ (i.e. your guardian angel).[458] But at the birthday festivals of English children, how few are even aware of the historical sequence, plain as it is, from the rites of the classic natal genius and the mediæval natal saint! Among us, the doctrine of guardian angels is to be found in commentaries, and may be sometimes mentioned in the pulpit; but the once distant conception of a present guardian spirit, acting on each individual man and interfering with circumstances on his behalf, has all but lost its old reality. The familiar demon which gave occult knowledge and did wicked work for the magician, and sucked blood from miserable hags by witch-teats, was two centuries ago as real to the popular mind as the alembic or the black cat with which it was associated. Now, it has been cast down to the limbo of unhallowed superstitions.
As we look at the forms that the spirits associated with individuals took in early and medieval Christianity, it's clear that the good and evil angels fighting for humanity from birth to death, the guardian angel watching over and protecting him, and the familiar spirit providing hidden knowledge or engaging in magical arts, continue in essence, and even in specifics, the philosophies of earlier cultures. These beings can even appear in visible forms. St. Francisca had a familiar angel, not just the standard guardian one that everyone is given, but this one appeared as a nine-year-old boy, with a face brighter than the sun, dressed in a small white tunic; later on, she received a second angel, with a column of light reaching up to the sky and three golden palm branches in his hands. Or such spirits, even if they're invisible, make their presence known through their actions, as seen in Calmet’s account of a Cistercian monk whose familiar spirit would prepare his chamber when he was returning from the countryside, so that people knew when to expect him home.[454] There's a charming quaintness in Luther’s comment about guardian angels, that a prince must have a greater, stronger, wiser angel than a count, and a count than an ordinary man.[455] Bishop Bull, in one of his passionate sermons, summarizes a learned argument: ‘I can't help but think it's highly likely that every faithful person at least has their own good Genius or Angel, appointed by God to be the Guardian and Guide of their life.’ But he 204won't push the belief, as long as the general ministry of angels is accepted.[456] Swedenborg goes further and says, ‘Every person has an accompanying spirit; without such a spirit, a person would be unable to think analytically, rationally, and spiritually.’[457] Yet in the modern educated world, these beliefs have become a relic. The idea of the good and evil genius contesting for a person throughout life may not have had much more than the idealistic meaning that art and poetry still provide. Travelers in France today may hear the peasant's greeting, "Hello to you and your company!" (i.e. your guardian angel).[458] But at birthday celebrations for English children, how few even recognize the clear historical connection to the rites of the classic natal genius and the medieval natal saint! Here, the idea of guardian angels is found in commentaries and may occasionally be mentioned from the pulpit; but the once widely held belief in a present guardian spirit, actively influencing each individual and intervening on their behalf, has nearly lost its former reality. The familiar demon that provided secret knowledge and performed wicked deeds for the magician, and drained blood from wretched hags with witch’s teats, was two centuries ago as real to the public mind as the alembic or the black cat it was associated with. Now, it has been relegated to the limbo of forbidden superstitions.
To turn from Man to Nature. General mention has been made already of the local spirits which belong to mountain and rock and valley, to well and stream and lake, in brief to those natural objects and places which in early ages aroused the savage mind to mythological ideas, such as modern poets in their altered intellectual atmosphere strive 205to reproduce. In discussing these imaginary beings, it is above all things needful to bring our minds into sympathy with the lower philosophy. Here we must seek to realize to the utmost the definition of the Nature-Spirits, to understand with what distinct and full conviction savage philosophy believes in their reality, to discern how, as living causes, they can fill their places and do their daily work in the natural philosophy of primæval man. Seeing how the Iroquois at their festivals could thank the invisible aids or good spirits, and with them the trees, shrubs, and plants, the springs and streams, the fire and wind, the sun, moon, and stars—in a word, every object that ministered to their wants—we may judge what real personality they attached to the myriad spirits which gave animated life to the world around them.[459] The Gold Coast negro’s generic name for a fetish-spirit is ‘wong;’ these aerial beings dwell in temple-huts and consume sacrifices, enter into and inspire their priests, cause health and sickness among men, and execute the behests of the mighty Heaven-god. But part or all of them are connected with material objects, and the negro can say, ‘In this river, or tree, or amulet, there is a wong.’ But he more usually says, ‘This river, or tree, or amulet is a wong.’ Thus among the wongs of the land are rivers, lakes, and springs, districts of land, termite-hills, trees, crocodiles, apes, snakes, elephants, birds.[460] In a word, his conceptions of animating souls and presiding spirits as efficient causes of all nature are two groups of ideas which we may well find it hard to distinguish, for the sufficient reason that they are but varying developments of the same fundamental animism.
To shift our focus from humans to nature. We’ve already mentioned the local spirits tied to mountains, rocks, valleys, wells, streams, and lakes—essentially to those natural elements that inspired mythological ideas in early times. Modern poets, in their changed intellectual environment, try to express these ideas. When discussing these imagined beings, it’s crucial to connect our minds with basic philosophy. Here, we need to fully grasp the nature of Nature-Spirits and understand how deeply early cultures believed in their existence. We should recognize how these spirits act as living forces, taking on roles and performing daily tasks in the natural philosophy of ancient humans. Observing the Iroquois at their festivals, they thanked the invisible helpers and benevolent spirits, along with trees, shrubs, plants, springs, streams, fire, wind, the sun, moon, and stars—basically every element that met their needs—gives us insight into the genuine personality they attributed to the countless spirits that animated their world. The Gold Coast people’s general term for a fetish-spirit is ‘wong;’ these ethereal beings reside in temple-huts, accept sacrifices, inspire their priests, influence health and illness, and carry out the commands of the powerful Heaven-god. However, part or all of these spirits are linked to physical objects, and the people might say, ‘In this river, or tree, or amulet, there is a wong.’ More commonly, they say, ‘This river, or tree, or amulet is a wong.’ Therefore, among the wongs of the land are rivers, lakes, springs, areas of land, termite mounds, trees, crocodiles, monkeys, snakes, elephants, and birds. In essence, their ideas of animating souls and governing spirits as influential forces in nature consist of two sets of concepts that are often difficult to separate because they are simply different manifestations of the same basic animism.
In the doctrine of nature-spirits among nations which have reached a higher grade of culture, are found at once traces of such primitive thought, and of its change under 206new intellectual conditions. Knowing the thoughts of rude Turanian tribes of Siberia as to pervading spirits of nature, we are prepared to look for remodelled ideas of the same class among a nation whose religion shows plain traces of evolution from the low Turanian stage. The archaic system of manes-worship and nature-worship, which survives as the state religion of China, fully recognizes the worship of the numberless spirits which pervade the universe. The belief in their personality is vouched for by the sacrifices offered to them. ‘One must sacrifice to the spirits,’ says Confucius, ‘as though they were present at the sacrifice.’ At the same time, spirits were conceived as embodied in material objects. Confucius says, again: ‘The action of the spirits, how perfect is it! Thou perceivest it, and yet seest it not! Incorporated or immembered in things, they cannot quit them. They cause men, clean and pure and better clothed, to bring them sacrifice. Many, many, are there of them, as the broad sea, as though they were above and right and left.’ Here are traces of such a primitive doctrine of personal and embodied nature-spirits as is still at home in the religion of rude Siberian hordes. But it was natural that Chinese philosophers should find means of refining into mere ideality these ruder animistic creations. Spirit (shin), they tell us, is the fine or tender part in all the ten thousand things; all that is extraordinary or supernatural is called spirit; the unsearchable of the male and female principles is called spirit; he who knows the way of passing away and coming to be, he knows the working of spirit.[461]
In the beliefs about nature spirits among more advanced cultures, we can see both signs of primitive thought and its evolution under new intellectual circumstances. Understanding the views of primitive Turanian tribes in Siberia regarding nature's pervasive spirits allows us to look for similar ideas transformed in a culture whose religion clearly shows an evolution from the basic Turanian stage. The ancient practice of worshipping ancestors and nature, which continues as the state religion of China, fully acknowledges the worship of countless spirits that fill the universe. The belief in their existence is supported by the sacrifices made to them. “You must offer sacrifices to the spirits,” Confucius says, “as if they were present at the offering.” At the same time, spirits were thought to be embodied in physical objects. Confucius also remarks: “The actions of the spirits, how perfect they are! You perceive them, yet you do not see them! Incorporated in things, they cannot leave them. They compel clean and pure people, dressed well, to bring them sacrifices. There are many, many such spirits, as broad as the sea, as if they are all around you.” These ideas reflect a primitive belief in personal and embodied nature spirits similar to those found in the religions of primitive Siberian groups. However, it was only natural for Chinese philosophers to find ways to refine these coarser animistic beliefs into a more idealized form. They tell us that spirit (shin) is the fine or delicate aspect present in all things; anything extraordinary or supernatural is labeled as spirit; the mysterious balance of the male and female principles is called spirit; understanding the cycle of existence means understanding the workings of spirit.[461]
The classic Greeks had inherited from their barbaric ancestors a doctrine of the universe essentially similar to that of the North American Indian, the West African, and the Siberian. We know, more intimately than the heathen religion of our own land, the ancient Greek scheme of nature-spirits impelling and directing by their personal power and will the functions of the universe, the ancient 207Greek religion of nature, developed by imagination, adorned by poetry, and consecrated by faith. History records for our instruction, how out of the midst of this splendid and honoured creed there were evolved the germs of the new philosophy. Led by minuter insight and stricter reason, thoughtful Greeks began the piecemeal supersession of the archaic scheme, and set in movement the transformation of animistic into physical science, which thence pervaded the whole cultured world. Such, in brief, is the history of the doctrine of nature-spirits from first to last. Let us endeavour, by classifying some of its principal special groups, to understand its place in the history of the human intellect.
The classic Greeks took on a view of the universe that was quite similar to that of North American Indians, West Africans, and Siberians, inherited from their primitive ancestors. We understand, more closely than the pagan beliefs of our own culture, the ancient Greek idea of nature-spirits that influence and guide the workings of the universe through their personal power and will. This ancient Greek religion of nature was shaped by imagination, enhanced by poetry, and solidified by faith. History shows us how the roots of the new philosophy emerged from this magnificent and respected belief system. With deeper insight and more rigorous reasoning, thoughtful Greeks began to gradually replace the old framework, initiating the shift from animistic beliefs to physical science, which ultimately spread throughout the cultured world. This, in short, is the story of the belief in nature-spirits from beginning to end. Let’s try to understand its role in the history of human thought by categorizing some of its main special groups.
What causes volcanos? The Australians account for volcanic rocks by the tradition that the sulky underground ‘ingna’ or demons made great fires and threw up red-hot stones.[462] The Kamchadals say that just as they themselves warm up their winter-houses, so the ‘kamuli’ or mountain-spirits heat up the mountains in which they dwell, and fling the brands out of the chimney.[463] The Nicaraguans offered human sacrifices to Masaya or Popogatepec (Smoking-Mountain), by throwing the bodies into the crater. It seems as though it were a controlling deity, not the mountain itself, that they worshipped; for one reads of the chiefs going to the crater, whence a hideous old naked woman came out and gave them counsel and oracle; at the edge were placed earthen vessels of food to please her, or to appease her when there was a storm or earthquake.[464] Thus animism provided a theory of volcanoes, and so it was likewise with whirlpools and rocks. In the Vei country in West Africa, there is a dangerous rock on the Mafa river, which is never passed without offering a tribute to the spirit of the flood—a leaf of tobacco, a handful of rice, or 208a drink of rum.[465] An early missionary account of a rock-demon worshipped by the Huron Indians will show with what absolute personality savages can conceive such a being. In the hollow of a certain sacred rock, it is related, dwells an ‘oki’ or spirit who can give success to travellers, wherefore they put tobacco into one of the cracks, and pray thus: ‘Demon who dwellest in this place, behold tobacco I present to thee; help us, keep us from shipwreck, defend us against our enemies, and vouchsafe that when we have made a good trade, we may return safe and sound to our village.’ Father Marquette relates how, travelling on a river in the then little known region of North America, he was told of a dreadful place to which the canoe was just drawing near, where dwells a demon waiting to devour such as dare to approach; this terrific manitu proved on arrival to be some high rocks in the bend of the river, against which the current runs violently.[466] Thus the missionary found in living belief among the savage Indians the very thought which had so long before passed into the classic tale of Skylla and Charybdis.
What causes volcanoes? Australians explain volcanic rocks by saying that the sulky underground 'ingna' or demons created large fires and launched red-hot stones.[462] The Kamchadals believe that just as they warm their winter homes, the 'kamuli' or mountain spirits heat the mountains they live in and fling embers out of the chimney.[463] Nicaraguans used to offer human sacrifices to Masaya or Popogatepec (Smoking Mountain) by throwing bodies into the crater. It seems like they worshipped a controlling deity, rather than the mountain itself; for it's written that chiefs would visit the crater, where a hideous old naked woman emerged to give them advice and oracle; they would place clay vessels of food at the edge to please her or to calm her during storms or earthquakes.[464] Thus, animism provided a theory of volcanoes, similarly for whirlpools and rocks. In the Vei country of West Africa, there's a dangerous rock on the Mafa River that must be passed with an offering to the flood spirit—a tobacco leaf, a handful of rice, or a drink of rum.208[465] An early missionary account of a rock demon worshipped by the Huron Indians shows just how vividly such beings can be imagined. In a hollow of a certain sacred rock, it's said, dwells an 'oki' or spirit who can bring success to travelers, which is why they place tobacco in one of the cracks and pray: 'Demon who dwells in this place, look at the tobacco I offer you; help us, keep us from shipwreck, protect us from our enemies, and grant that when we have made a good trade, we can return safely to our village.' Father Marquette recounts how, while traveling on a river in then little-known North America, he was warned of a frightening place they were approaching, where a demon awaited to devour anyone who dared come close; this terrible manitu turned out to be some high rocks at a bend in the river, against which the current ran fiercely.[466] Thus, the missionary discovered among the indigenous Indians a living belief mirroring the classic tale of Skylla and Charybdis.
In those moments of the civilized man’s life when he casts off hard dull science, and returns to childhood’s fancy, the world-old book of animated nature is open to him anew. Then the well-worn thoughts come back fresh to him, of the stream’s life that is so like his own; once more he can see the rill leap down the hillside like a child, to wander playing among the flowers; or can follow it as, grown to a river, it rushes through a mountain gorge, henceforth in sluggish strength to carry heavy burdens across the plain. In all that water does, the poet’s fancy can discern its personality of life. It gives fish to the fisher, and crops to the husbandman; it swells in fury and lays waste the land; it grips the bather with chill 209and cramp, and holds with inexorable grasp its drowning victim:[467]
In those moments in a civilized person's life when they set aside boring science and return to the imagination of childhood, the timeless book of living nature opens up to them again. Then the familiar thoughts come back to them, about the stream’s life that mirrors their own; once more they can see the brook rush down the hillside like a child, wandering and playing among the flowers; or they can follow it as it grows into a river, rushing through a mountain gorge, now strong and steady as it carries heavy loads across the plain. In everything water does, the poet’s imagination can recognize its lively spirit. It provides fish for the fisherman and crops for the farmer; it swells with rage and devastates the land; it chills the swimmer and cramps their body, and it holds with relentless grip its drowning victim:209
What ethnography has to teach of that great element of the religion of mankind, the worship of well and lake, brook and river, is simply this—that what is poetry to us was philosophy to early man; that to his mind water acted not by laws of force, but by life and will; that the water-spirits of primæval mythology are as souls which cause the water’s rush and rest, its kindness and its cruelty; that lastly man finds, in the beings which with such power can work him weal and woe, deities with a wider influence over his life, deities to be feared and loved, to be prayed to and praised and propitiated with sacrificial gifts.
What ethnography reveals about one of the fundamental aspects of human religion—the worship of wells, lakes, brooks, and rivers—is simply this: what we see as poetry was philosophy to early humans. In their view, water didn’t operate by physical laws but had life and will. The water spirits in ancient mythology were like souls that influenced the water's movement—its swift currents and calmness, its gentleness and harshness. Ultimately, people discovered in these powerful beings that could bring them both fortune and misfortune, deities with a broader impact on their lives, deities to be feared and loved, whom they could pray to, praise, and appease with offerings.
In Australia, special water-demons infest pools and watering-places. In the native theory of disease and death, no personage is more prominent than the water-spirit, which afflicts those who go into unlawful pools or bathe at unlawful times, the creature which causes women to pine and die, and whose very presence is death to the beholder, save to the native doctors, who may visit the water-spirit’s subaqueous abode and return with bleared eyes and wet clothes to tell the wonders of their stay.[468] It would seem that creatures with such attributes come naturally into the category of spiritual beings, but in such stories as that of the bunyip living in the lakes 210and rivers and seen floating as big as a calf, which carries off native women to his retreat below the waters, there appears that confusion between the spiritual water-demon and the material water-monster, which runs on into the midst of European mythology in such conceptions as that of the water-kelpie and the sea-serpent.[469] America gives cases of other principal animistic ideas concerning water. The water has its own spirits, writes Cranz, among the Greenlanders, so when they come to an untried spring, an angekok or the oldest man must drink first, to free it from a harmful spirit.[470] ‘Who makes this river flow?’ asks the Algonquin hunter in a medicine-song, and his answer is, ‘The spirit, he makes this river flow.’ In any great river, or lake, or cascade, there dwell such spirits, looked upon as mighty manitus. Thus Carver mentions the habit of the Red Indians, when they reached the shores of Lake Superior or the banks of the Mississippi, or any other great body of water, to present to the spirit who resides there some kind of offering; this he saw done by a Winnebago chief who went with him to the Falls of St. Anthony. Franklin saw a similar sacrifice made by an Indian, whose wife had been afflicted with sickness by the water-spirits, and who accordingly to appease them tied up in a small bundle a knife and a piece of tobacco and some other trifling articles, and committed them to the rapids.[471] On the river-bank, the Peruvians would scoop up a handful of water and drink it, praying the river-deity to let them cross or to give them fish, and they threw maize into the stream as a propitiatory offering; even to this day the Indians of the Cordilleras perform the ceremonial sip before they will pass a river on foot or horseback.[472] Africa displays well the 211rites of water-worship. In the East, among the Wanika, every spring has its spirit, to which oblations are made; in the West, in the Akra district, lakes, ponds, and rivers received worship as local deities. In the South, among the Kafirs, streams are venerated as personal beings, or the abodes of personal deities, as when a man crossing a river will ask leave of its spirit, or having crossed will throw in a stone; or when the dwellers by a stream will sacrifice a beast to it in time of drought, or, warned by illness in the tribe that their river is angry, will cast into it a few handfuls of millet or the entrails of a slaughtered ox.[473] Not less strongly marked are such ideas among the Tatar races of the North. Thus the Ostyaks venerate the river Ob, and when fish is scanty will hang a stone about a reindeer’s neck and cast it in for a sacrifice. Among the Buraets, who are professing Buddhists, the old worship may still be seen at the picturesque little mountain lake of Ikeougoun, where they come to the wooden temple on the shore to offer sacrifices of milk and butter and the fat of the animals which they burn on the altars. So across in Northern Europe, almost every Esthonian village has its sacred sacrificial spring. The Esths could at times even see the churl with blue and yellow stockings rise from the holy brook Wöhhanda, no doubt that same spirit of the brook to whom in older days there were sacrificed beasts and little children; in newer times, when a German landowner dared to build a mill and dishonour the sacred water, there came bad seasons that lasted year after year, and the country people burned down the abominable thing.[474] As for the water-worship prevailing among non-Aryan indigenes of British India, it 212seems to reach its climax among the Bodo and Dhimal of the North-East, tribes to whom the local rivers are the local deities,[475] so that men worship according to their water-sheds, and the map is a pantheon.
In Australia, special water-demons inhabit pools and watering spots. In the native understanding of illness and death, no figure is more significant than the water-spirit, which affects those who enter forbidden pools or bathe at inappropriate times. This being causes women to waste away and die, and just its presence is fatal to onlookers, except for the native healers who can visit the water-spirit’s underwater home and return with glazed eyes and wet clothes to share the wonders of their experience.[468] It seems that creatures with such characteristics naturally fall into the category of spiritual beings. However, in tales like that of the bunyip living in the lakes and rivers, which is described as being as large as a calf and abducting native women to its underwater lair, there is a mix-up between the spiritual water-demon and the physical water-monster, which connects to European mythology and concepts like the water-kelpie and the sea-serpent.[469] In America, there are other key animistic beliefs related to water. The water possesses its own spirits, writes Cranz about the Greenlanders, so when they approach an untested spring, an angekok or the eldest man must drink first to cleanse it of any harmful spirit.[470] “Who makes this river flow?” asks the Algonquin hunter in a medicine song, and he replies, “The spirit makes this river flow.” In any major river, lake, or waterfall, powerful spirits, known as mighty manitus, reside. Carver notes that when the Red Indians reached the shores of Lake Superior, the banks of the Mississippi, or any significant body of water, they would make some kind of offering to the spirit residing there; he witnessed this when a Winnebago chief visited the Falls of St. Anthony with him. Franklin observed a similar sacrifice performed by an Indian whose wife had suffered from illness caused by the water-spirits; to appease them, he tied a knife, a piece of tobacco, and a few other small items into a bundle and tossed it into the rapids.[471] On the riverbank, the Peruvians would scoop up some water and drink it, praying to the river deity to allow them to cross or provide fish, throwing maize into the water as an offering; even today, the Indians of the Cordilleras perform a ceremonial sip before they pass a river on foot or horseback.[472] Africa clearly demonstrates the practices of water-worship. In the East, among the Wanika, every spring has its spirit, to which offerings are made; in the West, in the Akra region, lakes, ponds, and rivers are worshiped as local deities. In the South, among the Kafirs, streams are revered as personal entities or homes to personal deities — for instance, a man crossing a river may seek permission from its spirit, or upon crossing, he might throw in a stone; local residents by a stream may sacrifice an animal during a drought or, alerted by illness in their community that their river is displeased, will toss handfuls of millet or the entrails of a slaughtered ox into it.[473] Such beliefs are also strongly seen among the Tatar peoples of the North. For instance, the Ostyaks revere the river Ob, and when fish are scarce, they will hang a stone around a reindeer’s neck and throw it in as a sacrifice. Among the Buraets, who practice Buddhism, ancient worship can still be observed at the beautiful little mountain lake of Ikeougoun, where they visit the wooden temple on the shore to offer sacrifices of milk, butter, and the fat of animals they burn on the altars. Similarly, in Northern Europe, almost every Estonian village has its own sacred sacrificial spring. The Esths could sometimes even see the spirit with blue and yellow stockings rise from the holy brook Wöhhanda; this spirit was likely the same one to whom animals and small children were once sacrificed. In more recent times, when a German landowner dared to build a mill and desecrate the sacred water, bad seasons followed year after year, prompting the locals to burn down the offending structure.[474] As for the water-worship practiced among the non-Aryan indigenous peoples of British India, it seems to reach its peak among the Bodo and Dhimal of the North-East, tribes for whom the local rivers are considered local deities,[475] causing people to worship according to their watersheds, making the map a pantheon.
Nor is such reverence strange to Aryan nations. To the modern Hindu, looking as he still does on a river as a living personal being to be adored and sworn by, the Ganges is no solitary water deity, but only the first and most familiar of the long list of sacred streams.[476] Turn to the classic world, and we but find the beliefs and rites of a lower barbaric culture holding their place, consecrated by venerable antiquity and glorified by new poetry and art. To the great Olympian assembly in the halls of cloud-compelling Zeus, came the Rivers, all save Ocean, and thither came the nymphs who dwell in lovely groves and at the springs of streams, and in the grassy meads; and they sate upon the polished seats:—
Nor is such respect unusual for Aryan nations. For the modern Hindu, who still sees a river as a living entity to be worshipped and respected, the Ganges is not just a unique water deity but simply the first and most well-known of many sacred rivers.[476] If we look to the classical world, we find that the beliefs and rituals of a more primitive culture have managed to persist, made sacred by ancient customs and celebrated through new poetry and art. In the grand assembly of gods in the halls of cloud-calling Zeus, the Rivers gathered, except for Ocean, along with the nymphs who live in beautiful groves, at the springs of rivers, and in the grassy meadows; they took their places on the polished seats:—
Even against Hephaistos the Fire-god, a River-god dared to stand opposed, deep-eddying Xanthos, called of men Skamandros. He rushed down to overwhelm Achilles and bury him in sand and slime, and though Hephaistos prevailed against him with his flames, and forced him, with the fish skurrying hither and thither in his boiling waves and the willows scorched upon his banks, to rush on no more but stand, yet at the word of white-armed Here, that it was not fit for mortals’ sake to handle so roughly an immortal god, Hephaistos quenched his furious fire, and the returning flood sped again along his channel:—
Even against Hephaestus, the Fire God, a River God dared to stand up, deep-eddying Xanthos, known to men as Skamandros. He surged down to overwhelm Achilles and bury him in sand and muck. Although Hephaestus beat him back with his flames and forced him, with fish darting here and there in his boiling waters and willows scorched along his banks, to stop moving and stand still, at the command of white-armed Hera, who said it wasn’t right for mortals to handle an immortal god so harshly, Hephaestus extinguished his raging fire, and the returning flood flowed again along his channel:—
To beings thus conceived in personal divinity, full worship was given. Odysseus invokes the river of Scheria; Skamandros had his priest and Spercheios his grove; and sacrifice was done to the rival of Herakles, the river-god Acheloos, eldest of the three thousand river-children of old Okeanos.[477] Through the ages of the classic world, the river-gods and the water-nymphs held their places, till within the bounds of Christendom they came to be classed with ideal beings like them in the mythology of the northern nations, the kindly sprites to whom offerings were given at springs and lakes, and the treacherous nixes who entice men to a watery death. In times of transition, the new Christian authorities made protest against the old worship, passing laws to forbid adoration and sacrifice to fountains—as when Duke Bretislav forbade the still half-pagan country folk of Bohemia to offer libations and sacrifice victims at springs,[478] and in England Ecgbert’s Poenitentiale proscribed the like rites, ‘if any man vow or bring his offerings to any well,’ ‘if one hold his vigils at any well.’[479] But the old veneration was too strong to be put down, and with a varnish of Christianity and sometimes the substitution of a saint’s name, water-worship has held its own to our day. The Bohemians will go to pray on the river-bank where a man has been drowned, and there they will cast in an offering, a loaf of new bread and a pair of wax-candles. On Christmas Eve they will put 214a spoonful of each dish on a plate, and after supper throw the food into the well, with an appointed formula, somewhat thus:—
To beings considered to have personal divinity, full worship was given. Odysseus calls upon the river of Scheria; Skamandros had his priest and Spercheios his grove; and sacrifices were made to Acheloos, the river god who rivals Herakles, the oldest of the three thousand river children of old Okeanos.[477] Throughout the ages of the classic world, river gods and water nymphs maintained their significance until, within the bounds of Christianity, they were categorized alongside ideal beings in northern mythology, like the benevolent sprites to whom offerings were given at springs and lakes, and the deceptive nixes who lure men to watery deaths. During times of change, the new Christian authorities protested against the old worship, enacting laws to prohibit adoration and sacrifices to fountains—such as when Duke Bretislav banned the still partly pagan countryside of Bohemia from making libations and sacrificing animals at springs,[478] and in England, Ecgbert’s Poenitentiale forbade similar rites, stating ‘if any man vows or brings his offerings to any well,’ ‘if someone holds vigils at any well.’[479] But the old reverence proved too strong to eliminate, and with a veneer of Christianity and sometimes the replacement of a saint’s name, water worship has persisted to this day. The Bohemians will go to pray by the riverbank where a person has drowned, and there they will make an offering, a loaf of fresh bread and a pair of wax candles. On Christmas Eve, they place a spoonful of each dish on a plate, and after dinner, they throw the food into the well, reciting a designated formula, somewhat like this:—
It well shows the unchanged survival of savage thought in modern peasants’ minds, to find still in Slavonic lands the very same fear of drinking a harmful spirit in the water, that has been noticed among the Esquimaux. It is a sin for a Bulgarian not to throw some water out of every bucket brought from the fountain; some elemental spirit might be floating on the surface, and if not thrown out, might take up his abode in the house, or enter into the body of some one drinking from the vessel.[481] Elsewhere in Europe, the list of still existing water-rites may be extended. The ancient lake-offerings of the South of France seem not yet forgotten in La Lozère, the Bretons venerate as of old their sacred springs, and Scotland and Ireland can show in parish after parish the sites and even the actual survivals of such observance at the holy wells. Perhaps Welshmen no longer offer cocks and hens to St. Tecla at her sacred well and church of Llandegla, but Cornish folk still drop into the old holy-wells offerings of pins, nails, and rags, expecting from their waters cure for disease, and omens from their bubbles as to health and marriage.[482]
It clearly shows the persistent survival of primitive beliefs in the minds of modern peasants, to still find in Slavic regions the same fear of drinking harmful spirits in the water, that has been seen among the Eskimos. For a Bulgarian, it's considered a sin not to pour out some water from every bucket brought from the fountain; some elemental spirit might be floating on the surface, and if not poured out, could take up residence in the house or enter the body of someone drinking from the vessel.[481] Elsewhere in Europe, the list of still-existing water rituals can be expanded. The ancient lake offerings of southern France seem not yet forgotten in La Lozère, the Bretons still honor their sacred springs as in the past, and Scotland and Ireland can show parish after parish the sites and even the actual continuations of such observances at holy wells. Perhaps Welsh people no longer offer cocks and hens to St. Tecla at her sacred well and church in Llandegla, but the people of Cornwall still drop pins, nails, and rags into the old holy wells, hoping for cures from their waters and signs from their bubbles regarding health and marriage.[482]
The spirits of the tree and grove no less deserve our 215study for their illustrations of man’s primitive animistic theory of nature. This is remarkably displayed in that stage of thought where the individual tree is regarded as a conscious personal being, and as such receives adoration and sacrifice. Whether such a tree is looked on as inhabited, like a man, by its own proper life or soul, or as possessed, like a fetish, by some other spirit which has entered it and uses it for a body, is often hard to determine. Shelley’s lines well express a doubting conception familiar to old barbaric thought—
The spirits of the tree and grove definitely deserve our 215attention for their insights into humanity’s early animistic view of nature. This is especially evident in the mindset where each tree is seen as a conscious personal being and thus receives worship and offerings. Whether a tree is thought to be inhabited, like a person, by its own unique life or soul, or viewed as being possessed, like a fetish, by some other spirit that has entered it and uses it as a physical form, is often difficult to tell. Shelley’s lines effectively capture a questioning idea common in ancient primitive thought—
But this vagueness is yet again a proof of the principle which I have confidently put forward here, that the conceptions of the inherent soul and of the embodied spirit are but modifications of one and the same deep-lying animistic thought. The Mintira of the Malay Peninsula believe in ‘hantu kayu,’ i.e. ‘tree-spirits,’ or ‘tree-demons,’ which frequent every species of tree, and afflict men with diseases; some trees are noted for the malignity of their demons.[483] Among the Dayaks of Borneo, certain trees possessed by spirits must not be cut down; if a missionary ventured to fell one, any death that happened afterwards would naturally be set down to this crime.[484] The belief of certain Malays of Sumatra is expressly stated, that certain venerable trees are the residence, or rather the material frame, of spirits of the woods.[485] In the Tonga Islands, we hear of natives laying offerings at the foot of particular trees, with the idea of their being inhabited by spirits.[486] So in America, the Ojibwa medicine-man has heard the tree utter its complaint 216when wantonly cut down.[487] A curious and suggestive description bearing on this point is given in Friar Roman Pane’s account of the religion of the Antilles islanders, drawn up by order of Columbus. Certain trees, he declares, were believed to send for sorcerers, to whom they gave orders how to shape their trunks into idols, and these ‘cemi’ being then installed in temple-huts, received prayer and inspired their priests with oracles.[488] Africa shows as well-defined examples. The negro woodman cuts down certain trees in fear of the anger of their inhabiting demons, but he finds his way out of the difficulty by a sacrifice to his own good genius, or, when he is giving the first cuts to the great asorin-tree, and its indwelling spirit comes out to chase him, he cunningly drops palm-oil on the ground, and makes his escape while the spirit is licking it up.[489] A negro was once worshipping a tree with an offering of food, when some one pointed out to him that the tree did not eat; the negro answered, ‘O the tree is not fetish, the fetish is a spirit and invisible, but he has descended into this tree. Certainly he cannot devour our bodily food, but he enjoys its spiritual part and leaves behind the bodily which we see.’[490] Tree-worship is largely prevalent in Africa, and much of it may be of this fully animistic kind; as where in Whidah Bosman says that ‘the trees, which are the gods of the second rank of this country, are only prayed to and presented with offerings in time of sickness, more especially fevers, in order to restore the patients to health;’[491] or where in Abyssinia the Gallas made pilgrimage from all quarters to their sacred tree Wodanabe on the banks of the Hawash, worshipping it and praying to it for riches, health, life, and every blessing.[492]
But this ambiguity once again supports the principle I confidently put forward here: that the ideas of the inherent soul and the embodied spirit are just variations of the same deep-rooted animistic belief. The Mintira people of the Malay Peninsula believe in 'hantu kayu,' meaning 'tree spirits' or 'tree demons,' which inhabit every type of tree and can cause illnesses in people; some trees are known for the malevolence of their demons. Among the Dayaks of Borneo, certain trees believed to be home to spirits must not be cut down; if a missionary were to chop one down, any death that occurred afterward would naturally be blamed on that act. Some Malays from Sumatra explicitly state that certain ancient trees are the dwelling places, or rather the physical forms, of forest spirits. In the Tonga Islands, locals are known to place offerings at the base of specific trees, believing them to be inhabited by spirits. Similarly, in America, an Ojibwa medicine man has reported hearing a tree express its distress when carelessly cut down. A fascinating and insightful account related to this is provided in Friar Roman Pane’s description of the religion of the Antilles islanders, commissioned by Columbus. He stated that certain trees were believed to summon sorcerers, who would receive instructions on how to carve their trunks into idols, which would then be installed in temple huts to receive prayers and inspire their priests with oracles. Africa also presents clear examples. The African woodcutter avoids cutting down specific trees out of fear of angering the spirits that reside within them, but he finds a way to cope by making a sacrifice to his own guardian spirit. For instance, when he begins to cut down a great asorin tree, and its spirit rushes out to chase him, he cleverly pours palm oil on the ground and escapes while the spirit is preoccupied with licking it up. One time, a man was offering food to a tree when someone pointed out that the tree does not consume food. The man replied, "Oh, the tree is not a fetish; the fetish is a spirit and invisible, but it has descended into this tree. Certainly, it cannot eat our physical food, but it enjoys its spiritual essence and leaves the physical part behind for us to see." Tree worship is quite common in Africa, much of which may fall into this fully animistic category; for example, in Whidah, Bosman mentions that "the trees, which are the gods of the second rank in this country, are only prayed to and offered gifts during times of illness, especially fevers, to restore the patients to health." Additionally, in Abyssinia, the Gallas would make pilgrimages from all directions to their sacred tree Wodanabe on the banks of the Hawash, worshipping it and praying for wealth, health, life, and all kinds of blessings.
217The position of tree-worship in Southern Asia in relation to Buddhism is of particular interest. To this day there are districts of this region, Buddhist or under strong Buddhist influence, where tree-worship is still displayed with absolute clearness of theory and practice. Here in legend a dryad is a being capable of marriage with a human hero, while in actual fact a tree-deity is considered human enough to be pleased with dolls set up to swing in the branches. The Talein of Burmah, before they cut down a tree, offer prayers to its ‘kaluk’ (i.q., ‘kelah’), its inhabiting spirit or soul. The Siamese offer cakes and rice to the takhien-tree before they fell it, and believe the inhabiting nymphs or mothers of trees to pass into guardian-spirits of the boats built of their wood, so that they actually go on offering sacrifice to them in this their new condition.[493] These people have indeed little to learn from any other race, however savage, of the principles of the lower animism. The question now arises, did such tree-worship belong to the local religions among which Buddhism established itself? There is strong evidence that this was the case. Philosophic Buddhism, as known to us by its theological books, does not include trees among sentient beings possessing mind, but it goes so far as to acknowledge the existence of the ‘dewa’ or genius of a tree. Buddha, it is related, told a story of a tree crying out to the brahman carpenter who was going to cut it down, ‘I have a word to say, hear my word!’ but then the teacher goes on to explain that it was not really the tree that spoke, but a dewa dwelling in it. Buddha himself was a tree-genius forty-three times in the course of his transmigrations. Legend says that during one such existence, a certain brahman used to pray for protection to the tree which Buddha was attached to; but the transformed teacher reproved the tree-worshipper for thus 218addressing himself to a senseless thing which hears and knows nothing.[494] As for the famous Bo tree, its miraculous glories are not confined to the ancient Buddhist annals; for its surviving descendant, grown from the branch of the parent tree sent by King Asoka from India to Ceylon in the 3rd century B.C., to this day receives the worship of the pilgrims who come by thousands to do it honour, and offer prayer before it. Beyond these hints and relics of the old worship, however, Mr. Fergusson’s recent investigations, published in his ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ have brought to light an ancient state of things which the orthodox Buddhist literature gives little idea of. It appears from the sculptures of the Sanchi tope in Central India, that in the Buddhism of about the 1st century A.D., sacred trees had no small place as objects of authorized worship. It is especially notable that the representatives of indigenous race and religion in India, the Nagas, characterized by their tutelary snakes issuing from their backs between their shoulders and curving over their heads, and other tribes actually drawn as human apes, are seen adoring the divine tree in the midst of unquestionable Buddhist surroundings.[495] Tree-worship, even now well marked among the indigenous tribes of India, was obviously not abolished on the Buddhist conversion. The new philosophic religion seems to have amalgamated, as new religions ever do, with older native thoughts and rites. And it is quite consistent with the habits of the Buddhist theologians and hagiologists, that when tree-worship was suppressed, they should have slurred over the fact of its former prevalence, and should even have used the recollection of it as a gibe against the hostile Brahmans.
217The significance of tree-worship in Southern Asia in relation to Buddhism is particularly intriguing. Even today, there are areas in this region, whether Buddhist or heavily influenced by Buddhism, where tree-worship is clearly evident in both belief and practice. In legends, a dryad can marry a human hero, while in reality, a tree-deity is considered human enough to appreciate dolls set up to swing in its branches. The Talein people of Burma offer prayers to the tree's ‘kaluk’ (i.q., ‘kelah’), its spirit or soul, before cutting it down. Similarly, the Siamese offer cakes and rice to the takhien tree before they fell it, believing that the spirits or guardians of the trees transition into the guardian spirits of boats made from their wood, so they continue to offer sacrifices in their new form.[493] These communities certainly have little to learn from any other culture, however primitive, regarding the principles of lower animism. The question now arises: did this tree-worship predate the local religions among which Buddhism integrated? There is strong evidence suggesting that it did. Philosophic Buddhism, as we understand from its theological texts, doesn’t consider trees among sentient beings with minds, but it does recognize the existence of a ‘dewa’ or spirit of a tree. It is said that Buddha shared a story about a tree calling out to a brahman carpenter who was about to cut it down, saying, ‘I have something to say, hear me out!’ However, the teacher explained that it wasn’t actually the tree speaking, but a dewa residing within it. Buddha himself was a tree spirit forty-three times during his reincarnations. Legend has it that during one of these lives, a certain brahman prayed for protection to the tree Buddha was attached to; however, the transformed teacher admonished the tree-worshipper for addressing a senseless entity that hears and knows nothing.[494] As for the renowned Bo tree, its miraculous attributes are not limited to ancient Buddhist texts; its living descendant, grown from a branch of the original tree sent by King Asoka from India to Ceylon in the 3rd century BCE, still receives worship from thousands of pilgrims who come to honor it and offer prayers. Beyond these clues and remnants of old worship, however, Mr. Fergusson’s recent studies, published in his ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ have uncovered an ancient state of affairs that orthodox Buddhist literature hardly reflects. The sculptures at the Sanchi tope in Central India indicate that in the Buddhism around the 1st century CE, sacred trees were significant objects of authorized worship. It is particularly noteworthy that representatives of indigenous races and religions in India, the Nagas, recognizable by their protective snakes protruding from their backs between their shoulders and arching over their heads, along with other tribes depicted as human-like apes, are shown venerating the divine tree in clearly Buddhist settings.[495] Tree-worship, still prevalent among indigenous tribes in India, was evidently not eradicated with the advent of Buddhism. The new philosophical religion appears to have blended, as new religions often do, with older local beliefs and practices. It is quite in line with the tendencies of Buddhist theologians and hagiographers that when tree-worship was suppressed, they would have downplayed its previous widespread nature and even used memories of it as a critique against the opposing Brahmans.
Conceptions like those of the lower races in character, and rivalling them in vivacity, belong to the mythology of Greece and Rome. The classic thought of the tree inhabited by a deity and uttering oracles, is like that of 219other regions. Thus the sacred palm of Negra in Yemen, whose demon was propitiated by prayer and sacrifice to give oracular response,[496] or the tall oaks inhabited by the gods, where old Slavonic people used to ask questions and hear the answers,[497] have their analogue in the prophetic oak of Dodona, wherein dwelt the deity, ‘ναῖεν δ’ ἐνὶ πυθμένι φηγοῦ.’[498] The Homeric hymn to Aphrodite tells of the tree-nymphs, long-lived yet not immortal—they grow with their high-topped leafy pines and oaks upon the mountains, but when the lot of death draws nigh, and the lovely trees are sapless, and the bark rots away and the branches fall, then their spirits depart from the light of the sun:—
Conceptions like those of the lower races in character, and competing with them in liveliness, belong to the mythology of Greece and Rome. The classic idea of a tree inhabited by a deity that speaks prophecies is similar to that found in other regions. Thus, the sacred palm of Negra in Yemen, whose spirit was appeased by prayer and sacrifice to provide prophetic answers, or the tall oaks inhabited by the gods, where the ancient Slavs would ask questions and hear replies, have parallels in the prophetic oak of Dodona, where the deity resided. The Homeric hymn to Aphrodite tells of the tree-nymphs, who live a long time but are not immortal—they grow alongside the tall, leafy pines and oaks on the mountains, but when death approaches, and the beautiful trees lose their sap, the bark decays, and the branches fall, then their spirits depart from the sunlight:—
The hamadryad’s life is bound to her tree, she is hurt when it is wounded, she cries when the axe threatens, she dies with the fallen trunk:—
The hamadryad's life is tied to her tree; she feels pain when it's harmed, she weeps when the axe is nearby, and she dies with the fallen trunk:—
How personal a creature the tree-nymph was to the classic mind, is shown in legends like that of Paraibios, 220whose father, regardless of the hamadryad’s entreaties, cut down her ancient trunk, and in himself and in his offspring suffered her dire vengeance.[501] The ethnographic student finds a curious interest in transformation-myths like Ovid’s, keeping up as they do vestiges of philosophy of archaic type—Daphne turned into the laurel that Apollo honours for her sake, the sorrowing sisters of Phaethon changing into trees, yet still dropping blood and crying for mercy when their shoots are torn.[502] Such episodes mediæval poetry could still adapt, as in the pathless infernal forest whose knotted dusk-leaved trees revealed their human animation to the Florentine when he plucked a twig,
How personal a being the tree-nymph was to the classic mindset is evident in legends like that of Paraibios, 220 whose father, ignoring the hamadryad’s pleas, cut down her ancient trunk and faced her terrible wrath along with his descendants.[501] Ethnographic students find a fascinating interest in transformation myths like Ovid's, which preserve remnants of ancient philosophy—Daphne turned into the laurel that Apollo honors in her memory, the grieving sisters of Phaethon transforming into trees, yet still shedding blood and crying out for mercy when their branches are torn.[502] Such episodes could still be adapted in medieval poetry, as in the untamed infernal forest where the twisted, dark-leaved trees revealed their human-like presence to the Florentine when he plucked a twig,
or the myrtle to which Ruggiero tied his hippogriff, who tugged at the poor trunk till it murmured and oped its mouth, and with doleful voice told that it was Astolfo, enchanted by the wicked Alcina among her other lovers,
or the myrtle where Ruggiero tied his hippogriff, who tugged at the poor trunk until it sighed and opened its mouth, and with a sorrowful voice revealed that it was Astolfo, enchanted by the wicked Alcina among her other lovers,
If these seem to us now conceits over quaint for beauty, we need not scruple to say so. They are not of Dante and Ariosto, they are sham antiques from classic models. And if even the classic originals have become unpleasing, we need not perhaps reproach ourselves with decline of poetic taste. We have lost something, and the loss has spoiled our appreciation of many an old poetic theme, yet it is not always our sense of the beautiful that has dwindled, but the old animistic philosophy of nature that is gone from us, dissipating from such fancies their meaning, and with 221their meaning their loveliness. Still, if we look for living men to whom trees are, as they were to our distant forefathers, the habitations and embodiments of spirits, we shall not look in vain. The peasant folklore of Europe still knows of willows that bleed and weep and speak when hewn, of the fairy maiden that sits within the fir-tree, of that old tree in Rugaard forest that must not be felled, for an elf dwells within, of that old tree on the Heinzenberg near Zell, which uttered its complaint when the woodman cut it down, for in it was Our Lady, whose chapel now stands upon the spot.[505] One may still look on where Franconian damsels go to a tree on St. Thomas’s Day, knock thrice solemnly, and listen for the indwelling spirit to give answer by raps from within, what manner of husbands they are to have.[506]
If these ideas seem a bit too strange for beauty today, we shouldn't hesitate to say so. They're not from Dante and Ariosto; they're fake antiques modeled after classics. And even if the classic originals no longer appeal to us, we might not need to blame ourselves for a decline in poetic taste. We've lost something, and that loss has affected our appreciation of many old poetic themes, yet it's not necessarily that our sense of beauty has diminished, but rather that the old animistic view of nature has faded away, stripping these ideas of their meaning, and with that, their beauty. Still, if we search for living people who see trees as our distant ancestors did—as homes and embodiments of spirits—we won't be disappointed. European peasant folklore still tells of willows that bleed and weep and speak when cut down, the fairy maiden who resides in the fir tree, that ancient tree in Rugaard forest that must not be cut because an elf lives inside it, and that old tree on the Heinzenberg near Zell, which cried out when the woodcutter felled it, for within it was Our Lady, whose chapel now stands at the site. One can still witness Franconian maidens visiting a tree on St. Thomas’s Day, knocking three times solemnly, and listening for the spirit within to respond with knocks to reveal what kind of husbands they will have.
In the remarkable document of mythic cosmogony, preserved by Eusebius under the alleged authorship of the Phœnician Sanchoniathon, is the following passage: ‘But these first men consecrated the plants of the earth, and judged them gods, and worshipped the things upon which they themselves lived and their posterity, and all before them, and (to these) they made libations and sacrifices.’[507] From examples such as have been here reviewed, it seems that direct and absolute tree-worship of this kind may indeed lie very wide and deep in the early history of religion. But the whole tree-cultus of the world must by no means be thrown indiscriminately into this one category. It is only on such distinct evidence as has been here put forward, that a sacred tree may be taken as having a spirit embodied in or attached to it. Beyond this limit, there is a wider range of animistic conceptions connected with tree and forest worship. The tree may be the spirit’s perch or shelter or favourite haunt. Under this definition come the 222trees hung with objects which are the receptacles of disease-spirits. As places of spiritual resort, there is no real distinction between the sacred tree and the sacred grove. The tree may serve as a scaffold or altar, at once convenient and conspicuous, where offerings can be set out for some spiritual being, who may be a tree-spirit, or perhaps the local deity, living there just as a man might do who had his hut and owned his plot of land around. The shelter of some single tree, or the solemn seclusion of a forest grove, is a place of worship set apart by nature, of some tribes the only temple, of many tribes perhaps the earliest. Lastly, the tree may be merely a sacred object patronized by or associated with or symbolizing some divinity, often one of those which we shall presently notice as presiding over a whole species of trees or other things. How all these conceptions, from actual embodiment or local residence or visit of a demon or deity, down to mere ideal association, can blend together, how hard it often is to distinguish them, and yet how in spite of this confusion they conform to the animistic theology in which all have their essential principles, a few examples will show better than any theoretical comment.[508] Take the groups of malicious wood-fiends so obviously devised to account for the mysterious influences that beset the forest wanderer. In the Australian bush, demons whistle in the branches, and stooping with outstretched arms sneak among the trunks to seize the wayfarer; the lame demon leads astray the hunter in the Brazilian forest; the Karen crossing a fever-haunted jungle shudders in the grip of the spiteful ‘phi,’ and runs to lay an offering by the tree he rested under last, from whose boughs the malaria-fiend came down upon him; the negro of Senegambia seeks to pacify the long-haired tree-demons that send diseases; the terrific cry of the wood-demon is heard in the Finland 223forest; the baleful shapes of terror that glide at night through our own woodland are familiar still to peasant and poet.[509] The North American Indians of the Far West, entering the defiles of the Black Mountains of Nebraska, will often hang offerings on the trees or place them on the rocks, to propitiate the spirits and procure good weather and hunting.[510] In South America, Mr. Darwin describes the Indians offering their adorations by loud shouts when they came in sight of the sacred tree standing solitary on a high part of the Pampas, a landmark visible from afar. To this tree were hanging by threads numberless offerings such as cigars, bread, meat, pieces of cloth, &c., down to the mere thread pulled from his poncho by the poor wayfarer who had nothing better to give. Men would pour libations of spirits and maté into a certain hole, and smoke upwards to gratify Walleechu, and all around lay the bleached bones of the horses slaughtered as sacrifices. All Indians made their offerings here, that their horses might not tire, and that they themselves might prosper. Mr. Darwin reasonably judges on this evidence that it was to the deity Walleechu that the worship was paid, the sacred tree being only his altar; but he mentions that the Gauchos think the Indians consider the tree as the god itself, a good example of the misunderstanding possible in such cases.[511] The New Zealanders would hang an offering of food or a lock of hair on a branch at a landing place, or near remarkable rocks or trees would throw a bunch of rushes as an offering to the spirit dwelling there.[512] The Dayaks fasten rags of their clothes on trees at cross roads, fearing for their health if they neglect the custom;[513] the Macassar man halting to eat in the forest will put a morsel of rice or fish on a leaf, and lay it on a stone or stump.[514] The divinities of African tribes 224may dwell in trees remarkable for size and age, or inhabit sacred groves where the priest alone may enter.[515] Trees treated as idols by the Congo people, who put calabashes of palm wine at their feet in case they should be thirsty,[516] and amongst West African negro tribes farther north, trees hung with rags by the passers-by, and the great baobabs pegged to hang offerings to, and serving as shrines before which sheep are sacrificed,[517] display well the rites of tree sacrifice, though leaving undefined the precise relation conceived between deity and tree.
In the fascinating document of mythical creation, preserved by Eusebius and attributed to the Phoenician Sanchoniathon, there's this passage: ‘But these first humans dedicated the plants of the earth, considered them gods, and worshipped the things that sustained them and their descendants, making offerings and sacrifices to them.’[507] Based on the examples discussed, it appears that direct and absolute tree-worship may indeed run deep in the early history of religion. However, not all tree worship around the world should be lumped into this single category. It is only based on the clear evidence presented here that a sacred tree can be viewed as having a spirit either embodied in or linked to it. Beyond this, there is a broader spectrum of animistic beliefs related to tree and forest worship. The tree might serve as the spirit's perching place, shelter, or favorite spot. This includes trees adorned with items that serve as containers for disease-spirits. As spiritual sites, there isn't a real distinction between a sacred tree and a sacred grove. The tree may act as a platform or altar, both practical and visible, where offerings can be laid out for some spiritual entity, who could be a tree-spirit or possibly the local deity, residing there much like a person who owns a home and the land around it. The shade of an individual tree or the quiet solitude of a forest grove serves as a natural place of worship, perhaps the only temple for some tribes, and possibly the earliest for many others. Lastly, the tree may simply be a sacred object affiliated with or symbolizing some divinity, often one that oversees an entire category of trees or other items. How all these ideas—from the actual embodiment or local presence of a spirit or deity to mere ideal connections—can blend and how difficult it can often be to differentiate them, yet how they align with the animistic theology, which maintains their foundational principles, will be better illustrated by a few examples than by any theoretical discussion.[508] Take the groups of mischievous wood-spirits clearly created to explain the mysterious influences that confront those wandering in the forest. In the Australian bush, demons whistle in the trees, lurking with outstretched arms among the trunks to capture travelers; the limping demon misleads hunters in the Brazilian forest; the Karen traversing a fever-stricken jungle trembles in the grip of the vindictive ‘phi,’ and rushes to leave an offering by the tree he rested under last, from which the malaria demon descended upon him; the people of Senegambia try to appease the long-haired tree-demons that cause illnesses; the terrifying cry of the wood-demon echoes in the forests of Finland; the fearsome shapes that glide through our own woodlands at night remain well-known to both peasants and poets.[509] The Native Americans of the Far West, when entering the Black Mountains of Nebraska, frequently hang offerings on trees or place them on rocks to appease the spirits and ensure favorable weather and hunting.[510] In South America, Mr. Darwin describes the Indians expressing their reverence with loud shouts upon seeing a sacred tree standing alone on a high part of the Pampas, a landmark visible from afar. Countless offerings like cigars, bread, meat, pieces of cloth, etc., were hanging from the tree by threads, including a mere thread pulled from a poncho by a traveler who had nothing better to give. Men poured spirits and maté into a specific hole while smoking upwards to please Walleechu, and all around lay the bleached bones of sacrificed horses. All Indians made their offerings here, hoping their horses would not tire and they themselves would prosper. Mr. Darwin reasonably suggests from this evidence that the worship was directed towards the deity Walleechu, with the sacred tree serving merely as his altar; however, he notes that the Gauchos believe the Indians view the tree as the god itself, which illustrates the potential for misunderstanding in such cases.[511] The New Zealanders would hang food offerings or a lock of hair on a branch at a landing spot, or throw a bundle of rushes as an offering to the spirit residing near notable rocks or trees.[512] The Dayaks attach scraps of their clothing to trees at crossroads, fearing for their health if they skip this custom;[513] the Macassar person stopping to eat in the forest will place a bit of rice or fish on a leaf and set it on a stone or stump.[514] The deities of African tribes may reside in trees that are notable for their size and age or inhabit sacred groves where only the priest is allowed to enter.[515] Trees treated as idols by the people of the Congo, who place calabashes of palm wine at their bases in case they are thirsty,[516] and among various West African tribes further north, trees draped with rags by passersby, along with great baobabs used to hang offerings, serve as shrines where sheep are sacrificed,[517] clearly display the rituals of tree sacrifice, although the exact relationship between deity and tree remains undefined.
The forest theology that befits a race of hunters is dominant still among Turanian tribes of Siberia, as of old it was across to Lapland. Full well these tribes know the gods of the forest. The Yakuts hang on any remarkably fine tree iron, brass, and other trinkets; they choose a green spot shaded by a tree for their spring sacrifice of horses and oxen, whose heads are set up in the boughs; they chant their extemporised songs to the Spirit of the Forest, and hang for him on the branches of the trees along the roadside offerings of horsehair, emblems of their most valued possession. A clump of larches on a Siberian steppe, a grove in the recesses of a forest, is the sanctuary of a Turanian tribe. Gaily-decked idols in their warm fur-coats, each set up beneath its great tree swathed with cloth or tinplate, endless reindeer-hides and peltry hanging to the trees around, kettles and spoons and snuff-horns and household valuables strewn as offerings before the gods—such is the description of a Siberian holy grove, at the stage when the contact of foreign civilization has begun by ornamenting the rude old ceremonial it must end by abolishing.[518] A race ethnologically allied to these tribes, though risen to higher culture, kept up remarkable relics of tree-worship in Northern Europe. In Esthonian districts, during the last 225century, the traveller might often see the sacred tree, generally an ancient lime, oak, or ash, standing inviolate in a sheltered spot near the dwelling-house, and old memories are handed down of the time when the first blood of a slaughtered beast was sprinkled on its roots, that the cattle might prosper, or when an offering was laid beneath the holy linden, on the stone where the worshipper knelt on his bare knees, moving from east to west and back, which stone he kissed thrice when he had said, ‘Receive the food as an offering!’ It may well have been an indwelling tree-deity for whom this worship was intended, for folklore shows that the Esths recognized such a conception with the utmost distinctness; they have a tale of the tree-elf who appeared in personal shape outside his crooked birch-tree, whence he could be summoned by three knocks on the trunk and the inquiry, ‘Is the crooked one at home?’ But also it may have been the Wood-Father or Tree-King, or some other deity, who received sacrifice and answered prayer beneath his sacred tree, as in a temple.[519] If, again, we glance at the tree-and-grove worship of the non-Aryan indigenous tribes of British India, we shall gather clear and instructive hints of its inner significance. In the courtyard of a Bodo house is planted the sacred ‘sij’ or euphorbia of Batho, the national god, to whom under this representation the ‘deoshi’ or priest offers prayer and kills a pig.[520] When the Khonds settle a new village, the sacred cotton-tree must be planted with solemn rites, and beneath it is placed the stone which enshrines the village deity.[521] Nowhere, perhaps, in the world in these modern days is the original meaning of the sacred grove more picturesquely shown than among the Mundas of Chota-Nagpur, in whose settlements a sacred grove of sal-trees, a remnant of the primæval forest spared by the woodman’s axe, is left as a home for the 226spirits, and in this hallowed place offerings to the gods are made.[522]
The forest beliefs suited for a race of hunters are still prevalent among the Turanian tribes of Siberia, just as they once were in Lapland. These tribes are well aware of the forest gods. The Yakuts attach iron, brass, and other trinkets to any especially impressive tree; they select a green area shaded by a tree for their spring sacrifices of horses and oxen, whose heads are placed in the branches. They recite their improvised songs to the Spirit of the Forest and leave on the branches along the roadside offerings of horsehair, representing their most cherished possessions. A cluster of larches on a Siberian steppe or a grove hidden deep in a forest serves as a sanctuary for a Turanian tribe. Colorfully adorned idols in warm fur coats are set up beneath their significant tree, wrapped in cloth or tinplate, with countless reindeer hides and furs hanging from nearby trees, along with kettles, spoons, snuff-horns, and other household treasures spread out as offerings before the gods—this is what a Siberian holy grove looks like at the point when foreign civilization begins to adorn the old rituals, which it will eventually eradicate.[518] A culture closely related to these tribes, albeit more advanced, has preserved notable remnants of tree worship in Northern Europe. In the Estonian regions during the last century, travelers could often see the sacred tree—usually an ancient lime, oak, or ash—standing untouched in a sheltered area near a home, with old tales passed down recalling when the first blood of a sacrificed animal was sprinkled on its roots for the prosperity of the cattle, or when an offering was placed beneath the sacred linden, on the stone where the worshiper knelt on bare knees, moving from east to west and back, kissing the stone three times after saying, ‘Receive the food as an offering!’ It likely signified a tree deity that this worship was directed towards, as folklore indicates that the Esths had a clear understanding of such a concept; they tell a story of the tree-elf who appeared in his physical form outside his bent birch tree, from which he could be summoned by three knocks on the trunk and the question, ‘Is the crooked one at home?’ It could also have been the Wood-Father or Tree-King, or another deity, who received sacrifices and answered prayers beneath his sacred tree, similar to a temple.[519] Additionally, looking at the tree and grove worship of the non-Aryan indigenous tribes of British India provides clear insights into its deeper meaning. In the courtyard of a Bodo house, the sacred ‘sij’ or euphorbia of Batho, the national god, is planted, where the ‘deoshi’ or priest offers prayers and sacrifices a pig.[520] When the Khonds establish a new village, they must plant a sacred cotton-tree with formal rituals, and beneath it, they place a stone that holds the village deity.[521] Nowadays, perhaps nowhere in the world is the original meaning of the sacred grove more vividly exemplified than among the Mundas of Chota-Nagpur, in whose communities a sacred grove of sal-trees, a remnant of the ancient forest untouched by the woodman's axe, is preserved as a dwelling for the spirits, where offerings to the gods are made.[522]
Here, then, among the lower races, is surely evidence enough to put on their true historic footing the rites of tree and grove which are found flourishing or surviving within the range of Semitic or Aryan culture. Mentions in the Old Testament record the Canaanitish Ashera-worship, the sacrifice under every green tree, the incense rising beneath oak and willow and shady terebinth, rites whose obstinate revival proves how deeply they were rooted in the old religion of the land.[523] The evidence of these Biblical passages is corroborated by other evidence from Semitic regions, as in the lines by Silius Italicus which mention the prayer and sacrifice in the Numidian holy groves, and the records of the council of Carthage which show that in the 5th century, an age after Augustine’s time, it was still needful to urge that the relics of idolatry in trees and groves should be done away.[524] From the more precise descriptions which lie within the range of Aryan descent and influence, examples may be drawn to illustrate every class of belief and rite of the forest. Modern Hinduism is so largely derived from the religions of the non-Aryan indigenes, that we may fairly explain thus a considerable part of the tree-worship of modern India, as where in the Birbhûm district of Bengal a great annual pilgrimage is made to a shrine in a jungle, to give offerings of rice and money and sacrifice animals to a certain ghost who dwells in a bela-tree.[525] In thoroughly Hindu districts may be seen the pippala (Ficus religiosa) planted as the village tree, the ‘chaityataru’ of Sanskrit 227literature, while the Hindu in private life plants the banyan and other trees and worships them with divine honours.[526] Greek and Roman mythology give perfect types not only of the beings attached to individual trees, but of the dryads, fauns, and satyrs living and roaming in the forest—creatures whose analogues are our own elves and fairies of the woods. Above these graceful fantastic beings are the higher deities who have trees for shrines and groves for temples. Witness the description in Ovid’s story of Erisichthon:—
Here, then, among the lesser races, is definitely enough evidence to place the rituals of trees and groves, which are found flourishing or surviving within Semitic or Aryan culture, on their true historical footing. Mentions in the Old Testament record the Canaanite worship of Ashera, the sacrifices made under every green tree, the incense rising beneath oak, willow, and shady terebinth trees—rituals whose stubborn revival shows how deeply they were rooted in the ancient religion of the land.[523] The evidence from these Biblical passages is supported by other findings from Semitic regions, as seen in the lines by Silius Italicus that mention the prayers and sacrifices made in the holy groves of Numidia, and the records from the council of Carthage, which illustrate that even in the 5th century, after Augustine's time, there was still a need to emphasize that the remnants of idolatry in trees and groves should be eliminated.[524] From more specific descriptions within the range of Aryan descent and influence, we can find examples that illustrate every class of belief and ritual associated with the forest. Modern Hinduism is so largely derived from the religions of the native non-Aryan peoples that we can reasonably explain a significant part of modern India's tree worship this way, as seen in the Birbhum district of Bengal, where a major annual pilgrimage occurs to a shrine in a jungle, where offerings of rice, money, and animal sacrifices are made to a certain ghost that resides in a bela tree.[525] In primarily Hindu areas, you can see the pippala (Ficus religiosa) planted as the village tree, the 'chaityataru' of Sanskrit literature, while Hindus in their private lives plant banyan and other trees and worship them with divine honors.[526] Greek and Roman mythology provide perfect examples not only of the beings associated with individual trees but also of the dryads, fauns, and satyrs that live and roam in the forest—creatures that resemble our own elves and fairies of the woods. Above these charming, fantastical beings are the higher deities who have trees for shrines and groves for temples. Witness the description in Ovid’s story of Erisichthon:—
In more prosaic fashion, Cato instructs the woodman how to gain indemnity for thinning a holy grove; he must offer a hog in sacrifice with this prayer, ‘Be thou god or goddess to whom this grove is sacred, permit me, by the expiation of this pig, and in order to restrain the overgrowth of this wood, &c., &c.’[528] Slavonic lands had their groves where burned the everlasting fire of Piorun the Heaven-god; the old Prussians venerated the holy oak of Romowe, with its drapery and images of the gods, standing in the midst of the sacred inviolate forest where no twig might be broken nor beast slain; and so on down to the elder-tree beneath which Pushkait was worshipped with offerings of bread and beer.[529] The Keltic Heaven-god, whose image was a mighty oak, the white-robed Druids climbing the sacred tree to cut the mistletoe, and sacrificing 228the two white bulls beneath, are types from another national group.[530] Teutonic descriptions begin with Tacitus, ‘Lucos ac nemora consecrant, deorumque nominibus adpellant secretum illud, quod sola reverentia vident,’ and the curious passage which describes the Semnones entering the sacred grove in bonds, a homage to the deity that dwelt there; many a century after, the Swedes were still holding solemn sacrifice and hanging the carcases of the slaughtered beasts in the grove hard by the temple of Upsal.[531] With Christianity comes a crusade against the holy trees and groves. Boniface hews down in the presence of the priest the huge oak of the Hessian Heaven-god, and builds of the timber a chapel to St. Peter. Amator expostulated with the hunters who hung the heads of wild beasts to the boughs of the sacred pear-tree of Auxerre, ‘Hoc opus idololatriæ culturæ est, non christianæ elegantissimæ disciplinæ;’ but this mild persuasion not availing, he chopped it down and burned it. In spite of all such efforts, the old religion of the tree and grove survived in Europe often in most pristine form. Within the last two hundred years, there were old men in Gothland who would ‘go to pray under a great tree, as their forefathers had done in their time;’ and to this day the sacrificial rite of pouring milk and beer over the roots of trees is said to be kept up on out-of-the-way Swedish farms.[532] In Russia, the Lyeshy or wood-demon still protects the birds and beasts in his domain, and drives his flocks of field-mice and squirrels from forest to forest, when we should say they are migrating. The hunter’s luck depends on his treatment of the forest-spirit, wherefore he will leave him as a sacrifice the first game he kills, or some smaller offering of bread or salted pancake on a stump. Or if one falls ill on returning from the forest, it is known that this is the Lyeshy’s doing, so 229the patient carries to the wood some bread and salt in a clean rag, and leaving it with a prayer, comes home cured.[533] Names like Holyoake and Holywood record our own old memories of the holy trees and groves, memories long lingering in the tenacious peasant mind; and it was a great and sacred linden-tree with three stems, standing in the parish of Hvitaryd in South Sweden, which with curious fitness gave a name to the family of Linnæus. Lastly, Jakob Grimm even ventures to connect historically the ancient sacred inviolate wood with the later royal forest, an ethnological argument which would begin with the savage adoring the Spirit of the Forest, and end with the modern landowner preserving his pheasants.[534]
In simpler terms, Cato explains to the woodcutter how to receive compensation for clearing a holy grove; he must sacrifice a pig with this prayer, 'O god or goddess to whom this grove is dedicated, allow me, through the offering of this pig, to manage the excessive growth of this wood, etc., etc.'[528] Slavonic lands had their groves where the eternal fire of Piorun the Sky-god burned; the old Prussians revered the holy oak of Romowe, adorned with drapery and images of the gods, standing in the middle of the sacred untouched forest where no branch could be broken or animal killed; and this continued down to the elder tree under which Pushkait was worshipped with offerings of bread and beer.[529] The Keltic Sky-god, whose image was a mighty oak, had the white-robed Druids climbing the sacred tree to cut the mistletoe and sacrificing the two white bulls underneath, representing another national group.[530] Teutonic accounts start with Tacitus, “They dedicate groves and forests, and they refer to that mystery by the names of the gods, which only reverence can perceive.” along with the intriguing passage that describes the Semnones entering the sacred grove in chains, as a mark of respect to the deity residing there; many centuries later, the Swedes were still performing solemn sacrifices and hanging the carcasses of slaughtered animals in the grove near the temple of Upsal.[531] With Christianity came a campaign against the holy trees and groves. Boniface chopped down, with the priest watching, the massive oak of the Hessian Sky-god and built a chapel to St. Peter with its wood. Amator protested to the hunters who hung the heads of wild animals on the branches of the sacred pear tree of Auxerre, "This work is a product of idol worship, not of the most refined Christian teachings." but when this gentle persuasion failed, he cut it down and burned it. Despite all these attempts, the ancient religion of the tree and grove persisted in Europe, often in its purest form. In the last two hundred years, there were old men in Gothland who would 'go and pray under a great tree, just as their ancestors had done in their time;' and even today, the ritual of pouring milk and beer over the roots of trees is said to continue on remote Swedish farms.[532] In Russia, the Lyeshy or wood-demon still protects the birds and animals in his territory and drives his flocks of field mice and squirrels from one forest to another, which we would simply call migration. A hunter’s luck relies on how he treats the forest spirit, so he will leave him as an offering the first game he kills or something small like bread or a salted pancake on a stump. If someone falls ill after coming back from the forest, it's believed to be the Lyeshy’s doing, so the sick person will take some bread and salt wrapped in a clean cloth to the woods, leave it with a prayer, and return home healed.[533] Names like Holyoake and Holywood reflect our own ancient connections to the holy trees and groves, memories that linger in the resilient peasant mind; and it was a grand, sacred linden tree with three trunks, situated in the parish of Hvitaryd in South Sweden, that fittingly gave its name to the family of Linnæus. Finally, Jakob Grimm even takes a historical leap to connect the ancient sacred untouched woods with the later royal forest, an ethnological argument that starts with the primitive worshiper adoring the Spirit of the Forest and ends with the modern landowner preserving his pheasants.[534]
To the modern educated world, few phenomena of the lower civilization seem more pitiable than the spectacle of a man worshipping a beast. We have learnt the lessons of Natural History at last thoroughly enough to recognize our superiority to our ‘younger brothers,’ as the Red Indians call them, the creatures whom it is our place not to adore but to understand and use. By men at lower levels of culture, however, the inferior animals are viewed with a very different eye. For various motives, they have become objects of veneration ranking among the most important in the lower ranges of religion. Yet I must here speak shortly and slightly of Animal-worship, not as wanting in interest, but as over-abounding in difficulty. Wishing rather to bring general principles into view than to mass uninterpreted facts, all I can satisfactorily do is to give some select examples from the various groups of evidence, so as at once to display the more striking features of the subject, and to trace the ancient ideas upward from the savage level far into the higher civilization.
To the modern educated world, few things seem more sad than seeing a person worship a beast. We've finally learned enough from Natural History to recognize our superiority over our "younger brothers," as the Native Americans refer to them—creatures we shouldn't worship but rather understand and utilize. However, people at lower cultural levels see these animals very differently. For various reasons, they have become objects of reverence, ranking among the most significant in the lower tiers of religion. Yet, I must briefly touch on Animal-worship—not because it's uninteresting, but because it's complicated. I prefer to highlight general principles rather than gather numerous unreflected facts. Therefore, all I can do is provide some selected examples from the various types of evidence to showcase the more striking aspects of the topic and trace ancient ideas from the savage level up into higher civilization.
First and foremost, uncultured man seems capable of simply worshipping a beast as beast, looking on it as possessed of power, courage, cunning, beyond his own, and 230animated like a man by a soul which continues to exist after bodily death, powerful as ever for good and harm. Then this idea blends with the thought of the creature as being an incarnate deity, seeing, hearing, and acting even at a distance, and continuing its power after the death of the animal body to which the divine spirit was attached. Thus the Kamchadals, in their simple veneration of all things that could do them harm or good, worshipped the whales that could overturn their boats, and the bears and wolves of whom they stood in fear. The beasts, they thought, could understand their language, and therefore they abstained from calling them by their names when they met them, but propitiated them with certain appointed formulas.[535] Tribes of Peru, says Garcilaso de la Vega, worshipped the fish and vicuñas that provided them food, the monkeys for their cunning, the sparrowhawks for their keen sight. The tiger and the bear were to them ferocious deities, and mankind, mere strangers and intruders in the land, might well adore these beings, its old inhabitants and lords.[536] How, indeed, can one wonder that in direct and simple awe, the Philippine islanders, when they saw an alligator, should have prayed him with great tenderness to do them no harm, and to this end offered him of whatever they had in their boats, casting it into the water.[537] Such rites display at least a partial truth in the famous apophthegm which attributes to fear the origin of religion: ‘Primos in orbe deos fecit timor.’[538] In discussing the question of the souls of animals in a previous chapter, instances were adduced of men seeking to appease by apologetic phrase and rite the animals they killed.[539] It is instructive to observe how naturally such personal intercourse between man and animal may pass into full worship, when the creature is powerful 231or dangerous enough to claim it. When the Stiêns of Kambodia asked pardon of the beast they killed, and offered sacrifice in expiation, they expressly did so through fear lest the creature’s disembodied soul should come and torment them.[540] Yet, strange to say, even the worship of the animal as divine does not prevent the propitiatory ceremony from passing into utter mockery. Thus Charlevoix describes North American Indians who, when they had killed a bear, would set up its head painted with many colours, and offer it homage and praise while they performed the painful duty of feasting on its body.[541] So among the Ainos, the indigenes of Yesso, the bear is a great divinity. It is true they slay him when they can, but while they are cutting him up they salute him with obeisances and fair speeches, and set up his head outside the house to preserve them from misfortune.[542] In Siberia, the Yakuts worship the bear in common with the spirits of the forest, bowing toward his favourite haunts with appropriate phrases of prose and verse, in praise of the bravery and generosity of their ‘beloved uncle.’ Their kindred the Ostyaks swear in the Russian courts of law on a bear’s head, for the bear, they say, is all-knowing, and will slay them if they lie. This idea actually serves the people as a philosophical, though one would say rather superfluous, explanation of a whole class of accidents: when a hunter is killed by a bear, it is considered that he must at some time have forsworn himself, and now has met his doom. Yet these Ostyaks, when they have overcome and slain their deity, will stuff its skin with hay, kick it, spit on it, insult and mock it till they have satiated their hatred and revenge, and are ready to set it up in a yurt as an object of worship.[543]
First and foremost, uncultured humans seem capable of simply worshiping a beast as a beast, seeing it as having power, courage, and cunning beyond their own. They view it as animated like a human by a soul that continues to exist after bodily death, powerful as ever for both good and harm. This idea blends with the thought of the creature being an incarnate deity, able to see, hear, and act even from a distance, and maintaining its power after the death of the animal body to which its divine spirit was attached. Thus, the Kamchadals, in their straightforward reverence for all things that could harm or help them, worshiped the whales that could capsize their boats, as well as the bears and wolves they feared. They believed the beasts could understand their language, so they avoided calling them by their names when they encountered them, instead appeasing them with certain ritual phrases. Tribes of Peru, as Garcilaso de la Vega mentions, worshiped the fish and vicuñas that provided them food, the monkeys for their cunning, and the sparrowhawks for their sharp eyesight. The tiger and the bear were viewed as ferocious deities, and humans, mere strangers and intruders in the land, were right to honor these beings, the ancient inhabitants and rulers. How can one be surprised that in sincere and simple awe, the Philippine islanders, upon seeing an alligator, would tenderly pray for it to do them no harm, offering whatever they had in their boats and casting it into the water? Such rites reveal at least a partial truth in the famous saying that fear is the origin of religion: ‘Primos in orbe deos fecit timor.’ In discussing the question of animal souls in a previous chapter, examples were given of humans trying to appease animals they killed with apologetic words and rituals. It’s enlightening to see how naturally personal interactions between humans and animals can evolve into full worship when the creature is powerful or dangerous enough to warrant it. When the Stiêns of Kambodia asked forgiveness from the beast they killed and made sacrifices as atonement, they did so out of fear that the creature’s disembodied soul might come back to torment them. Yet, oddly enough, even the worship of the animal as divine doesn’t stop the propitiatory ceremony from turning into outright mockery. For instance, Charlevoix describes North American Indians who, after killing a bear, would set up its head, painted in many colors, and pay it homage and praise while they feasted on its flesh. Among the Ainos, the indigenous people of Yesso, the bear is a significant deity. While they do kill it when they can, they greet it with respectful gestures and flattering words while they butcher it, and they display its head outside their homes to ward off misfortune. In Siberia, the Yakuts worship the bear along with the spirits of the forest, bowing toward its favored places with appropriate phrases and verses, praising the bravery and generosity of their ‘beloved uncle.’ Their relatives, the Ostyaks, swear on a bear’s head in Russian courts, claiming the bear is all-knowing and will kill them if they lie. This belief actually serves as a philosophical, albeit somewhat unnecessary, explanation for a whole class of accidents: when a hunter is killed by a bear, it is thought that he must have, at some point, lied and that it is now his time to face his fate. Yet these Ostyaks, after conquering and killing their deity, will stuff its skin with hay, kick it, spit on it, and insult and mock it until they have satisfied their rage and revenge, ready to display it in a yurt as an object of worship.
Whether an animal be worshipped as the receptacle or 232incarnation of an indwelling divine soul or other deity, or as one of the myriad representatives of the presiding god of its class, the case is included under and explained by the general theory of fetish-worship already discussed. Evidence which displays these two conceptions and their blending is singularly perfect in the islands of the Pacific. In the Georgian group, certain herons, kingfishers, and woodpeckers were held sacred and fed on the sacrifices, with the distinct view that the deities were embodied in the birds, and in this form came to eat the offered food and give the oracular responses by their cries.[544] The Tongans never killed certain birds, or the shark, whale, &c., as being sacred shrines in which gods were in the habit of visiting earth; and if they chanced in sailing to pass near a whale they would offer scented oil or kava to him.[545] In the Fiji Islands, certain birds, fish, plants, and some men, were supposed to have deities closely connected with or residing in them. Thus the hawk, fowl, eel, shark, and nearly every other animal became the shrine of some deity, which the worshipper of that deity might not eat, so that some were even tabued from eating human flesh, the shrine of their god being a man. Ndengei, the dull and otiose supreme deity, had his shrine or incarnation in the serpent.[546] Every Samoan islander had his tutelary deity or ‘aitu,’ appearing in some animal, an eel, shark, dog, turtle, &c., which species became his fetish, not to be slighted or injured or eaten, an offence which the deity would avenge by entering the sinner’s body and generating his proper incarnation within him till he died.[547] The ‘atua’ of the New Zealander, corresponding with this in name, is a divine ancestral soul, and is also apt to appear in the body of an animal.[548] If we pass to Sumatra, we shall find that the veneration paid by the Malays to the tiger, and their habit of apologizing to it 233when a trap is laid, is connected with the idea of tigers being animated by the souls of departed men.[549] In other districts of the world, one of the most important cases connected with these is the worship paid by the North American Indian to his medicine-animal, of which he kills one specimen to preserve its skin, which thenceforth receives adoration and grants protection as a fetish.[550] In South Africa, as has been already mentioned, the Zulus hold that divine ancestral shades are embodied in certain tame and harmless snakes, whom their human kinsfolk receive with kindly respect and propitiate with food.[551] In West Africa, monkeys near a grave-yard are supposed to be animated by the spirits of the dead, and the general theory of sacred and worshipped crocodiles, snakes, birds, bats, elephants, hyænas, leopards, &c., is divided between the two great departments of the fetish-theory, in some cases the creature being the actual embodiment or personation of the spirit, and in other cases sacred to it or under its protection.[552] Hardly any region of the world displays so perfectly as this the worship of serpents as fetish-animals endowed with high spiritual qualities, to kill one of whom would be an offence unpardonable. For a single description of negro ophiolatry, may be cited Bosman’s description from Whydah in the Bight of Benin; here the highest order of deities were a kind of snakes which swarm in the villages, reigned over by that huge chief monster, uppermost and greatest and as it were the grandfather of all, who dwelt in his snake-house beneath a lofty tree, and there received the royal offerings of meat and drink, cattle and money and stuffs. So heartfelt was the veneration of the snakes, that the Dutchmen made it a 234means of clearing their warehouses of tiresome visitors; as Bosman says, ‘If we are ever tired with the natives of this country, and would fain be rid of them, we need only speak ill of the snake, at which they immediately stop their ears and run out of doors.’[553] Lastly, among the Tatar tribes of Siberia, Castrén finds the explanation of the veneration which the nomade pays to certain animals, in a distinct fetish-theory which he thus sums up: ‘Can he also contrive to propitiate the snake, bear, wolf, swan, and various other birds of the air and beasts of the field, he has in them good protectors, for in them are hidden mighty spirits.’[554]
Whether an animal is worshipped as the home or incarnation of a divine soul or other deity, or as one of the many representatives of the god that oversees its kind, it falls under the general theory of fetish-worship that we've already talked about. Evidence displaying these two ideas and how they blend is particularly clear in the Pacific islands. In the Georgian group, certain herons, kingfishers, and woodpeckers were considered sacred and were fed offerings, based on the belief that the deities inhabited the birds and came to partake of the food and provide oracles through their calls.[544] The Tongans never killed specific birds or sharks and whales, viewing them as sacred vessels where gods would visit Earth; if they happened to sail near a whale, they would offer it scented oil or kava.[545] In the Fiji Islands, certain birds, fish, plants, and some humans were thought to have deities closely tied to or residing within them. Consequently, animals like hawks, fowl, eels, and sharks were seen as the abode of some deity, making them off-limits for their worshippers, which sometimes led to prohibitions against eating human flesh if the deity's shrine was a person. Ndengei, the lazy and sluggish supreme deity, was believed to inhabit serpents.[546] Every Samoan islander had their own protective deity or ‘aitu,’ represented by an animal like an eel, shark, dog, turtle, etc., which became their fetish—something not to be insulted, harmed, or consumed. Committing such an offense would invoke the deity's vengeance, causing it to enter the sinner's body and create its proper incarnation within them until that person died.[547] The ‘atua’ of the New Zealander, corresponding in name, represents a divine ancestral soul and can also appear in the form of an animal.[548] If we move on to Sumatra, we see the Malays’ reverence for the tiger, along with their habit of apologizing to it when setting traps, linked to the belief that the tigers are animated by the souls of deceased individuals.[549] In other parts of the world, a key example is the reverence shown by North American Indians for their medicine-animal, where they kill one specimen to keep its skin, which then receives worship and offers protection as a fetish.[550] In South Africa, as previously mentioned, the Zulus believe that divine ancestral spirits inhabit certain tame and harmless snakes, which their human relatives treat with kindness and appease with food.[551] In West Africa, monkeys near graveyards are thought to be animated by the spirits of the dead, and the broader theory regarding sacred and worshipped crocodiles, snakes, birds, bats, elephants, hyenas, leopards, etc., falls into two main categories of the fetish-theory: in some instances, the creature represents the spirit, while in others, it is sacred to or under the spirit's protection.[552] Few areas of the world show the worship of snakes as fetish-animals with significant spiritual qualities as clearly as this; to kill one would be an unpardonable offense. For a single instance of African snake-worship, one can reference Bosman's account from Whydah in the Bight of Benin, where the highest deities were a type of snake that swarmed the villages, ruled by a giant chief monster, who lived in his snake-house beneath a tall tree and received royal offerings of food, drink, cattle, money, and goods. The reverence for these snakes was so deep that the Dutch made it a means of getting rid of unwelcome visitors; as Bosman recounts, 'If we ever grew tired of the locals and wanted them gone, all we had to do was speak ill of the snake, and they would instantly cover their ears and rush outside.'[553] Finally, among the Tatar tribes of Siberia, Castrén explains the nomadic people's veneration for certain animals through a distinct fetish-theory, which he summarizes: 'If he can also manage to appease the snake, bear, wolf, swan, and various other birds and beasts, he has good protectors, for in them are hidden powerful spirits.'[554]
In the lower levels of civilization the social institution known as Totemism is of frequent occurrence. Its anthropological importance was especially brought into notice by J. F. McLennan, whose views as to an early totem-period of society have much influenced opinion since his time.[555] The totemic tribe is divided into clans, the members of each clan connecting themselves with, calling themselves by the name of, and even deriving their mythic pedigree from some animal, plant, or thing, but most often an animal; these totem-clans are exogamous, marriage not being permissible within the clan, while permissible or obligatory between clan and clan. Thus among the Ojibwa Indians of North America, the names of such clan-animals, Bear, Wolf, Tortoise, Deer, Rabbit, &c., served to designate the intermarrying clans into which the tribes were divided, Indians being actually spoken of as bears, wolves, &c., and the figures of these animals indicating their clans in the native picture-writing. The Ojibwa word for such a clan-name has passed into English in the form ‘totem,’ and thus has become an accepted term among anthropologists to denote 235similar clan-names customary over the world, this system of dividing tribes being called Totemism. Unfortunately for the study of the subject, John Long, the trader interpreter who introduced the Ojibwa word totem into Europe in 1791, does not seem to have grasped its meaning in the native law of marriage and clanship, but to have confused the totem-animal of the clan with the patron or guardian animal of the individual hunter, his manitu or ‘medicine.’[556] Even when the North American totem-clans came to be better understood as social institutions regulating marriage, the notion of the guardian spirit still clung to them. Sir George Grey, who knew of the American totem-clans from the ‘Archæologia Americana,’ put on record in 1841 a list of exogamous classes in West Australia, and mentioned the opinion frequently given by the natives as to the origin of these class-names, that they were derived from some animal or vegetable being very common in the district which the family inhabited, so that the name of this animal or vegetable came to be applied to the family. This seems so far valuable evidence, but Grey was evidently led by John Long’s mistaken statement, which he quotes, to fall himself into the same confusion between the tribal name and the patron animal or vegetable, the ‘kobong’ of his natives, which he regarded as a tribal totem.[557] In Mr. J. G. Frazer’s valuable collection of information on totemism,[558] the use of the self-contradictory term ‘individual totem’ has unfortunately tended to perpetuate this confusion. In the present state of the problem of totemism, it would be premature to discuss at length its development and purpose. Mention may however be made of observations which tend to place it on a new footing, as being distinctly related to the transmigration of souls. In Melanesia men 236may say that after death they will reappear for instance as sharks or bananas, and the family will acknowledge the kinship by feeding the sharks and abstaining from the bananas. It is not unreasonable that Dr. Codrington should suggest such practices as throwing light on the origin of totemism.[559] The late investigations of Spencer and Gillen, conducted with scrupulous care in an almost untouched district of Central Australia, show totemism in the Arunta tribe, not as the means of regulating the intermarriage of clans, but as based on a native theory of the ancestry of the race, as descended from the Alcheringa, quasi-human animal or vegetable ancestors, whose souls are still reborn in human form in successive generations.[560] This careful and definite account may be the starting-point of a new study. Savages would be alive to the absurdity of naming clans after animals in order to indicate a prohibition of marrying-in, opposed to the habit of the animals themselves. Indeed, it seems more likely that such animal-names may have commonly belonged to inbred clans, before the rule of exogamy was developed. At present the plainest fact as to Totemism is its historical position as shown by its immense geographical distribution. Its presence in North America and Australia has been noticed. It extends its organization through the forest-region of South America from Guyana to Patagonia. Northward of Australia it is to be traced among the more unchanged of the Malay populations, who underneath foreign influence still keep remains of a totemic system like that of the American tribes. Thence we follow the totem-clan into India, when it appears among non-Aryan hill-tribes such as the Oraons and Mundas, who have clans named after Eel, Hawk, Heron, and so on, and must not kill or eat these creatures. North of the Himalaya it appears among Mongoloid tribes in their native low cultured state, such as the Yakuts with their intermarrying totem-clans Swan, Raven, 237and the like. In Africa totemism appears in the Bantu district up to the West Coast. For example, the Bechuana are divided into Bakuena, men of the crocodile; Batlapi, of the fish; Balaung, of the lion; Bamorara, of the wild vine. A man does not eat his tribe-animal, or clothe himself in its skin, and if he must kill it as hurtful, the lion for instance, he asks pardon of it, and purifies himself from the sacrilege. These few instances illustrate the generalization that totemism in its complete form belongs to the savage and early barbaric stages of culture, only partial remains or survivals of it having lasted into the civilized period. Though appearing in all other quarters of the globe, it is interesting to notice that there is no distinct case of totemism found or recorded in Europe.[561]
In lower levels of civilization, a social institution called Totemism is quite common. Its anthropological significance was especially highlighted by J. F. McLennan, whose ideas about an early totem period in society have significantly influenced opinions since his time.[555] The totemic tribe is made up of clans, with each clan identifying themselves with, naming themselves after, and even tracing their mythic lineage back to some animal, plant, or object, most often an animal. These totem-clans are exogamous, meaning marriage within the clan isn't allowed, while marriage between clans is allowed or sometimes required. For example, among the Ojibwa Indians of North America, the names of clan animals—like Bear, Wolf, Tortoise, Deer, Rabbit, etc.—designated the intermarrying clans into which the tribes were divided. Ojibwa people were even referred to as bears, wolves, etc., and the imagery of these animals represented their clans in native picture writing. The Ojibwa term for such clan naming has entered the English language as ‘totem’ and has become a widely accepted term among anthropologists to describe similar clan names found worldwide, with this tribal division system called Totemism. Unfortunately for the study of this subject, John Long, the trader-interpreter who introduced the Ojibwa term “totem” to Europe in 1791, seems not to have understood its meaning within the native laws of marriage and clan affiliation but confused the totem animal of the clan with the personal guardian animal of an individual hunter, known as their manitu or ‘medicine.’[556] Even as North American totem-clans became better understood as social entities regulating marriage, the idea of the guardian spirit remained attached to them. Sir George Grey, who learned about American totem-clans from the ‘Archæologia Americana,’ recorded in 1841 a list of exogamous classes in Western Australia and noted the common belief among the locals regarding the origins of these class names, claiming they originated from a particular animal or plant that was abundant in the area where the family lived, leading to the family adopting the name of that animal or plant. This is somewhat valuable evidence, but Grey was clearly influenced by John Long’s incorrect claim, which he quoted, leading him to confuse the tribal name with the personal animal or plant, the ‘kobong’ of his natives, which he thought was a tribal totem.[557] In Mr. J. G. Frazer’s valuable collection of information about totemism,[558] the use of the contradictory term ‘individual totem’ has unfortunately reinforced this confusion. Given the current understanding of totemism, discussing its evolution and purpose in depth would be premature. However, observations can be mentioned that suggest it might be distinctly related to the concept of the transmigration of souls. In Melanesia, people may say that after death, they will return, for example, as sharks or bananas, and the family acknowledges this kinship by feeding the sharks and avoiding bananas. It’s not unreasonable for Dr. Codrington to suggest that such practices shed light on the origins of totemism.[559] Recent investigations by Spencer and Gillen, carried out carefully in a largely untouched region of Central Australia, show that totemism in the Arunta tribe is not merely a means of managing clan intermarriage, but is based on a local belief about the ancestry of the people, who are thought to descend from Alcheringa, quasi-human animal or plant ancestors, whose souls are continually reborn into human form in successive generations.[560] This thorough and clear account could be the starting point for new research. Indigenous peoples would likely find it absurd to name clans after animals to indicate a marriage prohibition, contrary to the animals’ own behavior. Indeed, it seems more likely that such animal names might have originally belonged to clans with intermarriage before the rules of exogamy were established. Presently, the most evident fact about totemism is its historical context as indicated by its vast geographical range. It’s been observed in North America and Australia, and it spreads through the forest regions of South America from Guyana to Patagonia. North of Australia, it can be traced among the less changed Malay populations, who, despite foreign influences, still retain remnants of a totemic system similar to those in American tribes. From there, we can follow the totem clans into India, where they appear among non-Aryan hill tribes such as the Oraons and Mundas, who have clans named after Eel, Hawk, Heron, etc., and are not permitted to kill or eat these creatures. North of the Himalayas, it can be found among Mongoloid tribes in their native, less developed state, like the Yakuts, with their intermarrying totem clans such as Swan and Raven. In Africa, totemism appears in the Bantu region up to the West Coast. For instance, the Bechuana are divided into Bakuena, the people of the crocodile; Batlapi, the people of the fish; Balaung, the people of the lion; Bamorara, the people of the wild vine. A man does not eat the animal representing his tribe or wear its skin, and if he has to kill it for some reason, like to protect himself from danger, as with a lion, he asks for its forgiveness and purifies himself from the wrongdoing. These few examples illustrate that totemism, in its complete form, belongs to the savage and early barbaric stages of culture, with only partial remnants or survivals lasting into the civilized period. Although it appears in all other parts of the world, it’s interesting to note that there are no distinct cases of totemism recorded in Europe.[561]
The three motives of animal-worship which have been described, viz., direct worship of the animal for itself, indirect worship of it as a fetish acted through by a deity, and veneration for it as a totem or representative of a tribe-ancestor, no doubt account in no small measure for the phenomena of Zoolatry among the lower races, due allowance being also made for the effects of myth and symbolism, of which we may gain frequent glimpses. Notwithstanding the obscurity and complexity of the subject, a survey of Animal-worship as a whole may yet justify an ethnographic view of its place in the history of civilization. If we turn from its appearances among the less cultured races to notice the shapes in which it has held its place among peoples advanced to the stage of national organization and stereotyped religion, we shall find a reasonable cause for its new position in the theory of development and survival, whereby ideas at first belonging to savage theology have in part continued to spread and solidify in their original manner, while in part they have been changed to accommodate them to more advanced ideas, or have been defended from the attacks of reason by being set up as sacred mysteries. Ancient Egypt 238was a land of sacred cats and jackals and hawks, whose mummies are among us to this day, but the reason of whose worship was a subject too sacred for the Father of History to discuss. Egyptian animal-worship seems to show, in a double line, traces of a savage ancestry extending into ages lying far behind even the remote antiquity of the Pyramids. Deities patronising special sacred animals, incarnate in their bodies, or represented in their figures, have nowhere better examples than the divine bull-dynasty of Apis, the sacred hawks caged and fed in the temple of Horus, Thoth and his cynocephalus and ibis, Hathor the cow and Sebek the crocodile. Moreover, the local character of many of the sacred creatures, worshipped in certain nomes yet killed and eaten with impunity elsewhere, fits remarkably with that character of tribe-fetishes and deified totems with which Mr. McLennan’s argument is concerned. See the men of Oxyrynchos reverencing and sparing the fish oxyrynchos, and those of Latopolis likewise worshipping the latos. At Apollinopolis men hated crocodiles and never lost a chance of killing them, while the people of the Arsinoite nome dressed geese and fish for these sacred creatures, adorned them with necklaces and bracelets, and mummified them sumptuously when they died.[562] In the modern world the most civilized people among whom animal-worship vigorously survives, lie within the range of Brahmanism, where the sacred animal, the deity incarnate in an animal or invested with or symbolized by its shape, may to this day be studied in clear example. The sacred cow is not merely to be spared, she is as a deity worshipped in annual ceremony, daily perambulated and bowed to by the pious Hindu, who offers her fresh grass and flowers; Hanuman the monkey-god has his temples and his idols, and in him Siva is incarnate, as Durga is in the jackal; the wise Ganesa wears the elephant’s head; 239the divine king of birds, Garuda, is Vishnu’s vehicle; the forms of fish, and boar, and tortoise, were assumed in those avatar-legends of Vishnu which are at the intellectual level of the Red Indian myths they so curiously resemble.[563] The conceptions which underlie the Hindu creed of divine animals were not ill displayed by that Hindu who, being shown the pictures of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John with their respective man, lion, ox, and eagle, explained these quite naturally and satisfactorily as the avatars or vehicles of the four evangelists.
The three reasons for animal worship that have been described—direct worship of the animal itself, indirect worship involving a deity acting through it, and respect for it as a totem or representative of a tribe's ancestor—definitely play a significant role in the presence of Zoolatry among less developed cultures, while also taking into account the influence of myths and symbols, of which we see frequent examples. Despite the complicated nature of this topic, looking at animal worship as a whole may provide an ethnographic perspective on its place in civilization's history. If we shift from its expressions among less cultured societies to examine how it exists among more advanced peoples with national organization and established religions, we can find a logical basis for its new role in the theories of development and survival. These ideas, which initially belonged to primitive religions, have partly continued to exist in their original forms while also being modified to align with more advanced ideas or safeguarded from rational scrutiny by being established as sacred mysteries. Ancient Egypt was a land of sacred cats, jackals, and hawks, whose mummies still exist today, but the reasoning behind their worship was a topic too sensitive for the Father of History to address. Egyptian animal worship appears to show, in two lines, evidence of a savage ancestry that stretches back to times much earlier than the ancient Pyramids. The gods associated with specific sacred animals, embodied in their forms, have no better examples than the divine bull dynasty of Apis, the sacred hawks kept and fed in the temple of Horus, Thoth with his dog-headed and ibis forms, Hathor the cow, and Sebek the crocodile. Additionally, the local nature of many sacred creatures, revered in certain regions yet hunted and consumed freely in others, aligns remarkably with the characteristics of tribe fetishes and deified totems that Mr. McLennan discusses. Consider the people of Oxyrynchos who honored and spared the fish oxyrynchos, and those of Latopolis who likewise worshipped the latos. In Apollinopolis, residents disliked crocodiles and seized every opportunity to kill them, while those from the Arsinoite nome prepared geese and fish for these sacred beings, adorned them with necklaces and bracelets, and luxuriously mummified them upon death.[562] In today's world, the most advanced cultures where animal worship still thrives are within Brahmanism, where the sacred animal—the deity incarnate in an animal or represented by its form—can still be observed. The sacred cow is not just to be spared; she is worshipped as a deity in annual ceremonies and is honored daily by devout Hindus who present her with fresh grass and flowers. Hanuman, the monkey-god, has his temples and idols, with Siva manifesting in him, just as Durga appears in the jackal; the wise Ganesa has the head of an elephant; the divine bird king, Garuda, is the mount of Vishnu; the forms of fish, boar, and tortoise were taken on in Vishnu's avatar legends, which closely resemble the mythologies of Native Americans. [563] The ideas underlying the Hindu belief in divine animals were well illustrated by a Hindu who, upon being shown images of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John with their corresponding symbols of man, lion, ox, and eagle, naturally and satisfactorily explained these as the avatars or vehicles of the four evangelists.
In Animal-worship, some of the most remarkable cases of development and survival belong to a class from which striking instances have already been taken. Serpent-worship unfortunately fell years ago into the hands of speculative writers, who mixed it up with occult philosophies, Druidical mysteries, and that portentous nonsense called the ‘Arkite Symbolism,’ till now sober students hear the very name of Ophiolatry with a shiver. Yet it is in itself a rational and instructive subject of inquiry, especially notable for its width of range in mythology and religion. We may set out among the lower races, with such accounts as those of the Red Indian’s reverence to the rattlesnake, as grandfather and king of snakes, as a divine protector able to give fair winds or cause tempests;[564] or of the worship of great snakes among the tribes of Peru before they received the religion of the Incas, as to whom an old author says, ‘They adore the demon when he presents himself to them in the figure of some beast or serpent, and talks with them.’[565] Thenceforth such examples of direct Ophiolatry may be traced on into classic and barbaric Europe; the great serpent which defended the citadel of Athens and enjoyed its monthly honey-cakes;[566] the Roman genius loci appearing in the form of the snake (Nullus enim locus sine 240genio est, qui per anguem plerumque ostenditur);[567] the old Prussian serpent-worship and offering of food to the household snakes;[568] the golden viper adored by the Lombards, till Barbatus got it in his hands and the goldsmiths made it into paten and chalice.[569] To this day, Europe has not forgotten in nursery tales or more serious belief the snake that comes with its golden crown and drinks milk out of the child’s porringer; the house-snake, tame and kindly but seldom seen, that cares for the cows and the children and gives omens of a death in the family; the pair of household snakes which have a mystic connexion of life and death with the husband and housewife themselves.[570] Serpent-worship, apparently of the directest sort, was prominent in the indigenous religions of Southern Asia. It now even appears to have maintained no mean place in early Indian Buddhism, for the sculptures of the Sanchi tope show scenes of adoration of the five-headed snake-deity in his temple, performed by a race of serpent-worshippers, figuratively represented with snakes growing from their shoulders, and whose raja himself has a five-headed snake arching hood-wise over his head. Here, moreover, the totem-theory comes into contact with ophiolatry. The Sanskrit name of the snake, ‘nâga,’ becomes also the accepted designation of its adorers, and thus mythological interpretation has to reduce to reasonable sense legends of serpent-races who turn out to be simply serpent-worshippers, tribes who have from the divine reptiles at once their generic name of Nâgas, and with it their imagined ancestral descent from serpents.[571] In different ways, these Nâga tribes of South Asia are on the one hand analogues of the 241Snake Indians of America, and on the other of the Ophiogenes or Serpent-race of the Troad, kindred of the vipers whose bite they could cure by touch, and descendants of an ancient hero transformed into a snake.[572]
In snake worship, some of the most notable examples of development and survival belong to a group from which striking instances have already been cited. Unfortunately, serpent worship fell into the hands of speculative writers long ago, who intertwined it with mystical philosophies, Druidic mysteries, and the ridiculous concept known as 'Arkite Symbolism,' leading serious scholars to cringe at the mere mention of Ophiolatry. However, it is inherently a rational and educational topic of exploration, particularly impressive for its wide-ranging presence in mythology and religion. We can start among the lower races, with accounts like that of the Native American’s respect for the rattlesnake, seen as the grandfather and king of snakes, a divine protector capable of providing fair weather or causing storms;[564] or the worship of large snakes among tribes in Peru before they adopted Inca religion, as noted by an ancient author who remarked, ‘They worship the demon when he appears to them as a beast or serpent, and communicates with them.’[565] Examples of direct Ophiolatry can be traced further into classical and barbaric Europe; the great snake that protected the citadel of Athens and received its monthly offerings of honey-cakes;[566] the Roman genius loci appearing as a snake (There's no place without its spirit, which is often shown through a serpent.;[567] the ancient Prussian serpent worship and the practice of feeding household snakes;[568] the golden viper venerated by the Lombards, until Barbatus acquired it and the goldsmiths crafted it into a paten and chalice.[569] To this day, Europe remembers in children's stories or more serious beliefs the snake that arrives with its golden crown and drinks milk from the child’s bowl; the household snake, tame and friendly but seldom seen, that watches over the cows and children and signals a death in the family; the pair of household snakes that have a mystical connection to the lives of the husband and wife.[570] Serpent worship, clearly in its most direct form, was prevalent in the native religions of Southern Asia. It even seems to have held a significant role in early Indian Buddhism, as the sculptures of the Sanchi stupa depict scenes of worship directed at a five-headed snake deity in his temple, performed by a group of snake worshippers, symbolically shown with snakes growing from their shoulders, and whose ruler has a five-headed snake arching over his head. Moreover, the totem theory intersects with ophiolatry here. The Sanskrit word for snake, ‘naga,’ also becomes the common name for its worshippers, leading to mythological interpretations that transform tales of serpent races into mere tales of snake worshippers, tribes that derive their name of Nâgas from divine reptiles and imagine their ancestral lineage from snakes.[571] In various ways, these Nâga tribes of South Asia can be seen as analogues to the Snake Indians of America, as well as to the Ophiogenes or Serpent race of Troas, relatives of the vipers whose bite they could heal by touch, and descendants of an ancient hero transformed into a snake.[572]
Serpents hold a prominent place in the religions of the world, as the incarnations, shrines, or symbols of high deities. Such were the rattlesnake worshipped in the Natchez temple of the Sun, and the snake belonging in name and figure to the Aztec deity Quetzalcoatl;[573] the snake as worshipped still by the Slave Coast negro, not for itself but for its indwelling deity;[574] the snake kept and fed with milk in the temple of the old Slavonic god Potrimpos;[575] the serpent-symbol of the healing deity Asklepios, who abode in or manifested himself through the huge tame snakes kept in his temples[576] (it is doubtful whether this had any original connexion with the adoption of the snake, from its renewal by casting its old slough, as the accepted emblem of new life or immortality in later symbolism); and lastly, the Phœnician serpent with its tail in its mouth, symbol of the world and of the Heaven-god Taaut, in its original meaning perhaps a mythic world-snake like the Scandinavian Midgard-worm, but in the changed fancy of later ages adapted into an emblem of eternity.[577] It scarcely seems proved that savage races, in all their mystic contemplations of the serpent, ever developed out of their own minds the idea, to us so familiar, of adopting it as a personification of evil.[578] In ancient times, we may ascribe this character perhaps to the monster whose well-known form is to be seen on the mummy-cases, the Apophis-serpent of the Egyptian 242Hades;[579] and it unequivocally belongs to the destroying serpent of the Zarathustrians, Azhi Dahâka,[580] a figure which bears so remarkable a relation to that of the Semitic serpent of Eden, which may possibly stand in historical connexion with it. A wondrous blending of the ancient rites of Ophiolatry with mystic conceptions of Gnosticism appears in the cultus which tradition (in truth or slander) declares the semi-Christian sect of Ophites to have rendered to their tame snake, enticing it out of its chest to coil round the sacramental bread, and worshipping it as representing the great king from heaven who in the beginning gave to the man and woman the knowledge of the mysteries.[581] Thus the extreme types of religious veneration, from the soberest matter-of-fact to the dreamiest mysticism, find their places in the worship of animals.[582]
Serpents have an important role in world religions, serving as manifestations, shrines, or symbols of powerful deities. Take, for example, the rattlesnake revered in the Natchez temple of the Sun, or the snake associated with the Aztec god Quetzalcoatl;[573] the snake, still honored by the people on the Slave Coast, represents not itself but the deity residing within it;[574] the snake cared for and fed with milk in the temple of the old Slavic god Potrimpos;[575] the serpent-symbol of the healing god Asklepios, who lived in or manifested through the huge tame snakes in his temples[576] (whether this originally connected to the snake's renewal by shedding its skin remains debated, but it became a symbol of new life or immortality in later interpretations); and finally, the Phoenician serpent with its tail in its mouth, representing the world and the Heaven-god Taaut, which perhaps originally symbolized a mythical world-snake like the Scandinavian Midgard-worm, but later evolved into a symbol of eternity.[577] It doesn’t seem proven that primitive cultures, in their mystical views of serpents, independently created the idea of associating it with evil, a concept so familiar to us now.[578] In ancient times, this association may be linked to the monster depicted on mummy cases, the Apophis-serpent of Egyptian Hades;[579] it clearly applies to the destructive serpent of the Zoroastrians, Azhi Dahâka,[580] which closely relates to the Semitic serpent of Eden, possibly indicating a historical connection. A fascinating mixture of ancient serpent worship and mystical Gnosticism appears in the practices attributed to the semi-Christian sect of Ophites, who reportedly enticed their tame snake out of its chest to coil around the sacramental bread, worshiping it as a representation of the great king from heaven who initially bestowed the knowledge of mysteries to man and woman.[581] Thus, the most extreme types of religious reverence, from the most straightforward to the most mystical, find their place within the worship of animals.[582]
Hitherto in the study of animistic doctrine, our attention has been turned especially to those minor spirits whose functions concern the closer and narrower detail of man’s life and its surroundings. In passing thence to the consideration of divine beings whose functions have a wider scope, the transition may be well made through a special group. An acute remark of Auguste Comte’s calls attention to an important process of theological thought, which we may here endeavour to bring as clearly as possible before our minds. In his ‘Philosophie Positive,’ he defines deities proper as differing by their general and abstract character from pure fetishes (i.e., animated objects), the humble fetish governing but a single object from which it is inseparable, while the gods administer a special order of phenomena at once in different bodies. When, he continues, 243the similar vegetation of the different oaks of a forest led to a theological generalization from their common phenomena, the abstract being thus produced was no longer the fetish of a single tree, but became the god of the forest; here, then, is the intellectual passage from fetishism to polytheism, reduced to the inevitable preponderance of specific over individual ideas.[583] Now this observation of Comte’s may be more immediately applied to a class of divine beings which may be accurately called species-deities. It is highly suggestive to study the crude attempts of barbaric theology to account for the uniformity observed in large classes of objects, by making this generalization from individual to specific ideas. To explain the existence of what we call a species, they would refer it to a common ancestral stock, or to an original archetype, or to a species-deity, or they combined these conceptions. For such speculations, classes of plants and animals offered perhaps an early and certainly an easy subject. The uniformity of each kind not only suggested a common parentage, but also the notion that creatures so wanting in individuality, with qualities so measured out as it were by line and rule, might not be independent arbitrary agents, but mere copies from a common model, or mere instruments used by controlling deities. Thus in Polynesia, as has been just mentioned, certain species of animals were considered as incarnations of certain deities, and among the Samoans it appears that the question as to the individuality of such creatures was actually asked and answered. If, for instance, a village god were accustomed to appear as an owl, and one of his votaries found a dead owl by the roadside, he would mourn over the sacred bird and bury it with much ceremony, but the god himself would not be thought to be dead, for he remains incarnate in all existing owls.[584] According to Father Geronimo Boscana, the Acagchemen tribe of Upper California furnish a curious parallel to this notion. They 244worshipped the ‘panes’ bird, which seems to have been an eagle or vulture, and each year, in the temple of each village, one of them was solemnly killed without shedding blood, and the body burned. Yet the natives maintained and believed that it was the same individual bird they sacrificed each year, and more than this, that the same bird was slain by each of the villages.[585] Among the comparatively cultured Peruvians, Acosta describes another theory of celestial archetypes. Speaking of star-deities, he says that shepherds venerated a certain star called Sheep, another star called Tiger protected men from tigers, &c.: ‘And generally, of all the animals and birds there are on the earth, they believed that a like one lived in heaven, in whose charge were their procreation and increase, and thus they accounted of divers stars, such as that they call Chacana, and Topatorca, and Mamana, and Mizco, and Miquiquiray, and other such, so that in a manner it appears that they were drawing towards the dogma of the Platonic ideas.’[586] The North American Indians also have speculated as to the common ancestors or deities of species. One missionary notes down their idea as he found it in 1634. ‘They say, moreover, that all the animals of each species have an elder brother, who is as it were the principle and origin of all the individuals, and this elder brother is marvellously great and powerful. The elder brother of the beavers, they told me, is perhaps as large as our cabin.’ Another early account is that each species of animals has its archetype in the land of souls; there exists, for example, a manitu or archetype of all oxen, which animates all oxen.[587] Here, again, occurs a noteworthy correspondence with the ideas of a distant race. In Buyán, the island paradise of Russian myth, there 245are to be found the Snake older than all snakes, and the prophetic Raven, elder brother of all ravens, and the Bird, the largest and oldest of all birds, with iron beak and copper claws, and the Mother of Bees, eldest among bees.[588] Morgan’s comparatively modern account of the Iroquois mentions their belief in a spirit of each species of trees and plants, as of oak, hemlock, maple, whortleberry, raspberry, spearmint, tobacco; most objects of nature being thus under the care of protecting spirits.[589] The doctrine of such species-deities is perhaps nowhere more definitely stated than by Castrén in his ‘Finnish Mythology.’ In his description of the Siberian nature-worship, the lowest level is exemplified by the Samoyeds, whose direct worship of natural objects for themselves may perhaps indicate the original religious condition of the whole Turanian race. But the doctrine of the comparatively cultured heathen Finns was at a different stage. Here every object in nature has a ‘haltia,’ a guardian deity or genius, a being which was its creator and thenceforth became attached to it. These deities or genii are, however, not bound to each single transitory object, but are free personal beings which have movement, form, body, and soul. Their existence in no wise depends on the existence of the individual objects, for although no object in nature is without its guardian deity, this deity extends to the whole race or species. This ash-tree, this stone, this house, has indeed its particular ‘haltia,’ yet these same ‘haltiat’ concern themselves with other ash-trees, stones, and houses, of which the individuals may perish, but their presiding genii live on in the species.[590] It seems as though some similar view ran through the doctrine of more civilized races, as in the well-known 246Egyptian and Greek examples where whole species of animals, plants, or things, stand as symbolic of, and as protected by, particular deities. The thought appears with most perfect clearness in the Rabbinical philosophy which apportions to each of the 2100 species, of plants for instance, a presiding angel in heaven, and assigns this as the motive of the Levitical prohibition of mixtures among animals and plants.[591] The interesting likeness pointed out by Father Acosta between these crude theological conceptions and the civilized philosophical conceptions which have replaced them, was again brought into view in the last century by the President De Brosses, in comparing the Red Indians’ archetypes of species with the Platonic archetypal ideas.[592] As for animals and plants, the desire of naturalists to ascend to primal unity to some extent finds satisfaction in a theory tracing each species to an origin in a single pair. And though this is out of the question with inanimate objects, our language seems in suggestive metaphor to lay hold on the same thought, when we say of a dozen similar swords, or garments, or chairs, that they have the same pattern (patronus, as it were father), whereby they were shaped from their matter (materia, or mother substance).
Until now, in our exploration of animistic beliefs, we've primarily focused on the minor spirits that influence the detailed aspects of human life and its environment. As we shift towards discussing divine beings with broader roles, it's fitting to transition through a specific group. Auguste Comte made an insightful observation regarding a significant process in theological thinking that we aim to clarify here. In his *Philosophie Positive*, he explains that true deities differ in their general and abstract nature from pure fetishes (meaning, animated objects); a simple fetish governs a single object to which it is inseparably linked, while gods oversee a specific order of phenomena across various entities. He elaborates that when the similar growth of different oaks in a forest results in a theological generalization based on shared characteristics, this abstract entity is no longer tied to one particular tree but becomes the god of the forest. This illustrates the intellectual shift from fetishism to polytheism, emphasizing the dominance of collective over individual concepts. Now, this observation from Comte can be directly applied to a category of divine beings that can accurately be referred to as species-deities. It’s quite enlightening to examine the primitive attempts of early theology to explain the similarity found in large groups of objects by generalizing from individual to specific concepts. To account for what we define as a species, they might trace it back to a common ancestral lineage, an original model, or a species-deity, or combine these ideas. Such theories likely found an easy basis in early classifications of plants and animals. The uniformity observed in each type not only suggested shared ancestry but raised the idea that creatures lacking individuality, with traits seemingly measured out precisely, might not be independent beings but rather replicas of a common template, or mere tools of controlling deities. In Polynesia, for instance, certain animal species were seen as incarnations of specific deities, and among the Samoans, there was actually discussion around the individuality of such creatures. If a village god typically manifested as an owl and a follower found a dead owl, they would mourn over the sacred bird and give it a ceremonial burial, but the god wouldn't be considered dead, as he continues to inhabit all existing owls. According to Father Geronimo Boscana, the Acagchemen tribe of Upper California provides an intriguing parallel to this idea. They revered the 'panes' bird, likely an eagle or vulture, and each year in every village's temple, one was ceremoniously killed without spilling blood and then burned. Nonetheless, the locals believed and asserted that it was the same individual bird they sacrificed annually and, even more remarkably, that the same bird was killed by each village. Among the relatively more cultured Peruvians, Acosta recounts another theory of celestial models. He notes that shepherds held a certain star, called Sheep, in reverence, while another star named Tiger was thought to protect people from actual tigers, etc. He states, "And overall, for all the animals and birds on earth, they believed a corresponding one existed in heaven, responsible for their reproduction and growth," which led them to recognize various stars such as Chacana, Topatorca, Mamana, Mizco, and Miquiquiray, indicating a movement towards the concept of Platonic ideas. North American Indians, similarly, have considered the common ancestors or deities of species. One missionary recorded their belief in 1634: "They also say that all animals of each species have an elder brother, who is like the principle and source of all individuals, and this elder brother is incredibly large and powerful. They told me the elder brother of the beavers may be as big as our cabin." Another early account suggests that each animal species has its archetype in the land of souls; for instance, a manitu or archetype for all oxen exists that animates every ox. Here, we see a notable similarity with the concepts of a distant culture. In Buyán, the mythical island paradise of Russian folklore, exist the Snake older than all snakes, the prophetic Raven, elder brother of all ravens, and the Bird, the largest and oldest of all birds, possessing an iron beak and copper claws, as well as the Mother of Bees, the eldest among bees. Morgan’s more recent account of the Iroquois refers to their belief in a spirit associated with each species of trees and plants, including oak, hemlock, maple, whortleberry, raspberry, and spearmint; essentially, most aspects of nature were overseen by protective spirits. The concept of such species-deities is perhaps most clearly stated by Castrén in his *Finnish Mythology*. In his analysis of Siberian nature worship, the lowest level is exhibited by the Samoyeds, whose direct reverence for natural objects may suggest the original religious condition of the entire Turanian race. However, the belief system of the relatively more sophisticated heathen Finns was at a different stage. Here, each natural object has a 'haltia,' a guardian deity or spirit, a being that created it and thereafter is bound to it. These deities or spirits, however, are not confined to individual transient objects but are free personal beings possessing movement, form, body, and soul. Their existence doesn’t depend on that of the individual objects because, although every natural element has its guardian deity, this deity pertains to the whole race or species. This ash-tree, this stone, this house, indeed has its specific 'haltia,' yet these same 'haltiat' oversee other ash-trees, stones, and houses, where individual entities may perish, but their overseeing spirits persist within the species. It seems a similar view permeates the beliefs of more advanced cultures, as seen in the well-known Egyptian and Greek cases where entire species of animals, plants, or objects symbolize and are safeguarded by specific deities. This idea is most clearly articulated in Rabbinical philosophy, which assigns a presiding angel in heaven to each of the 2100 species of plants, for example, explaining the rationale behind the Levitical prohibitions against mixtures of animals and plants. The interesting similarity noted by Father Acosta between these rudimentary theological concepts and the civilized philosophical ideas that replaced them was highlighted again in the last century by President De Brosses, comparing the archetypes of species among the Red Indians with Platonic archetypal ideas. Regarding animals and plants, naturalists' desire to trace back to a primal unity is somewhat fulfilled by a theory that links each species to an origin in a single pair. While this isn’t applicable to inanimate objects, our language suggestsively holds onto that idea, as when we say a dozen similar swords, garments, or chairs share the same *pattern* (patronus, as if it were a father) from which they were crafted from their *matter* (materia, or mother substance).
CHAPTER XVI.
ANIMISM (continued).
Higher Deities of Polytheism—Human characteristics applied to Deity—Lords of Spiritual Hierarchy—Polytheism: its course of development in lower and higher Culture—Principles of its investigation; classification of Deities according to central conceptions of their significance and function—Heaven-god—Rain-god—Thunder-god—Wind gods—Earth-god—Water-god—Sea-god—Fire-god—Sun-god—Moon-god.
Higher Deities of Polytheism—Human traits assigned to Deities—Lords of the Spiritual Hierarchy—Polytheism: its evolution in both lower and higher cultures—Principles for studying it; categorization of Deities based on their central ideas of significance and function—Heavenly god—Rain god—Thunder god—Wind gods—Earth god—Water god—Sea god—Fire god—Sun god—Moon god.
Surveying the religions of the world and studying the descriptions of deity among race after race, we may recur to old polemical terms in order to define a dominant idea of theology at large. Man so habitually ascribes to his deities human shape, human passions, human nature, that we may declare him an Anthropomorphite, an Anthropopathite, and (to complete the series) an Anthropophysite. In this state of religious thought, prevailing as it does through so immense a range among mankind, one of the strongest confirmations may be found of the theory here advanced concerning the development of Animism. This theory that the conception of the human soul is the very ‘fons et origo’ of the conceptions of spirit and deity in general, has been already vouched for by the fact of human souls being held to pass into the characters of good and evil demons, and to ascend to the rank of deities. But beyond this, as we consider the nature of the great gods of the nations, in whom the vastest functions of the universe are vested, it will still be apparent that these mighty deities are modelled on human souls, that in great measure their feeling and sympathy, their character and habit, their will and action, even their material and form, display throughout their adaptations, exaggerations and distortions, characteristics 248shaped upon those of the human spirit. The key to investigation of the Dii Majorum Gentium of the world is the reflex of humanity, and as we behold their figures in their proper districts of theology, memory ever brings back the Psalmist’s words, ‘Thou thoughtest I was altogether as thyself.’
Looking at the religions around the world and examining how different cultures describe their gods, we can return to old argumentative terms to outline a main idea in theology overall. People often attribute human form, emotions, and nature to their deities, which allows us to label them as Anthropomorphites, Anthropopathites, and to complete the list, Anthropophysites. In this state of religious thinking, which is so widespread among humanity, we find strong support for the theory being put forward about the evolution of Animism. This theory suggests that the idea of the human soul is the primary source of the ideas of spirit and deity in general. This has already been supported by observing that human souls are believed to transform into both good and evil spirits and to rise to the status of gods. Furthermore, as we look at the nature of the major gods among different nations, who are responsible for the largest functions of the universe, it becomes clear that these powerful deities are modeled after human souls. Their feelings and empathy, character and habits, will and actions, even their physical forms and appearances, reflect in many ways the traits of the human spirit in exaggerated and distorted adaptations. The key to understanding the Dii Majorum Gentium of the world lies in this reflection of humanity, and when we consider their roles in the relevant fields of theology, we are reminded of the Psalmist’s words, ‘Thou thoughtest I was altogether as thyself.’
The higher deities of Polytheism have their places in the general animistic system of mankind. Among nation after nation it is still clear how, man being the type of deity, human society and government became the model on which divine society and government were shaped. As chiefs and kings are among men, so are the great gods among the lesser spirits. They differ from the souls and minor spiritual beings which we have as yet chiefly considered, but the difference is rather of rank than of nature. They are personal spirits, reigning over personal spirits. Above the disembodied souls and manes, the local genii of rocks and fountains and trees, the host of good and evil demons, and the rest of the spiritual commonality, stand these mightier deities, whose influence is less confined to local or individual interests, and who, as it pleases them, can act directly within their vast domain, or control and operate through the lower beings of their kind, their servants, agents, or mediators. The great gods of Polytheism, numerous and elaborately defined in the theology of the cultured world, do not however make their earliest appearance there. In the religions of the lower races their principal types were already cast, and thenceforward, for many an age of progressing or relapsing culture, it became the work of poet and priest, legend-monger and historian, theologian and philosopher, to develop and renew, to degrade and abolish, the mighty lords of the Pantheon.
The major gods of Polytheism have their roles in the overall animistic framework of humanity. Across various cultures, it's evident that since humans are seen as the prototypes of deities, human society and governance served as blueprints for divine society and governance. Just as chiefs and kings exist among people, the great gods exist among lesser spirits. While they are distinct from the souls and minor spiritual entities we've primarily discussed, the difference is more about rank than nature. They are personal spirits who rule over other personal spirits. Above the disembodied souls, local spirits of rocks, springs, and trees, the multitude of good and evil demons, and other spiritual entities, stand these powerful deities. Their influence extends beyond local or individual concerns, and they can choose to act directly within their extensive domain or manage and operate through lesser beings of their kind, such as their servants, agents, or mediators. The great gods of Polytheism, which are numerous and intricately detailed in the theology of advanced civilizations, didn't originate there, though. In the religions of simpler societies, the primary types of these gods were already established, and for many ages of evolving or declining cultures, it became the responsibility of poets, priests, storytellers, historians, theologians, and philosophers to develop, renew, degrade, and even eliminate the powerful lords of the Pantheon.
With little exception, wherever a savage or barbaric system of religion is thoroughly described, great gods make their appearance in the spiritual world as distinctly as chiefs in the human tribe. In the lists, it is true, there are set down great deities, good or evil, who probably came 249in from modern Christian missionary teaching, or otherwise by contact with foreign religions. It is often difficult to distinguish from these the true local gods, animistic figures of native meaning and origin. Among the following polytheistic systems, examples may be found of such combinations, with the complex theological problems they suggest. Among the Australians, above the swarming souls, nature-spirits, demons, there stand out mythic figures of higher divinity; Nguk-wonga, the Spirit of the Waters; Biam, who gives ceremonial songs and causes disease, and is perhaps the same as Baiame the creator; Nambajandi and Warrugura, lords of heaven and the nether world.[593] In South America, if we look into the theology of the Manaos (whose name is well known in the famous legend of El Dorado and the golden city of Manoa), we see Mauari and Saraua, who may be called the Good and Evil Spirit, and beside the latter the two Gamainhas, Spirits of the Waters and the Forest.[594] In North America the description of a solemn Algonquin sacrifice introduces a list of twelve dominant manitus or gods; first the Great Manitu in heaven, then the Sun, Moon, Earth, Fire, Water, the House-god, the Indian corn, and the four Winds or Cardinal Points.[595] The Polynesian’s crowd of manes, and the lower ranks of deities of earth, sea, and air, stand below the great gods of Peace and War, Oro and Tane the national deities of Tahiti and Huahine, Raitubu the Sky-producer, Hina who aided in the work of forming the world, her father Taaroa, the uncreate Creator who dwells in Heaven.[596] Among the Land Dayaks of Borneo, the commonalty of spirits consists of the souls of the departed, and of such beings as dwell in the noble old forests on the tops of lofty hills, or such as hover about villages and devour the stores of rice; above these are Tapa, creator and preserver of man, 250and Iang, who taught the Dayaks their religion, Jirong, whose function is the birth and death of men, and Tenabi, who made, and still causes to flourish, the earth and all things therein save the human race.[597] In West Africa, an example may be taken from the theology of the Slave Coast, a systematic scheme of all nature as moved and quickened by spirits, kindly or hostile to mankind. These spirits dwell in field and wood, mountain and valley; they live in air and water; multitudes of them have been human souls, such ghosts hover about the graves and near the living, and have influence with the under-gods, whom they worship; among these ‘edrõ’ are the patron-deities of men and families and tribes; through these subordinate beings works the highest god, Mawu. The missionary who describes this negro hierarchy quite simply sees in it Satan and his Angels.[598] In Asia, the Samoyed’s little spirits that are bound to his little fetishes, and the little elves of wood and stream, have greater beings above them, the Forest-Spirit, the River-Spirit, the Sun and Moon, the Evil Spirit and the Good Spirit above all.[599] The countless host of the local gods of the Khonds pervade the world, rule the functions of nature, and control the life of men, and these have their chiefs; above them rank the deified souls of men who have become tutelary gods of tribes; above these are the six great gods, the Rain-god, the goddess of Firstfruits, the god of Increase, the god of Hunting, the iron god of War, the god of Boundaries, with which group stands also the Judge of the Dead, and above all other gods, the Sun-god and Creator Boora Pennu, and his wife the mighty Earth-goddess, Tari Pennu.[600] The Spanish conquerors found in Mexico a complex and systematic hierarchy of spiritual beings; numberless were the little deities who had their worship in house and lane, 251grove and temple, and from these the worshipper could pass to gods of flowers or of pulque, of hunters and goldsmiths, and then to the great deities of the nation and the world, the figures which the mythologist knows so well, Centeotl the Earth-goddess, Tlaloc the Water-god, Huitzilopochtli the War-god, Mictlanteuctli the Lord of Hades, Tonatiuh and Metztli the Sun and Moon.[601] Thus, starting from the theology of savage tribes, the student arrives at the polytheistic hierarchies of the Aryan nations. In ancient Greece, the cloud-compelling Heaven-god reigns over such deities as the god of War and the goddess of Love, the Sun-god and the Moon-goddess, the Fire-god and the ruler of the Under-world, the Winds and Rivers, the nymphs of wood and well and forest.[602] In modern India, Brahma-Vishnu-Siva reign pre-eminent over a series of divinities, heterogeneous and often obscure in nature, but among whom stand out in clear meaning and purpose such figures as Indra of Heaven and Sûrya of the Sun, Agni of the Fire, Pavana of the Winds and Varuna of the Waters, Yama lord of the Under-world, Kâma god of Love and Kârttikeya of War, Panchânana who gives epilepsy and Manasâ who preserves from snake-bites, the divine Rivers, and below these the ranks of nymphs, elves, demons, ministering spirits, of heaven and earth—Gandharvas, Apsaras, Siddhas, Asuras, Bhûtas, Râkshasas.[603]
With few exceptions, wherever a primitive or tribal religion is thoroughly described, powerful gods emerge in the spiritual realm as clearly as leaders in human society. It's true that the lists mention major deities, both good and evil, likely introduced through modern Christian missionary work or through interactions with foreign religions. It's often hard to differentiate between these and the genuine local gods, which are animistic figures rooted in native meaning and origin. Within the polytheistic systems that follow, examples illustrate such combinations, presenting complex theological issues. Among Australians, in addition to the numerous souls, nature spirits, and demons, there are mythic figures of higher divinity; Nguk-wonga, the Spirit of the Waters; Biam, who provides ceremonial songs and causes illness, and may be the same as Baiame, the creator; Nambajandi and Warrugura, lords of heaven and the underworld.249 In South America, examining the theology of the Manaos (notably recognized in the legendary story of El Dorado and the golden city of Manoa), we find Mauari and Saraua, representing the Good and Evil Spirit, accompanied by the two Gamainhas, Spirits of the Waters and the Forest.[594] In North America, a detailed description of an Algonquin sacrifice introduces a list of twelve leading manitus or gods, starting with the Great Manitu in heaven, followed by the Sun, Moon, Earth, Fire, Water, the House-god, Indian corn, and the four Winds or Cardinal Points.[595] The Polynesian multitude of manes, along with the lower-tier deities of earth, sea, and air, are subordinate to the great gods of Peace and War, Oro and Tane, the national deities of Tahiti and Huahine, Raitubu, the Sky-producer, Hina, who assisted in the world's formation, her father Taaroa, the uncreated Creator who resides in Heaven.[596] Among the Land Dayaks of Borneo, the common spirits include the souls of the deceased and beings inhabiting ancient forests on high hills, or those that linger around villages and consume rice supplies; above these are Tapa, the creator and preserver of mankind, and Iang, who taught the Dayaks their religion, Jirong, responsible for human birth and death, and Tenabi, who created and continues to sustain the earth and all within it, excluding the human race.250 In West Africa, we can consider the theology of the Slave Coast, a systematic framework of nature animated by spirits that are either friendly or hostile towards humanity. These spirits inhabit fields and woods, mountains and valleys; they live in the air and water; many of them were once human souls that haunt graves and linger near the living, having influence with the under-gods, whom they worship; among these ‘edrõ’ are the guardian deities of individuals, families, and tribes; through these subordinate entities, the highest god, Mawu, operates. The missionary describing this African hierarchy simply views it as Satan and his Angels.[598] In Asia, the little spirits of the Samoyed tied to their small fetishes, along with the tiny elves of woods and streams, have greater beings above them, such as the Forest-Spirit, the River-Spirit, the Sun, and Moon, and the Evil Spirit and the Good Spirit above all.[599] The vast array of local gods among the Khonds fill the world, oversee nature's functions, and govern human life, and they have their leaders; above these are the deified souls of people who became guardian gods of tribes; above them rank the six major gods: the Rain-god, the goddess of Firstfruits, the god of Increase, the god of Hunting, the iron god of War, and the god of Boundaries, along with the Judge of the Dead, and above all other gods, the Sun-god and Creator Boora Pennu, and his powerful wife, the Earth-goddess, Tari Pennu.[600] The Spanish conquerors discovered in Mexico a complicated and systematic hierarchy of spiritual beings; countless minor deities were worshiped in homes, along streets, in groves and temples, allowing worshippers to reach gods of flowers, pulque, hunters, and goldsmiths, leading up to the great national and universal deities known to mythologists, such as Centeotl the Earth-goddess, Tlaloc the Water-god, Huitzilopochtli the War-god, Mictlanteuctli the Lord of Hades, Tonatiuh, and Metztli the Sun and Moon.[601] Thus, beginning with the theology of tribal societies, the scholar arrives at the polytheistic hierarchies of the Aryan nations. In ancient Greece, the cloud-summoning Heaven-god reigns over deities like the god of War, the goddess of Love, the Sun-god, Moon-goddess, Fire-god, and the ruler of the Under-world, along with the Winds and Rivers, and the nymphs of woods, springs, and forests.[602] In modern India, Brahma-Vishnu-Siva take the lead over a range of deities, often diverse and unclear in nature, but among which distinct figures such as Indra of Heaven, Sûrya of the Sun, Agni of Fire, Pavana of the Winds, Varuna of the Waters, Yama lord of the Under-world, Kâma god of Love, Kârttikeya of War, Panchânana who brings epilepsy, and Manasâ who protects from snake bites, as well as the divine Rivers, exist, followed by the ranks of nymphs, elves, demons, and ministering spirits of heaven and earth—Gandharvas, Apsaras, Siddhas, Asuras, Bhûtas, Râkshasas.[603]
The systematic comparison of polytheistic religions has been of late years worked with admirable results. These have been due to the adoption of comparatively exact methods, as where the ancient Aryan deities of the Veda have been brought into connexion with those of the Homeric poems, in some cases as clearly as where we Englishmen can study in the Scandinavian Edda the old gods of our own race, whose names stand in local names on the map of England, and serve as counters to reckon our days of the 252week. Yet it need scarcely be said that to compare in full detail the deities even of closely connected nations, and à fortiori those of tribes not united in language and history, is still a difficult and unsatisfactory task. The old-fashioned identifications of the gods and heroes of different nations admitted most illusory evidence. Some had little more ground than similar-sounding names, as when the Hindu Brahma and Prajâpati were discovered to be the Hebrew Abraham and Japhet, and when even Sir William Jones identified Woden with Buddha. With not much more stringency, it is still often taken as matter of course that the Keltic Beal, whose bealtines correspond with a whole class of bonfire-customs among several branches of the Aryan race, is the Bel or the Baal of the Semitic cultus. Unfortunately, classical scholarship at the Renaissance started the subject on an unsound footing, by accepting the Greek deities with the mystified shapes and perverted names they had assumed in Latin literature. That there was a partial soundness in such comparisons, as in identifying Zeus and Jupiter, Hestia and Vesta, made the plan all the more misleading when Kronos came to figure as Saturn, Poseidon as Neptune, Athene as Minerva. To judge by example of the possible results of comparative theology worked on such principles, Thoth being identified with Hermes, Hermes with Mercury, and Mercury with Woden, there comes to pass the absurd transition from the Egyptian ibis-headed divine scribe of the gods, to the Teutonic heaven-dwelling driver of the raging tempest. It is not in this loose fashion that the mental processes are to be sought out, which led nations to arrange so similarly and yet so diversely their array of deities.
The systematic comparison of polytheistic religions has recently yielded impressive results. This progress is thanks to more accurate methods, such as linking the ancient Aryan gods from the Veda with those from the Homeric poems, sometimes as clearly as we English speakers can see the old gods of our ancestry in the Scandinavian Edda, whose names still appear in place names across England and help mark our days of the 252week. Yet, it goes without saying that fully comparing the gods of even closely related nations, let alone those of tribes that aren't united by language or history, remains a challenging and often unsatisfactory endeavor. The outdated identifications of the gods and heroes from different cultures relied on very flimsy evidence. Some connections were based merely on names that sounded alike, like when the Hindu Brahma and Prajâpati were equated with the Hebrew Abraham and Japhet, or when even Sir William Jones matched Woden with Buddha. With similarly loose criteria, it's often taken for granted that the Keltic Beal, whose bealtines align with various bonfire customs among many branches of the Aryan race, is the same as the Bel or Baal of the Semitic cult. Unfortunately, classical scholarship during the Renaissance began this study on shaky ground by accepting the Greek gods with the distorted forms and altered names they were given in Latin literature. The partial accuracy in comparisons like Zeus and Jupiter or Hestia and Vesta made the approach even more misleading when Kronos was equated with Saturn, Poseidon with Neptune, and Athene with Minerva. For instance, if we look at the absurd consequences of comparative theology based on such principles, Thoth being linked with Hermes, Hermes with Mercury, and Mercury with Woden highlights the ridiculous leap from the Egyptian ibis-headed divine scribe to the Teutonic storm god. This loose method is not how we should seek to understand the thought processes that led different cultures to arrange their pantheon of deities so similarly yet so diversely.
A twofold perplexity besets the soberest investigator on this ground, caused by the modification of deities by development at home and adoption from abroad. Even among the lower races, gods of long traditional legend and worship acquire a mixed and complex personality. The mythologist who seeks to ascertain the precise definition of the Red 253Indian Michabu in his various characters of Heaven-god and Water-god, Creator of the Earth and first ancestor of Man, or who examines the personality of the Polynesian Maui in his relation to Sun, lord of Heaven or Hades, first Man, and South Sea Island hero, will sympathize with the Semitic or Aryan student bewildered among the heterogeneous attributes of Baal and Astarte, Herakles and Athene. Sir William Jones scarcely overstated the perplexity of the problem in the following remarkable forecast delivered more than a century ago, in the first anniversary discourse before the Asiatic Society of Bengal, at a time when glimpses of the relation of the Hindu to the Greek Pantheon were opening into a new broad view of comparative theology in his mind. ‘We must not be surprised,’ he says, ‘at finding, on a close examination, that the characters of all the Pagan deities, male and female, melt into each other and at last into one or two; for it seems a well-founded opinion, that the whole crowd of gods and goddesses in ancient Rome, and modern Váránes [Benares] mean only the powers of nature, and principally those of the Sun, expressed in a variety of ways and by a multitude of fanciful names.’ As to the travelling of gods from country to country, and the changes they are apt to suffer on the road, we may judge by examples of what has happened within our knowledge. It is not merely that one nation borrows a god from another with its proper figure and attributes and rites, as where in Rome the worshipper of the Sun might take his choice whether he would adore in the temple of the Greek Apollo, the Egyptian Osiris, the Persian Mithra, or the Syrian Elagabalus. The intercourse of races can produce quainter results than this. Any Orientalist will appreciate the wonderful hotchpot of Hindu and Arabic language and religion in the following details, noted down among rude tribes of the Malay Peninsula. We hear of Jin Bumi the Earth-god (Arabic jin = demon, Sanskrit bhûmi = earth); incense is burnt to Jewajewa (Sanskrit dewa = god) who intercedes with Pirman the 254supreme invisible deity above the sky (Brahma?); the Moslem Allah Táala, with his wife Nabi Mahamad (Prophet Mohammed), appear in the Hinduized characters of creator and destroyer of all things; and while the spirits worshipped in stones are called by the Hindu term of ‘dewa’ or deity, Moslem conversion has so far influenced the mind of the stone-worshipper, that he will give to his sacred boulder the title of a Prophet Mohammed.[604] If we would have examples nearer home, we may trace the evil demon Aeshma Daeva of the ancient Persian religion becoming the Asmodeus of the book of Tobit, afterwards to find a place in the devilry of the middle ages, and to end his career as the Diable Boiteux of Le Sage. Even the Aztec war-god Huitzilopochtli may be found figuring as the demon Vizlipuzli in the popular drama of Doctor Faustus.
A twofold confusion challenges even the most serious investigator in this area, stemming from the adaptation of deities through local development and foreign adoption. Even among less advanced cultures, gods with a long history of legend and worship develop a mixed and complex persona. The mythologist trying to pinpoint the exact identity of the Red Indian Michabu, who embodies various roles as the Heaven-god, Water-god, Creator of the Earth, and first ancestor of Man, or examining Polynesian Maui in his connections to the Sun, lord of Heaven or Hades, first Man, and South Sea Island hero, will relate to the Semitic or Aryan scholars feeling lost amid the diverse attributes of Baal and Astarte, Herakles and Athene. Sir William Jones didn’t exaggerate the complexity of this issue in a remarkable prediction he made over a century ago during the first anniversary lecture at the Asiatic Society of Bengal, at a time when insights into the relationship between the Hindu and Greek pantheons were beginning to shape a broader perspective on comparative theology in his mind. "We shouldn’t be surprised," he states, "upon close examination, that the characteristics of all Pagan deities, both male and female, merge into one another, eventually coalescing into one or two; for it seems to be a well-supported idea that the entire array of gods and goddesses in ancient Rome and modern Váránes [Benares] represents only the forces of nature, primarily those of the Sun, expressed in various ways and by a multitude of imaginative names." Regarding the travel of gods from one country to another and the changes they often undergo along the way, we can draw insights from examples within our knowledge. It's not just that one nation adopts a god from another country along with its specific image, attributes, and rituals, as in Rome, where a worshipper of the Sun could choose to worship in the temple of the Greek Apollo, the Egyptian Osiris, the Persian Mithra, or the Syrian Elagabalus. The interaction of races can produce even more peculiar outcomes than this. Any Orientalist would recognize the fascinating blend of Hindu and Arabic language and religion in the following details gathered among the primitive tribes of the Malay Peninsula. We learn of Jin Bumi, the Earth-god (Arabic jin = demon, Sanskrit earth = earth); incense is burned to Jewajewa (Sanskrit dewa = god), who intercedes with Pirman, the supreme invisible deity above the sky (Brahma?); the Muslim Allah Táala, along with his wife Nabi Mahamad (Prophet Mohammed), appear in the Hinduized roles of creator and destroyer of all things; and while the spirits worshipped in stones are referred to by the Hindu term ‘dewa’ or deity, Muslim conversion has influenced the mindset of the stone-worshipper to the extent that he designates his sacred rock as a Prophet Mohammed.[604] If we seek examples closer to home, we can track how the evil demon Aeshma Daeva from ancient Persian religion became the Asmodeus of the book of Tobit, later finding a place in medieval depictions of devilry, and eventually ending up as the Diable Boiteux of Le Sage. Even the Aztec war-god Huitzilopochtli can be found represented as the demon Vizlipuzli in the popular drama of Doctor Faustus.
In ethnographic comparisons of the religions of mankind, unless there is evidence of direct relation between gods belonging to two peoples, the safe and reasonable principle is to limit the identification of deities to the attributes they have in common. Thus it is proper to compare the Dendid of the White Nile with the Aryan Indra, in so far as both are Heaven-gods and Rain-gods; the Aztec Tonatiuh with the Greek Apollo, in so far as both are Sun-gods; the Australian Baiame with the Scandinavian Thor, in so far as both are Thunder-gods. The present purpose of displaying Polytheism as a department of Animism does not require that elaborate comparison of systems which would be in place in a manual of the religions of the world. The great gods may be scientifically ranged and treated according to their fundamental ideas, the strongly-marked and intelligible conceptions which, under names often obscure and personalities often mixed and mystified, they stand to represent. It is enough to show the similarity of principle on which the theologic mind of the lower races shaped those old familiar types of deity, with which our first acquaintance was gained in the pantheon of classic mythology. 255It will be observed that not all, but the principal figures, belong to strict Nature-worship. These may be here first surveyed. They are Heaven and Earth, Rain and Thunder, Water and Sea, Fire and Sun and Moon, worshipped either directly for themselves, or as animated by their special deities, or these deities are more fully set apart and adored in anthropomorphic shape—a group of conceptions distinctly and throughout based on the principles of savage fetishism. True, the great Nature-gods are huge in strength and far-reaching in influence, but this is because the natural objects they belong to are immense in size or range of action, pre-eminent and predominant among lesser fetishes, though still fetishes themselves.
In comparing the religions of humanity, unless there's evidence of a direct link between the gods of two cultures, the sensible and cautious approach is to focus on the shared characteristics of the deities. Therefore, it's appropriate to compare the Dendid of the White Nile with the Aryan Indra, since both are gods of Heaven and Rain; the Aztec Tonatiuh with the Greek Apollo, as both are Sun-gods; and the Australian Baiame with the Scandinavian Thor, as both are Thunder-gods. The current aim of presenting Polytheism as a branch of Animism doesn’t require an in-depth comparison of belief systems, which would be suitable in a complete overview of world religions. The major gods can be scientifically categorized and analyzed based on their core concepts, the clear and distinct ideas they represent, despite often having obscure names and mixed or confusing personalities. It’s sufficient to highlight the similarity in the way the theological understanding of lower societies shaped those familiar types of deities we first encountered in classic mythology. 255 It's important to note that not all, but the main figures, are associated with strict Nature-worship. These can be surveyed first. They include Heaven and Earth, Rain and Thunder, Water and Sea, Fire and the Sun and Moon, worshipped either directly as they are, or seen as animated by their specific deities, or these deities are more clearly defined and venerated in human-like forms—a set of ideas rooted in the principles of primal fetishism. Indeed, the great Nature-gods are enormous in power and wide in influence, but this is because the natural elements they represent are vast in size or scope, standing out prominently among lesser fetishes, which, despite their status, are still fetishes themselves.
In the religion of the North American Indians, the Heaven-god displays perfectly the gradual blending of the material sky itself with its personal deity. In the early times of French colonization, Father Brebeuf mentions the Hurons addressing themselves to the earth, rivers, lakes, and dangerous rocks, but above all to heaven, believing that it is all animated, and some powerful demon dwells therein. He describes them as speaking directly to heaven by its personal name ‘Aronhiaté!’ Thus when they throw tobacco into the fire as sacrifice, if it is Heaven they address, they say ‘Aronhiaté! (Heaven!) behold my sacrifice, have pity on me, aid me!’ They have recourse to Heaven in almost all their necessities, and respect this great body above all creatures, remarking in it particularly something divine. They imagine in the sky an ‘oki,’ i.e. demon or power, which rules the seasons of the year and controls the winds and waves. They dread its anger, calling it to witness when they make some important promise or treaty, saying, Heaven hears what we do this day, and fearing chastisement should their word be broken. One of their renowned sorcerers said, Heaven will be angry if men mock him; when they cry every day to Heaven, Aronhiaté! yet give him nothing, he will avenge himself. Etymology again suggests 256the divine sky as the inner meaning of the Iroquois supreme deity, Taronhiawagon the ‘sky-comer’ or ‘sky-holder,’ who had his festival about the winter solstice, who brought the ancestral race out of the mountain, taught them hunting, marriage, and religion, gave them corn and beans, squashes and potatoes and tobacco, and guided them on their migrations as they spread over the land. Among the North American tribes, not only does the conception of the personal divine Heaven thus seem the fundamental idea of the Heaven-god, but it may expand under Christian influence into a yet more general thought of divinity in the Great Spirit in Heaven.[605] In South Africa, the Zulus speak of the Heaven as a person, ascribing to it the power of exercising a will, and they also speak of a Lord of Heaven, whose wrath they deprecate during a thunderstorm. In the native legends of the Zulu princess in the country of the Half-Men, the captive maiden expostulates personally with the Sky, for only acting in an ordinary way, and not in the way she wishes, to destroy her enemies:—
In the belief system of North American Indigenous peoples, the Heaven-god illustrates how the physical sky blends with a personal deity. During the early days of French colonization, Father Brebeuf noted that the Hurons spoke to the earth, rivers, lakes, and treacherous rocks, but primarily to the sky, believing it was alive and inhabited by a powerful spirit. He describes them as directly addressing the sky with its personal name ‘Aronhiaté!’ So, when they throw tobacco into the fire as a sacrifice, if they are speaking to Heaven, they say, ‘Aronhiaté! (Heaven!) see my sacrifice, have mercy on me, help me!’ They turn to Heaven in almost all their needs and hold this vast entity in high regard, sensing something divine in it. They imagine a spirit, or ‘oki,’ in the sky that governs the seasons and controls the winds and waves. They fear its wrath, calling upon it as a witness when making significant promises or agreements, saying, Heaven hears what we do today, and they worry about punishment if they break their word. One famous sorcerer warned that Heaven would be angry if people mocked it; when they call out to Heaven daily, ‘Aronhiaté!’ while offering nothing in return, it will seek vengeance. The etymology points to the divine sky as the deeper meaning behind the Iroquois supreme deity, Taronhiawagon, the ‘sky-comer’ or ‘sky-holder,’ who had a festival during the winter solstice, who brought their ancestors out from the mountains, taught them how to hunt, marry, and practice religion, provided them with corn, beans, squash, potatoes, and tobacco, and guided their movements as they expanded across the land. Among North American tribes, the notion of a personal divine Heaven appears to be the core idea of the Heaven-god, which could evolve under Christian influence into a broader understanding of divinity represented by the Great Spirit in Heaven.[605] In South Africa, the Zulus refer to Heaven as a person, attributing to it a will, and they mention a Lord of Heaven, whose anger they fear during thunderstorms. In the native legends about the Zulu princess from the land of the Half-Men, the captured girl personally expresses her discontent to the Sky for only acting normally and not the way she wants, to eliminate her enemies:—
Thereupon the clouds gather tumultuously; the princess sings again and it thunders terribly, and the Heaven kills the Half-Men round about her, but she is left unharmed.[606] West Africa is another district where the Heaven-god reigns, in whose attributes may be traced the transition from the direct conception of the personal sky to that of the supreme creative deity. Thus in Bonny, one word serves for god, heaven, cloud; and in Aquapim, Yankupong is at once the highest god and the weather. Of this latter deity, the 257Nyankupon of the Oji nation, it is remarked by Riis, ‘The idea of him as a supreme spirit is obscure and uncertain, and often confounded with the visible heavens or sky, the upper world (sorro) which lies beyond human reach; and hence the same word is used also for heavens, sky, and even for rain and thunder.’[607] The same transition from the divine sky to its anthropomorphic deity shows out in the theology of the Tatar tribes. The rude Samoyed’s mind scarcely if at all separates the visible personal Heaven from the divinity united with it under one and the same name, Num. Among the more cultured Finns, the cosmic attributes of the Heaven-god, Ukko the Old One, display the same original nature; he is the ancient of Heaven, the father of Heaven, the bearer of the Firmament, the god of the Air, the dweller on the Clouds, the Cloud-driver, the shepherd of the Cloud-lambs.[608] So far as the evidence of language, and document, and ceremony, can preserve the record of remotely ancient thought, China shows in the highest deity of the state religion a like theologic development. Tien, Heaven, is in personal shape the Shang-ti or Upper Emperor, the Lord of the Universe. The Chinese books may idealize this supreme divinity; they may say that his command is fate, that he rewards the good and punishes the wicked, that he loves and protects the people beneath him, that he manifests himself through events, that he is a spirit full of insight, penetrating, fearful, majestic. Yet they cannot refine him so utterly away into an abstract celestial deity, but that language and history still recognize him as what he was in the beginning, Tien, Heaven.[609]
The clouds gather furiously; the princess sings again, and it thunders loudly, while Heaven strikes down the Half-Men around her, yet she remains unharmed.[606] West Africa is another region where the Heaven-god rules, and you can see the shift from viewing the personal sky to recognizing the supreme creative deity. In Bonny, there’s one word that means god, heaven, and cloud, while in Aquapim, Yankupong is both the highest god and the weather. Regarding this latter deity, the 257Nyankupon of the Oji people, Riis notes, "The concept of him as a supreme spirit is unclear and often confused with the visible heavens or sky, the upper world (sorro) that lies beyond human reach; thus, the same word is used for heavens, sky, and even for rain and thunder.”[607] The same shift from the divine sky to its anthropomorphic deity is evident in the theology of the Tatar tribes. The simplistic mind of the Samoyed barely differentiates between the visible personal Heaven and the divinity associated with it, both referred to by the same name, Num. Among the more advanced Finns, the cosmic qualities of the Heaven-god, Ukko the Old One, reflect the same original essence; he is the ancient of Heaven, the father of Heaven, the bearer of the Firmament, the god of the Air, the dweller on the Clouds, the Cloud-driver, the shepherd of the Cloud-lambs.[608] As far as the records of ancient thought can be maintained through language, documents, and rituals, China illustrates a similar theological evolution in its highest deity of state religion. Tien, Heaven, takes a personal form as Shang-ti or the Upper Emperor, the Lord of the Universe. The Chinese texts might idealize this supreme being; they might say that his command is fate, that he rewards the good and punishes the wicked, that he loves and protects the people beneath him, that he reveals himself through events, that he is a spirit full of insight, penetrating, awe-inspiring, and majestic. Yet, they cannot completely abstract him into a celestial deity; language and history still recognize him as he was in the beginning, Tien, Heaven.[609]
258With such evidence perfectly accords the history of the Heaven-god among our Indo-European race. This being, adored in ancient Aryan religion, was—
258With such evidence perfectly aligns with the history of the Heaven-god among our Indo-European people. This being, worshipped in ancient Aryan religion, was—
The evidence of language to this effect has been set forth with extreme clearness by Professor Max Müller. In the first stage, the Sanskrit Dyu (Dyaus), the bright sky, is taken in a sense so direct that it expresses the idea of day, and the storms are spoken of as going about in it; while Greek and Latin rival this distinctness in such terms as ἔνδιος, ‘in the open air,’ εὔδιος, ‘well-skyed, calm,’ sub divo, ‘in the open air,’ sub Jove frigido, ‘under the cold sky,’ and that graphic description by Ennius of the bright firmament, Jove whom all invoke:—
The evidence of language supporting this idea has been clearly presented by Professor Max Müller. In the first stage, the Sanskrit Dyu (Dyaus), meaning bright sky, is used in such a direct way that it conveys the concept of day, with storms described as moving through it; while Greek and Latin match this clarity with terms like interior, ‘in the open air,’ smooth, ‘well-skied, calm,’ under the open sky, ‘in the open air,’ under the cold sky, ‘under the cold sky,’ and Ennius's vivid description of the bright firmament, Jove whom all call upon:—
In the second stage, Dyaus pitar, Heaven-father, stands in the Veda as consort of Prithivî mâtar, Earth-mother, ranked high or highest among the bright gods. To the Greek he is Ζεὺς πατήρ, the Heaven-father, Zeus the All-seer, the Cloud-compeller, King of Gods and Men. As Max Müller writes: ‘There was nothing that could be told of the sky that was not in some form or other ascribed to Zeus. It was Zeus who rained, who thundered, who snowed, who hailed, who sent the lightning, who gathered the clouds, who let loose the winds, who held the rainbow. It is Zeus who orders the days and nights, the months, seasons, and years. It is he who watches over the fields, who sends rich harvests, and who tends the flocks. Like the sky, Zeus dwells on the highest mountains; like the sky, Zeus embraces the earth; like the sky, Zeus is eternal, unchanging, the highest god. For good and for evil, Zeus the sky and Zeus the god are wedded together in the Greek mind, language triumphing over thought, tradition over religion.’ The same Aryan Heaven-father is Jupiter, in that original 259name and nature which he bore in Rome long before they arrayed him in the borrowed garments of Greek myth, and adapted him to the ideas of classic philosophy.[610] Thus, in nation after nation, took place the great religious development by which the Father-Heaven became the Father in Heaven.
In the second stage, Sky father, Heaven-father, appears in the Veda as the partner of Mother Earth, Earth-mother, recognized as high or the highest among the bright gods. To the Greeks, he is Father Zeus, the Heaven-father, Zeus the All-seer, the Cloud-compeller, King of Gods and Men. As Max Müller writes: ‘Everything that could be said about the sky was somehow attributed to Zeus. He was the one who rained, thundered, snowed, hailed, sent lightning, gathered clouds, unleashed winds, and held the rainbow. He organizes the days and nights, the months, seasons, and years. He oversees the fields, sends abundant harvests, and tends to the flocks. Like the sky, Zeus lives on the highest mountains; like the sky, Zeus surrounds the earth; like the sky, Zeus is eternal, unchanging, the highest god. For both good and evil, Zeus the sky and Zeus the god are intertwined in the Greek perspective, with language prevailing over thought, tradition over religion.’ The same Aryan Heaven-father is Jupiter, in that original 259 name and nature that he held in Rome long before they clothed him in the borrowed attire of Greek myth, adapting him to the ideas of classical philosophy.[610] Thus, across various nations, there was a significant religious evolution where the Father-Heaven became the Father in Heaven.
The Rain-god is most often the Heaven-god exercising a special function, though sometimes taking a more distinctly individual form, or blending in characteristics with a general Water-god. In East Central Africa, the spirit of an old chief dwelling on a cloudy mountain-top may receive the worship of his votaries and send down the refreshing showers in answer to their prayers; among the Damaras the highest deity is Omakuru the Rain-giver, who dwells in the far North; while to the negro of West Africa the Heaven-god is the rain-giver, and may pass in name into the rain itself.[611] Pachacamac, the Peruvian world-creator, has set the Rain-goddess to pour waters over the land, and send down hail and snow.[612] The Aztec Tlaloc was no doubt originally a Heaven-god, for he holds the thunder and lightning, but he has taken especially the attributes of Water-god and Rain-god; and so in Nicaragua the Rain-god Quiateot (Aztec quiahuitl = rain, teotl = god) to whom children were sacrificed to bring rain, shows his larger celestial nature by being also sender of thunder and lightning.[613] The Rain-god of the Khonds is Pidzu Pennu, whom the priests and elders propitiate with eggs and arrack and rice and a sheep, and invoke with quaintly pathetic prayers. They tell him how, if he will not give water, the 260land must remain unploughed, the seed will rot in the ground, they and their children and cattle will die of want, the deer and the wild hog will seek other haunts, and then of what avail will it be for the Rain-god to relent, how little any gift of water will avail, when there shall be left neither man, nor cattle, nor seed; so let him, resting on the sky, pour waters down upon them through his sieve, till the deer are drowned out of the forest and take refuge in the houses, till the soil of the mountains is washed into the valleys, till the cooking-pots burst with the force of the swelling rice, till the beasts gather so plentifully in the green and favoured land, that men’s axes shall be blunted with cutting up the game.[614] With perfect meteorological fitness, the Kol tribes of Bengal consider their great deity Marang Buru, Great Mountain, to be the Rain-god. Marang Buru, one of the most conspicuous hills of the plateau near Lodmah in Chota-Nagpur, is the deity himself or his dwelling. Before the rains come on, the women climb the hill, led by the wives of the pahans, with girls drumming, to carry offerings of milk and bel-leaves, which are put on the flat rock at the top. Then the wives of the pahans kneel with loosened hair and invoke the deity, beseeching him to give the crops seasonable rain. They shake their heads violently as they reiterate this prayer, till they work themselves into a frenzy, and the movement becomes involuntary. They go on thus wildly gesticulating, till a cloud is seen; then they rise, take the drums, and dance the kurrun on the rock, till Marang Buru’s response to their prayer is heard in the distant rumbling of thunder, and they go home rejoicing. They must go fasting to the mount, and stay there till there is ‘a sound of abundance of rain,’ when they get them down to eat and drink. It is said that the rain always comes before evening, but the old women appear to choose their own moment for beginning the fast.[615] It was to Ukko the 261Heaven-god, that in old days the Finn turned with such prayers:—
The Rain-god is usually the God of Heaven performing a specific role, but sometimes he takes on a more unique form or merges traits with a general Water-god. In East Central Africa, the spirit of a former chief living on a cloudy mountaintop might be worshiped by his followers and send down refreshing rain in response to their prayers. Among the Damaras, the top deity is Omakuru the Rain-giver, who resides in the far North. In West Africa, the God of Heaven is the rain-giver and may even be referred to as the rain itself.[611] Pachacamac, the creator of the Peruvian world, has assigned the Rain-goddess to pour water over the land and deliver hail and snow.[612] The Aztec Tlaloc was likely originally a God of Heaven, as he commands thunder and lightning, but he especially embodies the characteristics of a Water-god and Rain-god. Similarly, in Nicaragua, the Rain-god Quiateot (Aztec quiahuitl = rain, teotl = god), to whom children were sacrificed to ensure rain, also demonstrates a broader celestial nature by being a source of thunder and lightning.[613] The Rain-god of the Khonds is Pidzu Pennu, whom the priests and elders appease with eggs, arrack, rice, and a sheep, invoking him with oddly heartfelt prayers. They explain that if he withholds water, the land will remain unplowed, the seeds will rot in the ground, and both they and their children and cattle will face starvation. The deer and wild hog will flee to other places, and then what good will it do if the Rain-god shows mercy? Any amount of water will be useless when there are no people, animals, or seeds left. Therefore, let him, resting in the sky, pour down water through his sieve until the deer are driven out of the forest and seek shelter in the homes, until the mountain soil washes down to the valleys, until the cooking pots overflow with rice, and until animals gather so abundantly in the rich land that men's axes become dull from cutting up the game.[614] Perfectly aligned with meteorological reality, the Kol tribes of Bengal view their major deity Marang Buru, Great Mountain, as the Rain-god. Marang Buru, one of the most prominent hills of the plateau near Lodmah in Chota-Nagpur, is either the deity himself or his dwelling. Before the rains arrive, women climb the hill, led by the wives of the pahans, with girls drumming along, carrying offerings of milk and bel-leaves, which are placed on the flat rock at the top. Then, the wives of the pahans kneel with their hair undone and invoke the deity, pleading with him to provide the crops with timely rain. They shake their heads vigorously as they repeat this prayer until they enter a trance-like state, with their movements becoming involuntary. They continue to gesture wildly until a cloud appears; then they stand up, take the drums, and dance the kurrun on the rock, celebrating when they hear Marang Buru's response in the distant rumble of thunder, returning home filled with joy. They must make the climb fasting and stay there until they hear 'the sound of abundance of rain,' after which they can eat and drink. It is said that the rain always falls before evening, but the older women seem to pick their own moment to start the fast.[615] It was to Ukko the 261Heaven-god that the Finns traditionally turned with their prayers:—
Quite like this were the classic conceptions of Ζεὺς ὑέτιος Jupiter Pluvius. They are typified in the famous Athenian prayer recorded by Marcus Aurelius, ‘Rain, rain, O dear Zeus, on the plough-lands of the Athenians, and the plains!’[617] and in Petronius Arbiter’s complaint of the irreligion of his times, that now no one thinks heaven is heaven, no one keeps a fast, no one cares a hair for Jove, but all men with closed eyes reckon up their goods. Afore-time the ladies walked up the hill in their stoles with bare feet and loosened hair and pure minds, and entreated Jove for water; then all at once it rained bucketsfull, then or never, and they all went home wet as drowned rats.[618] In later ages, when drought parched the fields of the mediæval husbandman, he transferred to other patrons the functions of the Rain-god, and with procession and litany sought help from St. Peter or St. James, or, with more of mythological consistency, from the Queen of Heaven. As for ourselves, we have lived to see the time when men shrink from addressing even to Supreme Deity the old customary rain-prayers, for the rainfall is passing from the region of the supernatural, to join the tides and seasons in the realm of physical science.
Just like the classic ideas of Zeus the Rain-Bringer Jupiter Rainmaker, they are captured in the well-known Athenian prayer recorded by Marcus Aurelius: ‘Rain, rain, O dear Zeus, on the plough-lands of the Athenians, and the plains!’[617] and in Petronius Arbiter’s lament about the lack of piety in his time, where no one believes heaven is divine, nobody fasts, and no one cares about Jove, while everyone with closed eyes counts their possessions. In earlier times, women would ascend the hill in their stoles with bare feet, loose hair, and pure hearts, pleading with Jove for rain; then suddenly it would pour down, like never before, and they would all return home soaked to the skin.[618] In later periods, when drought dried up the fields of medieval farmers, they turned to different patrons for help, seeking assistance from St. Peter or St. James, or, more mythologically consistent, from the Queen of Heaven. As for us, we have reached a point where people hesitate to even offer the old customary prayers for rain to the Supreme Deity, as rainfall shifts from being viewed as supernatural to becoming part of the natural scientific understanding of tides and seasons.
262The place of the Thunder-god in polytheistic religion is similar to that of the Rain-god, in many cases even to entire coincidence. But his character is rather of wrath than of beneficence, a character which we have half lost the power to realize, since the agonizing terror of the thunderstorm which appals savage minds has dwindled away in ours, now that we behold in it not the manifestation of divine wrath, but the restoration of electric equilibrium. North American tribes, as the Mandans, heard in the thunder and saw in the lightning the clapping wings and flashing eyes of that awful heaven-bird which belongs to, or even is, the Great Manitu himself.[619] The Dacotas could show at a place called Thunder-tracks, near the source of the St. Peter’s River, the footprints of the thunder-bird five and twenty miles apart. It is to be noticed that these Sioux, among their varied fancies about thunder-birds and the like, give unusually well a key to the great thunderbolt-myth which recurs in so many lands. They consider the lightning entering the ground to scatter there in all directions thunderbolt-stones, which are flints, &c., their reason for this notion being the very rational one, that these siliceous stones actually produce a flash when struck.[620] In an account of certain Carib deities, who were men and are now stars, occurs the name of Savacou, who was changed into a great bird; he is captain of the hurricane and thunder, he blows fire through a tube and that is lightning, he gives the great rain. Rochefort describes the effect of a thunderstorm on the partly Europeanized Caribs of the West Indies two centuries ago. When they perceive its approach, he says, they quickly betake themselves to their cabins, and range themselves in the kitchen on their little seats near the fire; hiding their faces and leaning their heads in their hands and on their knees, they fall to weeping and lamenting in their jargon ‘Maboya mouche fache contre Caraïbe,’ i.e., 263Maboya (the evil demon) is very angry with the Caribs. This they say also when there comes a hurricane, not leaving off this dismal exercise till it is over, and there is no end to their astonishment that the Christians on these occasions manifest no such affliction and fear.[621] The Tupi tribes of Brazil are an example of a race among whom the Thunder or the Thunderer, Tupan, flapping his celestial wings and flashing with celestial light, was developed into the very representative of highest deity, whose name still stands among their Christian descendants as the equivalent of God.[622] In Peru, a mighty and far-worshipped deity was Catequil the Thunder-god, child of the Heaven-god, he who set free the Indian race from out of the ground by turning it up with his golden spade, he who in thunder-flash and clap hurls from his sling the small round smooth thunderstones, treasured in the villages as fire-fetishes and charms to kindle the flames of love. How distinct in personality and high in rank was the Thunder and Lightning (Chuqui yllayllapa) in the religion of the Incas, may be judged from his huaca or fetish-idol standing on the bench beside the idols of the Creator and the Sun at the great Solar festival in Cuzco, when the beasts to be sacrificed were led round them, and the priests prayed thus: ‘O Creator, and Sun, and Thunder, be for ever young! do not grow old. Let all things be at peace! let the people multiply, and their food, and let all other things continue to increase.’[623]
262The role of the Thunder-god in polytheistic religions is often similar to that of the Rain-god, and in many cases, they are even identical. However, the Thunder-god's nature leans more toward wrath than kindness—a perspective that's harder for us to grasp today. The intense fear of thunderstorms that once terrified primitive cultures has faded for us; we now see it not as a sign of divine anger, but as a natural electrical balance. North American tribes like the Mandans listened to the thunder and saw the lightning as the wings and eyes of a terrifying bird from the sky, which they believed belonged to, or was, the Great Manitu himself.[619] The Dacotas pointed to a location called Thunder-tracks, near the source of the St. Peter’s River, where the footprints of the thunderbird were found twenty-five miles apart. Notably, these Sioux, amidst their various beliefs about thunderbirds, provide a clear insight into the widespread thunderbolt myth found in many cultures. They believe that when lightning strikes the ground, it spreads thunderbolt-stones—things like flints—everywhere. Their reasoning, quite rational, is that these siliceous stones create a spark when struck.[620] In a description of certain Carib deities who were once men but are now stars, there is a god named Savacou, transformed into a great bird; he commands hurricanes and thunder, blows fire through a tube—which is lightning—and brings heavy rain. Rochefort writes about how a thunderstorm affected the partially Europeanized Caribs of the West Indies two centuries ago. When they sensed it approaching, he says, they quickly rushed to their cabins and huddled together in the kitchen by the fire; covering their faces and leaning their heads in their hands and on their knees, they wept and lamented, saying in their language, ‘Maboya mouche fache contre Caraïbe,’ meaning, Maboya (the evil demon) is very angry with the Caribs. They express this same sentiment when a hurricane comes, not stopping their grieving until it passes, and they remain bewildered by the fact that Christians do not show the same level of distress and fear.[621] The Tupi tribes of Brazil exemplify a culture where the Thunder or Thunderer, Tupan, with his heavenly wings and celestial light, became the ultimate representation of the highest deity, his name still recognized among their Christian descendants as equivalent to God.[622] In Peru, a powerful and widely revered deity was Catequil the Thunder-god, son of the Heaven-god, who freed the Indian race from the earth using his golden spade. He was known for sending down the smooth thunderstones from his sling, which were treasured in villages as fire charms and love tokens. The distinct personality and high status of Thunder and Lightning (Chuqui yllayllapa) in Inca religion can be seen from his huaca or fetish-idol positioned alongside the idols of the Creator and the Sun during the grand Solar festival in Cuzco, when the sacrificial animals were paraded around them, and the priests prayed: ‘O Creator, and Sun, and Thunder, remain forever young! Do not grow old. Let all things be at peace! May the people and their food multiply, and may all other things continue to flourish.’[623]
In Africa, we may contrast the Zulu, who perceives in thunder and lightning the direct action of Heaven or Heaven’s lord, with the Yoruba, who assigns them not to Olorun the Lord of Heaven, but to a lower deity, Shango the Thunder-god, whom they call also Dzakuta the Stone-caster, for it is he who (as among so many other peoples 264who have forgotten their Stone Age) flings down from heaven the stone hatchets which are found in the ground, and preserved as sacred objects.[624] In the religion of the Kamchadals, Billukai, the hem of whose garment is the rainbow, dwells in the clouds with many spirits, and sends thunder and lightning and rain.[625] Among the Ossetes of the Caucasus the Thunderer is Ilya, in whose name mythologists trace a Christian tradition of Elijah, whose fiery chariot seems indeed to have been elsewhere identified with that of the Thunder-god, while the highest peak of Ægina, once the seat of Pan-hellenic Zeus, is now called Mount St. Elias. Among certain Moslem schismatics, it is even the historical Ali, cousin of Mohammed, who is enthroned in the clouds, where the thunder is his voice, and the lightning the lash wherewith he smites the wicked.[626] Among the Turanian or Tatar race, the European branch shows most distinctly the figure of the Thunder-god. To the Lapps, Tiermes appears to have been the Heaven-god, especially conceived as Aija the Thunder-god; of old they thought the Thunder (Aija) to be a living being, hovering in the air and hearkening to the talk of men, smiting such as spoke of him in an unseemly way; or, as some said, the Thunder-god is the foe of sorcerers, whom he drives from heaven and smites, and then it is that men hear in thunder-peals the hurtling of his arrows, as he speeds them from his bow, the Rainbow. In Finnish poetry, likewise, Ukko the Heaven-god is portrayed with such attributes. The Runes call him Thunderer, he speaks through the clouds, his fiery shirt is the lurid storm-cloud, men talk of his stones and his hammer, he flashes his fiery sword and it lightens, or he draws his mighty rainbow, Ukko’s bow, to shoot his fiery copper arrows, wherewith men would invoke him to 265smite their enemies. Or when it is dark in his heavenly house he strikes fire, and that is lightning. To this day the Finlanders call a thunderstorm an ‘ukko,’ or an ‘ukkonen,’ that is, ‘a little ukko,’ and when it lightens they say, ‘There is Ukko striking fire!’[627]
In Africa, we can compare the Zulu, who sees thunder and lightning as the direct action of Heaven or its lord, with the Yoruba, who attribute these phenomena not to Olorun, the Lord of Heaven, but to a lesser deity, Shango the Thunder-god, also known as Dzakuta the Stone-caster. He is the one who (like many other cultures 264 that have forgotten their Stone Age) throws down stone tools from heaven, which are found in the ground and preserved as sacred items.[624] In the Kamchadal religion, Billukai, who is associated with the rainbow, lives in the clouds with many spirits and sends thunder, lightning, and rain.[625] Among the Ossetes of the Caucasus, the Thunderer is Ilya, whose name is linked by mythologists to the Christian Elijah, whose fiery chariot has also been identified with that of the Thunder-god. The highest peak of Ægina, once home to the Pan-hellenic Zeus, is now called Mount St. Elias. Among certain Muslim sects, it is even the historical Ali, cousin of Mohammed, who reigns in the clouds, where thunder is his voice and lightning is the whip with which he punishes the wicked.[626] Among the Turanian or Tatar race, the European branch clearly shows the figure of the Thunder-god. For the Lapps, Tiermes is seen as the Heaven-god, especially identified as Aija the Thunder-god; they believed that Thunder (Aija) was a living being, floating in the air and listening to people's conversations, punishing those who spoke of him disrespectfully. Others claimed that the Thunder-god is an enemy of sorcerers, driving them from the skies and striking them down. This is when people hear the howling of his arrows in thunderclaps, as he sends them flying from his bow, the Rainbow. Finnish poetry also describes Ukko the Heaven-god with similar characteristics. The Runes refer to him as the Thunderer; he communicates through the clouds, his fiery cloak is the storm-cloud, people talk about his stones and hammer, he flashes his fiery sword, and it lights up the sky, or he draws his powerful rainbow, Ukko’s bow, to shoot his fiery copper arrows, with which people call upon him to 265strike down their enemies. When it’s dark in his heavenly abode, he ignites fire, which is lightning. Even today, the Finns call a thunderstorm an ‘ukko’ or ‘ukkonen,’ meaning ‘little ukko,’ and when lightning occurs, they say, ‘There is Ukko striking fire!’[627]
What is the Aryan conception of the Thunder-god, but a poetic elaboration of thoughts inherited from the savage state through which the primitive Aryans had passed? The Hindu Thunder-god is the Heaven-god Indra, Indra’s bow is the rainbow, Indra hurls the thunderbolts, he smites his enemies, he smites the dragon-clouds, and the rain pours down on earth, and the sun shines forth again. The Veda is full of Indra’s glories: ‘Now will I sing the feats of Indra, which he of the thunderbolt did of old. He smote Ahi, then he poured forth the waters; he divided the rivers of the mountains. He smote Ahi by the mountain; Tvashtar forged for him the glorious bolt.’—‘Whet, O strong Indra, the heavy strong red weapon against the enemies!’—‘May the axe (the thunderbolt) appear with the light; may the red one blaze forth bright with splendour!’—‘When Indra hurls again and again his thunderbolt, then they believe in the brilliant god.’ Nor is Indra merely a great god in the ancient Vedic pantheon, he is the very patron-deity of the invading Aryan race in India, to whose help they look in their conflicts with the dark-skinned tribes of the land. ‘Destroying the Dasyus, Indra protected the Aryan colour’—‘Indra protected in battle the Aryan worshipper, he subdued the lawless for Manu, he conquered the black skin.’[628] This Hindu Indra is the offspring of Dyaus the Heaven. But in the Greek religion, Zeus is himself Zeus Kerauneios, the wielder of the thunderbolt, and thunders from the cloud-capped tops of Ida or Olympos. In like manner the Jupiter Capitolinus of Rome is himself Jupiter Tonans:
What is the Aryan view of the Thunder-god, if not a poetic expansion of ideas passed down from the primitive stage experienced by early Aryans? The Hindu Thunder-god is Indra, the god of the sky. Indra’s bow is the rainbow, he throws thunderbolts, he strikes down his foes, he rends the dragon-clouds, and then the rain falls on earth while the sun shines again. The Veda is filled with Indra’s achievements: ‘Now I will sing about the feats of Indra, who wielded the thunderbolt long ago. He defeated Ahi, then he released the waters; he separated the mountain rivers. He struck Ahi by the mountain; Tvashtar crafted the glorious bolt for him.’—‘Sharpen, O powerful Indra, the heavy and strong red weapon against our enemies!’—‘Let the axe (the thunderbolt) appear with the light; let the red one blaze brightly with brilliance!’—‘When Indra hurls his thunderbolt again and again, they believe in the radiant god.’ Indra isn't just a major deity in the ancient Vedic pantheon; he is the very patron god of the invading Aryan race in India, whom they rely on during their battles with the dark-skinned tribes of the land. ‘By destroying the Dasyus, Indra safeguarded the Aryan race’—‘Indra protected the Aryan worshipper in battle, he subdued the lawless for Manu, he overcame those with dark skin.’[628] This Hindu Indra is the child of Dyaus the Sky. In Greek religion, Zeus is himself Zeus Kerauneios, the wielder of the thunderbolt, thundering from the cloud-covered peaks of Ida or Olympus. Similarly, the Jupiter Capitolinus of Rome is Jupiter Tonans:
Thus, also, it was in accurate language that the old Slavonic nations were described as adoring Jupiter Tonans as their highest god. He was the cloud-dwelling Heaven-god, his weapon the thunder-bolt, the lightning-flash, his name Perun the Smiter (Perkun, Perkunas). In the Lithuanian district, the thunder itself is Perkun; in past times the peasant would cry when he heard the thunder peal ‘Dewe Perkune apsaugog mus!—God Perkun spare us!’ and to this day he says, ‘Perkunas gravja!—Perkun is thundering!’ or ‘Wezzajs barrahs!—the Old One growls!’[630] The old German and Scandinavian theology made Thunder, Donar, Thor, a special deity to rule the clouds and rain, and hurl his crushing hammer through the air. He reigned high in the Saxon heaven, till the days came when the Christian convert had to renounce him in solemn form, ‘ec forsacho Thunare!—I forsake Thunder!’ Now, his survival is for the most part in mere verbal form, in the etymology of such names as Donnersberg, Thorwaldsen, Thursday.[631]
Thus, it was accurately stated that the ancient Slavic nations worshipped Jupiter Tonans as their highest god. He was the sky god who lived among the clouds, wielding the thunderbolt as his weapon; his name was Perun the Smiter (Perkun, Perkunas). In the Lithuanian region, thunder itself is Perkun; in the past, when peasants heard the thunder rumble, they would cry, "Dewe Perkune apsaugog mus!—God Perkun spare us!" and to this day, they say, "Perkunas gravja!—Perkun is thundering!" or "Wezzajs barrahs!—the Old One growls!"[630] The ancient German and Scandinavian beliefs recognized Thunder, Donar, Thor, as a specific deity controlling the clouds and rain, throwing his powerful hammer through the sky. He was highly regarded in Saxon heaven until the time came when Christian converts had to formally renounce him, saying, "ec forsacho Thunare!—I forsake Thunder!" Now, his legacy mostly exists in language, seen in the etymology of names like Donnersberg, Thorwaldsen, and Thursday.[631]
In the polytheism of the lower as of the higher races, the Wind-gods are no unknown figures. The Winds themselves, and especially the Four Winds in their four regions, take name and shape as personal divinities, while some deity of wider range, a Wind-god, Storm-god, Air-god, or the mighty Heaven-god himself, may stand as compeller or controller of breeze and gale and tempest. We have already taken as examples from the Algonquin mythology of North America the four winds whose native legends have been versified in ‘Hiawatha;’ Mudjekeewis the West Wind, Father of the Winds of Heaven, and his children, Wabun the East Wind, the morning-bringer, the lazy Shawondasse the South Wind, the wild and cruel North 267Wind, the fierce Kabibonokka. Viewed in their religious aspect, these mighty beings correspond with four of the great manitus sacrificed to among the Delawares, the West, South, East, and North; while the Iroquois acknowledged a deity of larger grasp, Gäoh, the Spirit of the Winds, who holds them prisoned in the mountains in the Home of the Winds.[632] The Polynesian Wind-gods are thus described by Ellis: ‘The chief of these were Veromatautoru and Tairibu, brother and sister to the children of Taaroa, their dwelling was near the great rock, which was the foundation of the world. Hurricanes, tempests, and all destructive winds, were supposed to be confined within them, and were employed by them to punish such as neglected the worship of the gods. In stormy weather their compassion was sought by the tempest-driven mariner at sea, or the friends of such on shore. Liberal presents, it was supposed, would at any time purchase a calm. If the first failed, subsequent ones were certain of success. The same means were resorted to for procuring a storm, but with less certainty. Whenever the inhabitants of one island heard of invasion from those of another, they immediately carried large offerings to these deities, and besought them to destroy by tempest the hostile fleet whenever it might put to sea. Some of the most intelligent people still think evil spirits had formerly great power over the winds, as they say there have been no such fearful storms since they abolished idolatry, as there were before.’ Or, again, the great deity Maui adds a new complication to his enigmatic solar-celestial character by appearing as a Wind-God. In Tahiti he was identified with the East Wind; in New Zealand he holds all the winds but the west in his hands, or he imprisons them with great stones rolled to the mouths of their caves, save the West Wind 268which he cannot catch or prison, so that it almost always blows.[633] To the Kamchadal, it is Billukai the Heaven-god who comes down and drives his sledge on earth, and men see his traces in the wind-drifted snow.[634] To the Finn, while there are traces of subordinate Wind-gods in his mythology, the great ruler of wind and storm is Ukko the Heaven-god;[635] while the Esth looked rather to Tuule-ema, Wind’s Mother, and when the gale shrieks he will still say ‘Wind’s mother wails, who knows what mothers shall wail next.’[636] Such instances from Allophylian mythology[637] show types which are found developed in full vigour by the Aryan races. In the Vedic hymns, the Storm Gods, the Maruts, borne along with the fury of the boisterous winds, with the rain-clouds distribute showers over the earth, make darkness during the day, rend the trees and devour the forests like wild elephants.[638] No effort of the Red Indian’s personifying fancy in the tales of the dancing Pauppuk-keewis the Whirlwind, or that fierce and shifty hero, Manabozho the North-West Wind, can more than match the description in the Iliad, of Achilles calling on Boreas and Zephyros with libations and vows of sacrifice, to blow into a blaze the funeral pyre of Patroklos—
In the polytheism of both lower and higher races, the Wind gods are well-known figures. The Winds themselves, especially the Four Winds in their respective regions, take on names and forms as personal deities. Additionally, a deity with a broader scope, such as a Wind-god, Storm-god, Air-god, or the powerful Heaven-god, may act as the ruler or master of gentle breezes, fierce gales, and violent storms. We have previously referenced examples from Algonquin mythology in North America: the four winds whose native legends have been transformed into verses in ‘Hiawatha’; Mudjekeewis the West Wind, Father of the Winds of Heaven, and his offspring, Wabun the East Wind, the morning-bringer, the laid-back Shawondasse the South Wind, and the wild and cruel North Wind, known as Kabibonokka. In a religious context, these powerful beings correspond to four of the major manitus revered among the Delawares, namely the West, South, East, and North Winds. Meanwhile, the Iroquois recognized a more encompassing deity, Gäoh, the Spirit of the Winds, who keeps them contained in the mountains, in the Home of the Winds.[632] The Polynesian Wind-gods are described by Ellis as follows: "The chief among them were Veromatautoru and Tairibu, siblings of the children of Taaroa, residing near the great rock that was the foundation of the world. Hurricanes, tempests, and all destructive winds were believed to be trapped within them and used to punish those who neglected the worship of the gods. During stormy weather, sailors at sea or their friends on land sought their compassion. It was thought that generous offerings could ensure calm weather at any time. If the first attempt failed, subsequent offerings were certain to succeed. The same methods were used to summon a storm, although with less reliability. Whenever people on one island learned of an impending invasion from another, they rushed to offer large gifts to these deities, pleading for them to unleash tempests on the attacking ships as they set sail. Some of the more knowledgeable people still believe that evil spirits once had significant control over the winds, asserting that there haven’t been as many terrifying storms since the end of idolatry as there were before." Additionally, the great deity Maui complicates his already mysterious solar-celestial role by appearing as a Wind-God. In Tahiti, he was associated with the East Wind; in New Zealand, he controlled all the winds except for the west, which he couldn't catch or imprison, allowing it to blow almost continually.[633] To the Kamchadal, it is Billukai the Heaven-god who descends to Earth and drives his sledge, leaving traces visible in the snow blown by the wind.[634] To the Finns, although there are indications of lesser Wind-gods in their mythology, the supreme ruler of wind and storm is Ukko the Heaven-god;[635] whereas the Estonians looked more to Tuule-ema, the Wind’s Mother, and when the wind howls, they still say, "Wind’s mother wails; who knows what mothers will wail next?"[636] These examples from Allophylian mythology[637] reveal themes that are fully developed among the Aryan races. In the Vedic hymns, the Storm Gods, the Maruts, driven by the fierce winds and accompanied by rain-clouds, shower the earth with rain, cast darkness during the day, tear apart trees, and consume forests like wild elephants.[638] No creativity of the Red Indian’s imagination in tales of the dancing Pauppuk-keewis the Whirlwind or the fierce and unpredictable hero Manabozho the North-West Wind can match the depiction in the Iliad, where Achilles calls upon Boreas and Zephyros with offerings and vows of sacrifice, urging them to ignite the funeral pyre of Patroklos—
269Æolus with the winds imprisoned in his cave has the office of the Red Indian Spirit of the Winds, and of the Polynesian Maui. With quaint adaptation to nature-myth and even to moral parable, the Harpies, the Storm-gusts that whirl and snatch and dash and smirch with eddying dust-clouds, become the loathsome bird-monsters sent to hover over the table of Phineus to claw and defile his dainty viands.[639] If we are to choose an Aryan Storm-god for ideal grandeur, we must seek him in
269 Æolus, who keeps the winds locked away in his cave, serves a role similar to the Red Indian Spirit of the Winds and the Polynesian Maui. With an interesting twist on nature mythology and even moral lessons, the Harpies—those storm winds that whip around, snatch things up, and cover everything in swirling dust—transform into the disgusting bird-monsters that circle over Phineus's table, ready to claw and ruin his delicate dishes.[639] If we’re looking for an ideal Aryan Storm-god with true magnificence, we should look to
Jakob Grimm has defined Odin or Woden as ‘the all-penetrating creative and formative power.’ But such abstract conceptions can hardly be ascribed to his barbaric worshippers. As little may his real nature be discovered among the legends which degrade him to a historical king of Northern men, an ‘Othinus rex.’ See the All-father sitting cloud-mantled on his heaven-seat, overlooking the deeds of men, and we may discern in him the attributes of the Heaven-god. Hear the peasant say of the raging tempest, that it is ‘Odin faring by;’ trace the mythological transition from Woden’s tempest to the ‘Wütende Heer,’ the ‘Wild Huntsman’ of our own grand storm-myth, and we shall recognize the old Teutonic deity in his function of cloud-compeller, of Tempest-god.[640] The ‘rude Carinthian boor’ can show a relic from a yet more primitive stage of mental history, when he sets up a wooden bowl of various meats on a tree before his house, to fodder the wind that it may do no harm. In Swabia, Tyrol, and the Upper Palatinate, when the storm rages, they will fling a spoonful or a handful of meal in the face of the gale, with this formula in the last-named district, ‘Da Wind, hast du Mehl für dein Kind, aber aufhören musst du!’[641]
Jakob Grimm described Odin, or Woden, as ‘the all-penetrating creative and formative power.’ But such abstract ideas are hardly fitting for his primitive worshippers. Likewise, his true nature can’t be fully understood through the legends that reduce him to a historical king of the North, an ‘Othinus rex.’ Picture the All-father sitting, shrouded in clouds on his throne in the sky, observing the actions of humanity, and we can see the qualities of a Heaven-god in him. Listen to the peasant who attributes the fierce storm to ‘Odin passing by;’ trace the mythological evolution from Woden’s storm to the ‘Wütende Heer,’ the ‘Wild Huntsman’ in our own great storm-myth, and we’ll recognize the ancient Teutonic deity in his role as cloud-caller, the Tempest-god.[640] The ‘simple Carinthian peasant’ can reflect an even earlier stage of mental development when he places a wooden bowl filled with various foods on a tree in front of his house to feed the wind so it may not cause harm. In Swabia, Tyrol, and the Upper Palatinate, when storms rage, people will throw a spoonful or a handful of flour into the wind while reciting this formula in the last area mentioned, ‘Da Wind, hast du Mehl für dein Kind, aber aufhören musst du!’[641]
270The Earth-deity takes an important place in polytheistic religion. The Algonquins would sing medicine-songs to Mesukkummik Okwi, the Earth, the Great-Grandmother of all. In her charge (and she must be ever at home in her lodge) are left the animals whose flesh and skins are man’s food and clothing, and the roots and medicines of sovereign power to heal sickness and kill game in time of hunger; therefore good Indians never dig up the roots of which their medicines are made, without depositing an offering in the earth for Mesukkummik Okwi.[642] In the list of fetish-deities of Peruvian tribes, the Earth, adored as Mamapacha, Mother Earth, took high subordinate rank below Sun and Moon in the pantheon of the Incas, and at harvest-time ground corn and libations of chicha were offered to her that she might grant a good harvest.[643] Her rank is similar in the Aquapim theology of West Africa; first the Highest God in the firmament, then the Earth as universal mother, then the fetish. The negro, offering his libation before some great undertaking, thus calls upon the triad: ‘Creator, come drink! Earth, come drink! Bosumbra, come drink!’[644]
270The Earth deity plays a crucial role in polytheistic religions. The Algonquins would sing medicine songs to Mesukkummik Okwi, the Earth, the Great-Grandmother of all. She is responsible for the animals that provide flesh and skins for food and clothing, as well as the roots and medicines that hold the power to heal sickness and provide sustenance during times of hunger; therefore, good Indigenous people never dig up the roots used for their medicines without making an offering to the Earth for Mesukkummik Okwi.[642] In the list of deities worshipped by Peruvian tribes, the Earth, honored as Mamapacha, Mother Earth, holds a significant position below the Sun and Moon in the Inca pantheon, and at harvest time, ground corn and chicha were offered to her to ensure a good harvest.[643] Her status is similar in the Aquapim theology of West Africa; first the Highest God in the heavens, then the Earth as the universal mother, followed by the fetish. When a person makes an offering before a major endeavor, they call upon the triad: ‘Creator, come drink! Earth, come drink! Bosumbra, come drink!’[644]
Among the indigenes of India, the Bygah tribes of Seonee show a well-marked worship of the Earth. They call her ‘Mother Earth’ or Dhurteemah, and before praying or eating their food, which is looked on always as a daily sacrifice, they invariably offer some of it to the earth, before using the name of any other god.[645] Of all religions of the world, perhaps that of the Khonds of Orissa gives the Earth-goddess her most remarkable place and function. Boora Pennu or Bella Pennu, the Light-god or Sun-god, created Tari Pennu the Earth-goddess for his 271consort, and from them were born the other great gods. But strife arose between the mighty parents, and it became the wife’s work to thwart the good creation of her husband, and to cause all physical and moral ill. Thus to the Sun-worshipping sect she stands abhorred on the bad eminence of the Evil Deity. But her own sect, the Earth-worshipping sect, seem to hold ideas of her nature which are more primitive and genuine. The functions which they ascribe to her, and the rites with which they propitiate her, display her as the Earth-mother, raised by an intensely agricultural race to an extreme height of divinity. It was she who with drops of her blood made the soft muddy ground harden into firm earth; thus men learnt to offer human victims, and the whole earth became firm; the pastures and ploughed fields came into use, and there were cattle and sheep and poultry for man’s service; hunting began, and there were iron and ploughshares and harrows and axes, and the juice of the palm-tree; and love arose between the sons and daughters of the people, making new households, and society with its relations of father and mother, and wife and child, and the bonds between ruler and subject. It was the Khond Earth-goddess who was propitiated with those hideous sacrifices, the suppression of which is matter of recent Indian history. With dances and drunken orgies, and a mystery play to explain in dramatic dialogue the purpose of the rite, the priest offered Tari Pennu her sacrifice, and prayed for children and cattle and poultry and brazen pots and all wealth; every man and woman wished a wish, and they tore the slave-victim piecemeal, and spread the morsels over the fields they were to fertilize.[646] In Northern Asia, also, among the Tatar races, the office of the Earth-deity is strongly and widely marked. Thus in the nature-worship of the Tunguz and Buraets, Earth stands among the greater divinities. It is especially interesting to notice among the Finns a transition like that just observed from the god 272Heaven to the Heaven-god. In the designation of Maaemä, Earth-mother, given to the earth itself, there may be traced survival from the stage of direct nature-worship, while the passage to the conception of a divine being inhabiting and ruling the material substance, is marked by the use of the name Maan emo, Earth’s mother, for the ancient subterranean goddess whom men would ask to make the grass shoot thick and the thousandfold ears mount high, or might even entreat to rise in person out of the earth to give them strength. The analogy of other mythologies agrees with the definition of the divine pair who reign in Finn theology: as Ukko the Grandfather is the Heaven-god, so his spouse Akka the Grandmother is the Earth-goddess.[647] Thus in the ancient nature-worship of China, the personal Earth holds a place below the Heaven. Tien and Tu are closely associated in the national rites, and the idea of the pair as universal parents, if not an original conception in Chinese theology, is at any rate developed in Chinese classic symbolism. Heaven and Earth receive their solemn sacrifices not at the hands of common mortals but of the Son of Heaven, the Emperor, and his great vassals and mandarins. Yet their adoration is national; they are worshipped by the people who offer incense to them on the hill-tops at their autumn festival, they are adored by successful candidates in competitive examination; and, especially and appropriately, the prostration of bride and bridegroom before the father and mother of all things, the ‘worshipping of Heaven and Earth,’ is the all-important ceremony of a Chinese marriage.[648]
Among the indigenous people of India, the Bygah tribes of Seonee have a strong reverence for the Earth. They refer to her as ‘Mother Earth’ or Dhurteemah, and before praying or eating their food—which they always view as a daily sacrifice—they consistently offer a portion of it to the earth, before invoking any other deities.[645] Of all the religions around the world, the Khonds of Orissa perhaps give the Earth-goddess the most significant role. Boora Pennu or Bella Pennu, the Light-god or Sun-god, created Tari Pennu the Earth-goddess as his consort, and from them came the other major gods. However, conflict arose between these powerful parents, and it became the wife's role to undermine her husband's good creation, leading to all kinds of physical and moral troubles. Thus, to the Sun-worshipping sect, she is reviled as a malevolent deity. Yet her own followers, the Earth-worshipping sect, seem to hold more primitive and genuine views of her essence. The functions they assign to her and the rituals they perform to appease her illustrate her as the Earth-mother, revered by a deeply agricultural society. It was she who, with drops of her blood, turned the soft muddy ground into solid earth; thus, people learned to offer human sacrifices, making the entire earth solid; the fields became ready for grazing and farming, providing livestock and poultry for human needs; hunting commenced, alongside the creation of iron tools, plows, harrows, and axes, as well as the sap of palm trees; love blossomed between the sons and daughters of the community, forming new families, and establishing society with its roles of parents and children, along with the relationships between rulers and their subjects. It was the Khond Earth-goddess who was honored with those gruesome sacrifices, which have been repressed in recent Indian history. Through dances, drunken festivities, and a mystery play to convey the purpose of the ritual, the priest presented Tari Pennu her offering, praying for children, livestock, poultry, bronze vessels, and all riches; each man and woman made a wish, and they dismembered the sacrificial slave, scattering the pieces over the fields they intended to fertilize.[646] In Northern Asia, among the Tatar peoples, the role of the Earth-deity is distinctly recognized. Similarly, in the nature-worship practices of the Tunguz and Buraets, Earth ranks among the major deities. It is particularly interesting to observe among the Finns a shift similar to the one just mentioned from the god of Heaven to the Heaven-god. The term Maaemä, meaning Earth-mother, refers to the earth itself, suggesting remnants from a stage of direct nature-worship, while the transition to the idea of a divine being residing in and governing the material world is indicated by the name Maan emo, Earth’s mother, which refers to the ancient underground goddess whom people would ask to make grass grow thick and the crops plentiful, or even to rise from the earth herself to grant them strength. The parallels in other mythologies align with the understanding of the divine couple in Finn theology: just as Ukko the Grandfather is the Heaven-god, his partner Akka the Grandmother is the Earth-goddess.[647] In the ancient nature-worship of China, the personal Earth holds a lesser position compared to Heaven. Tien and Tu are closely linked in national rituals, and the concept of this pair as universal parents, while not necessarily original in Chinese theology, is certainly developed in classic Chinese symbolism. Heaven and Earth receive their esteemed sacrifices not from ordinary people but from the Son of Heaven, the Emperor, and his high-ranking vassals and officials. Nevertheless, their worship is national; they are venerated by the populace who offer incense to them on hilltops during autumn festivals, celebrated by successful candidates in competitive exams; and especially significant, the act of bowing before the parents of all things—the ‘worshipping of Heaven and Earth’—is a crucial part of a Chinese wedding ceremony.[648]
The Vedic hymns commemorate the goddess Prithivî, the broad Earth, and in their ancient strophes the modern Brahmans still pray for benefits to mother Earth and father Heaven, side by side:—
The Vedic hymns honor the goddess Prithivî, the vast Earth, and in their ancient verses, the modern Brahmans still pray for blessings to mother Earth and father Heaven, together:—
Greek religion shows a transition to have taken place like that among the Turanian tribes, for the older simpler nature-deity Gaia, Γῆ πάντων μήτηρ, Earth the All-Mother, seems to have faded into the more anthropomorphic Dēmētēr, Earth-Mother, whose eternal fire burned in Mantinēa, and whose temples stood far and wide over the land which she made kindly to the Greek husbandman.[650] The Romans acknowledged her plain identity as Terra Mater, Ops Mater.[651] Tacitus could rightly recognize this deity of his own land among German tribes, worshippers of ‘Nerthum (or, Hertham), id est Terram matrem,’ Mother Earth, whose holy grove stood in an ocean isle, whose chariot drawn by cows passed through the land making a season of peace and joy, till the goddess, satiated with mortal conversation, was taken back by her priest to her temple, and the chariot and garments and even the goddess herself were washed in a secret lake, which forthwith swallowed up the ministering slaves—‘hence a mysterious terror and sacred ignorance, what that should be which only the doomed to perish might behold.’[652] If in these modern days we seek in Europe traces of Earth-worship, we may find them in curiously distinct survival in Germany, if no longer in the Christmas food-offerings buried in and for the earth up to early in this century,[653] at any rate among Gypsy hordes. Dewel, the great god in heaven (dewa, deus), is rather feared than loved by these weatherbeaten outcasts, for he harms them on their wanderings with his thunder and lightning, his snow and rain, and his stars interfere with their dark doings. Therefore they curse him foully when misfortune falls on them, and when a child dies, they say that Dewel has eaten it. But Earth, Mother of all good, 274self-existing from the beginning, is to them holy, so holy that they take heed never to let the drinking-cup touch the ground, for it would become too sacred to be used by men.[654]
Greek religion shows a transition similar to that among the Turanian tribes, as the older, simpler nature-deity Gaia, Earth, the mother of all, Earth the All-Mother, seems to have faded into the more anthropomorphic Dēmētēr, Earth-Mother, whose eternal fire burned in Mantinēa, and whose temples were built far and wide across the land she made generous to the Greek farmers.[650] The Romans recognized her straightforward identity as Terra Mater, Ops Mater.[651] Tacitus could rightly see this deity among the German tribes, worshippers of ‘Nerthum (or, Hertham), that is Mother Earth,’ Mother Earth, whose holy grove was located on an island in the ocean, and whose chariot, pulled by cows, passed through the land bringing a season of peace and joy, until the goddess, satisfied with human interaction, was taken back by her priest to her temple, and the chariot and garments and even the goddess herself were washed in a secret lake, which immediately swallowed up the ministering slaves—‘hence a mysterious terror and sacred ignorance, what that should be which only those doomed to perish might see.’[652] If in these modern times we search in Europe for traces of Earth-worship, we may find them in notably distinct survival in Germany, if no longer in the Christmas food-offerings buried in and for the earth up to early in this century,[653] at any rate among Gypsy groups. Dewel, the great god in heaven (dewa, deus), is more feared than loved by these weathered outcasts, as he harms them on their journeys with his thunder and lightning, his snow and rain, and his stars disrupt their dark activities. Therefore, they curse him loudly when misfortune strikes them, and when a child dies, they say that Dewel has taken it. But Earth, Mother of all good, 274self-existing from the beginning, is sacred to them, so sacred that they are careful never to let the drinking cup touch the ground, for it would become too holy to be used by people.[654]
Water-worship, as has been seen, may be classified as a special department of religion. It by no means follows, however, that savage water-worshippers should necessarily have generalized their ideas, and passed beyond their particular water-deities to arrive at the conception of a general deity presiding over water as an element. Divine springs, streams, and lakes, water-spirits, deities concerned with the clouds and rain, are frequent, and many details of them are cited here, but I have not succeeded in finding among the lower races any divinity whose attributes, fairly criticized, will show him or her to be an original and absolute elemental Water-god. Among the deities of the Dakotas, Unktahe the fish-god of the waters is a master-spirit of sorcery and religion, the rival even of the mighty Thunderbird.[655] In the Mexican pantheon, Tlaloc god of rain and waters, fertilizer of earth and lord of paradise, whose wife is Chalchihuitlicue, Emerald-Skirt, dwells among the mountain-tops where the clouds gather and pour down the streams.[656] Yet neither of these mythic beings approaches the generality of conception that belongs to full elemental deity, and even the Greek Nēreus, though by his name he should be the very personification of water (νηρός), seems too exclusively marine in his home and family to be cited as the Water-god. Nor is the reason of this hard to find. It is an extreme stretch of the power of theological generalization to bring water in its myriad forms under one divinity, though each individual body of water, even the smallest stream or lake, can have its personal individuality or indwelling spirit.
Water worship, as we've observed, can be seen as a specific aspect of religion. However, this doesn’t mean that primitive water worshippers could necessarily generalize their beliefs and move beyond their specific water deities to form an idea of a single deity overseeing water as an element. Divine springs, rivers, and lakes, along with water spirits and deities associated with clouds and rain, are quite common, and I’ve referenced many examples here. Still, I haven't found among the lower races any deity whose characteristics, when examined closely, reveal them to be a true and absolute elemental Water-god. Among the deities of the Dakotas, Unktahe, the fish god of the waters, is a master spirit of sorcery and religion, even rivaling the powerful Thunderbird.[655] In the Mexican pantheon, Tlaloc, the god of rain and waters, nurturer of the earth and lord of paradise, whose wife is Chalchihuitlicue, the Emerald-Skirt, resides among the mountain tops where the clouds gather and release the streams.[656] Yet neither of these mythological figures embodies the broad concept of a full elemental deity, and even the Greek Nēreus, despite his name suggesting he is the very embodiment of water (νηρός), appears too exclusively focused on the sea in his home and family to be regarded as the Water-god. The reason for this isn’t difficult to identify. It’s quite a stretch to force all the various forms of water under a single deity, although each individual body of water, no matter how small, can have its own unique identity or spirit residing within it.
275Islanders and coast-dwellers indeed live face to face with mighty water-deities, the divine Sea and the great Sea-gods. What the sea may seem to an uncultured man who first beholds it, we may learn among the Lampongs of Sumatra: ‘The inland people of that country are said to pay a kind of adoration to the sea, and to make to it an offering of cakes and sweetmeats on their beholding it for the first time, deprecating its power of doing them mischief.’[657] The higher stage of such doctrine is where the sea, no longer itself personal, is considered as ruled by indwelling spirits. Thus Tuaraatai and Ruahatu, principal among marine deities of Polynesia, send the sharks to execute their vengeance. Hiro descends to the depths of the ocean and dwells among the monsters, they lull him to sleep in a cavern, the Wind-god profits by his absence to raise a violent storm to destroy the boats in which Hiro’s friends are sailing, but, roused by a friendly spirit-messenger, the Sea-god rises to the surface and quells the tempest.[658] This South Sea Island myth might well have been in the Odyssey. We may point to the Guinea Coast as a barbaric region where Sea-worship survives in its extremest form. It appears from Bosman’s account, about 1700, that in the religion of Whydah, the Sea ranked only as younger brother in the three divine orders, below the Serpents and Trees. But at present, as appears from Captain Burton’s evidence, the religion of Whydah extends through Dahome, and the divine Sea has risen in rank. ‘The youngest brother of the triad is Hu, the ocean or sea. Formerly it was subject to chastisement, like the Hellespont, if idle or useless. The Huno, or ocean priest, is now considered the highest of all, a fetish king, at Whydah, where he has 500 wives. At stated times he repairs to the beach, begs ‘Agbwe,’ the ... ocean god, not to be boisterous, and throws in rice and corn, oil and beans, cloth, cowries, and other valuables.... At times the king sends as an ocean sacrifice 276from Agbome a man carried in a hammock, with the dress, the stool, and the umbrella of a caboceer; a canoe takes him out to sea, where he is thrown to the sharks.’[659] While in these descriptions the individual divine personality of the sea is so well marked, an account of the closely related Slave Coast religion states that a great god dwells in the sea, and it is to him, not to the sea itself, that offerings are cast in.[660] In South America the idea of the divine Sea is clearly marked in the Peruvian worship of Mamacocha, Mother Sea, giver of food to men.[661] Eastern Asia, both in its stages of lower and higher civilization, contributes members to the divine group. In Kamchatka, Mitgk the Great Spirit of the Sea, fish-like himself, sends the fish up the rivers.[662] Japan deifies separately on land and at sea the lords of the waters; Midsuno Kami, the Water-god, is worshipped during the rainy season; Jebisu, the Sea-god, is younger brother of the Sun.[663]
275Islanders and people living by the coast truly interact with powerful water deities, like the divine Sea and the great Sea-gods. What the sea might look like to an unrefined person seeing it for the first time can be illustrated by the Lampongs of Sumatra: "The inland people of that country are said to show some sort of reverence to the sea, offering cakes and sweet treats when they see it for the first time, hoping to placate its power to harm them." [657] The more advanced belief system views the sea, no longer regarded as a personal entity, as governed by spirits within it. For example, Tuaraatai and Ruahatu, the leading marine deities of Polynesia, send sharks to carry out their vengeance. Hiro goes down into the ocean's depths and stays among the creatures there, lulled to sleep in a cave, while the Wind-god takes advantage of his absence to stir up a fierce storm that endangers the boats of Hiro's friends. But when a friendly spirit messenger wakes him, the Sea-god rises to calm the storm.[658] This South Sea Island myth could easily fit into the Odyssey. We can point to the Guinea Coast as a primitive area where Sea-worship persists in its most extreme form. It seems from Bosman’s account around 1700 that in the religion of Whydah, the Sea was seen only as the younger brother in the hierarchy of three divine orders, ranked below the Serpents and Trees. However, according to Captain Burton's observations, the religion of Whydah has spread into Dahome, and the divine Sea has gained status. "The youngest brother in the triad is Hu, the ocean or sea. It used to be subject to punishment, like the Hellespont, for being idle or useless. Now the Huno, or ocean priest, is regarded as the highest of all, a fetish king in Whydah, where he has 500 wives. At certain times, he goes to the beach, asking 'Agbwe,' the ocean god, not to be rough, and offers rice, corn, oil, beans, cloth, cowries, and other valuables.... Occasionally, the king sends a human sacrifice from Agbome, a man carried in a hammock, dressed with the garb, stool, and umbrella of a caboceer; a canoe then takes him out to sea, where he is offered to the sharks."[659] While these descriptions emphasize the distinctive divine character of the sea, an account of the closely related Slave Coast religion mentions that a great god resides in the sea, and offerings are made to him, rather than to the sea itself.[660] In South America, the concept of the divine Sea is prominent in the Peruvian worship of Mamacocha, Mother Sea, who provides food for people.[661] Eastern Asia, in both its simpler and more advanced civilizations, adds members to the divine group. In Kamchatka, Mitgk, the Great Spirit of the Sea, resembling a fish, sends fish up the rivers.[662] Japan separately deifies both land and sea lords of the waters; Midsuno Kami, the Water-god, is honored during the rainy season, while Jebisu, the Sea-god, is the younger brother of the Sun.[663]
Among barbaric races we thus find two conceptions current, the personal divine Sea and the anthropomorphic Sea-god. These represent two stages of development of one idea—the view of the natural object as itself an animated being, and the separation of its animating fetish-soul as a distinct spiritual deity. To follow the enquiry into classic times shows the same distinction as strongly marked. When Kleomenes marched down to Thyrea, having slaughtered a bull to the sea (σφαγιασάμενος δέ τῇ θαλάσσῃ ταῦρον) he embarked his army in ships for the Tirynthian land and Nauplia.[664] Cicero makes Cotta remark to Balbus that ‘our generals, embarking on the sea, have been accustomed to immolate a victim to the waves,’ and he goes on to argue, 277not unfairly, that if the Earth herself is a goddess, what is she other than Tellus, and ‘if the Earth, the Sea too, whom thou saidst to be Neptune.’[665] Here is direct nature-worship in its extremest sense of fetish-worship. But in the anthropomorphic stage appear that dim præ-Olympian figure of Nēreus the Old Man of the Sea, father of the Nereids in their ocean caves, and the Homeric Poseidōn the Earth-shaker, who stables his coursers in his cave in the Ægean deeps, who harnesses the gold-maned steeds to his chariot and drives through the dividing waves, while the subject sea-beasts come up at the passing of their lord, a king so little bound to the element he governs, that he can come from the brine to sit in the midst of the gods in the assembly on Olympos, and ask the will of Zeus.[666]
Among barbaric cultures, we find two prevalent ideas: the personal divine Sea and the anthropomorphic Sea-god. These represent two stages of the same concept—the belief that a natural object is itself a living being and the separation of its animating spirit as a distinct spiritual deity. Looking into classical times reveals the same clear distinction. When Kleomenes marched down to Thyrea, having sacrificed a bull to the sea (slaughtering a bull in the sea), he then sent his army by ship to the Tirynthian land and Nauplia.[664] Cicero mentions Cotta telling Balbus that “our generals, when setting sail, have been used to offer a sacrifice to the waves,” and he goes on to argue, 277not unfairly, that if the Earth herself is a goddess, she is nothing other than Tellus, and “if the Earth, then the Sea too, whom you called Neptune.”[665] This reflects direct nature-worship in its most extreme form of fetish-worship. But in the anthropomorphic stage, we see the distant pre-Olympian figure of Nēreus, the Old Man of the Sea, father of the Nereids in their ocean caves, and the Homeric Poseidōn, the Earth-shaker, who keeps his horses in his cave in the depths of the Aegean, who harnesses the golden-maned steeds to his chariot and drives through the parting waves, while the sea creatures rise at the passing of their lord—a king so little tied to the element he rules that he can come from the brine to sit among the gods in the assembly on Olympus and ask for Zeus's will.[666]
Fire-worship brings into view again, though under different aspects and with different results, the problems presented by water-worship. The real and absolute worship of fire falls into two great divisions, the first belonging rather to fetishism, the second to polytheism proper, and the two apparently representing an earlier and later stage of theological ideas. The first is the rude barbarian’s adoration of the actual flame which he watches writhing, roaring, devouring like a live animal; the second belongs to an advanced generalization, that any individual fire is a manifestation of one general elemental being—the Fire-god. Unfortunately, evidence of the exact meaning of fire-worship among the lower races is scanty, while the transition from fetishism to polytheism seems a gradual process of which the stages elude close definition. Moreover, it must be borne in mind that rites performed with fire are, though often, yet by no means necessarily, due to worship of the fire itself. Authors who have indiscriminately mixed up such rites as the new fire, the perpetual fire, the passing 278through the fire, classing them as acts of fire-worship, without proper evidence as to their meaning in any particular case, have added to the perplexity of a subject not too easy to deal with, even under strict precautions. Two sources of error are especially to be noted. On the one hand, fire happens to be a usual means whereby sacrifices are transmitted to departed souls and deities in general; and on the other hand, the ceremonies of earthly fire-worship are habitually and naturally transferred to celestial fire-worship in the religion of the Sun.
Fire worship brings to light, although from different angles and with different outcomes, the issues associated with water worship. The genuine and absolute worship of fire can be divided into two main categories: the first leans more towards fetishism, while the second aligns with true polytheism, seemingly reflecting an early and later stage of theological concepts. The first category is the crude barbarian’s reverence for the actual flame, which he observes as it twists, roars, and consumes like a living creature; the second pertains to a more developed understanding that sees any individual fire as a manifestation of a single elemental being—the Fire-god. Unfortunately, we have little concrete evidence of what fire worship really meant among primitive cultures, and the shift from fetishism to polytheism appears to be a gradual process that defies precise description. Furthermore, it should be remembered that rituals involving fire are often, though not always, related to the worship of fire itself. Authors who have mixed up rituals such as the new fire, the eternal fire, and passing through fire—classifying them all as acts of fire worship without clear evidence of what they mean in specific contexts—have complicated an already challenging topic. Two key sources of confusion should be highlighted. On one hand, fire is commonly used as a means to send sacrifices to deceased souls and deities in general; on the other, the practices associated with earthly fire worship are often naturally transferred to the worship of celestial fire in Sun religions.
It may best serve the present purpose to carry a line of some of the best-defined facts which seems to bear on fire-worship proper, from savagery on into the higher culture. In the last century, Loskiel, a missionary among the North American Indians, remarks that ‘In great danger, an Indian has been observed to lie prostrate on his face, and throwing a handful of tobacco into the fire, to call aloud, as in an agony of distress, “There, take and smoke, be pacified, and don’t hurt me.”’ Of course this may have been a mere sacrifice transmitted to some other spiritual being through fire, but we have in this region explicit statements as to a distinct fire-deity. The Delawares, it appears from the same author, acknowledged the Fire-manitu, first parent of all Indian nations, and celebrated a yearly festival in his honour, when twelve manitus, animal and vegetable, attended him as subordinate deities.[667] In North-West America, in Washington Irving’s account of the Chinooks and other Columbia River Tribes, mention is made of the spirit which inhabits fire. Powerful both for evil and good, and seemingly rather evil than good in nature, this being must be kept in good humour by frequent offerings. The Fire-spirit has great influence with the winged aërial supreme deity, wherefore the Indians implore him to be their interpreter, to procure them success in hunting and fishing, fleet horses, obedient wives, and male children.[668] In the elaborately 279systematic religion of Mexico, there appears in his proper place a Fire-god, closely related to the Sun-god in character, but keeping well marked his proper identity. His name was Xiuhteuctli, Fire-lord, and they called him likewise Huehueteotl, the old god. Great honour was paid to this god Fire, who gives them heat, and bakes their cakes, and roasts their meat. Therefore at every meal the first morsel and libation were cast into the fire, and every day the deity had incense burnt to him. Twice in the year were held his solemn festivals. At the first, a felled tree was set up in his honour, and the sacrificers danced round his fire with the human victims, whom afterwards they cast into a great fire, only to drag them out half roasted for the priests to complete the sacrifice. The second was distinguished by the rite of the new fire, so well known in connexion with solar worship; the friction-fire was solemnly made before the image of Xiuhteuctli in his sanctuary in the court of the great teocalli, and the game brought in at the great hunt which began the festival was cooked at the sacred fire for the banquets that ended it.[669] Polynesia well knows from the mythological point of view Mahuika the Fire-god, who keeps the volcano-fire on his subterranean hearth, whither Maui goes down (as the Sun into the Underworld) to bring up fire for man; but in the South Sea islands there is scarcely a trace of actual rites of fire-worship.[670] In West Africa, among the gods of Dahome is Zo the fire-fetish; a pot of fire is placed in a room, and sacrifice is offered to it, that fire may ‘live’ there, and not go forth to destroy the house.[671]
It might be most useful to trace a line of some clearly defined facts that seem to relate to fire-worship, from primitive times into more developed cultures. In the last century, Loskiel, a missionary among North American Indians, noted that “In great danger, an Indian has been seen lying face down, throwing a handful of tobacco into the fire, calling out in extreme distress, ‘There, take and smoke, be calm, and don’t hurt me.’” This could be just a sacrifice made to some other spiritual being through fire, but we also have direct accounts of a specific fire-deity in this area. The Delawares, according to the same author, acknowledged the Fire-manitu, who is considered the first parent of all Indian nations, and held an annual festival in his honor, where twelve minor deities, both animal and vegetable, attended him.[667] In North-West America, Washington Irving’s account of the Chinooks and other Columbia River tribes mentions the spirit that resides in fire. This being is powerful for both good and evil, although it tends to be more malevolent, and must be kept pleased with frequent offerings. The Fire-spirit has significant influence with the supreme winged deity, which is why the Indians ask this spirit to act as their mediator, seeking success in hunting and fishing, swift horses, obedient wives, and male children.[668] In the highly organized religion of Mexico, there is a Fire-god who is closely associated with the Sun-god but maintains a clear identity. His name was Xiuhteuctli, the Fire-lord, and he was also known as Huehueteotl, the old god. Great respect was given to this god of Fire, who provides heat, bakes their bread, and roasts their meat. Therefore, at every meal, the first bite and drink were offered to the fire, and incense was burned for him every day. His solemn festivals were held twice a year. During the first, a fallen tree was erected in his honor, and participants danced around his fire with human sacrifices, which were later thrown into a large fire, only to be pulled out half-cooked for the priests to complete the sacrifice. The second festival was marked by the rite of the new fire, closely associated with solar worship; the friction fire was created in front of the image of Xiuhteuctli in his sanctuary at the great teocalli, and the game caught during the large hunt that kicked off the festival was cooked at the sacred fire for the banquets that concluded it.[669] Polynesia is familiar with the mythological figure Mahuika, the Fire-god, who keeps the volcano fire on his hidden hearth, where Maui goes (like the Sun into the Underworld) to retrieve fire for humans; however, in the South Sea islands, there are hardly any signs of actual fire-worship rituals.[670] In West Africa, among the gods of Dahome, there is Zo the fire-fetish; a pot of fire is placed in a room, and a sacrifice is made to it so that the fire may "live" there and not leave to destroy the house.[671]
Asia is a region where distinct fire-worship may be peculiarly well traced through the range of lower and higher civilization. The rude Kamchadals, worshipping all things 280that did them harm or good, worshipped the fire, offering to it noses of foxes and other game, so that one might tell by looking at furs whether they had been taken by baptized or heathen hunters.[672] The Ainos of Yesso worship Abe kamui the Fire-deity as the benefactor of men, the messenger to the other gods, the purifier who heals the sick.[673] Turanian tribes likewise hold fire a sacred element, many Tunguz, Mongol, and Turk tribes sacrifice to Fire, and some clans will not eat meat without first throwing a morsel upon the hearth. The following passage is from a Mongol wedding-song to the personified Fire, ‘Mother Ut, Queen of Fire, thou who art made from the elm that grows on the mountain-tops of Changgai-Chan and Burchatu-Chan, thou who didst come forth when heaven and earth divided, didst come forth from the footsteps of Mother Earth, and wast formed by the King of Gods. Mother Ut, whose father is the hard steel, whose mother is the flint, whose ancestors are the elm-trees, whose shining reaches to the sky and pervades the earth. Goddess Ut, we bring thee yellow oil for offering, and a white wether with yellow head, thou who hast a manly son, a beauteous daughter-in-law, bright daughters. To thee, Mother Ut, who ever lookest upward, we bring brandy in bowls, and fat in both hands. Give prosperity to the King’s son (the bridegroom), to the King’s daughter (the bride), and to all the people!’[674] As an analogue to Hephaistos the Greek divine smith, may stand the Circassian Fire-god, Tleps, patron of metal-workers, and the peasants whom he has provided with plough and hoe.[675]
Asia is a region where distinct fire-worship can be clearly traced through a range of lower and higher civilizations. The primitive Kamchadals, who worship all things that harm or help them, revered fire, offering it the noses of foxes and other game, which made it possible to tell by looking at the furs whether they were caught by baptized or pagan hunters.280 The Ainos of Yesso worship Abe kamui, the Fire deity, as the benefactor of humanity, the messenger to other gods, and the purifier who heals the sick. Turanian tribes also regard fire as a sacred element; many Tunguz, Mongol, and Turk tribes sacrifice to fire, and some clans won't eat meat without first throwing a piece onto the hearth. The following excerpt is from a Mongol wedding song dedicated to the personified Fire, "Mother Ut, Queen of Fire, you who are made from the elm that grows on the mountaintops of Changgai-Chan and Burchatu-Chan, you who came forth when heaven and earth were separated, you who emerged from the footsteps of Mother Earth and were shaped by the King of Gods. Mother Ut, whose father is hard steel, whose mother is flint, whose ancestors are the elm trees, whose light reaches the sky and fills the earth. Goddess Ut, we bring you yellow oil as an offering, and a white ram with a yellow head, you who have a strong son, a beautiful daughter-in-law, and bright daughters. To you, Mother Ut, who always looks upward, we bring brandy in bowls and fat in both hands. Grant prosperity to the King's son (the bridegroom), to the King's daughter (the bride), and to all the people!" As a counterpart to Hephaistos, the Greek god of smithing, we have the Circassian Fire god, Tleps, the patron of metalworkers and the farmers he has provided with plows and hoes.
Among the most ancient cultured nations of the Old World, Egyptians, Babylonians, Assyrians, accounts of fire-worship are absent, or so scanty and obscure that their 281study is more valuable in compiling the history than in elucidating the principles of religion.[676] For this scientific purpose, the more full and minute documents of Aryan religion can give a better answer. In various forms and under several names, the Fire-god is known. Nowhere does he carry his personality more distinctly than under his Sanskrit name of Agni, a word which keeps its quality, though not his divinity, in the Latin ‘ignis.’ The name of Agni is the first word of the first hymn of the Rig-Veda: ‘Agnim île puro-hitam yajnasya devam ritvijam!—Agni I entreat, divine appointed priest of sacrifice!’ The sacrifices which Agni receives go to the gods, he is the mouth of the gods, but he is no lowly minister, as it is said in another hymn:
Among the oldest cultured nations of the Old World, like the Egyptians, Babylonians, and Assyrians, there are almost no records of fire-worship, or the accounts are so limited and unclear that studying them is more useful for compiling history than for explaining the principles of religion.281 For this scientific purpose, the more detailed documents of Aryan religion provide a better understanding. The Fire-god is known in various forms and under several names. Nowhere is he more distinctly identifiable than by his Sanskrit name Agni, a term that retains its essence, although not its divinity, in the Latin word ‘ignis.’ The name Agni appears as the first word of the first hymn of the Rig-Veda: ‘Agnim île puro-hitam yajnasya devam ritvijam!—Agni I entreat, divine appointed priest of sacrifice!’ The sacrifices that Agni receives are offered to the gods; he is the mouthpiece of the gods, though he is not a lowly servant, as stated in another hymn:
Such the mighty Agni is among the gods, yet he comes within the peasant’s cottage to be protector of the domestic hearth. His worship has survived the transformation of the ancient patriarchal Vedic religion of nature into the priest-ridden Hinduism of our own day. In India there may yet be found the so-called Fire-priests (Agnihotri) who perform according to Vedic rite the sacrifices entitling the worshippers to heavenly life. The sacred fire-drill for churning the new fire by friction of wood (arani) is used so that Agni still is new-born of the twirling fire-sticks, and receives the melted butter of the sacrifice.[677] Among the records of fire-worship in Asia, is the account of Jonas Hanways’s ‘Travels,’ dating from about 1740, of the everlasting fire at the burning wells near Baku, on the Caspian. At the sacred spot stood several ancient stone temples, mostly arched vaults 10 to 15 feet high. One little temple was 282still used for worship, near the altar of which, about three feet high, a large hollow cane conveyed the gas up from the ground, burning at the mouth with a blue flame. Here were generally forty or fifty poor devotees, come on pilgrimage from their country to make expiation for themselves and others, and subsisting on wild celery, &c. These pilgrims are described as marking their foreheads with saffron, and having great veneration for a red cow; they wore little clothing, and the holiest of them kept one arm on their heads, or continued unmoved in some other posture; they are described as Ghebers, or Gours, the usual Moslem term for Fire-worshippers.[678]
Agni is a powerful god, yet he comes into the humble home of a peasant to be the protector of the hearth. His worship has continued from the ancient patriarchal Vedic religion of nature to the priest-led Hinduism we see today. In India, you can still find the so-called Fire-priests (Agnihotri) who perform sacrifices according to Vedic rites, allowing worshippers to earn a place in heaven. The sacred fire-drill for creating new fire by friction (arani) is still used, meaning Agni is continuously reborn from the spinning fire-sticks and receives the melted butter from the sacrifices.[677] Among the records of fire-worship in Asia, there's the account from Jonas Hanway’s ‘Travels,’ dating back to around 1740, describing the eternal fire at the burning wells near Baku, on the Caspian Sea. At this sacred site stood several ancient stone temples, mostly arched vaults 10 to 15 feet high. One small temple was still in use for worship, beside an altar about three feet high, where a large hollow cane brought gas from the ground, burning at the top with a blue flame. Typically, there were about forty or fifty impoverished pilgrims who traveled from their homes to atone for themselves and others, living off wild celery, etc. These pilgrims were said to mark their foreheads with saffron and held great reverence for a red cow; they wore minimal clothing, and the holiest among them kept one arm on their heads or remained still in some other posture. They were referred to as Ghebers, or Gours, which is the common Muslim term for Fire-worshippers.[678]
In general, this name of Ghebers is applied to the Zoroastrians or Parsis, whom a modern European would all but surely point to if asked to instance a modern race of Fire-worshippers. Classical accounts of the Persian religion set down fire-worship as part and parcel of it; the Magi, it is recorded, hold the gods to be Fire and Earth and Water; and again, the Persians reckon the Fire to be a god (θεοφοροῦσιν).[679] On the testimony of the old religious books of the Parsis themselves, Fire, as the greatest Ized, as giver of increase and health, as craving for wood and scents and fat, seems to take the distinctest divine personality. Their doctrine that Ardebehist, the presiding angel or spirit of fire, is adored, but not the material object he belongs to, is a perfect instance of the development of the idea of an elemental divinity from that of an animated fetish. When, driven by Moslem persecution from Persia, Parsi exiles landed in Gujarat, they described their religion in an official document as being the worship of Agni or Fire, thus claiming for themselves a place among recognized Hindu sects.[680] In modern times, though for the most part the Parsis have found toleration and prosperity in 283India, yet an oppressed remnant of the race still keeps up the everlasting fires at Yezd and Kirman, in their old Persian land. The modern Parsis, as in Strabo’s time, scruple to defile the fire or blow it with their breath, they abstain from smoking out of regard not to themselves but to the sacred element, and they keep up consecrated ever-burning fires before which they do worship. Nevertheless, Prof. Max Müller is able to say of the Parsis of our own day: ‘The so-called Fire-worshippers certainly do not worship the fire, and they naturally object to a name which seems to place them on a level with mere idolators. All they admit is, that in their youth they are taught to face some luminous object while worshipping God, and that they regard the fire, like other great natural phenomena, as an emblem of the Divine power. But they assure us that they never ask assistance or blessings from an unintelligent material object, nor is it even considered necessary to turn the face to any emblem whatever in praying to Ormuzd.’[681] Now, admitting this view of fire-worship as true of the more intelligent Parsis, and leaving aside the question how far among the more ignorant this symbolism may blend (as in such cases is usual) into actual adoration, we may ask what is the history of ceremonies which thus imitate, yet are not, fire-worship. The ethnographic answer is clear and instructive. The Parsi is the descendant of a race in this respect represented by the modern Hindu, a race who did simply and actually worship Fire. Fire-worship still forms a link historically connecting the Vedic with the Zoroastrian ritual; for the Agnishtoma or praise of Agni the Fire, where four goats are to be sacrificed and burnt, is represented by the Yajishn ceremony, where the Parsi priests are now content to put some hair of an ox in a vessel and show it to the Fire. But the development of the more philosophic Zarathustrian doctrines has led to a result common in the history of religion, that the ancient distinctly 284meant rite has dwindled to a symbol, to be preserved with changed sense in a new theology.
In general, the name Ghebers refers to the Zoroastrians or Parsis, whom a modern European would almost certainly identify as a contemporary group of Fire-worshippers. Classical accounts of Persian religion describe fire-worship as an integral part of it; it is noted that the Magi consider the gods to be Fire, Earth, and Water. Furthermore, the Persians regard Fire as a god (θεοφοροῦσιν).[679] According to the ancient religious texts of the Parsis, Fire, recognized as the greatest Ized, as the giver of growth and health, and as something that requires wood, scents, and fat, seems to possess a defined divine personality. Their belief that Ardebehist, the angel or spirit of fire, is worshiped but not the physical fire itself perfectly illustrates the evolution of the concept of an elemental deity from that of an animated fetish. When the Parsis were forced to flee from Persia due to Muslim persecution and landed in Gujarat, they referred to their faith in an official document as the worship of Agni or Fire, thus claiming a place among recognized Hindu sects.[680] In modern times, although the Parsis have generally found acceptance and success in 283India, a small oppressed group still maintains the eternal fires at Yezd and Kirman, in their former Persian homeland. The modern Parsis, just like in Strabo’s time, take care not to defile the fire or blow on it with their breath; they avoid smoking not out of concern for themselves but for the sacred element, and they keep consecrated, ever-burning fires in front of which they worship. Nonetheless, Professor Max Müller states about today’s Parsis: ‘The so-called Fire-worshippers certainly do not worship the fire, and they naturally dislike a term that seems to equate them with mere idolaters. They only acknowledge that in their youth they are taught to face some bright object while worshipping God, and they see fire, like other significant natural phenomena, as a symbol of Divine power. However, they assure us that they never seek help or blessings from an unintelligent material object, nor is it even seen as necessary to face any symbol while praying to Ormuzd.’[681] Now, accepting this perspective of fire-worship as accurate for the more educated Parsis, and setting aside how much this symbolism might blend into actual adoration among the less informed (as is often the case), we can inquire about the history of rituals that mimic but do not constitute fire-worship. The ethnographic response is clear and insightful. The Parsi is a descendant of a lineage that is, in this respect, represented by modern Hindus, a lineage that did actually worship Fire. Fire-worship still serves as a historical link connecting the Vedic with the Zoroastrian rituals; the Agnishtoma or praise of Agni the Fire, during which four goats are sacrificed and burned, is reflected in the Yajishn ceremony, where Parsi priests now simply place some hair from an ox in a vessel and present it to the Fire. However, the advancement of more philosophical Zoroastrian beliefs has led to a common outcome in religious history: the ancient, clearly defined rite has reduced to a symbol, preserved with a changed meaning in a new theological context.
Somewhat of the same kind may have taken place among the European race who seem in some respects the closest relatives of the old Persians. Slavonic history possibly keeps up some trace of direct and absolute fire-worship, as where in Bohemia the Pagans are described as worshipping fires, groves, trees, stones. But though the Lithuanians and Old Prussians and Russians are among the nations whose especial rite it was to keep up sacred everlasting fires, yet it seems that their fire-rites were in the symbolic stage, ceremonies of their great celestial-solar religion, rather than acts of direct worship to a Fire-god.[682] Classical religion, on the other hand, brings prominently into view the special deities of fire. Hēphaistos, Vulcan, the divine metallurgist who had his temples on Ætna and Lipari, stands in especial connexion with the subterranean volcanic fire, and combines the nature of the Polynesian Mahuika and the Circassian Tleps. The Greek Hestia, the divine hearth, the ever-virgin venerable goddess, to whom Zeus gave fair office instead of wedlock, sits in the midst of the house, receiving fat:—
Somewhat similar may have occurred among the Europeans who seem, in some ways, to be the closest relatives of the ancient Persians. Slavonic history might retain some evidence of direct and absolute fire-worship, particularly where in Bohemia, Pagans are described as worshipping fires, groves, trees, and stones. However, although the Lithuanians, Old Prussians, and Russians are among the nations known for maintaining sacred everlasting fires, it appears that their fire rituals were in a symbolic stage—ceremonies of their significant celestial-solar religion, rather than direct worship of a Fire-god.[682] Classical religion, in contrast, prominently features specific deities of fire. Hēphaistos, Vulcan, the divine metallurgist who had his temples on Ætna and Lipari, is especially connected with the subterranean volcanic fire and embodies traits of the Polynesian Mahuika and the Circassian Tleps. The Greek Hestia, the divine hearth, the ever-virgin venerable goddess, to whom Zeus granted a significant role instead of marriage, sits in the center of the house, receiving offerings:
In the high halls of gods and men she has her everlasting seat, and without her are no banquets among mortals, for to Hestia first and last is poured the honey-sweet wine:—
In the grand halls of gods and humans, she has her eternal place, and without her, there are no feasts among mortals, for to Hestia, the honey-sweet wine is poured first and last:—
In Greek civil life, Hestia sat in house and assembly as 285representative of domestic and social order. Like her in name and origin, but not altogether in development, is Vesta with her ancient Roman cultus, and her retinue of virgins to keep up her pure eternal fire in her temple, needing no image, for she herself dwelt within:—
In Greek society, Hestia was seen as the embodiment of home and community, sitting in both households and public gatherings. Vesta, who is similar in name and origin but not entirely in her evolution, represents the ancient Roman worship, accompanied by her group of virgins who maintained her sacred, ever-burning fire in her temple, which didn’t require an image because she herself resided within it:—
The last lingering relics of fire-worship in Europe reach us, as usual, both through Turanian and Aryan channels of folklore. The Esthonian bride consecrates her new hearth and home by an offering of money cast into the fire, or laid on the oven for Tule-ema, Fire-mother.[685] The Carinthian peasant will ‘fodder’ the fire to make it kindly, and throw lard or dripping to it, that it may not burn his house. To the Bohemian it is a godless thing to spit into the fire, ‘God’s fire’ as he calls it. It is not right to throw away the crumbs after a meal, for they belong to the fire. Of every kind of dish some should be given to the fire, and if some runs over it is wrong to scold, for it belongs to the fire. It is because these rites are now so neglected that harmful fires so often break out.[686]
The last remnants of fire-worship in Europe come to us, as usual, through both Turanian and Aryan folklore. The Estonian bride blesses her new home by tossing money into the fire or placing it on the oven for Tule-ema, the Fire-mother.[685] The Carinthian farmer will ‘feed’ the fire to keep it friendly, throwing in lard or grease to prevent it from burning down his house. For the Bohemian, it’s disrespectful to spit into the fire, which he refers to as ‘God’s fire.’ It’s considered wrong to throw away crumbs after a meal because they belong to the fire. A portion of every dish should be offered to the fire, and if some spills over, it's wrong to get upset, as it also belongs to the fire. It’s due to the neglect of these rituals that harmful fires occur so frequently.[686]
What the Sea is to Water-worship, in some measure the Sun is to Fire-worship. From the doctrines and rites of earthly fire, various and ambiguous in character, generalized from many phenomena, applied to many purposes, we pass to the religion of heavenly fire, whose great deity has a perfect definiteness from his embodiment in one great individual fetish, the Sun.
What the sea is to water worship, the sun is to fire worship. From the beliefs and rituals surrounding earthly fire, which are varied and unclear, based on numerous phenomena and used for different purposes, we shift to the religion of heavenly fire, whose main deity is clearly defined through its representation in one powerful individual symbol, the sun.
Rivalling in power and glory the all-encompassing Heaven, the Sun moves eminent among the deities of nature, no mere cosmic globe affecting distant material worlds by force 286in the guise of light and heat and gravity, but a living reigning Lord:—
Rivaling in power and glory the all-encompassing Heaven, the Sun stands out among the deities of nature, not just a cosmic ball influencing distant material worlds through light, heat, and gravity, but a living, reigning Lord:— 286
It is no exaggeration to say, with Sir William Jones, that one great fountain of all idolatry in the four quarters of the globe was the veneration paid by men to the sun: it is no more than an exaggeration to say with Mr. Helps of the sun-worship in Peru, that it was inevitable. Sun-worship is by no means universal among the lower races of mankind, but manifests itself in the upper levels of savage religion in districts far and wide over the earth, often assuming the prominence which it keeps and develops in the faiths of the barbaric world. Why some races are sun-worshippers and others not, is indeed too hard a question to answer in general terms. Yet one important reason is obvious, that the Sun is not so evidently the god of wild hunters and fishers, as of the tillers of the soil, who watch him day by day giving or taking away their wealth and their very life. On the geographical significance of sun-worship, D’Orbigny has made a remark, suggestive if not altogether sound, connecting the worship of the sun not so much with the torrid regions where his glaring heat oppresses man all day long, and drives him to the shade for refuge, as with climates where his presence is welcomed for his life-giving heat, and nature chills at his departure. Thus while the low sultry forests of South America show little prominence of Sun-worship, this is the dominant organized cultus of the high table-lands of Peru and Cundinamarca.[687] The theory is ingenious, and if not carried too far may often be supported. We may well compare the feelings with which the sun-worshipping Massagetæ of Tartary must have sacrificed their horses to the deity who freed them from the miseries of winter, with the thoughts of men in those burning 287lands of Central Africa where, as Sir Samuel Baker says, ‘the rising of the sun is always dreaded ... the sun is regarded as the common enemy,’ words which recall Herodotus’ old description of the Atlantes or Atarantes who dwelt in the interior of Africa, who cursed the sun at his rising, and abused him with shameful epithets for afflicting them with his burning heat, them and their land.[688]
It’s no exaggeration to say, along with Sir William Jones, that one major source of idolatry around the world was the reverence people showed to the sun. It's not an overstatement to agree with Mr. Helps about sun-worship in Peru, claiming it was inevitable. Sun-worship isn’t universal among all primitive societies, but it does appear in the more advanced forms of tribal religion in various regions around the globe, often taking on a crucial role in the beliefs of the barbaric world. Why some cultures worship the sun while others do not is indeed a complex question to answer broadly. However, one clear reason is that the Sun is not as obviously revered by wild hunters and fishermen as by agricultural communities, who observe him daily as he gives or takes away their wealth and livelihoods. Regarding the geographical significance of sun-worship, D’Orbigny made a thought-provoking, if not entirely accurate, observation linking sun-worship not necessarily to the hot regions where the sun’s intense heat burdens people throughout the day, forcing them into the shade, but to climates where his presence is welcomed for its life-giving warmth, and where nature languishes in his absence. Thus, while the humid jungles of South America show little emphasis on sun-worship, it is the dominant organized religion in the high plateaus of Peru and Cundinamarca.[687] The theory is clever, and if not taken to extremes, can be often substantiated. We can easily compare the feelings of the sun-worshipping Massagetæ of Tartary as they sacrificed their horses to the deity who freed them from the hardships of winter, to the thoughts of people in the scorching lands of Central Africa where, as Sir Samuel Baker notes, “the rising of the sun is always dreaded... the sun is seen as a common enemy,” words that remind us of Herodotus’ ancient description of the Atlantes or Atarantes who lived in the interior of Africa, who cursed the sun at its rising and insulted him with shameful names for afflicting them with his scorching heat, and for harming their land.[688]
The details of Sun-worship among the native races of America give an epitome of its development among mankind at large. Among many of the ruder tribes of the northern continent, the Sun is looked upon as one of the great deities, as representative of the greatest deity, or as that greatest deity himself. Indian chiefs of Hudson’s Bay smoked thrice to the rising sun. In Vancouver Island men pray in time of need to the sun as he mounts toward the zenith. Among the Delawares the sun received sacrifice as second among the twelve great manitus; the Virginians bowed before him with uplifted hands and eyes as he rose and set; the Pottawatomis would climb sometimes at sunrise on their huts, to kneel and offer to the luminary a mess of Indian corn; his likeness is found representing the Great Manitu in Algonquin picture-writings. Father Hennepin, whose name is well known to geologists as the earliest visitor to the Falls of Niagara, about 1678, gives an account of the native tribes, Sioux and others, of this far-west region. He describes them as venerating the Sun, ‘which they recognize, though only in appearance, as the Maker and Preserver of all things;’ to him first they offer the calumet when they light it, and to him they often present the best and most delicate of their game in the lodge of the chief, ‘who profits more by it than the Sun.’ The Creeks regarded the Sun as symbol or minister of the Great Spirit, sending toward him the first puff of the calumet at treaties, and bowing reverently toward him in confirming their council talk or haranguing their warriors to battle.[689] 288Among the rude Botocudos of Brazil, the idea of the Sun as the great good deity seems not unknown; the Araucanians are described as bringing offerings to him as highest deity; the Puelches as ascribing to the sun, and praying to him for, all good things they possess or desire; the Diaguitas of Tucuman as having temples dedicated to the Sun, whom they adored, and to whom they consecrated birds’ feathers, which they then brought back to their cabins, and sprinkled from time to time with the blood of animals.[690]
The practices of Sun-worship among the native tribes of America summarize its evolution among humanity as a whole. In many of the less advanced tribes of the northern continent, the Sun is seen as one of the major deities, representing the greatest deity, or as that greatest deity itself. Indian chiefs in Hudson’s Bay would smoke three times to the rising sun. In Vancouver Island, people pray to the sun during times of need as it rises toward its peak. Among the Delawares, the sun was offered sacrifices as the second among the twelve great manitus; the Virginians would bow with raised hands and eyes to it as it rose and set; and the Pottawatomis would sometimes climb onto their huts at sunrise to kneel and offer a dish of Indian corn to the luminary; its image can be found representing the Great Manitu in Algonquin pictographs. Father Hennepin, known to geologists as the first visitor to Niagara Falls around 1678, provides an account of the native tribes, including the Sioux and others from this far-western region. He describes them as honoring the Sun, which they acknowledge, albeit only in appearance, as the Creator and Sustainer of all things; they are the first to offer the calumet when lighting it, and they often present their finest and most delicate game in the chief's lodge, “who benefits more from it than the Sun.” The Creeks viewed the Sun as a symbol or messenger of the Great Spirit, sending the first puff of the calumet toward him during treaties, and bowing respectfully to him as they affirmed their council discussions or rallied their warriors for battle.[689] 288 Among the primitive Botocudos of Brazil, the concept of the Sun as the great good deity seems recognized; the Araucanians are noted for bringing offerings to him as their highest deity; the Puelches attribute all the good things they possess or desire to the sun, and pray to him for such boons; the Diaguitas of Tucuman had temples dedicated to the Sun, whom they worshiped, and to whom they dedicated birds’ feathers which they would later bring back to their homes and occasionally sprinkle with the blood of animals.[690]
Such accounts of Sun-worship appearing in the lower native culture of America, may be taken to represent its first stage. It is on the whole within distinctly higher culture that its second stage appears, where it has attained to full development of ritual and appurtenance, and become in some cases even the central doctrine of national religion and statecraft. Sun-worship had reached this level among the Natchez of Louisiana, with whom various other tribes of this district stood in close relation. Every morning at sunrise the great Sun-chief stood at the house-door facing the east, shouted and prostrated himself thrice, and smoked first toward the sun, and then toward the other three quarters. The Sun-temple was a circular hut some thirty feet across and dome-roofed: here in the midst was kept up the everlasting fire, here prayer was offered thrice daily, and here were kept images and fetishes and the bones of dead chiefs. The Natchez government was a solar hierarchy. At its head stood the great chief, called the Sun or the 289Sun’s brother, high priest and despot over his people. By his side stood his sister or nearest female relative, the female chief who of all women was alone permitted to enter the Sun-temple. Her son, after the custom of female succession common among the lower races, would succeed to the primacy and chiefship; and the solar family took to themselves, wives and husbands from the plebeian order, who were their inferiors in life, and were slain to follow them as attendants in death.[691] Another nation of sun-worshippers were the Apalaches of Florida, whose daily service was to salute the Sun at their doors as he rose and set. The Sun, they said, had built his own conical mountain of Olaimi, with its spiral path leading to the cave-temple, in the east side. Here, at the four solar festivals, the worshippers saluted the rising sun with chants and incense as his rays entered the sanctuary, and again when at midday the sunlight poured down upon the altar through the hole or shaft pierced for this purpose in the rocky vault of the cave; through this passage the sun-birds, the tonatzuli, were let fly up sunward as messengers, and the ceremony was over.[692] Day by day, in the temples of Mexico, the rising sun was welcomed with blast of horns, and incense, and offering of a little of the officiators’ own blood drawn from their ears, and a sacrifice of quails. Saying, the Sun has risen, we know not how he will fulfil his course nor whether misfortune will happen, they prayed to him—‘Our Lord, do your office prosperously.’ In distinct and absolute personality, the divine Sun in Aztec theology was Tonatiuh, whose huge pyramid-mound stands on the plain of Teotihuacan, a witness of his worship for future ages. Beyond this, the religion of Mexico, in its complex system or congeries of great gods, such as results from the mixture and alliance of the deities of several nations, shows the solar element rooted deeply and widely in other personages of its divine mythology, and attributes 290especially to the Sun the title of Teotl, God.[693] Again, the high plateau of Bogota in New Granada was the seat of the semi-civilized Chibchas or Muyscas, of whose mythology and religion the leading ideas were given by the Sun. The Sun was the great deity to whom the human sacrifices were offered, and especially the holiest sacrifice, the blood of a pure captive youth daubed on a rock on a mountain-top for the rising sun to shine on. In native Muysca legend, the mythic civilizer of the land, the teacher of agriculture, the founder of the theocracy and institutor of sun-worship, is a figure in whom we cannot fail to discern the personal Sun himself.[694] It is thus, lastly, in the far more celebrated native theocracy to the south. In the royal religion of Peru, the Sun was at once ancestor and founder of the dynasty of Incas, who reigned as his representatives and almost in his person, who took wives from the convent of virgins of the Sun, and whose descendants were the solar race, the ruling aristocracy. The Sun’s innumerable flocks of llamas grazed on the mountains, and his fields were tilled in the valleys, his temples stood throughout the land, and first among them the ‘Place of Gold’ in Cuzco, where his new fire was kindled at the annual solar festival of Raymi, and where his splendid golden disc with human countenance looked forth to receive the first rays of its divine original. Sun-worship was ancient in Peru, but it was the Incas who made it the great state religion, imposing it wherever their wide conquests reached, till it became the central idea of Peruvian life.[695] 291The culture of the Old World never surpassed this highest range of Sun-worship in the New.
Such descriptions of sun-worship found in the early native cultures of America can be seen as its initial phase. Overall, the next phase emerged within a noticeably more advanced culture, where it developed fully in terms of rituals and practices, sometimes becoming the central belief of national religion and governance. Among the Natchez of Louisiana, sun-worship had reached this level, closely related to various other tribes in the area. Every morning at sunrise, the great Sun-chief would stand at his door facing east, shout, prostrate himself three times, and then smoke toward the sun and each of the other three directions. The Sun-temple was a circular hut about thirty feet wide with a dome roof: in the center, an everlasting fire was maintained, prayers were offered three times a day, and it housed images, fetishes, and the bones of deceased chiefs. The Natchez government operated as a solar hierarchy. At the top was the great chief, known as the Sun or the Sun’s brother, who held the roles of high priest and absolute ruler over his people. Beside him was his sister or closest female relative, the female chief, the only woman allowed to enter the Sun-temple. Following the customs of female succession common among lower races, her son would inherit the chief position, and the solar family would choose spouses from the common class, who were socially inferior and killed to accompany them in death. Another sun-worshipping group was the Apalaches of Florida, who honored the Sun daily at their doors during sunrise and sunset. They believed that the Sun had created his own conical mountain at Olaimi, with a spiral path leading to a cave-temple on the eastern side. At the four solar festivals, worshippers welcomed the rising sun with chants and incense as its rays entered the sanctuary and again at midday when sunlight streamed onto the altar through a specially made hole in the cave’s rocky ceiling; through this opening, sun-birds, or tonatzuli, were released skyward as messengers, marking the end of the ceremony. Daily in the temples of Mexico, the rising sun was greeted with blasts of horns, incense, and offerings of a little blood drawn from the officiators’ ears, along with a sacrifice of quails. They prayed to the Sun, saying they didn’t know how he would fulfill his course or if misfortune would come, asking, “Our Lord, may your work prosper.” In distinct and absolute terms, the divine Sun in Aztec theology was Tonatiuh, whose massive pyramid-mound stands in the Teotihuacan plain as a testament to his worship for generations to come. Furthermore, the religion of Mexico, with its complex system of significant gods, reflects a deep and widespread solar influence throughout its divine mythology, assigning the title of Teotl, God, especially to the Sun. Additionally, the high plateau of Bogotá in New Granada was home to the semi-civilized Chibchas or Muyscas, whose mythology and religion were primarily influenced by the Sun. The Sun was the supreme deity to whom human sacrifices were made, particularly the most sacred offering of a pure captive youth’s blood smeared on a rock at the mountain top for the rising sun to shine upon. In native Muysca legend, the mythical civilizer of the land, teacher of agriculture, founder of the theocracy, and initiator of sun-worship is a figure who unmistakably represents the Sun himself. Lastly, in the more renowned native theocracy to the south, the royal religion of Peru regarded the Sun as both ancestor and founder of the Inca dynasty, who ruled as his representatives and almost as though they embodied him, marrying women from the Sun’s virginal convent, and whose descendants formed a solar race, the ruling elite. The Sun's countless flocks of llamas grazed on the mountains, his fields were cultivated in the valleys, and his temples were spread across the land, especially the ‘Place of Gold’ in Cuzco, where his new fire was ignited at the annual solar festival of Raymi, and where his magnificent golden disc with a human face awaited the first rays from its divine source. Sun-worship has ancient roots in Peru, but it was the Incas who elevated it to the major state religion, enforcing it wherever their extensive conquests extended, until it became the central aspect of Peruvian life. The culture of the Old World never surpassed this peak of sun-worship found in the New.
In Australia and Polynesia the place of the solar god or hero is rather in myth than in religion. In Africa, though found in some districts,[696] Sun-worship is not very conspicuous out of Egypt. In tracing its Old World development, we begin among the ruder Allophylian tribes of Asia, and end among the great polytheistic nations. The northeast quarter of India shows the doctrine well defined among the indigenous stocks. The Bodo and Dhimal place the Sun in the pantheon as an elemental god, though in practical rank below the sacred rivers.[697] The Kol tribes of Bengal, Mundas, Oraons, Santals, know and worship as supreme, Sing-bonga, the Sun-god; to him some tribes offer white animals in token of his purity, and while not regarding him as author of sickness or calamity, they will resort to him when other divine aid breaks down in sorest need.[698] Among the Khonds, Bura Pennu the Light-god, or Bella Pennu the Sun-god, is creator of all things in heaven and earth, and great first cause of good. As such, he is worshipped by his own sect above the ranks of minor deities whom he brought into being to carry out the details of the universal work.[699] The Tatar tribes with much unanimity recognize as a great god the Sun, whose figure may be seen beside the Moon’s on their magic drums, from Siberia to Lapland. Castrén, the ethnologist, speaking of the Samoyed expression for heaven or deity in general (jilibeambaertje), tells an anecdote from his travels, which gives a lively idea of the thorough simple nature-religion still possible to the wanderers of the steppes. ‘A Samoyed woman,’ he says, ‘told me it was her habit every morning and evening to step out of her tent and bow down before the sun; in the morning 292saying, “When thou Jilibeambaertje risest, I too rise from my bed!” in the evening, “When thou Jilibeambaertje sinkest down, I too get me to rest!” The woman brought this as a proof of her assertion that even among the Samoyeds they said their morning and evening prayers, but she added with pity that “there were also among them wild people who never sent up a prayer to God.”’ Mongol hordes may still be met with whose shamans invoke the Sun, and throw milk up into the air as an offering to him, while the Karagas Tatars would bring to him as a sacrifice the head and heart of bear or stag. Tunguz, Ostyaks, Woguls, worship him in a character blending with that of their highest deity and Heaven-god; while among the Lapps, Baiwe the Sun, though a mighty deity, stood in rank below Tiermes the Thunder-god, and the great celestial ruler who had come to bear the Norwegian name of Storjunkare.[700]
In Australia and Polynesia, the role of the sun god or hero is more about myth than actual religion. While sun worship can be found in some parts of Africa,[696] it isn’t very prominent outside of Egypt. When tracing its historical development in the Old World, we start with the more primitive Allophylian tribes of Asia and end with the large polytheistic nations. In the northeast part of India, the idea is clearly defined among the local groups. The Bodo and Dhimal see the Sun as an elemental god in their pantheon, although they rank him lower than the sacred rivers.[697] The Kol tribes of Bengal, Mundas, Oraons, and Santals recognize and worship Sing-bonga, the Sun god, as supreme; some tribes offer white animals to him as a sign of his purity. They don’t see him as the cause of sickness or disaster but turn to him in desperate times when other divine help fails.[698] Among the Khonds, Bura Pennu the Light-god, or Bella Pennu the Sun-god, is considered the creator of everything in heaven and earth and the great source of goodness. He is worshipped by his followers above the lesser deities he created to manage the details of the universe.[699] The Tatar tribes unanimously recognize the Sun as a great god, whose image appears next to the Moon’s on their magical drums, stretching from Siberia to Lapland. Castrén, the ethnologist, recounts an anecdote from his travels regarding the Samoyed term for heaven or deity in general (jilibeambaertje), illustrating the straightforward nature religion still practiced by the steppe wanderers. He mentions, "A Samoyed woman told me that every morning and evening it was her routine to step out of her tent and bow down before the sun; in the morning she would say, 'When you Jilibeambaertje rise, I too rise from my bed!' and in the evening, 'When you Jilibeambaertje set, I too go to rest!' The woman shared this as evidence of their morning and evening prayers, but added with concern that 'there are also wild people among them who never pray to God.'" Mongol groups still exist where shamans invoke the Sun and offer milk thrown into the air as a sacrifice to him, while the Karagas Tatars would sacrifice the head and heart of a bear or stag. The Tunguz, Ostyaks, and Woguls worship the Sun in a way that combines it with their highest deity and Heaven god; among the Lapps, Baiwe the Sun, although a powerful deity, holds a lower rank than Tiermes the Thunder-god and the great celestial ruler who is known by the Norwegian name Storjunkare.[700]
In direct personal nature-worship like that of Siberian nomades of our day, the solar cultus of the ancient pastoral Aryans had its source. The Vedic bards sing of the great god Sûrya, knower of beings, the all-revealer before whom the stars depart with the nights like thieves. We approach Sûrya (they say) shining god among the gods, light most glorious. He shines on the eight regions, the three worlds, the seven rivers; the golden-handed Savitar, all-seeing, goes between heaven and earth. To him they pray, ‘On thy ancient paths, O Savitar, dustless, well made, in the air, on those good-going paths this day preserve us and bless us, O God!’ Modern Hinduism is full of the ancient Sun-worship, in offerings and prostrations, in daily rites and appointed festivals, and it is Savitar the Sun who is invoked in the ‘gâyatrî,’ the time-honoured formula repeated day by day since long-past ages by every Brahman: ‘Tat Savitur varenyam bhargo devasya dhîmahi 293dhiyo yo nah prakodayât.—Let us meditate on the desirable light of the divine Sun; may he rouse our minds!’ Every morning the Brahman worships the sun, standing on one foot and resting the other against his ankle or heel, looking towards the east, holding his hands open before him in a hollow form, and repeating to himself these prayers: ‘The rays of light announce the splendid fiery sun, beautifully rising to illumine the universe.’—‘He rises, wonderful, the eye of the sun, of water, and of fire, collective power of gods; he fills heaven, earth, and sky with his luminous net; he is the soul of all that is fixed or locomotive.’—‘That eye, supremely beneficial, rises pure from the east; may we see him a hundred years; may we live a hundred years; may we hear a hundred years.’—‘May we, preserved by the divine power, contemplating heaven above the region of darkness, approach the deity, most splendid of luminaries!’[701] A Vedic celestial deity, Mitra the Friend, came to be developed in the Persian religion into that great ruling divinity of light, the victorious Mithra, lord of life and head of all created beings. The ancient Persian Mihr-Yasht invokes him in the character of the sun-light, Mithra with wide pastures, whom the lords of the regions praise at early dawn, who as the first heavenly Yazata rises over Hara-berezaiti before the sun, the immortal with swift steeds, who first with golden form seizes the fair summits, then surrounds the whole Aryan region. Mithra came to be regarded as the very Sun, as where Dionysos addresses the Tyrian Bel, ‘εἴτε σὺ Μίθρης Ηέλιος Βαβυλῶνος.’ His worship spread from the East across the Roman empire, and in Europe he takes rank among the great solar gods absolutely identified with the personal Sun, as in this inscription on a Roman altar dating from Trajan’s time—‘Deo Soli Mithræ.’[702] 294The earlier Sun-worship of Europe, upon which this new Oriental variety was intruded, in certain of its developments shows the same clear personality. The Greek Helios, to whom horses were sacrificed on the mountain-top of Taugetos, was that same personal Sun to whom Sokrates, when he had staid rapt in thought till daybreak, offered a prayer before he departed (ἔπειτ’ ὤχετ’ ἀπιὼν προσευξάμενος τῷ ἡλιῳ).[703] Cæsar devotes to the German theology of his time three lines of his Commentaries. They reckon in the number of the gods, he says, those only whom they perceive and whose benefits they openly enjoy, Sun and Vulcan and Moon, the rest they know not even by report.[704] It is true that Cæsar’s short summary does no justice to the real number and quality of the deities of the German pantheon, yet his forcible description of nature-worship in its most primitive stage may probably be true of the direct adoration of the sun and moon, and possibly of fire. On the other hand, European sun-worship leads into the most perplexing problems of mythology. Well might Cicero exclaim, ‘How many suns are set forth by the theologians!’[705] The modern student who shall undertake to discriminate among the Sun-gods of European lands, to separate the solar and non-solar elements of the Greek Apollo and Herakles, or of the Slavonic Swatowit, has a task before him complicate with that all but hopeless difficulty which besets the study of myth, the moment that the clue of direct comparison with nature falls away.
In direct personal nature-worship similar to that of modern Siberian nomads, the solar worship of the ancient pastoral Aryans originated. The Vedic poets sing of the great god Sûrya, the knower of beings, the one who reveals everything before whom the stars vanish at night like thieves. They approach Sûrya (as they say), the shining god among the gods, the most glorious light. He shines over the eight regions, the three worlds, the seven rivers; the golden-handed Savitar, who sees everything, travels between heaven and earth. They pray to him, "On your ancient, dustless paths, O Savitar, well-constructed, in the air, on those good paths, preserve us and bless us today, O God!" Modern Hinduism is rich with ancient Sun-worship, seen in offerings and prostrations, daily rituals, and established festivals, and it is Savitar the Sun who is invoked in the “gâyatrî,” the time-honored formula repeated daily by every Brahman for ages: ‘Tat Savitur varenyam bhargo devasya dhîmahi dhiyo yo nah prakodayât.—Let us meditate on the desirable light of the divine Sun; may he awaken our minds!’ Every morning, the Brahman worships the sun, standing on one foot with the other resting against his ankle or heel, looking east, hands cupped open before him, and repeating to himself these prayers: "The rays of light announce the splendid fiery sun, beautifully rising to illuminate the universe."—"He rises, amazing, the eye of the sun, water, and fire, the collective power of the gods; he fills heaven, earth, and sky with his luminous web; he is the soul of everything that is fixed or moving."—"That eye, supremely beneficial, rises pure from the east; may we see him for a hundred years; may we live for a hundred years; may we hear for a hundred years."—"May we, safeguarded by divine power, gazing upon heaven above the darkness, approach the deity, the most brilliant of lights!"[701] A Vedic celestial deity, Mitra the Friend, evolved in the Persian religion into the great divine ruler of light, the victorious Mithra, lord of life and head of all created beings. The ancient Persian Mihr-Yasht invokes him as sunlight, Mithra with vast pastures, whom the lords of the regions praise at dawn, who as the first heavenly Yazata rises over Hara-berezaiti before the sun, the immortal with swift steeds, who first with golden form grasps the beautiful peaks, then envelops the entire Aryan region. Mithra came to be viewed as the very Sun, much like where Dionysos addresses the Tyrian Bel, ‘Whether you are Mithras Helios of Babylon.’ His worship spread from the East throughout the Roman Empire, and in Europe he ranks among the great solar gods, completely identified with the personal Sun, as evidenced by this inscription on a Roman altar dating back to Trajan’s era—‘To God alone, Mithras.’[702] 294The earlier Sun-worship in Europe, from which this new Oriental variant emerged, shows the same clear personality in some of its developments. The Greek Helios, to whom horses were sacrificed on the summit of Taugetos, was that same personal Sun to whom Sokrates, lost in thought until daybreak, offered a prayer before he left (Then he left after praying to the sun.).[703] Cæsar dedicates three lines in his Commentaries to the German theology of his time. He says they only count as gods those they can see and whose benefits they openly enjoy, like the Sun, Vulcan, and Moon; the rest they don’t even know about. [704] It is true that Cæsar’s brief summary does not do justice to the actual number and nature of the deities in the German pantheon, yet his striking description of nature-worship in its most primitive form likely reflects the direct veneration of the sun and moon, and possibly fire. On the other hand, European sun-worship leads to some of the most complex problems in mythology. Cicero could well exclaim, "How many suns are described by the theologians!"[705] The modern student who takes on the task of distinguishing among the Sun-gods of European lands, sorting out the solar and non-solar aspects of Greek Apollo and Herakles, or of the Slavic Swatowit, faces a complicated challenge fraught with the almost insurmountable difficulties that arise in the study of myth once the direct comparison with nature is set aside.
The religion of ancient Egypt is one of which we know much, yet little—much of its temples, rites, names of deities, liturgical formulas, but little of the esoteric religious ideas which lay hidden within these outer manifestations. Yet it is clear that central solar conceptions as it 295were radiate through the Egyptian theology. Ra, who traverses in his boat the upper and lower regions of the universe, is the Sun himself in plain cosmic personality. And to take two obvious instances of solar characters in other deities, Osiris the manifester of good and truth, who dies by the powers of darkness and becomes judge of the dead in the west-land of Amenti, is solar in his divine nature, as is also his son Horus, smiter of the monster Set.[706] In the religions of the Semitic race, the place of the Sun is marked through a long range of centuries. The warning to the Israelites lest they should worship and serve sun, moon, and stars, and the mention of Josiah taking away the horses that the Kings of Judah had given to the sun, and burning the chariots of the sun with fire,[707] agree with the place given in other Semitic religions to the Sun-god, Shamas of Assyria, or Baal, even expressly qualified as Baal-Shemesh or Lord Sun. Syrian religion, like Persian, introduced a new phase of Sun-worship into Rome, the cultus of Elagabal, and the vile priest emperor who bore this divine name made it more intelligible to classic ears as Heliogabalus.[708] Eusebius is a late writer as regards Semitic religion, but with such facts as these before us we need not withhold our confidence from him when he describes the Phœnicians and Egyptians as holding Sun, Moon, and Stars to be gods, sole causes of the generation and destruction of all things.[709]
The religion of ancient Egypt is something we know a lot about, yet very little—much about its temples, rituals, names of gods, and ceremonial texts, but not much about the deeper religious concepts hidden beneath these outward expressions. However, it’s clear that central solar ideas are prominent in Egyptian theology. Ra, who travels in his boat through the upper and lower parts of the universe, is essentially the Sun itself in a straightforward cosmic form. To cite two clear examples of solar influences in other deities, Osiris, who embodies goodness and truth, dies at the hands of darkness and becomes the judge of the dead in the western land of Amenti; he has a solar aspect to his divine nature, as does his son Horus, the one who defeats the monster Set. In the religions of the Semitic people, the Sun's role is significant throughout many centuries. The warning to the Israelites not to worship or serve the sun, moon, and stars, and the mention of Josiah removing the horses that the kings of Judah dedicated to the sun, while burning the sun chariots with fire, aligns with the status of the Sun-god in other Semitic religions, like Shamas of Assyria or Baal, who is even specifically called Baal-Shemesh or Lord Sun. The Syrian religion, similar to the Persian, brought a new phase of Sun-worship to Rome, seen in the cult of Elagabalus, the infamous priest-emperor who adopted this divine name, making it easier for the Romans to understand as Heliogabalus. Eusebius, though a later writer on Semitic religion, helps us recognize that we can trust him when he describes the Phoenicians and Egyptians as believing that the Sun, Moon, and Stars are gods, the sole sources of the creation and destruction of all things.
The widely spread and deeply rooted religion of the Sun naturally offered strenuous resistance to the invasion of Christianity, and it was one of the great signs of the religious change of the civilized world when Constantine, that ardent votary of the Sun, abandoned the faith of Apollo for that of Christ. Amalgamation even proved possible 296between the doctrines of Sabæism and Christianity, and in and near Armenia a sect of Sun-worshippers have lasted on into modern times under the profession of Jacobite Christians;[710] a parallel case within the limits of Mohammedanism being that of Beduin Arabs who still continue the old adoration of the rising sun, in spite of the Prophet’s expressed command not to bow before the sun or moon, and in spite of the good Moslem’s dictum, that ‘the sun rises between the devil’s horns.’[711] Actual worship of the sun in Christendom soon shrank to the stage of survival. In Lucian’s time the Greeks kissed their hands as an act of worship to the rising sun; and Tertullian had still to complain of many Christians that with an affectation of adoring the heavenly bodies they would move their lips toward the sunrise (Sed et plerique vestrum affectatione aliquando et cœlestia adorandi ad solis ortum labia vibratis).[712] In the 5th century, Leo the Great complains of certain Christians who, before entering the Basilica of St. Peter, or from the top of a hill, would turn and bow to the rising sun; this comes, he says, partly of ignorance and partly of the spirit of paganism.[713] To this day, in the Upper Palatinate, the peasant takes off his hat to the rising sun; and in Pomerania, the fever-stricken patient is to pray thrice turning toward the sun at sunrise, ‘Dear Sun, come soon down, and take the seventy-seven fevers from me. In the name of God the Father, &c.’[714]
The widely spread and deeply rooted religion of the Sun naturally resisted the spread of Christianity, and it was a significant sign of the religious shift in the civilized world when Constantine, who was a devoted follower of the Sun, switched from believing in Apollo to believing in Christ. It even became possible to blend the doctrines of Sabæism and Christianity, and in and around Armenia, a group of Sun-worshippers has persisted into modern times under the identity of Jacobite Christians; a similar case within Islam is that of Beduin Arabs who continue the ancient worship of the rising sun, despite the Prophet’s clear instruction not to bow before the sun or moon, and despite the good Muslim's saying that ‘the sun rises between the devil’s horns.’ Actual worship of the sun in Christendom eventually dwindled to a mere remnant. In Lucian’s time, the Greeks would kiss their hands as a form of worship to the rising sun, and Tertullian still had to point out that many Christians, pretending to worship heavenly bodies, would move their lips toward the sunrise. In the 5th century, Leo the Great complained about certain Christians who would bow to the rising sun before entering St. Peter’s Basilica or from the top of a hill; he said this happened partly due to ignorance and partly due to lingering paganism. Even today, in the Upper Palatinate, peasants take off their hats to the rising sun; and in Pomerania, a patient with a fever is supposed to pray three times facing the sun at sunrise, saying, ‘Dear Sun, come soon down, and take the seventy-seven fevers from me. In the name of God the Father, etc.’
For the most part, the ancient rites of solar worship are represented in modern Christendom in two ways; by the ceremonies connected with turning to the east, of which an account is given in an ensuing chapter under the heading of Orientation; and in the continuance of the great sun-festivals, 297countenanced by or incorporated in Christianity. Spring-tide, reckoned by so many peoples as New-Year, has in great measure had its solar characteristics transferred to the Paschal festival. The Easter bonfires with which the North German hills used to be ablaze mile after mile, are not altogether given up by local custom. On Easter morning in Saxony and Brandenburg, the peasants still climb the hill-tops before dawn, to see the rising sun give his three joyful leaps, as our forefathers used to do in England in the days when Sir Thomas Browne so quaintly apologized for declaring that ‘the sun doth not dance on Easter Day.’ The solar rite of the New Fire, adopted by the Roman Church as a Paschal ceremony, may still be witnessed in Europe, with its solemn curfew on Easter Eve, and the ceremonial striking of the new holy fire. On Easter Eve, under the solemn auspices of the Greek Church, a mob of howling fanatics crush and trample to death the victims who faint and fall in their struggles to approach the most shameless imposture of modern Christendom, the miraculous fire from heaven which descends into the Holy Sepulchre.[715] Two other Christian festivals have not merely had solar rites transferred to them, but seem distinctly themselves of solar origin. The Roman winter-solstice festival, as celebrated on December 25 (VIII. Kal. Jan.) in connexion with the worship of the Sun-god Mithra, appears to have been instituted in this special form after the Eastern campaign of Aurelian A.D. 273, and to this festival the day owes its apposite name of Birthday of the Unconquered Sun, ‘Dies Natalis Solis invicti.’ With full symbolic appropriateness, though not with historical justification, the day was adopted in the Western Church, where it appears to have been generally introduced by the 4th century, and whence in time it passed to the Eastern Church, as the solemn anniversary of the birth of Christ, 298the Christian Dies Natalis, Christmas Day. Attempts have been made to ratify this date as matter of history, but no valid nor even consistent early Christian tradition vouches for it. The real solar origin of the festival is clear from the writings of the Fathers after its institution. In religious symbolism of the material and spiritual sun, Augustine and Gregory of Nyassa discourse on the glowing light and dwindling darkness that follow the Nativity, while Leo the Great, among whose people the earlier solar meaning of the festival evidently remained in strong remembrance, rebukes in a sermon the pestiferous persuasion, as he calls it, that this solemn day is to be honoured not for the birth of Christ, but for the rising, as they say, of the new sun.[716] As for modern memory of the sun-rites of mid-winter, Europe recognizes Christmas as a primitive solar festival by bonfires which our ‘yule-log,’ the ‘souche de Noël,’ still keeps in mind; while the adaptation of ancient solar thought to Christian allegory is as plain as ever in the Christmas service chant, ‘Sol novus oritur.’[717] The solar Christmas festival has its pendant at Midsummer. The summer solstice was the great season of fire-festivals throughout Europe, of bonfires on the heights, of dancing round and leaping through the fires, of sending blazing fire-wheels to roll down from the hills into the valleys in sign of the sun’s descending course. These ancient rites attached themselves in Christendom to St. John’s Eve.[718] It seems as though the same train of symbolism which had adapted the midwinter festival to the Nativity, may have suggested the dedication of the midsummer festival to John the Baptist, in clear allusion to his words, ‘He must increase, but I must decrease.’
For the most part, the ancient rituals of sun worship are represented in modern Christianity in two ways: through the ceremonies associated with facing east, which are described in a later chapter under the heading of Orientation, and through the continuation of significant sun festivals, 297endorsed or integrated into Christianity. Spring, which many cultures consider New Year's, has largely transferred its solar traits to the Paschal festival. The Easter bonfires that once lit up the North German hills mile after mile are not entirely abandoned by local customs. On Easter morning in Saxony and Brandenburg, peasants still hike up the hills before dawn to watch the rising sun perform its three joyful leaps, just as our ancestors in England did back when Sir Thomas Browne humorously apologized for stating that "the sun doesn’t dance on Easter Day." The solar rite of the New Fire, adopted by the Roman Church as a Paschal ceremony, can still be seen in Europe, marked by a solemn curfew on Easter Eve and the ceremonial striking of the new holy fire. On Easter Eve, under the serious supervision of the Greek Church, a crowd of shouting fanatics tragically crush and trample their victims who faint and fall while desperately trying to reach the most disgraceful fraud in modern Christianity, the miraculous fire from heaven that descends into the Holy Sepulchre.[715] Two other Christian festivals haven’t just adopted solar rites; they seem to have distinct solar origins. The Roman winter solstice festival, celebrated on December 25 (VIII. Kal. Jan.) in connection with the worship of the Sun-god Mithra, appears to have been established in this specific form after Aurelian’s Eastern campaign in A.D. 273, and this festival gave the day its fitting name, the Birthday of the Unconquered Sun, ‘Birthday of the Unconquered Sun.’ Although it was appropriate symbolically, there’s no historical justification for adopting this day in the Western Church, where it seems to have been mostly introduced by the 4th century, and eventually passed to the Eastern Church as the solemn anniversary of Christ's birth, 298the Christian Birthday, Christmas Day. Attempts have been made to validate this date historically, but no reliable or even consistent early Christian tradition supports it. The true solar origin of the festival is evident from the writings of the Church Fathers following its establishment. In their religious symbolism of the material and spiritual sun, Augustine and Gregory of Nyssa talk about the bright light and fading darkness that follow the Nativity, while Leo the Great, among whose people the earlier solar significance of the festival clearly remained strong, criticizes in a sermon the harmful belief, as he calls it, that this solemn day should be honored not for Christ's birth, but for the rising, as some say, of the new sun.[716] Regarding the modern remembrance of mid-winter sun rituals, Europe acknowledges Christmas as a primitive solar festival through bonfires, which our ‘yule-log,’ the ‘souche de Noël,’ still brings to mind; while the adaptation of ancient solar ideas to Christian allegory is just as clear as ever in the Christmas service chant, ‘A new sun rises.’[717] The solar Christmas festival has its counterpart at Midsummer. The summer solstice was the major season for fire festivals all over Europe, with bonfires on hilltops, dancing around and leaping through the fires, and sending blazing fire-wheels rolling down from the hills into the valleys to symbolize the sun’s descending path. These ancient rituals became associated with St. John’s Eve.[718] It seems that the same symbolism which reworked the midwinter festival for the Nativity may have inspired the dedication of the midsummer festival to John the Baptist, strongly referencing his words, "He must increase, but I must decrease."
299Moon-worship, naturally ranking below Sun-worship in importance, ranges through nearly the same district of culture. There are remarkable cases in which the Moon is recognized as a great deity by tribes who take less account, or none at all, of the Sun. The rude savages of Brazil seem especially to worship or respect the moon, by which they regulate their time and festivals, and draw their omens. They would lift up their hands to the moon with wonder-struck exclamations of teh! teh! they would have children smoked by the sorcerers to preserve them from moon-given sickness, or the women would hold up their babes to the luminary. The Botocudos are said to give the highest rank among the heavenly bodies to Taru the Moon, as causing thunder and lightning and the failure of vegetables and fruits, and as even sometimes falling to the earth, whereby many men die.[719] An old account of the Caribs describes them as esteeming the Moon more than the Sun, and at new moon coming out of their houses crying ‘Behold the Moon!’[720] The Ahts of Vancouver’s Island, it is stated, worship the Sun and Moon, particularly the full moon and the sun ascending to the zenith. Regarding the Moon as husband and the Sun as wife, their prayers are more generally addressed to the Moon as the superior deity; he is the highest object of their worship, and they speak of him as ‘looking down upon the earth in answer to prayer, and seeing everybody.’[721] With a somewhat different turn of mythic fancy, the Hurons seem to have considered Ataentsic the Moon as maker of the earth and man, and grandmother of Iouskeha the Sun, with whom she governs the world.[722] In Africa, Moon-worship is prominent in an immense district where Sun-worship is unknown or insignificant. Among south-central tribes, men will watch for the 300first glimpses of the new Moon, which they hail with shouts of kua! and vociferate prayers to it; on such an occasion Dr. Livingstone’s Makololo prayed, ‘Let our journey with the white man be prosperous!’ &c.[723] These people keep holiday at new-moon, as indeed in many countries her worship is connected with the settlement of periodic festival. Negro tribes seem almost universally to greet the new Moon, whether in delight or disgust. The Guinea people fling themselves about with droll gestures, and pretend to throw firebrands at it; the Ashango men behold it with superstitious fear; the Fetu negroes jumped thrice into the air with hands together and gave thanks.[724] The Congo people fell on their knees, or stood and clapped their hands, crying, ‘So may I renew my life as thou art renewed!’[725] The Hottentots are described early in the last century as dancing and singing all night at new and full moon, calling the Moon the Great Captain, and crying to him ‘Be greeted!’ ‘Let us get much honey!’ ‘May our cattle get much to eat and give much milk!’ With the same thought as that just noticed in the district north-west of them, the Hottentots connect the Moon in legend with that fatal message sent to Man, which ought to have promised to the human race a moon-like renewal of life, but which was perverted into a doom of death like that of the beast who brought it.[726]
299Moon-worship, which is obviously less important than Sun-worship, covers almost the same areas of culture. There are notable instances where the Moon is revered as a significant deity by tribes that pay little attention, or none at all, to the Sun. The primitive tribes of Brazil seem particularly to honor or respect the Moon, which they use to track time and plan their festivities, as well as to interpret omens. They would lift their hands to the Moon with awestruck exclamations of "teh! teh!" They would have children smoke to ward off illnesses caused by the Moon, or mothers would hold their babies up to the light. The Botocudos are said to regard Taru the Moon as the most important of the celestial bodies, as he causes thunder and lightning and affects crops and fruit, and is even known to fall to the earth, resulting in the death of many people.[719] An old account of the Caribs describes them as valuing the Moon more than the Sun, and at the new moon, they come out of their homes shouting "Behold the Moon!"[720] The Ahts of Vancouver Island are said to worship both the Sun and Moon, particularly the full Moon and the Sun as it reaches its highest point in the sky. They view the Moon as the husband and the Sun as the wife, and their prayers are mostly directed to the Moon as the superior deity; he is their primary object of worship, and they refer to him as "looking down upon the earth in response to prayer, seeing everyone." [721] With a slightly different mythological twist, the Hurons seem to have viewed Ataentsic the Moon as the creator of the earth and man, and the grandmother of Iouskeha the Sun, with whom she oversees the world.[722] In Africa, Moon-worship is prevalent in vast regions where Sun-worship is either absent or minimal. Among tribes in the south-central region, men eagerly await the first appearance of the new Moon, which they greet with shouts of "kua!" and loudly pray to it; on such occasions, Dr. Livingstone's Makololo would pray, "Let our journey with the white man be successful!" and so on.[723] These communities celebrate the new Moon, as in many cultures her worship is associated with the scheduling of regular festivals. African tribes seem almost universally to welcome the new Moon, whether joyfully or with disdain. The people of Guinea perform lively gestures and pretend to throw firebrands at it; the Ashango men regard it with superstitious dread; the Fetu people leap three times into the air with their hands together and give thanks.[724] The Congo people would kneel or stand and clap their hands, exclaiming, "So may I renew my life as you are renewed!"[725] The Hottentots were noted in the early 19th century for dancing and singing all night during the new and full Moon, referring to the Moon as the Great Captain, and calling out to him, "Be greeted!" "May we gather plenty of honey!" "May our cattle have plenty to eat and give abundant milk!" Similar to what was just mentioned in the area northwest of them, the Hottentots connect the Moon in their legends to that fateful message sent to Man, which was supposed to ensure a renewal of life resembling that of the Moon but was twisted into a doom of death like that of the beast who brought it.[726]
The more usual status of the Moon in the religions of the world is, as nature suggests, that of a subordinate companion deity to the Sun, such a position as is acknowledged in the precedence of Sunday to Monday. Their various mutual relations as brother and sister, husband and wife, have already been noticed here as matter of mythology. As wide-lying rude races who place them thus side by side in their theology, it is enough to mention the Delawares of 301North America,[727] the Ainos of Yesso,[728] the Bodos of North-East-India,[729] the Tunguz of Siberia.[730] This is the state of things which continues at higher levels of systematic civilization. Beside the Mexican Tonatiuh the Sun, Metztli the Moon had a smaller pyramid and temple;[731] in Bogota, the Moon, identified in local myth with the Evil Deity, had her place and figure in the temple beside the Sun her husband;[732] the Peruvian Mother-Moon, Mama-Quilla, had her silver disc-face to match the golden one of her brother and husband the Sun, whose companion she had been in the legendary civilizing of the land.[733] In the ancient Kami-religion of Japan, the supreme Sun-god ranks high above the Moon-god, who was worshipped under the form of a fox.[734] Among the historic nations of the Old World, documents of Semitic culture show Sun and Moon side by side. For one, we may take the Jewish law, to stone with stones till they died the man or woman who ‘hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven.’ For another, let us glance over the curious record of the treaty-oath between Philip of Macedon and the general of the Carthaginian and Libyan army, which so well shows how the original identity of nature-deities may be forgotten in their different local shapes, so that the same divinity may come twice or even three times over in as many national names and forms. Herakles and Apollo stand in company with the personal Sun, and as well as the personal Moon is to be seen the ‘Carthaginian deity,’ whom there is reason to look on as Astarte, a goddess latterly of lunar nature. This is the list of deities invoked: ‘Before Zeus and Hera and 302Apollo; before the goddess of the Carthaginians (δαίμονος Καρχηδονίων) and Herakles and Iolaos; before Ares, Triton, Poseidon; before the gods who fought with the armies, and Sun and Moon and Earth; before the rivers and meadows and waters; before all the gods who rule Macedonia and the rest of Greece; before all the gods who were at the war, they who have presided over this oath.’[735] When Lucian visited the famous temple of Hierapolis in Syria, he saw the images of the other gods, ‘but only of the Sun and Moon they show no images.’ And when he asked why, they told him that the forms of other gods were not seen by all, but Sun and Moon are altogether clear, and all men see them.[736] In Egyptian theology, not to discuss other divine beings to whom a lunar nature has been ascribed, it is at least certain that Khonsu is the Moon in absolute personal divinity.[737] In Aryan theology, the personal Moon stands as Selēnē beside the more anthropomorphic forms of Hekatē and Artemis,[738] as Luna beside the less understood Lucina, and Diana with her borrowed attributes,[739] while our Teutonic forefathers were content with his plain name of Moon.[740] As for lunar survivals in the higher religions, they are much like the solar. Monotheist as he is, the Moslem still claps his hands at sight of the new moon, and says a prayer.[741] In Europe in the 15th century it was matter of complaint that some still adored the new moon with bended knee, or hood or hat removed, and to this day we may still see a hat raised or a curtsey dropped to her, half in conservatism and half in jest. It is with reference to silver as the lunar metal, that money is turned 303when the act of adoration is performed, while practical peasant wit dwells on the ill-luck of having no piece of silver when the new moon is first seen.[742]
The typical role of the Moon in world religions is, as nature suggests, that of a secondary companion deity to the Sun, a position acknowledged in the preference of Sunday over Monday. Their various relationships as siblings or spouses have already been discussed in terms of mythology. Among different indigenous cultures that position them side by side in their beliefs, we can mention the Delawares of North America, the Ainos of Yesso, the Bodos of Northeast India, and the Tunguz of Siberia. This dynamic of the Moon and Sun continues even in more advanced civilizations. For instance, in Mexico, the Sun god Tonatiuh had a large pyramid and temple, while the Moon goddess Metztli had a smaller one; in Bogotá, the Moon, linked in local myth with evil, was represented in a temple next to her husband, the Sun; and in Peru, the Mother Moon, Mama-Quilla, had her silver disc-face to match the golden face of her brother and husband, the Sun, whom she accompanied in legends about civilizing the land. In ancient Japanese Kami religion, the supreme Sun god is ranked much higher than the Moon god, who was worshiped in the form of a fox. Among the historically significant nations of the Old World, records from Semitic culture show the Sun and Moon together. For example, Jewish law states that a man or woman who “has gone and served other gods, and worshiped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven” should be stoned to death. Another example is the historical treaty-oath between Philip of Macedon and the general of the Carthaginian and Libyan army, which illustrates how the original identity of nature-deities can be forgotten as they take on different local forms, allowing the same divinity to appear multiple times under various names and shapes. Herakles and Apollo are depicted alongside the personal Sun, as is the “Carthaginian deity,” thought to be Astarte, a goddess of lunar nature. The deities invoked include: “Before Zeus and Hera and Apollo; before the goddess of the Carthaginians and Herakles and Iolaos; before Ares, Triton, Poseidon; before the gods who fought with the armies, and Sun and Moon and Earth; before the rivers and meadows and waters; before all the gods who rule Macedonia and the rest of Greece; before all the gods who were at the war, they who have presided over this oath.” When Lucian visited the famous temple of Hierapolis in Syria, he noted the images of all other gods, “but only of the Sun and Moon they show no images.” When he inquired why, they explained that the forms of other gods were not visible to everyone, but the Sun and Moon are clear for all to see. In Egyptian theology, while there are other divine beings associated with a lunar nature, it is clear that Khonsu represents the Moon in absolute personal divinity. In Aryan theology, the personal Moon is represented as Selēnē next to the more anthropomorphic forms of Hekatē and Artemis, as Luna beside the less understood Lucina, and Diana with her borrowed features, while our Teutonic ancestors simply referred to him as the Moon. Regarding lunar remnants in higher religions, they resemble solar elements. Despite being monotheistic, Muslims still clap their hands upon seeing the new moon and say a prayer. In 15th-century Europe, there were complaints that some still worshipped the new moon with a bow, or with their hood or hat removed, and to this day, we might still see someone tip their hat or curtsy to her, partly in tradition and partly in jest. Referring to silver as the lunar metal, money is turned over during the act of reverence, while practical rural wisdom points out the bad luck of being without a piece of silver when the new moon is first sighted.
Thus, in tracing the development of Nature-Worship, it appears that though Fire, Air, Earth, and Water are not yet among the lower races systematized into a quaternion of elements, their adoration, with that of Sun and Moon, shows already arising in primitive culture the familiar types of those great divinities, who received their further development in the higher Polytheism.
Thus, in exploring the evolution of Nature-Worship, it seems that although Fire, Air, Earth, and Water are not yet organized into a set of four elements among the lower races, their veneration, along with that of the Sun and Moon, indicates that the familiar forms of these significant deities are starting to emerge in primitive culture, which later evolved into more complex Polytheism.
CHAPTER XVII.
ANIMISM (continued).
Polytheism comprises a class of Great Deities, ruling the course of Nature and the life of Man—Childbirth-god—Agriculture-god—War-god—God of the Dead—First Man as Divine Ancestor—Dualism; its rudimentary and unethical nature among low races; its development through the course of culture—Good and Evil Deity—Doctrine of Divine Supremacy, distinct from, while tending towards, the doctrine of Monotheism—Idea of a Highest or Supreme Deity evolved in various forms; its place as completion of the Polytheistic system and outcome of the Animistic philosophy; its continuance and development among higher nations—General survey of Animism as a Philosophy of Religion—Recapitulation of the theory advanced as to its development through successive stages of culture; its primary phases best represented among the lower races, while survivals of these among the higher races mark the transition from savage through barbaric to civilized faiths—Transition of Animism in the History of Religion; its earlier and later stages as a Philosophy of the Universe; its later stages as the principle of a Moral Institution.
Polytheism includes a group of major deities who govern nature and human life—gods of childbirth, agriculture, war, the dead, and the First Man as a divine ancestor. There's dualism; its basic and unethical aspects among primitive cultures; its evolution through cultural development—good and evil deities—belief in divine supremacy, which is separate yet leaning towards monotheism—concepts of a highest or supreme deity appearing in various forms; this completes the polytheistic framework and results from animistic philosophy; it continues and develops among more advanced societies—overview of animism as a religious philosophy—summary of the theory regarding its development through different cultural stages; its initial forms are best represented among lower societies, while remnants of these in higher societies indicate the shift from savage to barbaric to civilized beliefs—transition of animism in the history of religion; its earlier and later phases as a philosophy of the universe; its later phases as a foundation for moral institutions.
Polytheism acknowledges, beside great fetish-deities like Heaven and Earth, Sun and Moon, another class of great gods whose importance lies not in visible presence, but in the performance of certain great offices in the course of Nature and the life of Man. The lower races can furnish themselves with such deities, either by giving the recognized gods special duties to perform, or by attributing these functions to beings invented in divine personality for the purpose. The creation of such divinities is however carried to a much greater extent in the complex systems of the higher polytheism. For a compact group of examples showing to what different ideas men will resort for a deity to answer a special end, let us take the deity presiding over 305Childbirth. In the West Indies, a special divinity occupied with this function took rank as one of the great indigenous fetish-gods;[743] in the Samoan group, the household god of the father’s or mother’s family was appealed to;[744] in Peru the Moon takes to this office,[745] and the same natural idea recurs in Mexico;[746] in Esthonian religion the productive Earth-mother appropriately becomes patroness of human birth;[747] in the classic theology of Greece and Italy, the divine spouse of the Heaven-king, Hera,[748] Juno,[749] favours and protects on earth marriage and the birth of children; and to conclude the list, the Chinese work out the problem from the manes-worshipper’s point of view, for the goddess whom they call ‘Mother’ and propitiate with many a ceremony and sacrifice to save and prosper their children, is held to have been in human life a skilful midwife.[750]
Polytheism recognizes, alongside major deities like Heaven and Earth, the Sun and the Moon, another category of significant gods whose value is found not in their physical presence, but in their role in essential aspects of Nature and human life. Lower societies can create such deities by assigning specific roles to known gods or by inventing new divine figures to carry out those functions. However, the creation of these divine beings is much more extensive in the intricate systems of higher polytheism. To illustrate the different concepts people adopt for a deity to fulfill a specific purpose, consider the deity associated with childbirth. In the West Indies, a specific deity responsible for this role was revered as one of the principal indigenous gods; in the Samoan islands, the household god of either the father's or mother's family was invoked; in Peru, the Moon serves this function, and this same idea appears in Mexico; in Estonian mythology, the Earth-mother, known for fertility, becomes the patron of childbirth; in the classical belief systems of Greece and Italy, Hera, the divine partner of the Heaven-king, and Juno, support and protect marriage and the birth of children on Earth; and finally, the Chinese approach the matter from the perspective of ancestor worship, believing that their goddess, known as ‘Mother’, who is honored through various ceremonies and sacrifices to ensure the safety and prosperity of their children, was once a skilled midwife in human life.
The deity of Agriculture may be a cosmic being affecting the weather and the soil, or a mythic giver of plants and teacher of their cultivation and use. Thus among the Iroquois, Heno the Thunder, who rides through the heavens on the clouds, who splits the forest-trees with the thunderbolt-stones he hurls at his enemies, who gathers the clouds and pours out the warm rains, was fitly chosen as patron of husbandry, invoked at seed-time and harvest, and called Grandfather by his children the Indians.[751] It is interesting to notice again on the southern continent the working out of this idea in the Tupan of Brazilian tribes; Thunder and Lightning, it is recorded, they call Tupan, considering themselves to owe to him their hoes and the profitable art of tillage, and therefore acknowledging him as a deity.[752] 306Among the Guarani race, Tamoi the Ancient of Heaven had no less rightful claim, in his character of heaven-god, to be venerated as the divine teacher of agriculture to his people.[753] In Mexico, Centeotl the Grain-goddess received homage and offerings at her two great festivals, and took care of the growth and keeping of the corn.[754] In Polynesia, we hear in the Society Islands of Ofanu the god of husbandry, in the Tonga Islands of Alo Alo the fanner, god of wind and weather, bearing office as god of harvest, and receiving his offering of yams when he had ripened them.[755] A picturesque figure from barbaric Asia is Pheebee Yau, the Ceres of the Karens, who sits on a stump and watches the growing and ripening com, to fill the granaries of the frugal and industrious.[756] The Khonds worship at the same shrine, a stone or tree near the village, both Būrbi Pennu the goddess of new vegetation, and Pidzu Pennu the rain-god.[757] Among Finns and Esths it is the Earth-mother who appropriately undertakes the task of bringing forth the fruits.[758] And so among the Greeks it is the same being, Dēmētēr the Earth-mother, who performs this function, while the Roman Ceres who is confused with her is rather, as in Mexico, a goddess of grain and fruit.[759]
The deity of Agriculture can be a cosmic being influencing the weather and soil, or a mythical provider of plants and a teacher of their cultivation and use. Among the Iroquois, Heno the Thunder rides through the sky on clouds, strikes down forest trees with thunderbolt-stones that he throws at his enemies, gathers clouds, and releases warm rains. He was rightly named the patron of farming, called upon during planting and harvest, and affectionately referred to as Grandfather by his children, the Indians.[751] It's interesting to see a similar concept on the southern continent with the Tupan of Brazilian tribes; they refer to Thunder and Lightning as Tupan, acknowledging him as a deity from whom they believe they received their hoes and the useful skill of farming.[752] 306 Among the Guarani, Tamoi the Ancient of Heaven rightly deserves respect as the god of heaven and the divine teacher of agriculture for his people.[753] In Mexico, Centeotl the Grain-goddess is honored and offered gifts during her two major festivals, taking care of the growth and maintenance of corn.[754] In Polynesia, in the Society Islands, we find Ofanu, the god of farming, while in the Tonga Islands there's Alo Alo, the fanner, god of wind and weather, who oversees the harvest and receives offerings of yams when they are ripe.[755] A colorful figure from ancient Asia is Pheebee Yau, the Ceres of the Karens, who sits on a stump and watches over the growing and ripening corn, ensuring it fills the granaries of the hardworking and careful people.[756] The Khonds worship at the same shrine, a stone or tree near their village, both Būrbi Pennu, the goddess of new vegetation, and Pidzu Pennu, the rain-god.[757] Among the Finns and Esths, it is the Earth-mother who fittingly takes on the role of bringing forth the fruits.[758] Similarly, among the Greeks, it is Dēmētēr, the Earth-mother, who fulfills this role, while the Roman Ceres, who is often mixed up with her, is more like a goddess of grain and fruit, similar to the case in Mexico.[759]
The War-god is another being wanted among the lower races, and formed or adapted accordingly. Areskove the Iroquois War-god seems to be himself the great celestial deity; for his pleasant food they slaughtered human victims, that he might give them victory over their enemies; as a pleasant sight for him they tortured the war-captives; on him the war-chief called in solemn council, and the warriors, shouting his name, rushed into the battle he was surveying 307from on high. Canadian Indians before the fight would look toward the sun, or addressed the Great Spirit as god of war; Floridan Indians prayed to the Sun before their wars.[760] Araucanians of Chili entreated Pillan the Thunder-god that he would scatter their enemies, and thanked him amidst their cups after a victory.[761] The very name of Mexico seems derived from Mexitli, the national War-god, identical or identified with the hideous gory Huitzilopochtli. Not to attempt a general solution of the enigmatic nature of this inextricable compound parthenogenetic deity, we may notice the association of his principal festival with the winter-solstice, when his paste idol was shot through with an arrow, and being thus killed, was divided into morsels and eaten, wherefore the ceremony was called the teoqualo or ‘god-eating.’ This and other details tend to show Huitzilopochtli as originally a nature-deity, whose life and death were connected with the year’s, while his functions of War-god may be of later addition.[762] Polynesia is a region where quite an assortment of war-gods may be collected. Such, to take but one example, was Tairi, war-god of King Kamehameha of the Sandwich Islands, whose hideous image, covered with red feathers, shark-toothed, mother-of-pearl-eyed, with helmet-crest of human hair, was carried into battle by his special priest, distorting his own face into hideous grins, and uttering terrific yells which were considered to proceed from the god.[763] Two examples from Asia may show what different original conceptions may serve to shape such deities as these upon. The Khond War-god, who entered into all weapons, so that from instruments of peace they became weapons of war, who gave edge to the axe and point to the arrow, is the very personified spirit of tribal war, 308his token is the relic of iron and the iron weapons buried in his sacred grove which stands near each group of hamlets, and his name is Loha Pennu or Iron-god.[764] The Chinese War-god, Kuang Tä, on the other hand, is an ancient military ghost; he was a distinguished officer, as well as a ‘faithful and honest courtier,’ who flourished during the wars of the Han dynasty, and emperors since then have delighted to honour him by adding to his usual title more and more honorary distinctions.[765] Looking at these selections from the army of War-gods of the different regions of the world, we may well leave their classic analogues, Arēs and Mars, as beings whose warlike function we recognize, but not so easily their original nature.[766]
The War-god is another figure sought after by the lower races, and is formed or adapted accordingly. Areskove, the Iroquois War-god, seems to be a great celestial deity himself; for his favor, they sacrificed human victims so he would grant them victory over their enemies; as a pleasing sight for him, they tortured war captives; the war chief called on him in solemn council, and the warriors, shouting his name, charged into battle that he was observing from above. Canadian Indians would look to the sun or address the Great Spirit as the god of war before a fight; Floridian Indians prayed to the Sun before going to war. The Araucanians of Chile asked Pillan, the Thunder-god, to scatter their enemies and thanked him amidst their celebrations after a victory. The very name of Mexico seems to come from Mexitli, the national War-god, who is identified with the terrifyingly bloody Huitzilopochtli. Without attempting to provide a general explanation for the complex nature of this intricate compound parthenogenetic deity, we may note the connection of his main festival with the winter solstice, when his paste idol was shot with an arrow, 'killed', and then divided into pieces and eaten, hence the ceremony was called the teoqualo, or ‘god-eating.’ This, along with other details, suggests Huitzilopochtli originally was a nature-deity, whose life and death were tied to the cycle of the year, while his role as a War-god may have been a later addition. Polynesia is a region that has quite a variety of war-gods. For example, Tairi was the war-god of King Kamehameha of the Sandwich Islands, whose terrifying image, covered in red feathers, shark teeth, and mother-of-pearl eyes, with a helmet crest made of human hair, was brought into battle by his special priest, contorting his face into horrifying grins and shouting terrible yells that were thought to come from the god. Two examples from Asia illustrate the different original concepts that shape such deities. The Khond War-god enters into all weapons, transforming instruments of peace into weapons of war, giving sharpness to the axe and point to the arrow; he is the very spirit of tribal war, represented by relics of iron and iron weapons buried in his sacred grove near each cluster of hamlets, and his name is Loha Pennu, or Iron-god. The Chinese War-god, Kuang Tä, on the other hand, is an ancient military ghost; he was a notable officer and a ‘faithful and honest courtier’ during the wars of the Han dynasty, and since then emperors have delighted in honoring him with more and more honorary titles. Looking at these selections from the various War-gods around the world, we may recognize their warlike role much like that of Arēs and Mars, but understanding their original nature is less straightforward.
It would be easy, going through the religious systems of Polynesia and Mexico, Greece and Rome, India and China, to give the names and offices of a long list of divinities, patrons of hunting and fishing, carpentering and weaving, and so forth. But studying here rather the continuity of polytheistic ideas than the analysis of polytheistic divinities, it is needless to proceed farther in the comparison of these deities of special function, as recognized to some extent in the lower civilization, before their elaborate development became one of the great features of the higher.
It would be simple to go through the religious systems of Polynesia and Mexico, Greece and Rome, India and China, and provide the names and roles of many gods, patrons of hunting and fishing, carpentry and weaving, and so on. However, focusing more on the continuity of polytheistic ideas rather than analyzing the individual polytheistic gods, there’s no need to dig deeper into comparing these function-specific deities, as they were recognized to some degree in earlier civilizations before their complex development became a prominent aspect of more advanced societies.
The great polytheistic deities we have been examining, concerned as they are with the earthly course of nature and human life, are gods of the living. But even in savage levels man began to feel an intellectual need of a God of the Dead, to reign over the souls of men in the next life, and this necessity has been supplied in various ways. Of the deities set up as lords of Deadman’s Land, some are beings whose original meaning is obscure. Some are distinctly nature-deities appointed to this office, often for local reasons, as happening to belong to the regions where the dead take 309up their abode. Some, again, are as distinctly the deified souls of men. The two first classes may be briefly instanced together in America, where the light-side and shadow-side (as Dr. J. G. Müller well calls them) of the conception of a future life are broadly contrasted in the definitions of the Lord of the Dead. Among the Northern Indians this may be Tarenyawagon the Heaven-God, identified with the Great Spirit, who receives good warriors in his happy hunting-grounds, or his grandmother, the Death-goddess Atahentsic.[767] In Brazil, the Under-world-god, who places good warriors and sorcerers in Paradise, contrasts with Aygnan the evil deity who takes base and cowardly Tupi souls,[768] much as the Mexican Tlaloc, Water-god and lord of the earthly paradise, contrasts with Mictlanteuctli, ruler of the dismal dead-land in the shades below.[769] In Peru there has been placed on record a belief that the departed spirits went to be with the Creator and Teacher of the World—‘Bring us too near to thee ... that we may be fortunate, being near to thee, O Uira-cocha!’ There are also statements as to an under-world of shades, the land of the demon Supay.[770] Accounts of this class must often be suspected of giving ideas mis-stated under European influence, or actually adopted from Europeans, but there is in some a look of untouched genuineness. Thus in Polynesia, the idea of a Devil borrowed from colonists or missionaries may be suspected in such a figure as the evil deity Wiro, chief of Reigna, the New Zealander’s western world of departed souls. But few conceptions of deity are more quaintly original than that of the Samoan deity Saveasiuleo, at once 310ruler of destinies of war and other affairs of men and chief of the subterranean Bulotū, with the human upper half of his body reclining in his great house in company with the spirits of departed chiefs, while his tail or extremity stretches far away into the sea, in the shape of an eel or serpent. Under a name corresponding dialectically (Siuleo = Hikuleo), this composite being reappears in the kindred myths of the neighbouring group, the Tonga Islands. The Tongan Hikuleo has his home in the spirit-land of Bulotū, here conceived as out in the far western sea. Here we are told the use of his tail. His body goes away on journeys, but his tail remains watching in Bulotū, and thus he is aware of what goes on in more places than one. Hikuleo used to carry off the first-born sons of Tongan chiefs, to people his island of the blest, and he so thinned the ranks of the living that at last the other gods were moved to compassion. Tangaloa and Maui seized Hikuleo, passed a strong chain round him, and fastened one end to heaven and the other to earth. Another god of the dead, of well-marked native type, is the Rarotongan Tiki, an ancestral deity as in New Zealand, to whose long house, a place of unceasing joys, the dead are to find their way.[771] Among Turanian tribes, there are Samoyeds who believe in a deity called ‘A,’ dwelling in impenetrable darkness, sending disease and death to men and reindeer, and ruling over a crowd of spirits which are manes of the dead. Tatars tell of the nine Irle-Chans, who in their gloomy subterranean kingdom not only rule over souls of the dead, but have at their command a multitude of ministering spirits, visible and invisible. In the gloomy under-world of the Finns reigns Mana or Tuoni, a being whose nature is worked out by personification from the dismal dead-land or death itself.[772] Much the 311same may be said of the Greek Aidēs, Hades, and the Scandinavian Hel, whose names, perhaps not so much by confusion as with a sense of their latent significance, have become identified in language with the doleful abodes over which a personifying fancy set them to preside.[773] As appropriately, though working out a different idea, the ancient Egyptians conceived their great solar deity to rule in the regions of his western under-world—Osiris is Lord of the Dead in Amenti.[774]
The major gods we've been discussing, who are focused on the natural world and human life, are gods of the living. However, even in primitive societies, people started to feel the need for a God of the Dead, someone who would govern the souls of the deceased in the afterlife, and this need has been met in various ways. Among the deities considered masters of the afterlife, some have meanings that are unclear. Others are clearly nature deities assigned this role, often for regional reasons, residing in the areas where the dead dwell. Some are clearly deified human souls. The first two categories can notably be seen in America, where the positive and negative aspects of an afterlife are highlighted in the definitions of the Lord of the Dead. Among the Northern Indians, this figure may be Tarenyawagon, the Heaven-God, who is associated with the Great Spirit and welcomes brave warriors into his happy hunting grounds, or his grandmother, the goddess of death, Atahentsic. In Brazil, the god of the underworld places good warriors and sorcerers in Paradise, contrasting with Aygnan, the evil deity who claims the cowardly Tupi souls, similar to how the Mexican Tlaloc, the Water-god and lord of earthly paradise, contrasts with Mictlanteuctli, the ruler of the gloomy afterlife. In Peru, there are records of a belief that departed spirits join the Creator and Teacher of the World—‘Bring us closer to you... that we may be fortunate, being near you, O Uira-cocha!’ There's also mention of an underworld of spirits, the land of the demon Supay. Accounts like these may sometimes reflect ideas altered by European influence or taken from Europeans, but some retain a sense of untouched authenticity. For example, in Polynesia, the evil deity Wiro, the chief of the New Zealander's realm of spirits, may be influenced by concepts introduced by colonists or missionaries. However, few deities are as uniquely original as the Samoan god Saveasiuleo, who rules over destiny in war and human affairs and is the leader of the underworld Bulotū, with his human upper body relaxing in his great house among the spirits of departed chiefs, while his tail stretches into the sea in the shape of an eel or serpent. This composite being appears under a dialectically similar name (Siuleo = Hikuleo) in the myths of nearby Tonga Islands. The Tongan Hikuleo resides in the spirit-land of Bulotū, imagined as being in the far western sea. Here, we learn about the purpose of his tail. While his body travels, his tail remains in Bulotū, keeping watch and thus knowing what happens in multiple places. Hikuleo used to abduct the first-born sons of Tongan chiefs to populate his island of the blessed, thinning the ranks of the living so much that the other gods felt pity. Tangaloa and Maui captured Hikuleo, bound him with a strong chain, attaching one end to heaven and the other to earth. Another notable god of the dead is the Rarotongan Tiki, an ancestral deity like in New Zealand, to whose long house, a place of everlasting joy, the dead are meant to find their way. Among Turanian groups, some Samoyeds believe in a god called ‘A,’ who resides in impenetrable darkness, causing sickness and death to people and reindeer, and overseeing a crowd of spirits that are the shades of the dead. Tatars describe the nine Irle-Chans ruling in their gloomy underworld who govern souls of the deceased and command numerous spirits, both visible and invisible. In the dreary underworld of the Finns reigns Mana or Tuoni, a being whose essence is shaped by personification from the dreary realm of death itself. Similarly, the Greek Aidēs (Hades) and the Scandinavian Hel embody concepts that have become linguistically linked to the sorrowful places over which they preside, perhaps not out of confusion but due to their underlying significance. Appropriately, though embodying a different idea, the ancient Egyptians envisioned their great solar god ruling in the western underworld—Osiris is the Lord of the Dead in Amenti.
In the world’s assembly of great gods, an important place must be filled up by the manes-worshipper in logical development of his special system. The theory of family manes, carried back to tribal gods, leads to the recognition of superior deities of the nature of Divine Ancestor or First Man, and it is of course reasonable that such a being, if recognized, should sometimes fill the place of lord of the dead, whose ancestral chief he is. There is an anecdote among the Mandans told by Prince Maximilian von Wied, which brings into view conceptions lying in the deepest recesses of savage religion, the idea of the divine first ancestor, the mythic connexion of the sun’s death and descent into the under-world, with the like fate of man and the nature of the spiritual intercourse between man’s own soul and his deity. The First Man, it is said, promised the Mandans to be their helper in time of need, and then departed into the West. It came to pass that the Mandans were attacked by foes. One Mandan would send a bird to the great ancestor to ask for help, but no bird could fly so far. Another thought a look would reach him, but the hills walled him in. Then said a third, thought must be the safest way to reach the First Man. He wrapped himself in his buffalo-robe, fell down, and spoke, ‘I think—I have thought—I come back.’ Throwing off the fur, he was bathed in sweat. The divine helper he had called on in his 312distress appeared.[775] There is instructive variety in the ways in which the lower American races work out the conception of the divine forefather. The Mingo tribes revere and make offerings to the First Man, he who was saved at the great deluge, as a powerful deity under the Master of Life, or even as identified with him; some Mississippi Indians said that the First Man ascended into heaven, and thunders there; among the Dog-ribs, he was creator of sun and moon;[776] Tamoi, the grandfather and ancient of heaven of the Guaranis, was their first ancestor, who dwelt among them and taught them to till the soil, and rose to heaven in the east, promising to succour them on earth, and at death to carry them from the sacred tree into a new life where they should all meet again, and have much hunting.[777]
In the assembly of great gods, an important role needs to be filled by the manes-worshipper in the logical development of his unique system. The theory of family manes, traced back to tribal gods, leads to recognizing higher deities resembling the Divine Ancestor or First Man. Naturally, it makes sense that such a being, if acknowledged, should sometimes take the role of the lord of the dead, of whom he is the ancestral chief. There’s a story among the Mandans told by Prince Maximilian von Wied that highlights beliefs deep within primitive religion: the concept of the divine first ancestor, the mythical link between the sun's death and descent into the underworld, the similar fate of man, and the nature of spiritual connection between a person's soul and their deity. It’s said that the First Man promised the Mandans to help them in times of need, then journeyed to the West. Eventually, the Mandans were attacked by enemies. One Mandan tried sending a bird to the great ancestor to ask for help, but no bird could fly that far. Another considered that a glance might reach him, but the hills blocked him. Then a third thought that thought might be the safest way to contact the First Man. He wrapped himself in his buffalo-robe, fell down, and said, ‘I think—I have thought—I come back.’ After throwing off the fur, he was soaked in sweat. The divine helper he called upon in his distress appeared. There is a fascinating variety in how different Native American groups express the idea of the divine ancestor. The Mingo tribes honor and make offerings to the First Man, who survived the great flood, as a powerful deity associated with the Master of Life, or even as identified with him; some Mississippi Indians claimed that the First Man ascended to heaven and thunders there; among the Dog-ribs, he was the creator of the sun and moon. Tamoi, the grandfather and ancient one of heaven for the Guaranis, was their first ancestor. He lived among them, taught them to farm, and rose to heaven in the east, promising to help them on earth and, at death, to carry them from the sacred tree into a new life where they would all reunite and have plenty of hunting.
Polynesia, again, has thoroughly worked the theory of divine ancestors into the native system of multiform and blending nature-deities. Men are sprung from the divine Maui, whom Europeans have therefore called the ‘Adam of New Zealand,’ or from the Rarotongan Tiki, who seems his equivalent (Mauitiki), and who again is the Tii of the Society Islands; it is, however, the son of Tii who precisely represents a Polynesian Adam, for his name is Taata, i.e., Man, and he is the ancestor of the human race. There is perhaps also reason to identify Maui and the First Man with Akea, first King of Hawaii, who at his earthly death descended to rule over his dark subterranean kingdom, where his subjects are the dead who recline under the spreading kou-trees, and drink of the infernal rivers, and feed on lizards and butterflies.[778] In the mythology of Kamchatka, the relation between the Creator and the First Man is one not of identity but of parentage. Among the sons of 313Kutka the Creator is Haetsh the First Man, who dwelt on earth, and died, and descended into Hades to be chief of the under-world; there he receives the dead and new-risen Kamchadals, to continue a life like that of earth in his pleasant subterranean land where mildness and plenty prevail, as they did in the regions above in the old days when the Creator was still on earth.[779] Among all the lower races who have reasoned out this divine ancestor, none excel those consistent manes-worshippers, the Zulus. Their worship of the manes of the dead has not only made the clan-ancestors of a few generations back into tribal deities (Unkulunkulu), but beyond these, too far off and too little known for actual worship, yet recognized as the original race-deity and identified with the Creator, stands the First Man, he who ‘broke off in the beginning,’ the Old-Old-One, the great Unkulunkulu. While the Zulu’s most intense religious emotions are turned to the ghosts of the departed, while he sacrifices his beloved oxen and prays with agonising entreaty to his grandfather, and carries his tribal worship back to those ancestral deities whose praise-giving names are still remembered, the First Man is beyond the reach of such rites. ‘At first we saw that we were made by Unkulunkulu. But when we were ill we did not worship him, nor ask anything of him. We worshipped those whom we had seen with our eyes, their death and their life among us.... Unkulunkulu had no longer a son who could worship him; there was no going back to the beginning, for people increased, and were scattered abroad, and each house had its own connections; there was no one who said, “For my part I am of the house of Unkulunkulu.”’ Nay more, the Zulus who would not dare to affront an ‘idhlozi,’ a common ghost, that might be angry and kill them, have come to make open mock of the name of the great first ancestor. When the grown-up people wish to talk privately or eat something by themselves, it is the regular thing to send the children out to 314call at the top of their voices for Unkulunkulu. ‘The name of Unkulunkulu has no respect paid to it among black men; for his house no longer exists. It is now like the name of a very old crone, who has no power to do even a little thing for herself, but sits continually where she sat in the morning till the sun sets. And the children make sport of her, for she cannot catch them and flog them, but only talk with her mouth. Just so is the name of Unkulunkulu when all the children are told to go and call him. He is now a means of making sport of children.’[780]
Polynesia has deeply integrated the concept of divine ancestors into its complex system of nature deities. People are said to descend from the divine Maui, often referred to by Europeans as the ‘Adam of New Zealand,’ or from the Rarotongan Tiki, who appears to be his equivalent (Mauitiki), and who in turn is the Tii of the Society Islands. However, it’s the son of Tii who closely resembles a Polynesian Adam, because his name is Taata, meaning Man, and he is the ancestor of the human race. There may also be a connection between Maui and the First Man with Akea, the first King of Hawaii, who, upon his earthly death, descended to govern his dark underground kingdom, where his subjects, the dead, rest under the spreading kou trees, drink from the rivers of the underworld, and feed on lizards and butterflies.[778] In Kamchatka's mythology, the connection between the Creator and the First Man is not one of identity but of parentage. Among the sons of 313Kutka the Creator is Haetsh the First Man, who lived on earth, died, and then descended into Hades to lead the underworld; there, he welcomes the deceased and newly risen Kamchadals, continuing a life similar to that of the earth in his pleasant subterranean realm where abundance and gentleness thrive, just like in the days when the Creator was still present on earth.[779] Among all the lesser races that have conceived of a divine ancestor, none surpasses the Zulus, who consistently honor their ancestral spirits. Their reverence for the spirits of the dead has transformed the clan-ancestors of recent generations into tribal deities (Unkulunkulu), while the First Man, too far back and too little known for genuine worship, is acknowledged as the original race-deity and equated with the Creator—the one who ‘broke off in the beginning,’ the Old-Old-One, the great Unkulunkulu. The Zulu's most profound religious feelings are directed toward the spirits of the deceased, as they sacrifice their cherished oxen and plead agonizingly with their ancestors, while continuing their tribal worship of those ancestral deities whose revered names are still remembered. The First Man, however, is beyond such rituals. ‘In the beginning, we realized we were created by Unkulunkulu. But when we were sick, we did not worship him or ask anything of him. We honored those we could see, their lives and deaths among us.... Unkulunkulu no longer had a son who could worship him; we couldn't go back to the beginning as people multiplied and spread out, and each household had its own ties; no one claimed, “I belong to the family of Unkulunkulu.”’ Furthermore, the Zulus, who would not dare to provoke a common ghost (idhlozi) that might become angry and harm them, have begun to openly mock the name of their great first ancestor. When adults want to talk privately or eat something alone, it has become commonplace to send the children out to 314 loudly call for Unkulunkulu. ‘The name of Unkulunkulu is not honored among black people; his household no longer exists. It’s like the name of an ancient crone who has no power to do even the smallest things for herself, sitting in the same place from morning until sunset. The children make fun of her because she can't catch them and punish them, only speak with her mouth. Just like that, the name of Unkulunkulu is used as a way for kids to play around.’[780]
In Aryan religion, the divinities just described give us analogues for the Hindu Yama, throughout his threefold nature as First Man, as solar God of Hades, as Judge of the Dead. Professor Max Müller thus suggests his origin, which may indeed be inferred from his being called the child of Vivasvat, himself the Sun: ‘The sun, conceived as setting or dying every day, was the first who had trodden the path of life from East to West—the first mortal—the first to show us the way when our course is run, and our sun sets in the far West. Thither the fathers followed Yama; there they sit with him rejoicing, and thither we too shall go when his messengers (day and night) have found us out.... Yama is said to have crossed the rapid waters, to have shown the way to many, to have first known the path on which our fathers crossed over.’ It is a perfectly consistent myth-formation, that the solar Yama should become the first of mortals who died and discovered the way to the other world, who guides other men thither and assembles them in a home which is secured to them for ever. As representative of death, Yama had even in early Aryan times his aspects of terror, and in later Indian theology he becomes not only the Lord but the awful Judge of the Dead, whom some modern Hindus are said to worship alone of all the gods, alleging that their future state is to be determined only by Yama, and that they have nothing therefore to hope or fear from any beside him. In these 315days, Hindu and Parsi in Bombay are learning from scholars in Europe the ancient connexion of their long antagonistic faiths, and have to hear that Yama son of Visavat sitting on his awful judgment-seat of the dead, to reward the good and punish the wicked with hideous tortures, and Yima son of Vivanhâo who in primæval days reigned over his happy deathless kingdom of good Zarathustrian men, are but two figures developed in the course of ages out of one and the same Aryan nature-myth.[781] Within the limits of Jewish, Christian, and Moslem theology, the First Man scarcely occupies more than a place of precedence among the human race in Hades or in Heaven, not the high office of Lord of the Dead. Yet that tendency to deify an ideal ancestor, which we observe to act so strongly on lower races, has taken effect also here. The Rabbinical Adam is a gigantic being reaching from earth to heaven, for the definition of whose stature Rabbi Eliezer cites Deuteronomy iv. 32, ‘God made man (Adam) upon the earth, and from one end of heaven to the other.’[782] It is one of the familiar episodes of the Koran, how the angels were bidden to bow down before Adam, the regent of Allah upon earth, and how Eblis (Diabolus) swelling with pride, refused the act of adoration.[783] Among the Gnostic sect of the Valentinians, Adam the primal man in whom the Deity had revealed himself, stood as earthly representative of the Demiurge, and was even counted among the Æons.[784]
In Aryan religion, the gods mentioned earlier give us parallels for the Hindu Yama, reflecting his threefold nature as the First Man, the solar God of Hades, and the Judge of the Dead. Professor Max Müller suggests his origin, which may be inferred from him being called the child of Vivasvat, who is the Sun: ‘The sun, thought of as setting or dying every day, was the first to travel the path of life from East to West—the first mortal—the first to guide us when our journey is complete, and our sun sets in the far West. There the ancestors followed Yama; there they sit with him rejoicing, and we too shall go when his messengers (day and night) have found us.... Yama is said to have crossed the swift waters, to have shown the way to many, to have first known the path that our ancestors took to cross over.’ It's a consistent myth that the solar Yama becomes the first mortal to die and discover the way to the afterlife, guiding others there and gathering them in a home that is secured for them forever. As a representative of death, Yama had, even in early Aryan times, aspects of terror, and in later Indian theology, he becomes not only the Lord but the fearsome Judge of the Dead, whom some modern Hindus reportedly worship as the only deity, believing their future state is determined solely by Yama, having nothing to hope for or fear from any other god. Nowadays, Hindus and Parsis in Bombay are learning from European scholars about the ancient connection of their long-standing conflicting faiths and are told that Yama, the son of Vivasvat, sitting on his terrifying judgment seat of the dead, to reward the righteous and punish the wicked with horrific tortures, and Yima, the son of Vivanhâo, who reigns over his joyful, deathless kingdom of good Zarathustrian men, are simply two figures that have evolved over time from one and the same Aryan nature-myth. Within the bounds of Jewish, Christian, and Muslim theology, the First Man hardly more than holds a place of precedence among humanity in Hades or Heaven, not the high office of Lord of the Dead. Yet, that tendency to deify an ideal ancestor, which we see powerfully affecting lower races, is evident here too. The Rabbinical Adam is a gigantic being extending from earth to heaven, for which Rabbi Eliezer cites Deuteronomy 4:32, ‘God made man (Adam) upon the earth, and from one end of heaven to the other.’ It's one of the well-known stories in the Koran, how the angels were commanded to bow down before Adam, the regent of Allah on earth, and how Eblis (the Devil), filled with pride, refused to show worship. Among the Gnostic sect of the Valentinians, Adam, the primal man in whom the Deity had revealed himself, served as the earthly representative of the Demiurge and was even counted among the Æons.
The figures of the great deities of Polytheism, thus traced in outline according to the determining idea on which each is shaped, seem to show that conceptions originating under rude and primitive conditions of human thought and passing thence into the range of higher culture, 316may suffer in the course of ages the most various fates, to be expanded, elaborated, transformed, or abandoned. Yet the philosophy of modern ages still to a remarkable degree follows the primitive courses of savage thought, even as the highways of our land so often follow the unchanging tracks of barbaric roads. Let us endeavour timidly and circumspectly to trace onward from savage times the courses of vast and pregnant generalization which tend towards the two greatest of the world’s schemes of religious doctrine, the systems of Dualism and Monotheism.
The figures of the major deities in Polytheism, shaped by the core idea behind each one, seem to indicate that concepts that began in rough and primitive human thought and eventually evolved into more advanced cultures, 316can experience a variety of outcomes over time, being expanded, refined, transformed, or discarded. Yet the philosophy of modern times still largely mirrors the primitive thinking of early humans, just as the roads in our country often follow the old paths laid down by ancient civilizations. Let’s cautiously and carefully trace back the pathways from primitive times that lead to the two most significant religious doctrines in the world: the systems of Dualism and Monotheism.
Rudimentary forms of Dualism, the antagonism of a Good and Evil Deity, are well known among the lower races of mankind. The investigation of these savage and barbaric doctrines, however, is a task demanding peculiar caution. The Europeans in contact with these rude tribes since their discovery, themselves for the most part holding strongly dualistic forms of Christianity, to the extent of practically subjecting the world to the contending influences of armies of good and evil spirits under the antagonistic control of God and Devil, were liable on the one hand to mistake and exaggerate savage ideas in this direction, so that their records of native religion can only be accepted with reserve, while on the other hand there is no doubt that dualistic ideas have been largely introduced and developed among the savages themselves, under this same European influence. For instance, among the natives of Australia, we hear of the great deity Nambajandi who dwells in his heavenly paradise, where the happy shades of black men feast and dance and sing for evermore; over against him stands the great evil being Warrūgūra, who dwells in the nethermost regions, who causes the great calamities which befall mankind, and whom the natives represent with horns and tail, although no horned beast is indigenous in the land.[785] There may be more or less native substratum in all this, but the hints borrowed from popular Christian ideas are unmistakeable. 317Thus also, among the North American Indians, the native religion was modified under the influence of ideas borrowed from the white men, and there arose a full dualistic scheme, of which Loskiel, a Moravian missionary conversant especially with Algonquin and Iroquois tribes, gives the following suggestive particulars, dating from 1794. ‘They (the Indians) first received in modern times through the Europeans the idea of the Devil, the Prince of Darkness. They consider him as a very mighty spirit, who can only do evil, and therefore call him the Evil One. Thus they now believe in a great good and a great evil spirit; to the one they ascribe all good, and to the other all evil. About thirty years ago, a remarkable change took place in the religious opinions of the Indians. Some preachers of their own nation pretended to have received revelations from above, to have travelled into heaven, and conversed with God. They gave different accounts of their journey to heaven, but all agreed in this, that no one could arrive there without great danger; for the road runs close by the gates of hell. There the Devil lies in ambush, and snatches at every one who is going to God. Now those who have passed by this dangerous place unhurt, come first to the Son of God, and from him to God himself, from whom they pretend to have received a commandment, to instruct the Indians in the way to heaven. By them the Indians were informed that heaven was the dwelling of God, and hell that of the Devil. Some of these preachers had not indeed reached the dwelling of God, but professed to have approached near enough to hear the cocks in heaven crow, or to see the smoke of the chimneys in heaven, &c., &c.’[786]
Rudimentary forms of dualism, the struggle between a good and evil deity, are well-documented among the more primitive cultures of humanity. However, studying these savage and barbaric beliefs requires special caution. Europeans who have interacted with these rough tribes since their discovery, most of whom held strong dualistic views of Christianity—essentially placing the world under the opposing forces of good and evil spirits controlled by God and the Devil—were prone to misinterpret and exaggerate primitive ideas in this regard. As a result, their accounts of indigenous religions should be taken with caution. On the other hand, it is clear that dualistic ideas have also been considerably introduced and developed among the indigenous populations, influenced by Europeans. For example, among the Australian natives, there is mention of the great deity Nambajandi, who lives in his heavenly paradise, where the joyful spirits of black men feast, dance, and sing forever. Opposing him is the great evil being Warrūgūra, who resides in the deepest regions and causes the significant misfortunes that plague humanity, represented by the natives with horns and a tail, although no horned creature is native to the land.[785] There may be some native elements in all this, but the influences from popular Christian concepts are unmistakable. 317 Similarly, among the North American Indians, their native religion evolved under the impact of ideas taken from white men, leading to a fully developed dualistic framework. Loskiel, a Moravian missionary familiar with Algonquin and Iroquois tribes, shared the following insightful details from 1794. ‘They (the Indians) first learned in modern times from Europeans about the Devil, the Prince of Darkness. They see him as a very powerful spirit who can only do evil, thus calling him the Evil One. Now, they believe in a great good spirit and a great evil spirit; they attribute all good to one and all evil to the other. About thirty years ago, a significant change occurred in the religious beliefs of the Indians. Some preachers from their own community claimed to have received divine revelations, stating they had journeyed to heaven and talked with God. They provided various accounts of their heavenly trip but all agreed on one thing: no one could reach heaven without great peril; the road leads dangerously close to the gates of hell. There, the Devil lies in wait, ready to ensnare anyone trying to reach God. Those who manage to pass through this dangerous area safely first meet the Son of God and then proceed to God himself, from whom they claimed to have received a mandate to teach the Indians how to reach heaven. These preachers informed the Indians that heaven is the home of God and hell is the home of the Devil. Some of these preachers had not actually reached God's dwelling but claimed to have gotten close enough to hear roosters crowing in heaven or to see smoke rising from heavenly chimneys, etc., etc.’[786]
Such unequivocal proofs that savage tribes can adopt and work into the midst of their native beliefs the European doctrine of the Good and Evil Spirit, must induce us to criticize keenly all recorded accounts of the religion of uncultured 318tribes, lest we should mistake the confused reflexion of Christendom for the indigenous theology of Australia or Canada. It is the more needful to bring this state of things into the clearest light, in order that the religion of the lower tribes may be placed in its proper relation to the religion of the higher nations. Genuine savage faiths do in fact bring to our view what seem to be rudimentary forms of ideas which underlie dualistic theological schemes among higher nations. It is certain that even among rude savage hordes, native thought has already turned toward the deep problem of good and evil. Their crude though earnest speculation has already tried to solve the great mystery which still resists the efforts of moralists and theologians. But as in general the animistic doctrine of the lower races is not yet an ethical institution, but a philosophy of man and nature, so savage dualism is not yet a theory of abstract moral principles, but a theory of pleasure or pain, profit or loss, affecting the individual man, his family, or at the utmost stretch, his people. This narrow and rudimentary distinction between good and evil was not unfairly stated by the savage who explained that if anybody took away his wife, that would be bad, but if he himself took someone’s else’s, that would be good. Now by the savage or barbarian mind, the spiritual beings which by their personal action account for the events of life and the operations of nature, are apt to be regarded as kindly or hostile, sometimes or always, like the human beings on whose type they are so obviously modelled. In such a case, we may well judge by the safe analogy of disembodied human souls, and it appears that these are habitually regarded as sometimes friends and sometimes foes of the living. Nothing could be more conclusive in this respect than an account of the three days’ battle between two factions of Zulu ghosts for the life of a man and wife whom the one spiritual party desired to destroy and the other to save; the defending spirits prevailed, dug up the bewitched charm-bags which had been buried to cause sympathetic disease, and flung these objects 319into the midst of the assembly of the people watching in silence, just as the spirits now fling real flowers at a table-rapping séance.[787] For spirits less closely belonging to the definition of ghosts, may be taken Rochefort’s remarks in the 17th century as to the two sorts of spirits, good and bad, recognized by the Caribs of the West Indies. This writer declares that their good spirits or divinities are in fact so many demons who seduce them and keep them enchained in their damnable servitude; but nevertheless, he says, the people themselves do distinguish them from their evil spirits.[788] Nor can we pronounce this distinction of theirs unreasonable, learning from other authorities that it was the office of some of these spirits to attend men as familiar genii, and of others to inflict diseases. After the numerous details which have incidentally been cited in the present volumes, it will be needless to offer farther proof that spiritual beings are really conceived by savages and barbarians as ranged in antagonistic ranks as good and evil, i.e., friendly and hostile to themselves. The interesting enquiry on which it is here desirable to collect evidence, is this: how far are the doctrines of the higher nations anticipated in principle among the lower tribes, in the assignment of the conduct of the universe to two mighty hostile beings, in whom the contending powers of good and evil are personified, the Good Deity and the Evil Deity, each the head and ruler of a spiritual host like-minded? The true answer seems to be that savage belief displays to us the primitive conceptions which, when developed in systematic form and attached to ethical meaning, take their place in religious systems of which the Zoroastrian is the type.
Such clear evidence that primitive tribes can incorporate the European concept of Good and Evil Spirits into their native beliefs compels us to critically examine all documented accounts of the religions of uncivilized tribes. We must avoid confusing the blurred reflection of Christianity with the indigenous beliefs of Australia or Canada. It's crucial to illuminate this situation so that the religion of lesser tribes can be appropriately compared to that of more advanced nations. Authentic primitive faiths reveal what seem to be basic ideas underlying dualistic theological frameworks in higher nations. Even among primitive groups, native thought has begun to address the fundamental problem of good and evil. Their rough yet sincere speculation has attempted to unravel the great mystery that continues to challenge moralists and theologians. However, like the animistic beliefs of lower races, which are not yet ethical systems but philosophies regarding man and nature, primitive dualism is not yet an abstract moral theory. Instead, it's a view focused on pleasure or pain, gain or loss, impacting the individual, his family, or, at most, his community. This narrow and basic distinction between good and evil was aptly summarized by a primitive individual who explained that if someone were to take his wife, that would be bad, but if he were to take someone else’s wife, that would be good. In the minds of primitive or barbaric people, spiritual beings that influence life events and natural phenomena are often seen as friendly or hostile, sometimes or always, similar to the human beings they resemble. From this perspective, we can safely compare them to disembodied human souls, which are typically viewed as occasional friends or foes of the living. Nothing illustrates this better than the account of a three-day battle between two groups of Zulu ghosts over the lives of a man and woman, where one group wanted to destroy them, and the other wanted to save them. The defending spirits triumphed, unearthed the enchanted charm bags meant to cause a disease, and threw these items into the crowd of onlookers, much like spirits today might toss flowers at a séance. For spirits that don’t neatly fit the definition of ghosts, we can refer to Rochefort’s 17th-century observations about the two types of spirits, good and bad, recognized by the Caribs in the West Indies. This author states that their good spirits or deities are, in fact, demons who seduce them and keep them trapped in their miserable servitude; however, he notes that the people themselves do differentiate them from their evil spirits. We cannot dismiss this distinction as unreasonable, especially since other sources indicate that some of these spirits act as familiar genies to people, while others are responsible for inflicting diseases. Given the countless details mentioned throughout these volumes, further proof that spiritual beings are viewed by savages and barbarians as divided into opposing forces of good and evil—i.e., friendly and hostile—seems unnecessary. The intriguing question that we should gather evidence on is this: to what extent are the doctrines of advanced nations reflected in principle among lower tribes, particularly in the idea of assigning the governance of the universe to two powerful opposing beings, representing the forces of good and evil—the Good Deity and the Evil Deity—each at the head of a like-minded spiritual host? The accurate answer appears to be that primitive beliefs show us the foundational ideas which, when refined into structured forms and given ethical significance, find their place in religious systems exemplified by Zoroastrianism.
First, when in district after district two special deities with special native names are contrasted in native religion as the Good and Evil Deity, it is in some cases easier to explain these beings as native at least in origin, than to suppose that foreign intercourse should have exerted the 320consistent and far-reaching influence needed to introduce them. Second, when the deities in question are actually polytheistic gods, such as Sun, Moon, Heaven, Earth, considered as of good or evil, i.e., favourable or unfavourable aspect, this looks like native development, not innovation derived from a foreign religion ignoring such divinities. Third, when it is held that the Good Deity is remote and otiose, but the Evil Deity present and active, and worship is therefore directed especially to the propitiation of the hostile principle, we have here a conception which appears native in the lower culture, rather than derived from the higher culture to which it is unfamiliar and even hateful. Now Dualism, as prevailing among the lower races, will be seen in a considerable degree to assert its originality by satisfying one or more of these conditions.
First, when in various districts two specific deities with unique local names are contrasted in local religion as the Good and Evil Deity, it is sometimes easier to explain these beings as having local origins rather than assuming that foreign interactions had the consistent and widespread influence necessary to introduce them. Second, when the deities in question are actually polytheistic gods, like the Sun, Moon, Heaven, and Earth, viewed as having good or evil aspects, meaning favorable or unfavorable characteristics, this appears to be a local development rather than an innovation stemming from a foreign religion that ignores such deities. Third, when it is believed that the Good Deity is distant and indifferent, but the Evil Deity is present and active, leading worship to focus especially on appeasing the hostile force, we find a concept that seems to be native to the lower culture, rather than derived from the higher culture it does not understand or even despises. Now, Dualism, as it exists among the lower races, will be seen to assert its originality to a significant extent by meeting one or more of these conditions.
There have been recorded among the Indians of North America a group of mythic beliefs, which display the fundamental idea of dualism in the very act of germinating in savage religion. Yet the examination of these myths leads us first to destructive criticism of a picturesque but not ancient member of the series. An ethnologist, asked to point out the most striking savage dualistic legend of the world, would be likely to name the celebrated Iroquois myth of the Twin Brethren. The current version of this legend is that set down in 1825 by the Christian chief of the Tuscaroras, David Cusick, as the belief of his people. Among the ancients, he relates, there were two worlds, the lower world in darkness and possessed by monsters, the upper world inhabited by mankind. A woman near her travail sank from this upper region to the dark world below. She alighted on a Tortoise, prepared to receive her with a little earth on his back, which Tortoise became an island. The celestial mother bore twin sons into the dark world, and died. The tortoise increased to a great island, and the twins grew up. One was of gentle disposition, and was called Enigorio, the Good Mind, the other was of insolent character, and was named Enigonhahetgea, the Bad Mind. 321The Good Mind, not contented to remain in darkness, wished to create a great light; the Bad Mind desired that the world should remain in its natural state. The Good Mind took his dead mother’s head and made it the sun, and of a remnant of her body he made the moon. These were to give light to the day and to the night. Also he created many spots of light, now stars: these were to regulate the days, nights, seasons, years. Where the light came upon the dark world, the monsters were displeased, and hid themselves in the depths, lest man should find them. The Good Mind continued the creation, formed many creeks and rivers on the Great Island, created small and great beasts to inhabit the forests, and fishes to inhabit the waters. When he had made the universe, he doubted concerning beings to possess the Great Island. He formed two images of the dust of the ground in his own likeness, male and female, and by breathing into their nostrils gave them living souls, and named them Ea-gwe-howe, that is ‘real people;’ and he gave the Great Island all the animals of game for their maintenance; he appointed thunder to water the earth by frequent rains; the island became fruitful, and vegetation afforded to the animals subsistence. The Bad Mind went throughout the island and made high mountains and waterfalls and great steeps, and created reptiles injurious to mankind; but the Good Mind restored the island to its former condition. The Bad Mind made two clay images in the form of man, but while he was giving them existence they became apes; and so on. The Good Mind accomplished the works of creation, notwithstanding the imaginations of the Bad Mind were continually evil; thus he attempted to enclose all the animals of game in the earth away from mankind, but his brother set them free, and traces of them were made on the rocks near the cave where they were shut in. At last the brethren came to single combat for the mastery of the universe. The Good Mind falsely persuaded the Bad Mind that whipping with flags would destroy his own life, but he himself used the 322deer-horns, the instrument of death. After a two days’ fight, the Good Mind slew his brother and crushed him in the earth; and the last words of the Bad Mind were that he would have equal power over men’s souls after death, then he sank down to eternal doom and became the Evil Spirit. The Good Mind visited the people, and then retired from the earth.[789]
There have been recorded among the Native Americans of North America a set of mythic beliefs that showcase the core idea of dualism as it emerged in primitive religion. However, studying these myths first leads us to critique a colorful but not ancient part of this series. If an ethnologist were asked to highlight the most notable savage dualistic legend in the world, they would likely mention the famous Iroquois myth of the Twin Brethren. The version of this legend that is commonly told today was recorded in 1825 by David Cusick, a Christian chief of the Tuscaroras, as the belief of his people. He explained that in ancient times, there were two worlds: a dark, lower world inhabited by monsters and an upper world where humans lived. A pregnant woman from the upper world fell into the dark world below and landed on a Tortoise, which was ready to support her with a bit of earth on its back, eventually becoming an island. The celestial mother gave birth to twin sons in the dark world and died. The Tortoise expanded into a large island, and the twins grew up. One of them had a gentle nature and was called Enigorio, the Good Mind, while the other was arrogant and was named Enigonhahetgea, the Bad Mind. The Good Mind, dissatisfied with the darkness, wanted to create a great light, while the Bad Mind wanted the world to stay as it was. The Good Mind took his dead mother's head and turned it into the sun, and with a part of her body, he created the moon. These were meant to illuminate the day and night. He also made many spots of light, now known as stars, to mark the days, nights, seasons, and years. When light spread across the dark world, the monsters were unhappy and hid in the depths, fearing that humans would find them. The Good Mind continued creating, forming many streams and rivers on the Great Island, creating both small and large animals to fill the forests and fish for the waters. After crafting the universe, he pondered who should inhabit the Great Island. He shaped two figures from the dust of the ground in his own likeness, male and female, and breathed life into them, naming them Ea-gwe-howe, meaning ‘real people.’ He provided the Great Island with all the game animals for their sustenance, assigned thunder to water the earth with frequent rains, making the island fertile, and vegetation provided food for the animals. The Bad Mind traveled across the island, making steep mountains, waterfalls, and harmful reptiles; however, the Good Mind restored the island to its previous state. The Bad Mind created two clay images in the likeness of a man, but while giving them life, they turned into apes, and so forth. Although the Good Mind carried out the works of creation, the Bad Mind's evil imaginations persisted; he tried to trap all the game animals underground, away from mankind, but his brother freed them, leaving their marks on rocks near the cave where they were held. Eventually, the brothers faced off in a duel for control of the universe. The Good Mind deceitfully warned the Bad Mind that whipping with flags would cost him his life, while he wielded the deer-horns, a weapon of death. After fighting for two days, the Good Mind killed his brother and buried him in the earth; the last words of the Bad Mind were that he would have equal power over men's souls after death, after which he descended into eternal damnation and became the Evil Spirit. The Good Mind visited the people and then withdrew from the earth.
This is a graphic tale. Its versions of the cosmic myth of the World-Tortoise, and its apparent philosophical myth of fossil footprints, have much mythological interest. But its Biblical copying extends to the very phraseology, and only partial genuineness can be allowed to its main theme. Dr. Brinton has shown from early American writers how much dualistic fancy has sprung up since the times of first intercourse between natives and white men. When this legend is compared with the earlier version given by Father Brebeuf, missionary to the Hurons in 1636, we find its whole complexion altered; the moral dualism vanishes; the names of Good and Bad Mind do not appear; it is the story of Ioskeha the White One, with his brother Tawiscara the Dark One, and we at once perceive that Christian influence in the course of two centuries had given the tale a meaning foreign to its real intent. Yet to go back to the earliest sources and examine this myth of the White One and the Dark One, proves it to be itself a perfect example of the rise of primitive dualism in the savage mind. Father Brebeuf’s story is as follows: Aataentsic the Moon fell from heaven on earth, and bore two sons, Taouiscaron and Iouskeha, who being grown up quarrelled; judge, he says, if there be not in this a touch of the death of Abel. They came to combat, but with very different weapons. Iouskeha had a stag-horn, Taouiscaron contented himself with some wild-rose berries, persuading himself that as soon as he should thus smite his brother, he would fall dead at his 323feet; but it fell out quite otherwise than he had promised himself, and Iouskeha struck him so heavy a blow in the side that the blood gushed forth in streams. The poor wretch fled, and from his blood which fell upon the land came the flints which the savages still call Taouiscara, from the victim’s name. From this we see it to be true that the original myth of the two brothers, the White One and the Dark One, had no moral element. It seems mere nature-myth, the contest between Day and Night, for the Hurons knew that Iouskeha was the Sun, even as his mother or grandmother Aataentsic was the Moon. Yet in the contrast between these two, the Huron mind had already come to the rudimentary contrast of the Good and Evil Deity. Iouskeha the Sun, it is expressly said, seemed to the Indians their benefactor; their kettle would not boil were it not for him; it was he who learnt from the Tortoise the art of making fire; without him they would have no luck in hunting; it is he who makes the corn to grow. Iouskeha the Sun takes care for the living and all things concerning life, and therefore, says the missionary, they say he is good. But Aataentsic the Moon, the creatress of earth and man, makes men die and has charge of their departed souls, and they say she is evil. The Sun and Moon dwell together in their cabin at the end of the earth, and thither it was that the Indians made the mythic journey of which various episodes have been more than once cited here; true to their respective characters, the Sun receives the travellers kindly and saves them from the harm the beauteous but hurtful Moon would have done them. Another missionary of still earlier time identifies Iouskeha with the supreme deity Atahocan: ‘Iouskeha,’ he says, ‘is good and gives growth and fair weather; his grandmother Eatahentsic is wicked and spoils.’[790] Thus in early Iroquois legend, the Sun and Moon, as god and goddess 324of Day and Night, had already acquired the characters of the great friend and enemy of man, the Good and Evil Deity. And as to the related cosmic legend of Day and Night, contrasted in the persons of the two brothers, the White One and the Dark One, though this was originally pure unethic nature-myth, yet it naturally took the same direction among the half-Europeanized Indians of later times, becoming a moral myth of Good and Evil. The idea comes to full maturity in the modern shaping of Iroquois religion, where the good and great deity Häwenneyu the Ruler has opposed to him a rival deity keeping the same name as in the myth, Hänegoategeh the Evil-minded. We have thus before us the profoundly interesting fact, that the rude North American Indians have more than once begun the same mythologic transition which in ancient Asia shaped the contrast of light and darkness into the contrast of righteousness and wickedness, by following out the same thought which still in the European mind arrays in the hostile forms of Light and Darkness the contending powers of Good and Evil.
This is a vivid story. Its interpretations of the cosmic myth of the World-Tortoise and its seemingly philosophical myth of fossil footprints are quite intriguing. However, its biblical influence reaches down to the very wording, and only a fraction of authenticity can be claimed for its main theme. Dr. Brinton has demonstrated through early American writers how much dualistic imagination has emerged since the initial encounters between Native Americans and white settlers. When we compare this legend with the earlier version provided by Father Brebeuf, a missionary to the Hurons in 1636, we see that its entire nature has changed; the moral dualism disappears; the names of Good and Bad Mind do not show up; it becomes the tale of Ioskeha the White One with his brother Tawiscara the Dark One, revealing how Christian influence over two centuries has altered its original meaning. Yet, examining the earliest sources of this myth reveals that the story of the White One and the Dark One perfectly exemplifies the emergence of primitive dualism in the minds of early peoples. Father Brebeuf’s story goes like this: Aataentsic the Moon fell from heaven to earth and gave birth to two sons, Taouiscaron and Iouskeha, who as adults quarreled; you can judge how this resembles the death of Abel. They prepared to fight, but with very different weapons. Iouskeha had a stag-horn, while Taouiscaron settled for some wild-rose berries, convincing himself that if he hit his brother with them, he would fall dead at his feet; but things turned out quite differently than he expected, and Iouskeha dealt him such a heavy blow in the side that blood poured out like a river. The unfortunate one fled, and from his blood that fell on the ground came the flints that the natives still call Taouiscara, after the victim’s name. This shows us that the original myth of the two brothers, the White One and the Dark One, had no moral component. It seems to be just a nature myth, illustrating the struggle between Day and Night, as the Hurons recognized that Iouskeha was the Sun, just as his mother or grandmother Aataentsic was the Moon. Yet in the contrast between the two, the Huron mindset had already begun to form a basic distinction between the Good and Evil Deity. Iouskeha the Sun is said to be perceived by the Indians as their benefactor; their kettle wouldn't boil without him; he learned the art of making fire from the Tortoise; without him, they would have no luck in hunting; he is responsible for the growth of corn. Iouskeha the Sun cares for the living and everything related to life, which is why, according to the missionary, they say he is good. But Aataentsic the Moon, the creator of the earth and humanity, causes death and oversees the souls of the departed, so they consider her evil. The Sun and Moon live together in their cabin at the end of the earth, and there was where the Indians undertook the mythical journey, of which various episodes have been mentioned more than once here; true to their natures, the Sun treated the travelers kindly and saved them from the dangers posed by the beautiful yet harmful Moon. Another missionary from an even earlier time identifies Iouskeha with the supreme deity Atahocan: ‘Iouskeha,’ he says, ‘is good and provides growth and nice weather; his grandmother Eatahentsic is wicked and disrupts.’[790] Thus, in early Iroquois legend, the Sun and Moon, as god and goddess of Day and Night, had already developed into the significant figures of humanity's greatest friend and enemy, the Good and Evil Deity. Regarding the related cosmic legend of Day and Night, represented by the two brothers, the White One and the Dark One, although it originally was purely a nature myth without moral implications, it naturally evolved in the semi-Europeanized tribes of later generations into a moral myth of Good and Evil. This idea fully matures in the modern conception of Iroquois religion, where the good and great deity Häwenneyu the Ruler faces a rival deity sharing the same name as in the myth, Hänegoategeh the Evil-minded. We are thus presented with the deeply fascinating notion that the somewhat primitive North American Indians have repeatedly initiated the same mythological change as that which took place in ancient Asia, transforming the opposition of light and darkness into a confrontation of righteousness and wickedness, by following the same idea that continues to shape the European consciousness, where the opposing forms of Light and Darkness symbolize the ongoing struggle of Good and Evil.
Judging by such evidence, at once of the rudimentary dualism springing up in savage animism, and of the tendency of this to amalgamate with similar thought brought in by foreign intercourse, it is possible to account for many systems of the dualistic class found in the native religions of America. While the evidence may lead us to agree with Waitz that the North American Indian dualism, the most distinct and universal feature of their religion, is not to be altogether referred to a modern Christian origin, yet care must be taken not to claim as the result of primitive religious development what shows signs of being borrowed civilized theology. The records remain of the Jesuit missionary teaching under which the Algonquins came to use their native term Manitu, that is, spirit or demon, in speaking of the Christian God and Devil as the good and the evil Manitu. Still later, the Great Spirit and the Evil Spirit, Kitchi Manitu and Matchi Manitu, gained 325a wider place in the beliefs of North American tribes, who combined these adopted Christian conceptions with older native beliefs in powers of light and warmth and life and protection, of darkness and cold and death and destruction. Thus the two great antagonistic Beings became chiefs of the kindly and harmful spirits pervading the world and struggling for the mastery over it. Here the nature-religion of the savage was expanded and developed rather than set on foot by the foreigner. Among other American races, such combinations of foreign and native religious ideas are easy to find, though hard to analyse. In the extreme north-west, we may doubt any native origin in the semi-Christianized Kodiak’s definition of Shljem Shoá the creator of heaven and earth, to whom offerings were made before and after the hunt, as contrasted with Ijak the bad spirit dwelling in the earth. In the extreme south-east may be found more originality among the Floridan Indians two or three centuries ago, for they are said to have paid solemn worship to the Bad Spirit Toia who plagued them with visions, but to have had small regard for the Good Spirit, who troubles himself little about mankind.[791] On the southern continent, Martius makes this characteristic remark as to the rude tribes of Brazil: ‘All Indians have a lively conviction of the power of an evil principle over them; in many there dawns also a glimpse of the good; but they revere the one less than they fear the other. It might be thought that they hold the Good Being weaker in relation to the fate of man than the evil.’ This generalization is to some extent supported by statements as to particular tribes. The Macusis are said to recognize the good creator Macunaima, ‘he who works by night,’ and his evil adversary Epel or Horiuch: of these people it is observed that ‘All the powers of nature are products of the Good Spirit, when they do 326not disturb the Indian’s rest and comfort, but the work of evil spirits when they do.’ Uauüloa and Locozy, the good and evil deity of the Yumanas, live above the earth and toward the sun; the Evil Deity is feared by these savages, but the Good Deity will come to eat fruit with the departed and take their souls to his dwelling, wherefore they bury the dead each doubled up in his great earthen pot, with fruit in his lap, and looking toward the sunrise. Even the rude Botocudos are thought to recognize antagonistic principles of good and evil in the persons of the Sun and Moon.[792] This idea has especial interest from its correspondence on the one hand with that of the Iroquois tribes, and on the other with that of the comparatively civilized Muyscas of Bogota, whose good deity is unequivocally a mythic Sun, thwarted in his kindly labours for man by his wicked wife Huythaca the Moon.[793] The native religion of Chili is said to have placed among the subaltern deities Meulen, the friend of man, and Huecuvu the bad spirit and author of evil. These people can hardly have learnt from Christianity to conceive their evil spirit as simply and fully the general cause of misfortune: if the earth quakes, Huecuvu has given it a shock; if a horse tires, Huecuvu has ridden him; if a man falls sick, Huecuvu has sent the disease into his body, and no man dies but that Huecuvu suffocates him.[794]
Judging by such evidence, which shows the basic dualism emerging in primitive animism and how this tends to mix with similar ideas introduced through foreign contact, we can explain many dualistic belief systems found in the native religions of America. While the evidence may lead us to agree with Waitz that North American Indian dualism, which is the most distinct and universal aspect of their religion, isn't entirely traced back to modern Christian influences, we must be careful not to attribute what appears to be primitive religious development to simply borrowed theology. There are records of Jesuit missionaries teaching the Algonquins to use their native term Manitu, meaning spirit or demon, when referring to the Christian God and Devil as the good and evil Manitu. Later, the concepts of the Great Spirit and the Evil Spirit, Kitchi Manitu and Matchi Manitu, became widely accepted in the beliefs of North American tribes, who integrated these adopted Christian ideas with earlier native beliefs about powers of light, warmth, life, and protection, as well as darkness, cold, death, and destruction. Thus, the two major opposing Beings became leaders of the good and harmful spirits that filled the world and fought for control over it. Here, the nature-religion of the primitive was expanded and developed rather than started by outsiders. Similar mixtures of foreign and native religious ideas can be found among other American groups, though they're often difficult to analyze. In the far Northwest, we might question any native origin in the semi-Christianized Kodiak’s representation of Shljem Shoá as the creator of heaven and earth, to whom offerings were made before and after hunts, compared to Ijak, the malevolent spirit residing in the earth. In the far Southeast, we can discover more originality among the Floridan Indians a few centuries ago, as they reportedly paid solemn worship to the Bad Spirit Toia, who troubled them with visions, while they showed little regard for the Good Spirit, who was minimally concerned about humanity. On the southern continent, Martius makes this notable comment about the rough tribes of Brazil: ‘All Indians strongly believe in the power of an evil principle over them; many start to see the good as well, but they revere the good less than they fear the evil.’ This generalization is somewhat supported by observations about specific tribes. The Macusis are said to acknowledge the good creator Macunaima, ‘he who works by night,’ and his evil opponent Epel or Horiuch: it is noted that ‘All the powers of nature are products of the Good Spirit if they don't disrupt the Indian’s rest and comfort, but they are the work of evil spirits when they do.’ Uauüloa and Locozy, the good and evil deities of the Yumanas, exist above the earth and towards the sun; the Evil Deity is feared by these people, but the Good Deity comes to share fruit with the departed and takes their souls to his home. Therefore, they bury the dead doubled up in a large earthen pot, with fruit in their lap and facing the sunrise. Even the primitive Botocudos are thought to recognize opposing forces of good and evil represented by the Sun and Moon. This concept is particularly interesting because it corresponds on one side with that of the Iroquois tribes and on the other with the more civilized Muyscas of Bogota, whose good deity is clearly a mythic Sun, hindered in his benevolent efforts for mankind by his wicked wife Huythaca, the Moon. The native religion of Chile reportedly includes among its lesser deities Meulen, the friend of man, and Huecuvu, the evil spirit and source of misfortune. These people probably did not learn from Christianity to see their evil spirit as simply and thoroughly the general reason for misfortune: if the earth shakes, Huecuvu has caused it; if a horse gets tired, Huecuvu has ridden it; if a person becomes ill, Huecuvu has inflicted the sickness upon him, and no one dies without Huecuvu having suffocated him.
In Africa, again, allowing for Moslem influence, dualism is not ill represented in native religion. An old account from Loango describes the natives as theoretically recognizing Zambi the supreme deity, creator of good and lover of justice, and over against him Zambi-anbi the destroyer, the counsellor of crime, the author of loss and accident, of disease and death. But when it comes to actual worship, as 327the good god will always be favourable, it is the god of evil who must be appeased, and it is for his satisfaction that men abstain some from one kind of food and some from another.[795] Among accounts of the two rival deities in West Africa, one describes the Guinea negroes as recognizing below the Supreme Deity two spirits (or classes of spirits), Ombwiri and Onyambe, the one kind and gentle, doing good to men and rescuing them from harm, the other hateful and wicked, whose seldom mentioned name is heard with uneasiness and displeasure.[796] It would be scarcely profitable, in an enquiry where accurate knowledge of the doctrine of any insignificant tribe is more to the purpose than vague speculation on the theology of the mightiest nation, to dwell on the enigmatic traces of ancient Egyptian dualism. Suffice it to say that the two brother-deities Osiris and Seti, Osiris the beneficent solar divinity whose nature the blessed dead took on them, Seti perhaps a rival national god degraded to a Typhon, seem to have become the representative figures of a contrasted scheme of light and darkness, good and evil; the sculptured granite still commemorates the contests of their long-departed sects, where the hieroglyphic square-eared beast of Seti has been defaced to substitute for it the figure of Osiris.[797]
In Africa, with the influence of Islam, dualism is represented in native religions. An old account from Loango describes the locals as theoretically recognizing Zambi as the supreme deity, the creator of good and lover of justice, while opposing him is Zambi-anbi, the destroyer and the advisor of crime, the source of loss and accidents, disease, and death. However, in actual worship, since the good god is always favorable, it is the god of evil that needs to be appeased, and people abstain from certain foods to satisfy him. Among the accounts of the two rival deities in West Africa, one describes the Guinea people as recognizing two spirits beneath the Supreme Deity, Ombwiri and Onyambe, with one being kind and gentle, helping people and protecting them from harm, while the other is hateful and wicked, whose name is rarely mentioned and is associated with unease and displeasure. It may not be useful, in an inquiry where knowing the beliefs of any minor tribe is more relevant than vague thoughts on the theology of a powerful nation, to focus on the unclear remnants of ancient Egyptian dualism. It suffices to say that the two brother-deities, Osiris and Seti—Osiris being the benevolent solar god that the blessed dead embody, and Seti perhaps a rival national god that was degraded to a Typhon—seem to represent a contrasting scheme of light and darkness, good and evil. The carved granite still commemorates the struggles of their long-gone factions, where the hieroglyphic square-eared beast of Seti has been defaced to replace it with the figure of Osiris.
The conception of the light-god as the good deity in contrast to a rival god of evil, is one plainly suggested by nature, and naturally recurring in the religions of the world. The Khonds of Orissa may be counted its most perfect modern exponents in barbaric culture. To their supreme creative deity, Būra Pennu or Bella Pennu, Light-god or Sun-god, there stands opposed his evil consort Tari Pennu the Earth-goddess, and the history of good and evil in the world is the history of his work and her counterwork. He created a world paradisaic, happy, harmless; she rebelled against him, and to blast the lot of his new creature, man, 328she brought in disease, and poison, and all disorder, ‘sowing the seeds of sin in mankind as in a ploughed field.’
The idea of a light god as the good deity, in contrast to an evil rival god, is something clearly suggested by nature and appears frequently in world religions. The Khonds of Orissa can be seen as its most perfect modern examples in primitive culture. To their supreme creative deity, Būra Pennu or Bella Pennu, the Light-god or Sun-god, is opposed his evil consort Tari Pennu, the Earth-goddess. The story of good and evil in the world is the story of his creations and her counteractions. He created a paradise that was happy and harmless; she rebelled against him, bringing disease, poison, and all sorts of chaos, ‘sowing the seeds of sin in mankind like seeds in a plowed field.’
Death became the divine punishment of wickedness, the spontaneously fertile earth went to jungle and rock and mud, plants and animals grew poisonous and fierce, throughout nature good and evil were commingled, and still the fight goes on between the two great powers. So far all Khonds agree, and it is on the practical relation of good and evil that they split into their two hostile sects of Būra and Tari. Būra’s sect hold that he triumphed over Tari, in sign of her discomfiture imposed the cares of childbirth on her sex, and makes her still his subject instrument wherewith to punish; Tari’s sect hold that she still maintains the struggle, and even practically disposes of the happiness of man, doing evil or good on her own account, and allowing or not allowing the Creator’s blessings to reach mankind.[798]
Death became the ultimate punishment for wrongdoing, the once fertile land turned into jungle, rock, and mud, and plants and animals became toxic and aggressive. Throughout nature, good and evil are mixed together, and the battle continues between these two powerful forces. This is where all Khonds agree, but it's on the practical relationship between good and evil that they divide into two opposing sects: Būra and Tari. The Būra sect believes that Būra defeated Tari, imposing the burdens of childbirth on her as a sign of her defeat, and continues to use her as a tool for punishment. The Tari sect believes that she is still fighting back and can influence human happiness, doing good or evil based on her own decisions and either allowing or blocking the Creator's blessings from reaching humanity.[798]
Now that the sacred books of the Zend-Avesta are open to us, it is possible to compare the doctrines of savage tribes with those of the great faith through which of all others Dualism seems to have impressed itself on the higher nations. The religion of Zarathustra was a schism from that ancient Aryan nature-worship which is represented in a pure and early form in the Veda, and in depravity and decay in modern Hinduism. The leading thought of the Zarathustrian faith was the contest of Good and Evil in the world, a contrast typified and involved in that of Day and Night, Light and Darkness, and brought to personal shape in the warfare of Ahura-Mazda and Anra-Mainyu, the Good and Evil Deity, Ormuzd and Ahriman. The prophet Zarathustra said: ‘In the beginning there was a pair of twins, two spirits, each of a peculiar activity. These are the good and the base in thought, word, and deed. Choose one of these two spirits. Be good, not base!’ The sacred Vendidad begins with the record of the primæval contest of the two principles. Ahura-Mazda created the best of regions 329and lands, the Aryan home, Sogdia, Bactria, and the rest; Anra-Mainyu against his work created snow and pestilence, buzzing insects and poisonous plants, poverty and sickness, sin and unbelief. The modern Parsi, in passages of his formularies of confession, still keeps alive the old antagonism. I repent, he says, of all kind of sins which the evil Ahriman produced amongst the creatures of Ormuzd in opposition. ‘That which was the wish of Ormazd the Creator, and I ought to have thought and have not thought, what I ought to have spoken and have not spoken, what I ought to have done and have not done; of these sins repent I with thoughts, words, and works, corporeal as well as spiritual, earthly as well as heavenly, with the three words: Pardon, O Lord, I repent of sin. That which was the wish of Ahriman, and I ought not to have thought and yet have thought, what I ought not to have spoken and yet have spoken, what I ought not to have done and yet have done; of these sins repent I with thoughts, words, and works, corporeal as well as spiritual, earthly as well as heavenly, with the three words: Pardon, O Lord, I repent of sin.’ ... ‘May Ahriman be broken, may Ormazd increase.’[799] The Izedis or Yezidis, the so-called Devil-worshippers, still remain a numerous though oppressed people in Mesopotamia and adjacent countries. Their adoration of the sun and horror of defiling fire accord with the idea of a Persian origin of their religion (Persian ized = god), an origin underlying more superficial admixture of Christian and Moslem elements. This remarkable sect is distinguished by a special form of dualism. While recognizing the existence of a Supreme Being, their peculiar reverence is given to Satan, chief of the angelic host, who now has the means of doing evil to mankind, and in his restoration will have the power of rewarding them. ‘Will not Satan then reward the poor Izedis, who alone have never spoken ill of him, and have suffered so much for him?’ Martyrdom for the rights 330of Satan! exclaims the German traveller to whom an old white-bearded devil-worshipper thus set forth the hopes of his religion.[800]
Now that we have access to the sacred texts of the Zend-Avesta, we can compare the beliefs of primitive tribes with those of the major faith that has profoundly influenced the higher civilizations, particularly through the concept of Dualism. The religion founded by Zarathustra was a split from the ancient Aryan nature-worship seen in its pure form in the Vedas, and in its corrupted state in modern Hinduism. The central idea of the Zarathustrian faith is the struggle between Good and Evil, symbolized by Day and Night, Light and Darkness, and embodied in the conflict between Ahura-Mazda and Anra-Mainyu, the Good and Evil Deities, Ormuzd and Ahriman. The prophet Zarathustra said: ‘In the beginning, there were two spirits, each with a unique purpose. These represent good and evil in thought, word, and deed. Choose one of these two spirits. Be good, not evil!’ The sacred Vendidad starts with the account of the original battle between these two forces. Ahura-Mazda created the best regions and lands, the Aryan homeland, Sogdia, Bactria, and more; in contrast, Anra-Mainyu created snow and disease, gnats and poisonous plants, poverty and illness, sin and doubt. The modern Parsi keeps the old conflict alive in his confessional texts. He says he repents for all the sins caused by the evil Ahriman among the creations of Ormuzd. ‘That which was the wish of Ormazd the Creator, and what I should have thought and did not think, what I should have spoken and did not speak, what I should have done and did not do; for these sins I repent with my thoughts, words, and actions, both physical and spiritual, earthly and heavenly, with three words: Pardon, O Lord, I repent of sin. That which was the wish of Ahriman, and what I should not have thought and yet did think, what I should not have spoken and yet did speak, what I should not have done and yet did do; for these sins I repent with my thoughts, words, and actions, both physical and spiritual, earthly and heavenly, with three words: Pardon, O Lord, I repent of sin.’ ... ‘May Ahriman be defeated, may Ormuzd prosper.’ The Izedis or Yezidis, often labeled as Devil-worshippers, still exist as a sizable but oppressed community in Mesopotamia and surrounding areas. Their worship of the sun and aversion to polluted fire suggest a Persian origin of their faith (Persian ized = god), which is layered over more superficial influences from Christianity and Islam. This notable sect is characterized by a unique form of dualism. While they acknowledge the existence of a Supreme Being, they hold a special veneration for Satan, the leader of the angelic host, who currently has the means to do harm to humanity, and who will, upon his restoration, have the power to reward them. ‘Will not Satan then reward the poor Izedis, who alone have never spoken ill of him and have suffered so much for him?’ exclaims a German traveler, recalling how an old white-bearded devil-worshipper expressed the hopes of his faith.
Direct worship of the Evil Principle, familiar as it is to low barbaric races, is scarcely to be found among people higher in civilization than these persecuted and stubborn sectaries of Western Asia. So far as such ideas extend in the development of religion, they seem fair evidence how far worship among low tribes turns rather on fear than love. That the adoration of a Good Deity should have more and more superseded the propitiation of an Evil Deity, is the sign of one of the great movements in the education of mankind, a result of happier experience of life, and of larger and more gladsome views of the system of the universe. It is not, however, through the inactive systems of modern Parsism and Izedism that the mighty Zoroastrian dualism has exerted its main influence on mankind. We must look back to long-past ages for traces of its contact with Judaism and Christianity. It is often and reasonably thought that intercourse between Jews and ancient Persians was an effective agent in producing that theologic change which differences the later Jew of the Rabbinical books from the earlier Jew of the Pentateuch, a change in which one important part is the greater prominence of the dualistic scheme. So in later times (about the fourth century), the contact of Zoroastrism and Christianity appears to have been influential in producing Manichæism. Manichæism is known mostly on the testimony of its adversaries, but thus much seems clear, that it is based on the very doctrine of the two antagonistic principles of good and evil, of spirit and matter. It sets on the one hand God, original good and source of good alone, primal light and lord of the kingdom of light, and on the other hand the Prince of Darkness, with his kingdom of darkness, of matter, of confusion, and destruction. The theory of ceaseless conflict between these contending 331powers becomes a key to the physical and moral nature and course of the universe.[801] Among Christian or semi-Christian sects, the Manichæans stand as representatives of dualism pushed to its utmost development. It need scarcely be said, however, that Christian dualism is not bounded by the limits of this or that special sect. In so far as the Evil Being, with his subordinate powers of darkness, is held to exist and act in any degree in independence of the Supreme Deity and his ministering spirits of light, so far theological schools admit, though in widely different grades of importance, a philosophy of nature and of life which has its basis rather in dualism than in monotheism.
Direct worship of the Evil Principle, common among primitive tribes, is rarely found among more civilized people than these marginalized and determined sects of Western Asia. The extent of these ideas in religious development shows how worship among lesser tribes is often based more on fear than love. The fact that the worship of a Good Deity has increasingly replaced the appeasement of an Evil Deity signifies one of the major shifts in humanity's education, a result of a more positive life experience and broader, more joyful perspectives on the universe. However, it is not through the stagnant traditions of modern Parsism and Izedism that the powerful Zoroastrian dualism has primarily influenced humanity. We need to look back to ancient times for evidence of its interactions with Judaism and Christianity. It is often reasonably argued that the contact between Jews and ancient Persians significantly contributed to the theological shift that distinguishes the later Jewish thought in the Rabbinical texts from that of the earlier Jews in the Pentateuch, with one notable aspect being the increased emphasis on dualistic concepts. Similarly, in later periods (around the fourth century), the interaction between Zoroastrianism and Christianity appears to have played a role in the emergence of Manichaeism. Manichaeism is mostly known through the accounts of its opponents, but it seems clear that it is founded on the doctrine of two opposing principles of good and evil, spirit and matter. On one side, it presents God as the original source of good, primal light, and ruler of the kingdom of light; on the other side, it depicts the Prince of Darkness, along with his realm of darkness, matter, chaos, and destruction. The ongoing struggle between these opposing forces serves as a framework for understanding the physical and moral nature and course of the universe.331 Among Christian or semi-Christian sects, the Manichaeans represent dualism taken to its extreme. It’s worth mentioning, however, that Christian dualism is not limited to any particular sect. To the extent that the Evil Being and his subordinate dark forces are believed to exist and operate independently from the Supreme Deity and his aiding spirits of light, various theological schools acknowledge, though at different levels of significance, a philosophy of nature and life that is more rooted in dualism than in monotheism.
We now turn to the last objects of our present survey, those theological beliefs of the lower tribes of mankind which point more or less distinctly toward a doctrine of Monotheism. Here it is by no means proposed to examine savage ideas from the point of view of doctrinal theology, an undertaking which would demand arguments quite beyond the present range. Their treatment is limited to classifying the actual beliefs of the lower races, with some ethnographic considerations as to their origin and their relation to higher religions. For this purpose it is desirable to distinguish the prevalent doctrines of the uncultured world from absolute monotheism. At the outset, care is needed to exclude an ambiguity of which the importance often goes unnoticed. How are the mighty but subordinate divinities, recognized in different religions, to be classed? Beings who in Christian or Moslem theology would be called angels, saints, demons, would under the same definitions be called deities in polytheistic systems. This is obvious, but we may realize it more distinctly from its actually having happened. The Chuwashes, a race of Tatar affinity, are stated to reverence a god of Death, who takes to himself the souls of the departed, and whom they call Esrel; it is curious that Castrén, in mentioning 332this, should fail to point out that this deity is no other than Azrael the angel of death, adopted under Moslem influence.[802] Again, in the mixed Pagan and Christian religion of the Circassians, which at least in its recently prevalent form would be reckoned polytheistic, there stand beneath the Supreme Being a number of mighty subordinate deities, of whom the principal are Iele the Thunder-god, Tleps the Fire-god, Seoseres the god of Wind and Water, Misitcha the Forest-god, and Mariam the Virgin Mary.[803] If the monotheistic criterion be simply made to consist in the Supreme Deity being held as creator of the universe and chief of the spiritual hierarchy, then its application to savage and barbaric theology will lead to perplexing consequences. Races of North and South America, of Africa, of Polynesia, recognizing a number of great deities, are usually and reasonably considered polytheists, yet under this definition their acknowledgment of a Supreme Creator, of which various cases will here be shown, would entitle them at the same time to the name of monotheists. To mark off the doctrines of monotheism, closer definition is required, assigning the distinctive attributes of deity to none save the Almighty Creator. It may be declared that, in this strict sense, no savage tribe of monotheists has been ever known. Nor are any fair representatives of the lower culture in a strict sense pantheists. The doctrine which they do widely hold, and which opens to them a course tending in one or other of these directions, is polytheism culminating in the rule of one supreme divinity. High above the doctrine of souls, of divine manes, of local nature-spirits, of the great deities of class and element, there are to be discerned in barbaric theology shadowings, quaint or majestic, of the conception of a Supreme Deity, henceforth to be traced onward in expanding power and brightening glory along the history of religion. It is no unimportant task, partial as it is, to select and group the typical data 333which show the nature and position of the doctrine of supremacy, as it comes into view within the lower culture.
We now turn to the final subjects of our current survey, those theological beliefs of the lower tribes of humanity that point more or less clearly toward a doctrine of Monotheism. Here, we're not aiming to analyze primitive ideas from a doctrinal theology perspective, which would require arguments beyond our current scope. Instead, we're focusing on classifying the actual beliefs of these lower races, with some ethnographic insights into their origins and their relationship to higher religions. For this purpose, it's important to differentiate the common doctrines of the uncultured world from absolute monotheism. To begin, we need to be careful to eliminate any ambiguity that often goes unnoticed. How should we categorize the powerful but subordinate deities recognized in different religions? Beings that in Christian or Muslim theology would be referred to as angels, saints, or demons would, under the same definitions, be considered deities in polytheistic systems. This is clear, but we can understand it more distinctly because it has actually happened. The Chuwashes, a group of Tatar descent, are said to honor a god of Death who takes the souls of the departed, whom they call Esrel; it's interesting that Castrén, while mentioning this, fails to point out that this deity is none other than Azrael, the angel of death, adopted under Muslim influence. Again, in the mixed Pagan and Christian religion of the Circassians, which in its currently prevalent form would be classified as polytheistic, there exist several powerful subordinate deities under the Supreme Being, the principal ones being Iele the Thunder-god, Tleps the Fire-god, Seoseres the god of Wind and Water, Misitcha the Forest-god, and Mariam the Virgin Mary. If we define monotheism simply as the belief in a Supreme Deity as the creator of the universe and the leader of the spiritual hierarchy, then applying this to primitive and barbaric theology will lead to confusing results. Races from North and South America, Africa, and Polynesia, who recognize a number of significant deities, are typically and reasonably considered polytheists; however, under this definition, their acknowledgment of a Supreme Creator, of which various examples will be provided, would also qualify them as monotheists. To clarify the doctrines of monotheism, a more precise definition is required, assigning the distinctive attributes of deity only to the Almighty Creator. It can be stated that, in this strict sense, no savage tribe of monotheists has ever been known. Nor are any fair representations of lower culture strictly pantheists. The doctrine they largely hold, which leads them in one direction or another, is polytheism culminating in the belief in one supreme deity. Above the beliefs in souls, divine spirits, local nature-spirits, and the great deities of class and element, we can perceive in barbaric theology shadows, whether quaint or majestic, of the concept of a Supreme Deity, which can be traced onward in increasing power and radiant glory throughout the history of religion. It's a significant task, albeit partial, to select and group the typical data that reveal the nature and position of the doctrine of supremacy as it emerges within lower culture.
On the threshold of the investigation, there meets us the same critical difficulty which obstructs the study of primitive dualism. Among low tribes who have been in contact with Christianity or Mohammedanism, how are we to tell to what extent, under this foreign influence, dim, uncouth ideas of divine supremacy may have been developed into more cultured forms, or wholly foreign ideas implanted? We know how the Jesuit missionaries led the native Canadians to the conception of the Great Manitu; how they took up the native Brazilian name of the divine Thunder, Tupan, and adapted its meaning to convey in Christian teaching the idea of God. Thus, again, we find most distinctly-marked African ideas of a Supreme Deity in the West, where intercourse with Moslems has actually Islamized or semi-Islamized whole negro nations, and the name of Allah is in all men’s mouths. The ethnographer must be ever on the look-out for traces of such foreign influence in the definition of the Supreme Deity acknowledged by any uncultured race, a divinity whose nature and even whose name may betray his adoption from abroad. Thus the supreme Iroquois deity, Neo or Hawaneu, the pre-existent creator, has been triumphantly adduced to show the monotheism underlying the native creeds of America. But it seems that this divinity was introduced by the French Catholic missionaries, and that Niio is an altered form of Dieu.[804] Among the list of supreme deities of the lower races who are also held to be first ancestors of man, we hear of Louquo, the uncreate first Carib, who descended from the eternal heaven, made the flat earth, and produced man from his own body. He lived long on earth among men, died and came to life again after three days, and returned to heaven.[805] It would be hardly reasonable 334to enumerate, among genuine deities of native West Indian religion, a being with characteristics thus on the face of them adopted from the religion of the white men. Yet even in such extreme cases, it does not necessarily follow that the definitions of these deities, vitiated as they are for ethnographical use by foreign influence, have not to some extent a native substratum. In criticising details, moreover, it must not be forgotten how largely the similarities in the religions of different races may be of independent origin, and how closely allied are many ideas in the rude native theologies of savages to ideas holding an immemorial place in the religions of their civilized invaders. For the present purpose, however, it is well to dwell especially on such evidence as by characteristic traits or early date is farthest removed from suspicion of being borrowed from a foreign source.
At the start of the investigation, we encounter the same challenging issue that complicates the study of basic dualism. Among low tribes who have come into contact with Christianity or Islam, how can we determine to what extent, influenced by these foreign religions, vague and rough ideas of divine supremacy have evolved into more sophisticated forms or entirely new concepts introduced? We know how Jesuit missionaries guided native Canadians to the idea of the Great Manitu; how they adapted the native Brazilian name, Tupan, meaning divine Thunder, to communicate the Christian concept of God. Similarly, we can clearly see African notions of a Supreme Deity in the West, where interactions with Muslims have completely or partially converted entire Black nations to Islam, and the name Allah is commonly used. Ethnographers must always be vigilant for signs of such foreign influence in how any uncivilized group defines their Supreme Deity, a divinity whose nature and even name may reveal its foreign origins. For instance, the supreme deity of the Iroquois, Neo or Hawaneu, the pre-existing creator, is often cited to demonstrate the monotheism within the native beliefs of America. However, it appears that this deity was introduced by French Catholic missionaries, and that Niio is a modified form of Dieu.[804] Among the supreme deities recognized by lower races, who are also considered the first ancestors of mankind, we find Louquo, the uncreated first Carib, who descended from eternal heaven, created the flat Earth, and produced humans from his own body. He lived among people for a long time, died, was resurrected after three days, and returned to heaven.[805] It would be unreasonable to include, among the authentic deities of native West Indian religion, a being with characteristics that are clearly borrowed from the religions of white men. Yet, even in such extreme examples, it doesn't necessarily mean that the definitions of these deities, which are compromised for ethnographic purposes by foreign influence, lack some native foundations. In critiquing details, we must also remember that many similarities in the religions of different races may have independent origins, and many concepts in the primitive theologies of indigenous peoples share close ties with ideas that have been foundational in the religions of their civilized invaders. For the present purpose, however, it is valuable to focus on evidence that, due to unique traits or early origins, is least likely to be suspected of having been borrowed from a foreign source.
In surveying the peoples of the world, the ethnographer finds many who are not shown to have any definite conception of a supreme deity; and even where such a conception is placed on record, it is sometimes so vaguely asserted, or on such questionable authority, that he can but take note of it and pass on. In numerous cases, however, illustrated by the following collection from different regions, certain leading ideas, singly or blended, may be traced. There are many savage and barbaric religions which solve their highest problem by the simple process of raising to divine primacy one of the gods of polytheism itself. Even the system of the manes-worshipper has been stretched to reach the limit of supreme deity, in the person of the primæval ancestor. More frequently, it is the nature-worshipper’s principle which has prevailed, giving to one of the great nature-deities the precedence of the rest. Here, by no recondite speculation, but by the plain teaching of nature, the choice has for the most part lain between two mighty visible divinities, the all-animating Sun and the all-encompassing Heaven. In the study of such schemes, we are on intellectual terra firma. There is among the religions of the lower races another notable group of systems, seemingly 335in close connexion with the first. These display to us a heavenly pantheon arranged on the model of an earthly political constitution, where the commonalty are crowds of human souls and other tribes of world-pervading spirits, the aristocracy are great polytheistic gods, and the King is the supreme Deity. To this comparatively intelligible side of the subject, a more perplexed and obscure side stands contrasted. Among thoughtful men whose theory of the soul animating the body has already led them to suppose a divine spirit animating the huge mass of earth or sky, this idea needs but a last expansion to become a doctrine of the universe as animated by one greatest, all-pervading divinity, the World-Spirit. Moreover, where speculative philosophy grapples with the vast fundamental world-problem, the solution is attained by ascending from the Many to the One, by striving to discern through and beyond the Universe a First Cause. Let the basis of such reasoning be laid in theological ground, then the First Cause is realized as the Supreme Deity. In such ways, the result of carrying to their utmost limits the animistic conceptions which among low races and high pervade the philosophy of religion, is to reach an idea of as it were a soul of the world, a shaper, animator, ruler of the universe. Entering these regions of transcendental theology, we are not to wonder that the comparative distinctness belonging to conceptions of lower spiritual beings here fades away. Human souls, subordinate nature-spirits, and huge polytheistic nature-gods, carry with the defined special functions they perform some defined character and figure, but beyond such limits form and function blend into the infinite and universal in the thought of supreme divinity. To realize this widest idea, two especial ways are open. The first way is to fuse the attributes of the great polytheistic powers into more or less of common personality, thus conceiving that, after all, it is the same Highest Being who holds up the heavens, shines in the sun, smites his foes in the thunder, stands first in the human pedigree as 336the divine ancestor. The second way is to remove the limit of theologic speculation into the region of the indefinite and the inane. An unshaped divine entity looming vast, shadowy, and calm beyond and over the material world, too benevolent or too exalted to need human worship, too huge, too remote, too indifferent, too supine, too merely existent, to concern himself with the petty race of men,—this is a mystic form of formlessness in which religion has not seldom pictured the Supreme.
In looking at the peoples of the world, the ethnographer finds many who don’t seem to have a clear idea of a supreme deity; and even where such an idea is documented, it is sometimes stated so vaguely or based on questionable sources that he can only take note of it and move on. In many cases, however, as shown in the following collection from different regions, certain key concepts, either individually or in combination, can be identified. There are many primitive and tribal religions that address their highest problem by simply elevating one of the gods from polytheism to a position of divine primacy. Even the belief in ancestral spirits has been expanded to reach the ultimate divine being, represented by the original ancestor. More often, it is the principle of nature worship that prevails, granting one of the major nature deities precedence over the others. Here, through the straightforward teachings of nature, the choice generally lies between two powerful visible deities, the all-encompassing Sun and Heaven. In studying these frameworks, we are on solid intellectual ground. Among the religions of lesser-developed societies, there is another significant group of systems that seemingly connects closely with the first. These present us with a heavenly pantheon structured like an earthly political system, where the common people consist of crowds of human souls and various spirits, the elite are great polytheistic gods, and the King is the supreme Deity. On this relatively clear side of the subject, there exists a more confusing and obscure counterpart. Among reflective individuals whose understanding of the soul animating the body has led them to consider a divine spirit animating the vast expanse of earth or sky, this concept only needs a final expansion to evolve into a doctrine of the universe being animated by one ultimate, all-encompassing divinity, the World-Spirit. Additionally, when speculative philosophy tackles the immense fundamental issue of existence, the solution is achieved by moving from Many to One, striving to perceive a First Cause through and beyond the Universe. If the foundation of this reasoning is theological, then the First Cause becomes identified as the Supreme Deity. In these ways, the outcome of pushing animistic ideas, which pervade the philosophy of religion among both primitive and advanced societies, to their utmost limits leads to a notion resembling the soul of the world, a creator, animator, and ruler of the universe. As we enter these realms of transcendental theology, we shouldn’t be surprised that the comparative clarity associated with the ideas of lower spiritual beings begins to fade. Human souls, subordinate nature spirits, and vast polytheistic nature gods carry defined roles and characters based on the specific functions they perform, but beyond those limits, form and function merge into the infinite and universal concept of supreme divinity. To comprehend this broadest idea, there are two particular paths available. The first path is to blend the attributes of the major polytheistic powers into a more or less unified personality, thereby conceiving that, after all, it is the same Highest Being who supports the heavens, shines in the sun, strikes his foes with thunder, and stands at the beginning of the human lineage as the divine ancestor. The second path is to push theological speculation into the realm of the indefinite and the void. An unformed divine entity looming vast, shadowy, and serene beyond and above the material world, too benevolent or too exalted to require human worship, too colossal, too distant, too indifferent, too merely existent to be concerned with the trivial affairs of humanity—this is a mystical representation of formlessness in which religion has often envisioned the Supreme.
Thus, then, it appears that the theology of the lower races already reaches its climax in conceptions of a highest of the gods, and that these conceptions in the savage and barbaric world are no copies stamped from one common type, but outlines widely varying among mankind. The degeneration-theory, in some instances no doubt with justice, may claim such beliefs as mutilated and perverted remnants of higher religions. Yet for the most part, the development-theory is competent to account for them without seeking their origin in grades of culture higher than those in which they are found existing. Looked upon as products of natural religion, such doctrines of divine supremacy seem in no way to transcend the powers of the low-cultured mind to reason out, nor of the low-cultured imagination to deck with mythic fancy. There have existed in times past, and do still exist, savage or barbaric peoples who hold such views of a highest god as they may have attained to of themselves, without the aid of more cultured nations. Among these races, Animism has its distinct and consistent outcome, and Polytheism its distinct and consistent completion, in the doctrine of a Supreme Deity.
It seems that the theology of lower races already peaks in the idea of a highest god, and these ideas in the savage and barbaric world aren't just copies of a single common type; they vary widely among different groups of people. The degeneration theory might claim that these beliefs are distorted and corrupted remnants of higher religions, and in some cases, it might be right. However, for the most part, the development theory can explain them without needing to trace their origins to cultures that are more advanced than those where they currently exist. When viewed as products of natural religion, these beliefs in divine supremacy don't seem to surpass the ability of a less-cultured mind to reason or a less-cultured imagination to embellish with myths. Throughout history and still today, there have been savage or barbaric communities that have developed their own concepts of a highest god without the influence of more cultured societies. Among these groups, Animism leads to its unique and consistent outcome, while Polytheism reaches its distinct and consistent conclusion in the belief in a Supreme Deity.
The native religions of South America and the West Indies display a well-marked series of types. The primacy of the Sun was long ago well stated by the Moluches when a Jesuit missionary preached to them, and they replied, ‘Till this hour, we never knew nor acknowledged anything greater or better than the Sun.’[806] So when a later missionary 337argued with the chief of the Tobas, ‘My god is good and punishes wicked people,’ the chief replied, ‘My God (the Sun) is good likewise; but he punishes nobody, satisfied to do good to all.’[807] In various manifestations, moreover, there reigns among barbarians a supreme being whose characteristics are those of the Heaven-god. It is thus with the Tamoi of the Guaranis, ‘that beneficent deity worshipped in his blended character of ancestor of mankind and ancient of heaven, lord of the celestial paradise.’[808] It is so with the highest deity of the Araucanians, Pillan the Thunder or the Thunderer, called also Huenu-Pillan or Heaven-Thunder, and Vuta-gen or Great Being. ‘The universal government of Pillan,’ says Molina, ‘is a prototype of the Araucanian polity. He is the great Toqui (Governor) of the invisible world, and as such has his Apo-Ulmenes, and his Ulmenes, to whom he entrusts the administration of affairs of less importance. These ideas are certainly very rude, but it must be acknowledged that the Araucanians are not the only people who have regulated the things of heaven by those of the earth.’[809] A different but not less characteristic type of the Supreme Deity is placed on record among the Caribs, a beneficent power dwelling in the skies, reposing in his own happiness, careless of mankind, and by them not honoured nor adored.[810]
The native religions of South America and the West Indies show a clear variety of types. The importance of the Sun was famously expressed by the Moluches when a Jesuit missionary preached to them, and they replied, ‘Until now, we never knew or acknowledged anything greater or better than the Sun.’[806] Later, when another missionary debated with the chief of the Tobas, saying, ‘My god is good and punishes wicked people,’ the chief responded, ‘My God (the Sun) is also good; however, he punishes no one, content to do good to everyone.’[807] Additionally, among various tribes, there is a supreme being whose traits resemble that of a Heaven-god. This is the case with the Tamoi of the Guaranis, ‘that benevolent deity worshipped in his combined role as the ancestor of humanity and the ancient of heaven, lord of the celestial paradise.’[808] Similarly, the highest deity among the Araucanians is Pillan the Thunder or the Thunderer, also known as Huenu-Pillan or Heaven-Thunder, and Vuta-gen or Great Being. ‘The universal government of Pillan,’ says Molina, ‘is a model of the Araucanian governance. He is the great Toqui (Governor) of the invisible world, and he has his Apo-Ulmenes and Ulmenes, to whom he entrusts the management of less important matters. These concepts are certainly quite basic, but it must be noted that the Araucanians are not the only people who have governed the heavens based on the earth.’[809] A different yet equally distinct type of Supreme Deity is noted among the Caribs, a benevolent power residing in the skies, enjoying his own happiness, unconcerned about humanity, and not honored or worshipped by them.[810]
The theological history of Peru, in ages before the Spanish conquest, has lately had new light thrown on it by the researches of Mr. Markham. Here the student comes into view of a rivalry full of interest in the history of barbaric religion, the rivalry between the Creator and the divine Sun. In the religion of the Incas, precedence was given to Uiracocha, called Pachacamac, ‘Creator of the World.’ The Sun (with whom was coupled his sister-wife 338the Moon) was the divine ancestor, the dawn or origin, the totem or lar, of the Inca family. The three great deities were the Creator, Sun, and Thunder; their images were brought out together at great festivals into the square of Cuzco, llamas were sacrificed to all three, and they could be addressed in prayer together, ‘O Creator, and Sun, and Thunder, be for ever young, multiply the people, and let them always be at peace.’ Yet the Thunder and Lightning was held to come by the command of the Creator, and the following prayer shows clearly that even ‘our father the Sun’ was but his creature:—
The theological history of Peru, before the Spanish conquest, has recently gained new insights thanks to the research of Mr. Markham. Here, students can explore a fascinating rivalry in the history of indigenous religion, the competition between the Creator and the divine Sun. In Inca religion, Uiracocha, known as Pachacamac, meaning ‘Creator of the World,’ held the highest rank. The Sun (along with his sister-wife, the Moon) was seen as the divine ancestor, the dawn or origin, the totem of the Inca lineage. The three main deities were the Creator, the Sun, and Thunder; their images were displayed together during large festivals in the square of Cuzco, and llamas were sacrificed to all three. People could pray to them together, saying, ‘O Creator, and Sun, and Thunder, be forever young, multiply the people, and let them always be at peace.’ However, Thunder and Lightning were believed to come at the command of the Creator, and a prayer illustrates that even ‘our father the Sun’ was merely his creation:—
‘Uiracocha! Thou who gavest being to the Sun, and afterwards said let there be day and night. Raise it and cause it to shine, and preserve that which thou hast created, that it may give light to men. Grant this, Uiracocha!
‘Uiracocha! You who gave life to the Sun, and then said let there be day and night. Raise it and make it shine, and protect what you’ve created, so it may give light to people. Please grant this, Uiracocha!
‘Sun! Thou who art in peace and safety, shine upon us, keep us from sickness, and keep us in health and safety.’
‘Sun! You who are in peace and safety, shine upon us, keep us from illness, and keep us healthy and safe.’
Among the transitions of religion, however, it is not strange that a subordinate God, by virtue of his nearer intercourse and power, should usurp the place of the supreme deity. Among the various traces of this taking place under the Incas, are traditions of the great temple at Cuzco called ‘The Golden Place,’ where Manco Ccapac originally set up a flat oval golden plate to signify the Creator; Mayta Ccapac, it is said, renewed the Creator’s symbol, but Huascar Inca took it down, and set up in its stead in the place of honour a round golden plate like the sun with rays. The famous temple itself, Ccuricancha the ‘Golden Place,’ was known to the Spaniards as the Temple of the Sun; no wonder that the idea has come to be so generally accepted, that the Sun was the chief god of Peru. There is even on record a memorable protest made by one Inca, who dared to deny that the Sun could be the maker of all things, comparing him to a tethered beast that must make ever the same daily round, and to an arrow that must go whither it is sent, not whither it will. But what availed philosophic protest, even from the head of church and state himself, against a state 339church of which the world has seldom seen the equal for stiff and solid organization? The Sun reigned in Peru till Pizarro overthrew him, and his splendid golden likeness came down from the temple wall to be the booty of a Castilian soldier, who lost it in one night at play.[811]
Among the changes in religion, it's not surprising that a lesser god, due to his closer relationship and power, would take the place of the supreme deity. Evidence of this happening during the Incas includes stories about the great temple at Cuzco known as ‘The Golden Place,’ where Manco Ccapac originally set up a flat oval golden plate to represent the Creator. Mayta Ccapac is said to have renewed the Creator’s symbol, but Huascar Inca removed it and replaced it with a round golden plate resembling the sun with rays. The famous temple itself, Ccuricancha, the ‘Golden Place,’ was known to the Spaniards as the Temple of the Sun; it’s no wonder that over time, the view developed that the Sun was the main god of Peru. There's even a notable protest recorded by one Inca who boldly claimed that the Sun couldn’t be the creator of everything, comparing him to a tied-up animal that circles the same path every day and to an arrow that can only go where it's aimed, not where it wants. But what did logical protest, even from the leader of church and state himself, matter against a state church that has hardly been matched in rigid and strong organization? The Sun ruled in Peru until Pizarro defeated him, and his magnificent golden image came down from the temple wall to become the prize of a Castilian soldier, who lost it in one night during a game.[811]
Among rude tribes of the North American continent, evidence of the primacy of the divine Sun is not unknown. Father Hennepin’s account of the Sioux worshipping the Sun as the Creator is explicit enough, and agrees with the argument of the modern Shawnees, that the Sun animates everything, and therefore must be the Master of Life or Great Spirit.[812] It is the widespread belief in this Great Spirit which has long and deservedly drawn the attention of European thinkers to the native religions of the North American tribes. The name of the Great Spirit originates with the equivalent term Kitchi Manitu in the language of the Algonquin Indians. Before the European intercourse in the 17th century, these tribes had indeed no deity so called, but as has been already pointed out, the term came first into use by the application of the native word manitu, meaning demon or deity, to the Christian God. During the following centuries, the name of the Great Spirit, with the ideas belonging to the name, travelled far and wide over the continent. It became the ordinary expression of Europeans in their descriptions of Indian religion, and in discourse carried on in English words between Europeans and Indians, and was more or less naturalized among the Indians themselves. On their religions it had on the one 340hand a transforming influence, while on the other hand, as is usual in the combination of religions, the new divinity incorporated into himself the characteristics of native divinities, so that native ideas remained in part represented in him. A divine being whose characteristics are often so unlike what European intercourse would have suggested, could be hardly altogether of foreign origin.[813] Again, among the Greenlanders, Torngarsuk or Great Spirit (his name is an augmentative of ‘torngak’—‘demon’) was known to the early Danish missionary Egede as the oracular deity of the angekoks, to whose under-world souls hope to descend at death. He so far held the place of supreme deity in the native mind, that, as Cranz the missionary relates somewhat afterwards, many Greenlanders hearing of God and his almighty power were apt to fall on the idea that it was their Torngarsuk who was meant; but he was eventually identified with the Devil.[814] In like manner, Algonquin Indians, early in the 17th century, hearing of the white man’s Deity, identified him with one known to their own native belief, Atahocan the Creator. When Le Jeune the missionary talked to them of an almighty creator of heaven and earth, they began to say to one another, ‘Atahocan, Atahocan, it is Atahocan!’ The traditional idea of such a being seems indeed to have lain in utter mythic vagueness in their thoughts, for they had made his name into a verb, ‘Nitatahocan,’ meaning, ‘I tell a fable, an old fanciful story.’[815]
Among the rough tribes of North America, the importance of the Sun as a divine being is well-known. Father Hennepin clearly described how the Sioux worshipped the Sun as the Creator, which aligns with the views of the modern Shawnees, who believe that the Sun brings life to everything and must therefore be regarded as the Master of Life or Great Spirit.[812] This widespread belief in the Great Spirit has long attracted the attention of European thinkers toward the native religions of North American tribes. The term Great Spirit comes from the equivalent phrase Kitchi Manitu in the language of the Algonquin Indians. Before European contact in the 17th century, these tribes didn't have a deity named this way, but as mentioned earlier, the term was first used when the native word manitu, meaning demon or deity, was applied to the Christian God. Over the following centuries, the name Great Spirit, along with its associated ideas, spread widely across the continent. It became the common term used by Europeans to describe Indian religion, and in conversations conducted in English between Europeans and Indians, it was somewhat integrated into the vocabulary of the Native Americans themselves. It influenced their religions in one way, while also, as often happens when religions combine, the new deity absorbed traits of local gods, so that original ideas remained partly represented in him. A divine being whose characteristics often diverge significantly from what European interaction would suggest could hardly be entirely foreign in origin.[813] Similarly, among the Greenlanders, Torngarsuk or Great Spirit (his name is a larger form of ‘torngak’—‘demon’) was recognized by the early Danish missionary Egede as the oracular deity of the angekoks, whose underworld souls hope to reach after death. He was regarded as the supreme deity in the native belief system to such an extent that, as missionary Cranz later noted, many Greenlanders, upon hearing about God and His almighty power, were inclined to think it was their Torngarsuk being referred to; however, he eventually became associated with the Devil.[814] Similarly, Algonquin Indians, early in the 17th century, upon hearing of the white man’s God, identified him with a figure from their own belief system, Atahocan the Creator. When Le Jeune the missionary spoke to them about an all-powerful creator of heaven and earth, they began to say to each other, ‘Atahocan, Atahocan, it’s Atahocan!’ The traditional understanding of such a being seems to have remained quite vague in their minds, as they had turned his name into a verb, ‘Nitatahocan,’ meaning ‘I tell a fable, an old fanciful story.’[815]
In late times, Schoolcraft represents the Great Spirit as a Soul of the Universe, inhabiting and animating all things, recognized in rocks and trees, in cataracts and clouds, in thunder and lightning, in tempest and zephyr, becoming incarnate in birds and beasts as titular deities, existing in the world under every possible form, animate and 341inanimate.[816] Whether the Red Indian mind even in modern times really entertained this extreme pantheistic scheme, we may well doubt. In early times of American discovery, the records show a quite different and more usual conception of a supreme deity. Among the more noteworthy of these older documents are the following. Jacques Cartier, in his second Canadian voyage (1535), speaks of the people having no valid belief in God, for they believe in one whom they call Cudouagni, and say that he often speaks with them, and tells them what the weather will be; they say that when he is angry with them he casts earth in their eyes. Thevet’s statement somewhat later is as follows: ‘As to their religion, they have no worship or prayer to God, except that they contemplate the new moon, called in their language Osannaha, saying that Andouagni calls it thus, sending it little by little to advance or retard the waters. For the rest, they fully believe that there is a Creator, greater than the Sun, the Moon, and the Stars, and who holds all in his power. He it is whom they call Andouagni, without however having any form or method of prayer to him.’[817] In Virginia about 1586, we learn from Heriot that the natives believed in many gods, which they call ‘mantoac,’ but of different sorts and degrees, also that there is one chief god who first made other principal gods, and afterwards the sun, moon, and stars as petty gods. In New England, in 1622, Winslow says that they believe, as do the Virginians, in many divine powers, yet of one above all the rest; the Massachusetts call their great god Kiehtan, who made all the other gods; he dwells far westerly above the heavens, whither all good men go when they die; ‘They never saw Kiehtan, but they hold it a great charge and dutie, that one age teach another; and to him they make feasts, and cry and sing for plentie and victorie, or anything is good.’ Another famous native 342American name for the supreme deity is Oki. Captain John Smith, the hero of the colonization of Virginia in 1607, he who was befriended by Pocahontas, ‘La Belle Sauvage,’ thus describes the religion of the country, and especially of her tribe, the Powhatans: ‘There is yet in Virginia no place discovered to be so Savage in which they haue not a Religion, Deer, and Bow and Arrowes. All things that are able to doe them hurt beyond their prevention, they adore with their kinde of divine worship; as the fire, water, lightning, thunder, our Ordnance peeces, horses, &c. But their chiefe god they worship is the Devill. Him they call Okee, and serue him more of feare than loue. They say they haue conference with him, and fashion themselves as neare to his shape as they can imagine. In their Temples they haue his image evill favouredly carved, and then painted and adorned with chaines of copper, and beads, and covered with a skin in such manner as the deformities may well suit with such a God.’[818] This quaint account deserves to be quoted at length as an example of the judgment which a half-educated and whole-prejudiced European is apt to pass on savage deities, which from his point of view seem of simply diabolic nature. It is known from other sources that Oki, a word belonging not to the Powhatan but to the Huron language, was in fact a general name for spirit or deity. We may judge the real belief of these Indians better from Father Brebeuf’s description of the Heaven God, cited here in a former chapter: they imagine in the heavens an Oki, that is, a Demon or power ruling the seasons of the year, and controlling the winds and waves, a being whose anger they fear, and whom they call on in making solemn treaties.[819] 343About a century later, Father Lafitau wrote passages which illustrate well the transformation of native animistic conceptions under missionary influence into analogues of Christian theology. Such general terms for spiritual beings as ‘oki’ or ‘manitu’ had become to him individual names of one supreme being. ‘This great Spirit, known among the Caribs under the name of Chemiin, under that of Manitou among the Algonquin nations, and under that of Okki among those who speak the Huron tongue ...’ &c. All American tribes, he says, use expressions which can only denote God: ‘they call him the great Spirit, sometimes the Master and Author of Life ...’ &c.[820] The longer rude tribes of America have been in contact with European belief, the less confidently can we ascribe to purely native sources the theologic scheme their religions have settled into. Yet the Creeks towards the end of the 18th century preserved some elements of native faith. They believed in the Great Spirit, the Master of Breath (a being whom Bartram represents as a soul and governor of the universe): to him they would address their frequent prayers and ejaculations, at the same time paying a kind of homage to the sun, moon, and stars, as the mediators or ministers of the Great Spirit, in dispensing his attributes for their comfort and well-being in this life.[821] In our own day, among the wild Comanches of the prairies, the Great Spirit, their creator and supreme deity, is above Sun and Moon and Earth; towards him is sent the first puff of tobacco-smoke before the Sun receives the second, and to him is offered the first morsel of the feast.[822]
In later times, Schoolcraft describes the Great Spirit as the Soul of the Universe, living in and giving life to everything, recognized in rocks and trees, waterfalls and clouds, as well as thunder and lightning, in storms and gentle breezes, taking form in animals and birds as deities, existing in the world in every possible form, both living and non-living. Whether the Native American mindset, even in modern times, truly embraced this extreme pantheistic idea, we can question. During the early period of American exploration, the records reveal a quite different and more common understanding of a supreme deity. Among the most notable of these earlier documents are the following. Jacques Cartier, during his second voyage to Canada (1535), mentions that the people have no real belief in God, but instead believe in one they call Cudouagni, claiming he often speaks to them and tells them about the weather; they say that when he is angry, he throws dirt in their eyes. Thevet’s later account goes as follows: ‘Regarding their religion, they have no form of worship or prayer to God, except that they look at the new moon, called Osannaha in their language, saying that Andouagni calls it that, sending it little by little to control the waters. Furthermore, they firmly believe in a Creator, greater than the Sun, the Moon, and the Stars, who has power over everything. This is the one they refer to as Andouagni, although they have no specific form or method of praying to him.’ In Virginia, around 1586, we learn from Heriot that the natives believed in many gods, referred to as ‘mantoac,’ but of different types and levels, and also that there is one chief god who created the other main gods, and later the sun, moon, and stars as lesser gods. In New England, in 1622, Winslow notes that they, like the Virginians, believe in many divine powers, yet there is one above all others; the Massachusetts people call their great god Kiehtan, who created all the other gods; he resides far to the west above the heavens, where all good people go when they die; ‘They have never seen Kiehtan, but they consider it a significant responsibility to pass knowledge from one generation to the next; they hold feasts for him, praying and singing for abundance, victory, or anything good.’ Another well-known Native American name for the supreme deity is Oki. Captain John Smith, the pioneer of Virginia's colonization in 1607, who was helped by Pocahontas, ‘La Belle Sauvage,’ describes the religion of the area, particularly of her tribe, the Powhatans: ‘There is no location in Virginia that is so savage that its people don’t have a religion—they believe in deer, bows, and arrows. They worship anything that can harm them—like fire, water, lightning, thunder, our artillery, horses, etc. However, their main god is the Devil, whom they call Okee, and they serve him more out of fear than love. They claim they communicate with him and try to shape themselves to resemble him as much as they can. In their temples, they have his image poorly carved, then painted and decorated with copper chains and beads, and covered with a skin in a way that aligns with the characteristics of such a God.’ This peculiar account is worth quoting at length as an example of the judgment that a partially educated and fully biased European might make regarding savage deities, which seem purely diabolical from his perspective. It is known from other sources that Oki, a term not from the Powhatan but the Huron language, was actually a general term for spirit or deity. We can better understand the true beliefs of these indigenous people through Father Brebeuf’s description of the Heaven God, referenced in a previous chapter: they imagine an Oki in the heavens, meaning a demon or power governing the seasons and controlling the winds and waves, a being whose anger they fear and whom they invoke when making solemn agreements. About a hundred years later, Father Lafitau wrote passages that illustrate well how native animistic beliefs transformed under missionary influence into parallels of Christian theology. General terms for spiritual beings like ‘oki’ or ‘manitu’ had become for him individual names of one supreme being. ‘This great Spirit, known among the Caribs as Chemiin, as Manitou among the Algonquin nations, and as Okki among Huron speakers…’ etc. He states that all American tribes use expressions that can only refer to God: ‘they call him the great Spirit, sometimes the Master and Author of Life…’ The longer indigenous tribes in America have been in contact with European beliefs, the less certainly can we attribute the theological framework their religions have adopted solely to native sources. Yet the Creeks, at the end of the 18th century, retained some elements of their original faith. They believed in the Great Spirit, the Master of Breath (a being whom Bartram describes as the soul and governor of the universe); they often directed their prayers and cries to him while also honoring the sun, moon, and stars as the mediators or agents of the Great Spirit, ensuring their well-being in this life. In our own time, among the wild Comanches of the prairies, the Great Spirit, their creator and supreme deity, is above the Sun, the Moon, and the Earth; the first puff of tobacco smoke is offered to him before the Sun receives the second, and the first bite of the feast is given to him.
Turning from the simple faiths of savage tribes of North America to the complex religion of the half-civilized Mexican nation, we find what we might naturally expect, a cumbrous polytheism complicated by mixture of several national pantheons, and beside and beyond this, certain 344appearances of a doctrine of divine supremacy. But these doctrines seem to have been spoken of more definitely than the evidence warrants. A remarkable native development of Mexican theism must be admitted, in so far as we may receive the native historian Ixtlilxochitl’s account of the worship paid by Nezahualcoyotl, the poet king of Tezcuco, to the invisible supreme Tloque Nahuaque, he who has all in him, the cause of causes, in whose star-roofed pyramid stood no idol, and who there received no bloody sacrifice, but only flowers and incense. Yet it would have been more satisfactory were the stories told by this Aztec panegyrist of his royal ancestor confirmed by other records. Traces of divine supremacy in Mexican religion are especially associated with Tezcatlipoca, ‘Shining Mirror,’ a deity who seems in his original nature the Sun-God, and thence by expansion to have become the soul of the world, creator of heaven and earth, lord of all things, Supreme Deity. Such conceptions may in more or less measure have arisen in native thought, but it should be pointed out that the remarkable Aztec religious formulas collected by Sahagun, in which the deity Tezcatlipoca is so prominent a figure, show traces of Christian admixture in their material, as well as of Christian influence in their style. For instance, all students of Mexican antiquities know the belief in Mictlan, the Hades of the dead. But when one of these Aztec prayer-formulas (concerning auricular confession, the washing away of sins, and a new birth) makes mention of sinners being plunged into a lake of intolerable misery and torment, the introduction of an idea so obviously European condemns the composition as not purely native. The question of the actual developments of ideas verging on pantheism or theism, among the priests and philosophers of native Mexico, is one to be left for further criticism.[823]
Turning from the simple beliefs of the indigenous tribes of North America to the more complex religion of the semi-civilized Mexican nation, we find what we might expect: a cumbersome polytheism complicated by a mix of several national pantheons, along with some hints of a doctrine of divine supremacy. However, these doctrines seem to be discussed more definitively than the evidence supports. We must acknowledge a significant native development of Mexican theism, as reflected in the account by the native historian Ixtlilxochitl about the worship practiced by Nezahualcoyotl, the poet king of Tezcuco, toward the invisible supreme Tloque Nahuaque, who encompasses all, the cause of all causes, in whose star-roofed pyramid there was no idol and where no bloody sacrifice was offered, only flowers and incense. Yet it would be more satisfying if the stories told by this Aztec admirer of his royal ancestor were confirmed by other records. Traces of divine supremacy in Mexican religion are especially linked with Tezcatlipoca, "Shining Mirror," a deity who seems to have originally been the Sun-God and subsequently expanded to become the soul of the world, creator of heaven and earth, lord of all things, Supreme Deity. Such ideas may have emerged to varying degrees in native thought, but it should be noted that the remarkable Aztec religious formulas collected by Sahagun, where Tezcatlipoca is a prominent figure, show signs of Christian influence in both their content and style. For instance, all scholars of Mexican antiquities are familiar with the belief in Mictlan, the underworld of the dead. However, when one of these Aztec prayer formulas (regarding confession, the cleansing of sins, and rebirth) mentions sinners being thrown into a lake of unbearable misery and torment, the introduction of such a clearly European idea casts doubt on the originality of the composition. The question of the actual developments of ideas bordering on pantheism or theism among the priests and philosophers of native Mexico is one that requires further examination.[823]
In the islands of the Pacific, the idea of Supreme Deity 345is especially manifested in that great mythologic divinity of the Polynesian race, whom the New Zealanders call Tangaroa, the Hawaiians Kanaroa, the Tongans and Samoans Tangaloa, the Georgian and Society islanders Taaroa. Students of the science of religion who hold polytheism to be but the mis-development of a primal idea of divine unity, which in spite of corruption continues to pervade it, might well choose this South Sea Island divinity as their aptest illustration from the savage world. Taaroa, says Moerenhout, is their supreme or rather only god; for all the others, as in other known polytheisms, seem scarcely more than sensible figures and images of the infinite attributes united in his divine person. The following is given as a native poetic definition of the Creator. ‘He was; Taaroa was his name; he abode in the void. No earth, no sky, no men. Taaroa calls, but nought answers; and alone existing, he became the universe. The props are Taaroa; the rocks are Taaroa; the sands are Taaroa; it is thus he himself is named.’ According to Ellis, Taaroa is described in the Leeward Islands as the eternal parentless uncreate Creator, dwelling alone in the highest heaven, whose bodily form mortals cannot see, who after intervals of innumerable seasons casts off his body or shell and becomes renewed. It was he who created Hina his daughter, and with her aid formed the sky and earth and sea. He founded the world on a solid rock, which with all the creation he sustains by his invisible power. Then he created the ranks of lesser deities such as reign over sea and land and air, and govern peace and war, and preside over physic and husbandry, and canoe-building, and roofing, and theft. The version from the Windward Islands is that Taaroa’s wife was the rock, the foundation of all things, and she gave birth to earth and sea. Now, fortunately for our understanding of this myth, the name of Taaroa’s wife, with whom he begat the lesser deities, was taken down in Tahiti in Captain Cook’s time. She was a rock called Papa, and her name plainly suggests her identity with Papa the Earth, the wife of Rangi the 346Heaven in the New Zealand myth of Heaven and Earth, the great first parents. If this inference be just, then it seems that Taaroa the Creator is no personification of a primæval theistic idea, but simply the divine personal Heaven transformed under European influence into the supreme Heaven-god. Thus, when Turner gives the Samoan myths of Tangaloa in heaven presiding over the production of the earth from beneath the waters, or throwing down from the sky rocks which are now islands, the classic name by which he calls him is that which rightly describes his nature and mythic origin—Tangaloa, the Polynesian Jupiter. Yet in island district after district, we find the name of the mighty heavenly creator given to other and lesser mythic beings. In Tahiti, the manes-worshipper’s idea is applied not only to lesser deities, but to Taaroa the Creator himself, whom some maintained to be but a man deified after death. In the New Zealand mythology, Tangaroa figures on the one hand as Sea-god and father of fish and reptiles, on the other as the mischievous eaves-dropping god who reveals secrets. In Tonga, Tangaloa was god of artificers and arts, and his priests were carpenters; it was he who went forth to fish, and dragged up the Tonga islands from the bottom of the sea. Here, then, he corresponds with Maui, and indeed Tangaroa and Maui are found blending in Polynesia even to full identification. It is neither easy nor safe to fix to definite origin the Protean shapes of South Sea mythology, but on the whole the native myths are apt to embody cosmic ideas, and as the idea of the Sun preponderates in Maui, so the idea of the Heaven in Taaroa.[824] In the Fiji Islands, whose native mythology is on the whole distinct from that of Polynesia proper, a strange weird figure takes the supreme place among the gods. His name is Ndengei, 347the serpent is his shrine, some traditions represent him with a serpent’s head and body and the rest of him stone. He passes a monotonous existence in his gloomy cavern, feeling no emotion nor sensation, nor any appetite but hunger; he takes no interest in any one but Uto, his attendant, and gives no sign of life beyond eating, answering his priest, and changing his position from one side to the other. No wonder Ndengei is less worshipped than most of the inferior gods. The natives have even made a comic song about him, where he talks with his attendant, Uto, who has been to attend the feast at Rakiraki, where Ndengei has especially his temple and worship.
In the Pacific Islands, the concept of a Supreme Deity is prominently represented by the major mythological figure of the Polynesian culture, known as Tangaroa by the New Zealanders, Kanaroa by the Hawaiians, Tangaloa by the Tongans and Samoans, and Taaroa by the Georgians and Society Islanders. Scholars of religion who view polytheism as a misguided evolution of an original idea of divine unity, which still influences it despite its distortions, might consider this South Sea Island deity a fitting example from the primitive world. According to Moerenhout, Taaroa is their supreme, or rather sole, god; all other deities, similar to those in other known polytheistic traditions, seem to be mere representations of the infinite qualities unified in his divine essence. A native poetic definition of the Creator states: ‘He was; Taaroa was his name; he existed in the emptiness. No land, no sky, no people. Taaroa calls, but nothing answers; and alone existing, he became the universe. The supports are Taaroa; the rocks are Taaroa; the sands are Taaroa; this is how he is known.’ According to Ellis, Taaroa is described in the Leeward Islands as the eternal, parentless, uncreated Creator, living alone in the highest heaven, whose physical form mortals cannot perceive, who after countless seasons sheds his body or shell and is renewed. He created Hina, his daughter, and with her help, shaped the sky, earth, and sea. He established the world on a solid rock, which he sustains along with all of creation through his invisible power. Then he created the ranks of lesser deities that govern the sea, land, air, peace, and war, as well as agriculture, canoe-building, roofing, and thievery. In the Windward Islands version, Taaroa’s wife was the rock, the foundation of all things, and she gave birth to earth and sea. Fortunately, for our understanding of this myth, the name of Taaroa’s wife, with whom he fathered the lesser deities, was recorded in Tahiti during Captain Cook’s time. She was a rock named Papa, and her name clearly connects her with Papa the Earth, the spouse of Rangi the Heaven in New Zealand's myth of Heaven and Earth, the great first parents. If this inference is correct, it suggests that Taaroa the Creator is not a personification of a primordial theistic idea, but rather a divine personal Heaven transformed under European influence into the supreme Heaven god. Thus, when Turner recounts the Samoan myths of Tangaloa in heaven overseeing the earth's emergence from beneath the waters or dropping rocks from the sky that became islands, the classic name he uses accurately describes his nature and mythic origin—Tangaloa, the Polynesian Jupiter. Yet, in district after district of the islands, we encounter the name of this powerful heavenly creator being assigned to other, lesser mythic figures. In Tahiti, the idea of manes-worship is applied not only to lesser deities but also to Taaroa the Creator himself, whom some claimed was merely a man deified after his death. In New Zealand mythology, Tangaroa appears simultaneously as the Sea-god and father of fish and reptiles, and as the mischievous god who overhears secrets. In Tonga, Tangaloa was the god of craftsmen and arts, with his priests being carpenters; he ventured out to fish and pulled the Tonga islands up from the ocean floor. Here, he aligns with Maui, and in fact, Tangaroa and Maui are often regarded as the same being in Polynesia. It's challenging to pinpoint a definitive origin for the many forms of South Sea mythology, but generally speaking, the native myths tend to encapsulate cosmic ideas, and just as the concept of the Sun prevails in Maui, the concept of Heaven dominates in Taaroa.[824] In the Fiji Islands, where the native mythology is quite distinct from that of Polynesia, a peculiar and eerie figure holds the highest position among the gods. His name is Ndengei; the serpent is his sanctuary, and some tales depict him with a serpent’s head and body, while the rest of him is made of stone. He leads a monotonous life in his dark cave, devoid of emotion, sensation, or any desire except for hunger; he shows no interest in anyone but Uto, his attendant, and demonstrates no signs of life beyond eating, responding to his priest, and shifting his position from side to side. It's not surprising that Ndengei is less venerated than most of the lesser gods. The locals have even created a humorous song about him, featuring a conversation between him and his attendant, Uto, who has been at the feast in Rakiraki, where Ndengei has his temple and is worshipped.
Ndengei. ‘Have you been to the sharing of food to-day?’
Ndengei. "Did you go to the food sharing today?"
Uto. ‘Yes: and turtles formed a part; but only the under-shell was shared to us two.’
Uto. "Yeah, and turtles were included, but only the bottom shell was divided between the two of us."
Ndengei. ‘Indeed, Uto! This is very bad. How is it? We made them men, placed them on the earth, gave them food, and yet they share to us only the under-shell. Uto, how is this?’[825]
Ndengei. ‘Seriously, Uto! This is really bad. What’s going on? We created them, put them on Earth, provided them with food, and yet they only give us the scraps. Uto, what’s up with this?’[825]
The native religion of Africa, a land pervaded by the doctrines of divine hierarchy and divine supremacy, affords apt evidence for the problem before us. The capacity of the manes-worshipper’s scheme to extend in this direction may be judged from the religious speculations of the Zulus, where may be traced the merging of the First Man, the Old-Old-One, Unkulunkulu, into the ideal of the Creator, Thunderer, and Heaven-god.[826] If we examine a collection of documents illustrating the doctrines of the West African races lying between the Hottentots on the south and the Berbers on the north, we may fairly judge their conceptions, evidently influenced as these have been by Christian intercourse, to be nevertheless based on native ideas of the personal Heaven.[827] Whether they think of their 348supreme deity as actively pervading and governing his universe, or as acting through his divine subordinates, or as retiring from his creation and leaving the lesser spirits to work their will, he is always to their minds the celestial ruler, the Heaven-god. Examples may be cited, each in its way full of instruction. In the mind of the Gold-coast negro, tendencies towards theistic religion seem to have been mainly developed through the idea of Nyongmo, the personal Heaven, or its animating personal deity. Heaven, wide-arching, rain-giving, light-giving, who has been and is and shall be, is to him the Supreme Deity. The sky is Nyongmo’s creature, the clouds are his veil, the stars his face-ornaments. Creator of all things, and of their animating powers whose chief and elder he is, he sits in majestic rest surrounded by his children, the wongs, the spirits of the air who serve him and represent him on earth. Though men’s worship is for the most part paid to these, reverence is also given to Nyongmo, the Eldest, the Highest. Every day, said a fetish-man, we see how the grass and corn and trees spring forth by the rain and sunshine that Nyongmo sends, how should he not be the Creator? Again, the mighty Heaven-god, far removed from man and seldom roused to interfere in earthly interests, is the type on which the Guinea negroes may have modelled their thoughts of a Highest Deity who has abandoned the control of his world to lesser and evil spirits.[828] The religion of another district seems to show clearly the train of thought by which such ideas may be worked out. Among the Kimbunda race of Congo, Suku-Vakange is the highest being. He takes little interest in mankind, leaving the real government of the world to the good and evil kilulu or spirits, into whose ranks the souls of men pass at death. Now in that there are more bad spirits who torment, than good who favour living men, human misery would be unbearable, were it not that from 349time to time Suku-Vakange, enraged at the wickedness of the evil spirits, terrifies them with thunder, and punishes the more obstinate with his thunderbolts. Then he returns to rest, and lets the kilulu rule again.[829] Who, we may ask, is this divinity, calm and indifferent save when his wrath bursts forth in storm, but the Heaven himself? The relation of the Supreme Deity to the lesser gods of polytheism is graphically put in the following passage, where an American missionary among the Yorubas describes the relation of Olorung, the Lord of Heaven, to his lesser deities (orisa), among whom the chief are the androgynous Obatala, representing the reproductive power of nature, and Shango the Thunder-god. ‘The doctrine of idolatry prevalent in Yoruba appears to be derived by analogy from the form and customs of the civil government. There is but one king in the nation, and one God over the universe. Petitioners to the king approach him through the intervention of his servants, courtiers, and nobles: and the petitioner conciliates the courtier whom he employs by good words and presents. In like manner no man can directly approach God; but the Almighty himself, they say, has appointed various kinds of orisas, who are mediators and intercessors between himself and mankind. No sacrifices are made to God, because he needs nothing; but the orisas, being much like men, are pleased with offerings of sheep, pigeons, and other things. They conciliate the orisa or mediator that he may bless them, not in his own power, but in the power of God.’[830]
The native religion of Africa, a place shaped by beliefs in a divine hierarchy and supremacy, provides clear evidence for the issues we’re discussing. We can gauge the extent of the manes-worshipper’s beliefs by looking at the religious ideas of the Zulus, where we see the blending of the First Man, the Old-Old-One, Unkulunkulu, with the concept of the Creator, Thunderer, and Heaven-god.[826] When we analyze a collection of documents showcasing the beliefs of the West African people between the Hottentots to the south and the Berbers to the north, we can reasonably conclude that their ideas, clearly influenced by Christian contact, are still rooted in native concepts of a personal Heaven.[827] Whether they perceive their supreme deity as actively involved in managing the universe, as acting through divine subordinates, or as withdrawing from creation and leaving lesser spirits to act freely, he is always viewed as the celestial ruler, the Heaven-god. Many examples could illustrate this point, each offering valuable insight. For the Gold-coast negro, theistic beliefs appear to have developed mainly through the idea of Nyongmo, the personal Heaven, or its animating personal deity. Heaven, vast and rain-giving, who has existed and will always exist, is for him the Supreme Deity. The sky is Nyongmo’s creation, the clouds are his veil, and the stars are his adornments. As the Creator of everything and its vital forces, of which he is the chief and elder, he sits in majestic rest surrounded by his children, the wongs, spirits of the air who serve him and represent him on Earth. While most worship is directed towards these spirits, reverence is also shown to Nyongmo, the Eldest, the Highest. "Every day," a spiritual leader remarked, "we see how the grass, corn, and trees grow by the rain and sunshine that Nyongmo provides; how could he not be the Creator?" Meanwhile, the powerful Heaven-god, remote from humanity and rarely intervening in earthly matters, is the model from which the Guinea negroes might have shaped their views of a Highest Deity who has relinquished control of the world to lesser evil spirits.[828] The religion of a different region illustrates the thought process by which these ideas could develop. Among the Kimbunda people of Congo, Suku-Vakange is the highest being. He shows little concern for humanity, allowing the true governance of the world to be managed by the good and evil kilulu or spirits, into which human souls enter after death. Given that there are more harmful spirits than benevolent ones, human suffering would be unbearable, if not for the fact that Suku-Vakange, angered by the wickedness of the evil spirits, occasionally frightens them with thunder and punishes the more defiant with his lightning. Then he returns to his rest, letting the kilulu rule once more.[829] Who, we might wonder, is this calm and indifferent deity, only stirring when his wrath is unleashed in a storm, if not Heaven itself? The relationship of the Supreme Deity to the lesser gods of polytheism is vividly depicted in the following passage, where an American missionary among the Yorubas explains the relationship of Olorung, the Lord of Heaven, to his lesser deities (orisa), the chief among them being the androgynous Obatala, representing nature's reproductive power, and Shango the Thunder-god. "The concept of idolatry in Yoruba seems to be derived by analogy from the structure and customs of civil government. There is only one king for the nation and one God for the universe. People seeking the king approach him through his servants, courtiers, and nobles, and they win the favor of the courtier by kind words and gifts. Similarly, no one can approach God directly; instead, they believe that the Almighty has appointed various types of orisas, who act as mediators and intercessors between him and humanity. No sacrifices are made to God because he needs nothing; however, the orisas, being similar to humans, are pleased with offerings of sheep, pigeons, and other items. They seek to appease the orisa or mediator so that he may bless them, not using his own power, but through the power of God."[830]
Rooted as they are in the depths of nature-worship, the doctrines of the supreme Sun and Heaven both come to the surface again in the native religions of Asia. The divine Sun holds his primacy distinctly enough among the rude indigenous tribes of India. Although one sect of the Khonds of Orissa especially direct their worship to Tari 350Pennu the Earth-goddess, yet even they agree theoretically with the sect who worship Bura Pennu or Bella Pennu, Light-god or Sun-god, in giving to him supremacy above the manes-gods and nature-gods, and all spiritual powers.[831] Among the Kol tribes of Bengal, the acknowledged primate of all classes of divinities is the beneficent supreme deity, Sing-bonga, Sun-god. Among some Munda tribes his authority is so real that they will appeal to him for help where recourse to minor deities has failed; while among the Santals his cultus has so dwindled away that he receives less practical worship than his malevolent inferiors, and is scarce honoured with more than nominal dignity and an occasional feast.[832] These are rude tribes who, so far as we know, have never been other than rude tribes. The Japanese are a comparatively civilized nation, one of those so instructive to the student of culture from the stubborn conservatism with which they have consecrated by traditional reverence, and kept up by state authority, the religion of their former barbarism. This is the Kami-religion, Spirit-religion, the ancient but mixed faith of divine spirits of ancestors, nature-spirits, and polytheistic gods, which still holds official place by the side of the imported Buddhism and Confucianism. The Sun-goddess, Amaterasu, ‘Heaven-shiner,’ though but sprung from the left eye of the parent Izanagi, came to be honoured above all lesser kamis or gods, while by a fiction of ancestor-worship the solar race, as in Peru, became the royal family, her spirit descending to animate the Mikado. Kaempfer, in his ‘History of Japan,’ written early in the 18th century, showed how absolutely the divine Tensio Dai Sin, represented below on the imperial throne, was looked upon as ruler of the minor powers; he mentions the Japanese tenth month, called the ‘godless month,’ because then the lesser gods are considered to be away from their temples, gone to pay their annual homage to the Dairi. He describes, as it 351was in his time, the great Japanese place of pilgrimage, Yse. There was to be seen the small cavern in a hill near the sea, where the divine Sun once hid herself, depriving the world of light, and thus showing herself to be supreme above all gods. Within the small ancient temple hard by, of which an account and a picture are given from a Japanese book, there were to be seen round the walls the usual pieces of cut white paper, and in the midst nothing but a polished metal mirror.[833]
Rooted in deep nature-worship, the beliefs surrounding the supreme Sun and Heaven emerge again in the native religions of Asia. The divine Sun holds a clear place among the primitive indigenous tribes of India. Although one sect of the Khonds of Orissa primarily worships Tari Pennu, the Earth-goddess, they still theoretically agree with the sect that worships Bura Pennu or Bella Pennu, the Light-god or Sun-god, in giving him supremacy over the manes-gods, nature-gods, and all other spiritual powers.[831] Among the Kol tribes of Bengal, the recognized leader of all classes of deities is the benevolent supreme deity, Sing-bonga, the Sun-god. Among some Munda tribes, his authority is so significant that they turn to him for help when lesser deities have failed; while among the Santals, his worship has declined to the point that he receives less attention than his harmful counterparts and is barely honored beyond nominal respect and occasional feasts.[832] These are primitive tribes that, as far as we know, have always remained so. The Japanese, on the other hand, are a comparatively civilized nation, offering valuable insights into culture due to their strong conservatism, which has maintained traditional reverence and state endorsement for the religion of their past barbarism. This is known as the Kami-religion, Spirit-religion, an ancient yet complex belief in divine spirits of ancestors, nature-spirits, and polytheistic gods, which still holds an official place alongside the imported Buddhism and Confucianism. The Sun-goddess, Amaterasu, “Heaven-shiner,” despite being born from the left eye of the parent Izanagi, came to be revered above all lesser kamis or gods. Through a form of ancestor-worship, the solar lineage, like in Peru, transformed into the royal family, with her spirit continuing to empower the Mikado. Kaempfer, in his "History of Japan," written in the early 18th century, illustrated how the divine Tensio Dai Sin, depicted below on the imperial throne, was regarded as the ruler over lesser powers. He noted that the Japanese tenth month is known as the “godless month,” because during this time, the lesser gods are thought to leave their temples to pay their annual respects to the Dairi. He described, as it was in his time, the prominent Japanese pilgrimage site, Yse. There, one could see the small cave in a hill near the sea where the divine Sun once concealed herself, causing the world to lack light, thereby demonstrating her supremacy over all gods. Inside the nearby ancient temple, which is detailed in a Japanese book, there were pieces of cut white paper adorning the walls, and at the center, just a polished metal mirror.[833]
Over the vast range of the Tatar races, it is the type of the supreme Heaven that comes prominently into view. Nature-worshippers in the extreme sense, these rude tribes conceived their ghosts and elves and demons and great powers of the earth and air to be, like men themselves, within the domain of the divine Heaven, almighty and all-encompassing. To trace the Samoyed’s thought of Num the personal Sky passing into vague conceptions of pervading deity; to see with the Tunguz how Boa the Heaven-god, unseen but all-knowing, kindly but indifferent, has divided the business of his world among such lesser powers as sun and moon, earth and fire; to discern the meaning of the Mongrel Tengri, shading from Heaven into Heaven-god, and thence into god or spirit in general; to follow the records of Heaven-worship among the ancient Turks and Hiong-nu; to compare the supremacy among the Lapps of Tiermes, the Thunderer, with the supremacy among the Finns of Jumala and Ukko, the Heaven-god and heavenly Grandfather—such evidence seems good ground for Castrén’s argument, that the doctrine of the divine Sky underlay the first Turanian conceptions, not merely of a Heaven-god, but of a highest deity who in after ages of Christian conversion blended into the Christian God.[834] Here, again, we may have 352the advantage of studying among a cultured race the survival of religion from ruder ancient times, kept up by official ordinance. The state religion of China is in its dominant doctrine the worship of Tien, Heaven, identified with Shang-ti, the Emperor-above, next to whom stands Tu, Earth; while below them are worshipped great nature-spirits and ancestors. It is possible that this faith, as Professor Max Müller argues, may be ethnologically and even linguistically part and parcel of the general Heaven-worship of the Turanian tribes of Siberia. At any rate, it is identical with it in its primary idea, the adoration of the supreme Heaven. Dr. Legge charges Confucius with an inclination to substitute in his religious teaching the name of Tien, Heaven, for that known to more ancient religion and used in more ancient books, Shang-ti, the personal ruling Deity. But it seems rather that the sage was in fact upholding the traditions of the ancient faith, thus acting according to the character on which he prided himself, that of a transmitter and not a maker, a preserver of old knowledge, not a new revealer. It is in accordance with the usual course of theologic development, for the divine Heaven to reign in rude mythologic religion over the lesser spirits of the world before the childlike poetic thought passes into the statesman’s conception of a Celestial Emperor. As Plath well remarks, ‘It belongs to the Chinese system that all nature is animated by spirits, and that all these follow one order. As the Chinese cannot think of a Chinese Empire with an Emperor only, and without the host of vassal-princes and officials, so he cannot think of the Upper Emperor without the host of spirits.’ Developed in a different line, the idea of a supreme Heaven comes to pervade Chinese philosophy and ethics as a general expression of fate, ordinance, duty. ‘Heaven’s order is nature’—‘The wise man readily awaits Heaven’s command’—‘Man must first do his own part; when he has done all, then he can wait for Heaven to complete it’—‘All state officers are Heaven’s workmen, and represent him’—‘How does Heaven speak? The four 353seasons have their course, the hundred things arise, what speaks he?’—‘No, Heaven speaks not; by the course of events he makes himself understood, no more.’[835]
Over the wide range of Tatar races, the idea of supreme Heaven stands out clearly. These tribes, who are extreme nature-worshippers, believed that their ghosts, elves, demons, and mighty forces of nature were, like humans, part of the divine Heaven, all-powerful and all-encompassing. To explore the Samoyed's idea of Num, the personal Sky evolving into vague notions of a universal deity; to observe the Tunguz perspective of Boa the Heaven-god, who is unseen yet all-knowing, benevolent but detached, and has delegated the responsibilities of his world to lesser powers like the sun, moon, earth, and fire; to understand the significance of the Mongolian Tengri, transitioning from Heaven to Heaven-god, and then to a god or spirit in general; to follow the history of Heaven-worship among the ancient Turks and Hiong-nu; to compare the dominance of Tiermes, the Thunderer, among the Lapps with that of Jumala and Ukko, the Heaven-god and heavenly Grandfather, among the Finns—this evidence provides strong support for Castrén’s argument that the concept of divine Sky formed the basis for the earliest Turanian ideas, not just of a Heaven-god, but of a highest deity who later merged with the Christian God during conversions.[834] Here, once again, we have the benefit of examining a cultured society that maintains remnants of older religious beliefs upheld by official decree. The state religion of China primarily worships Tien, Heaven, identified with Shang-ti, the Emperor-above, with Tu, Earth, as the next in line; beneath them, great nature-spirits and ancestors are honored. It’s possible that this belief, as Professor Max Müller suggests, is ethnologically and even linguistically integral to the broader Heaven-worship of the Turanian tribes in Siberia. In any case, it aligns with it in its fundamental idea: the veneration of the supreme Heaven. Dr. Legge accuses Confucius of favoring the term Tien, Heaven, in his religious teachings over the name from older traditions and texts, Shang-ti, the personal ruling Deity. However, it seems more accurate to say that the sage was genuinely preserving the traditions of the ancient faith, adhering to the character he valued as a transmitter rather than a creator, a preserver of old knowledge instead of a new revealer. This aligns with the typical pattern of theological development where the divine Heaven presides over lesser spirits in primitive mythological religions before childlike poetic ideas evolve into the statesman’s concept of a Celestial Emperor. As Plath aptly points out, “In the Chinese system, all of nature is animated by spirits, and all these spirits follow a certain order. Just as the Chinese cannot conceive of an Empire with an Emperor alone, without a multitude of vassal-princes and officials, they cannot imagine the Upper Emperor without a host of spirits.” Developed in a different direction, the concept of supreme Heaven comes to influence Chinese philosophy and ethics as a general expression of fate, law, and duty. “Heaven’s order is nature”—“The wise man readily awaits Heaven’s command”—“Man must first do his own part; after doing all, he can then wait for Heaven to complete it”—“All state officers are Heaven’s workers and represent him”—“How does Heaven communicate? The four seasons progress, and the hundred things arise; what does he say?”—“No, Heaven does not speak; through the course of events, he makes himself understood, no more.”[835]
These stray scraps from old Chinese literature are intelligible to European ears, for our Aryan race has indeed worked out religious ideas from the like source and almost in the like directions. The Samoyed or Tunguz Heaven-god had his analogue in Dyu, Heaven, of the Vedic hymns. Once meaning the sky, and the sky personified, this Zeus came to mean far more than mere heaven in the minds of Greek poets and philosophers, when it rose toward ‘that conception which in sublimity, brightness, and infinity transcended all others as much as the bright blue sky transcended all other things visible upon earth.’ At the lower level of mythic religion, the ideal process of shaping the divine world into a monarchic constitution was worked out by the ancient Greeks, on the same simple plan as among such barbarians as the Kols of Chota-Nagpur or the Gallas of Abyssinia; Zeus is King over Olympian gods, and below these again are marshalled the crowded ranks of demigods, heroes, demons, nymphs, ghosts. At the higher level of theologic speculation, exalted thoughts of universal cause and being, of physical and moral law, took personality under the name of Zeus. It is in direct derivation along this historic line, that the classical heaven-cultus still asserts itself in song and pageant among us, in that quaintest of quaint survivals, the factitious religion of the Italian Opera, where such worship as artistic ends require is still addressed to the divine Cielo. Even in our daily talk, colloquial expressions call up before the mind of the ethnographer outlines of remotest religious history. Heaven grants, forbids, blesses still in phrase, as heretofore in fact.
These stray bits from old Chinese literature make sense to European ears because our Aryan race has indeed derived religious ideas from similar sources and nearly in the same directions. The Samoyed or Tunguz Heaven-god had a counterpart in Dyu, the Heaven of the Vedic hymns. Once meaning the sky and the sky personified, this Zeus came to represent much more than just heaven in the minds of Greek poets and philosophers, as it evolved toward a notion that, in its greatness, brightness, and infinity, surpassed everything else just like the bright blue sky surpasses all other visible things on earth. At the lower level of mythic religion, the ideal process of structuring the divine world into a monarchic system was developed by the ancient Greeks, following a simple plan similar to that of the Kols of Chota-Nagpur or the Gallas of Abyssinia; Zeus is king over the Olympian gods, and below them, the crowds of demigods, heroes, demons, nymphs, and ghosts are organized. At the higher level of theological speculation, lofty thoughts about universal causes and existence, as well as physical and moral laws, personified under the name of Zeus. It is directly along this historical line that the classical heaven-cult still expresses itself in song and pageantry among us, in the most peculiar of survivals—the fabricated religion of Italian Opera, where artistic worship is still directed toward the divine Cielo. Even in our everyday conversations, colloquial expressions conjure up for the ethnographer outlines of the most ancient religious history. Heaven grants, forbids, and blesses still in phrases, just as it did in the past.
Vast and difficult as is the research into the full scope and history of the doctrine of supremacy among the higher 354nations, it may be at least seen that helpful clues exist to lead the explorer. The doctrine of mighty nature-spirits, inhabiting and controlling sky and earth and sea, seems to expand in Asia into such ideas as that of Mahâtman the Great Spirit, Paramâtman the Highest Spirit, taking personality as Brahma the all-pervading universal soul[836]—in Europe into philosophic conceptions of which a grand type stands out in Kepler’s words, that the universe is a harmonious whole, whose soul is God. There is a saying of Comte’s that throws strong light upon this track of speculative theology: he declares that the conception among the ancients of the Soul of the Universe, the notion that the earth is a vast living animal, and in our own time, the obscure pantheism which is so rife among German metaphysicians, are only fetishism generalized and made systematic.[837] Polytheism, in its inextricable confusion of the persons and functions of the great divinities, and in its assignment of the sovereignty of the world to a supreme being who combines in himself the attributes of several such minor deities, tends toward the doctrine of fundamental unity. Max Müller, in a lecture on the Veda, has given the name of kathenotheism to the doctrine of divine unity in diversity which comes into view in these instructive lines:—
Vast and challenging as the research into the full scope and history of the doctrine of supremacy among the major nations is, there are at least some clues that can guide the seeker. The belief in powerful nature spirits that inhabit and control the sky, earth, and sea seems to develop in Asia into concepts like Mahâtman, the Great Spirit, and Paramâtman, the Highest Spirit, taking the form of Brahma, the all-pervading universal soul[836]—while in Europe, it evolves into philosophical ideas, one prominent example being Kepler’s view that the universe is a harmonious whole, with God as its soul. Comte once expressed a thought that sheds light on this path of speculative theology; he claimed that the ancient idea of the Soul of the Universe, the belief that the earth is a vast living being, and the obscure pantheism prevalent among German metaphysicians today are merely generalized and systematized forms of fetishism.[837] Polytheism, with its complicated mix of the identities and roles of the major deities, and its assignment of world sovereignty to a supreme being who embodies the qualities of various lesser gods, moves towards the idea of fundamental unity. Max Müller, in a lecture on the Veda, referred to the concept of divine unity in diversity that emerges in these enlightening lines as kathenotheism:—
‘They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni; then he is the beautiful-winged heavenly Garutman: That which is One the wise call it in divers manners; they call it Agni, Yama, Mâtariçvan.’[838]
‘They call him Indra, Mitra, Varuna, Agni; then he is the beautiful-winged heavenly Garutman: The wise refer to the One in different ways; they call it Agni, Yama, Mâtariçvan.’[838]
355The figure of the supreme deity, be he Heaven-god, Sun-god, Great Spirit, beginning already in uncultured thought to take the form and function of a divine ruler of the world, represents a conception which it becomes the age-long work of systematic theology to develop and to define. Thus in Greece arises Zeus the highest, greatest, best, ‘who was and is and shall be,’ ‘beginning and chief of all things,’ ‘who rules over all mortals and immortals,’ ‘Zeus the god of gods.’[839] Such is Ahura Mazda in the Persian faith, among whose seventy-two names of might are these: Creator, Protector, Nourisher, Holiest Heavenly One, Healing Priest, Most Pure, Most Majestic, Most Knowing, Most Ruling at Will.[840] There may be truth in the assertion that the esoteric religion of ancient Egypt centred in a doctrine of divine unity, manifested through the heterogeneous crowd of popular deities.[841] It may be a hopeless task to disentangle the confused personalities of Baal, Bel, and Moloch, and no antiquary may ever fully solve the enigma how far the divine name of El carried in its wide range among the Jewish and other Semitic nations a doctrine of divine supremacy.[842] The great Syro-Phœnician kingdoms and religions have long since passed away into darkness, leaving but antiquarian relics to vouch for their former might. Far other has been the history of their Jewish kindred, still standing fast to their ancient nationality, still upholding to this day their patriarchal religion, in the midst of nations who inherit from the faith of Israel the belief in one God, highest, almighty, who in the beginning made the heavens and the earth, whose throne is established of old, who is from everlasting to everlasting.
355The concept of the supreme deity, whether known as the Heaven-god, Sun-god, or Great Spirit, has evolved from primitive thought into the idea of a divine ruler of the world. This concept becomes the ongoing task of systematic theology to explore and articulate. In Greece, we see the emergence of Zeus, the highest and greatest, ‘who was, is, and will be,’ ‘the beginning and chief of all things,’ ‘who rules over both mortals and immortals,’ ‘Zeus, the god of gods.’[839] Similarly, in the Persian faith, Ahura Mazda holds among his seventy-two names of power titles such as Creator, Protector, Nourisher, Holiest Heavenly One, Healing Priest, Most Pure, Most Majestic, Most Knowledgeable, and Most Ruling at Will.[840] There may be some truth to the idea that the esoteric religion of ancient Egypt was centered on a doctrine of divine unity, expressed through a diverse array of popular deities.[841] It might be nearly impossible to untangle the complex identities of Baal, Bel, and Moloch, and no archaeologist may ever fully decipher how extensively the divine name El conveyed a notion of divine supremacy among the Jewish and other Semitic peoples.[842] The ancient Syro-Phoenician kingdoms and religions have faded into obscurity, leaving only historical remnants to testify to their past power. In contrast, the history of their Jewish relatives has been quite different; they have maintained their national identity and continue to uphold their ancient patriarchal religion, amidst nations that share with Israel the belief in one God, the highest and all-powerful, who created the heavens and the earth in the beginning, whose throne was established long ago, and who is from everlasting to everlasting.
Before now bringing these researches to a close, it will be well to state compactly the reasons for treating the animism of the modern savage world as more or less representing the 356animism of remotely ancient races of mankind. Savage animism, founded on a doctrine of souls carried to an extent far beyond its limits in the cultivated world, and thence expanding to a yet wider doctrine of spiritual beings animating and controlling the universe in all its parts, becomes a theory of personal causes developed into a general philosophy of man and nature. As such, it may be reasonably accounted for as the direct product of natural religion, using this term according to the sense of its definition by Bishop Wilkins: ‘I call that Natural Religion, which men might know, and should be obliged unto, by the meer principles of Reason, improved by Consideration and Experience, without the help of Revelation.’[843] It will scarcely be argued by theologians familiar with the religions of savage tribes, that they are direct or nearly direct products of revelation, for the theology of our time would abolish or modify their details till scarce one was left intact. The main issue of the problem is this, whether savage animism is a primary formation belonging to the lower culture, or whether it consists, mostly or entirely, of beliefs originating in some higher culture, and conveyed by adoption or degradation into the lower. The evidence for the first alternative, though not amounting to complete demonstration, seems reasonably strong, and not met by contrary evidence approaching it in force. The animism of the lower tribes, self-contained and self-supporting, maintained in close contact with that direct evidence of the senses on which it appears to be originally based, is a system which might quite reasonably exist among mankind, had they never anywhere 357risen above the savage condition. Now it does not seem that the animism of the higher nations stands in a connexion so direct and complete with their mental state. It is by no means so closely limited to doctrines evidenced by simple contemplation of nature. The doctrines of the lower animism appear in the higher often more and more modified, to bring them into accordance with an advancing intellectual condition, to adapt them at once to the limits of stricter science and the needs of higher faith; and in the higher animism these doctrines are retained side by side with other and special beliefs, of which the religions of the lower world show scarce a germ. In tracing the course of animistic thought from stage to stage of history, instruction is to be gained alike from the immensity of change and from the intensity of permanence. Savage animism, both by what it has and by what it wants, seems to represent the earlier system in which began the age-long course of the education of the world. Especially is it to be noticed that various beliefs and practices, which in the lower animism stand firm upon their grounds as if they grew there, in the higher animism belong rather to peasants than philosophers, exist rather as ancestral relics than as products belonging to their age, are falling from full life into survival. Thus it is that savage religion can frequently explain doctrines and rites of civilized religion. The converse is far less often the case. Now this is a state of things which appears to carry a historical as well as a practical meaning. The degradation-theory would expect savages to hold beliefs and customs intelligible as broken-down relics of former higher civilization. The development-theory would expect civilized men to keep up beliefs and customs which have their reasonable meaning in less cultured states of society. So far as the study of survival enables us to judge between the two theories, it is seen that what is intelligible religion in the lower culture is often meaningless superstition in the higher, and thus the development-theory has the upper hand. Moreover, this evidence fits with the teaching of prehistoric 358archæology. Savage life, carrying on into our own day the life of the Stone Age, may be legitimately claimed as representing remotely ancient conditions of mankind, intellectual and moral as well as material. If so, a low but progressive state of animistic religion occupies a like ground in savage and in primitive culture.
Before wrapping up this research, it's important to summarize why we view the animism of modern primitive societies as somewhat reflective of the animism of ancient human races. Primitive animism is based on a belief in souls that goes much further than in more advanced societies. It expands into a broader belief in spiritual beings that animate and govern the universe in every aspect, evolving into a theory of personal causes that forms a general philosophy of humanity and nature. This can be reasonably understood as a direct result of natural religion, which Bishop Wilkins defines as: ‘Natural Religion is what people could know and would be obliged to follow purely through the principles of Reason, enhanced by Thought and Experience, without relying on Revelation.’ It’s unlikely that theologians who are familiar with the religions of primitive tribes would argue that these religions are direct or nearly direct products of revelation, as modern theology would modify or eliminate almost all of their details until hardly any remained intact. The main question is whether primitive animism is a foundational concept of lower cultures or if it is primarily composed of beliefs that originated in a higher culture, later adopted or degraded by the lower. The evidence supporting the first option, while not completely conclusive, seems to be quite strong and isn't countered by evidence of similar strength. The animism found in lower tribes, which is self-sufficient and supported, remains closely linked to direct sensory evidence on which it seems to be originally based; it's a system that could reasonably exist among humanity if they never advanced beyond a primitive condition. However, the animism of higher societies doesn’t seem to have such a direct and complete connection to their mental state. It's not as strictly tied to ideas simply derived from observing nature. The beliefs from lower animism often appear in higher animism but in more modified forms, adjusted to fit an evolving intellectual condition, aligning them with the boundaries of stricter science and the demands of greater faith. In higher animism, these beliefs exist alongside other unique beliefs that barely appear in the religions of lower societies. As we trace the journey of animistic thought through various historical stages, we learn from both the vast changes and the strong continuities. Primitive animism, by what it includes and what it lacks, seems to represent the earlier system that initiated the long process of humanity’s education. It's particularly notable that various beliefs and practices that in lower animism stand firm as though rooted there, in higher animism are more common among ordinary people than philosophers, exist more as ancestral remnants than as contemporary products, and are fading from full vitality into mere survival. Because of this, primitive religion can often explain doctrines and rituals of civilized religion, while the opposite is less frequently true. This situation appears to carry both historical and practical significance. The degradation theory would suggest that primitivists hold beliefs and customs that can be understood as broken remnants of a former advanced civilization. The development theory would predict that civilized individuals maintain beliefs and customs with reasonable meaning in less cultured societies. Based on the existence of survivals, we can see that what constitutes understandable religion in lower cultures can often appear as meaningless superstition in higher ones, thus giving an advantage to the development theory. Furthermore, this evidence aligns with findings in prehistoric archaeology. Primitive life, which continues into our own era from the Stone Age, can justifiably be viewed as representing the ancient conditions of humanity, both intellectually and morally, as well as materially. If this is true, a low but evolving form of animistic religion occupies a similar space in both primitive and savage cultures.
Lastly, a few words of explanation may be offered as to the topics which this survey has included and excluded. To those who have been accustomed to find theological subjects dealt with on a dogmatic, emotional, and ethical, rather than an ethnographic scheme, the present investigation may seem misleading, because one-sided. This one-sided treatment, however, has been adopted with full consideration. Thus, though the doctrines here examined bear not only on the development but the actual truth of religious systems, I have felt neither able nor willing to enter into this great argument fully and satisfactorily, while experience has shown that to dispose of such questions by an occasional dictatorial phrase is one of the most serious of errors. The scientific value of descriptions of savage and barbarous religions, drawn up by travellers and especially by missionaries, is often lowered by their controversial tone, and by the affectation of infallibility with which their relation to the absolutely true is settled. There is something pathetic in the simplicity with which a narrow student will judge the doctrines of a foreign religion by their antagonism or conformity to his own orthodoxy, on points where utter difference of opinion exists among the most learned and enlightened scholars. The systematization of the lower religions, the reduction of their multifarious details to the few and simple ideas of primitive philosophy which form the common groundwork of them all, appeared to me an urgently needed contribution to the science of religion. This work I have carried out to the utmost of my power, and I can now only leave the result in the hands of other students, whose province it is to deal with such evidence in wider schemes of argument. Again, the intellectual rather than the emotional 359side of religion has here been kept in view. Even in the life of the rudest savage, religious belief is associated with intense emotion, with awful reverence, with agonizing terror, with rapt ecstasy when sense and thought utterly transcend the common level of daily life. How much the more in faiths where not only does the believer experience such enthusiasm, but where his utmost feelings of love and hope, of justice and mercy, of fortitude and tenderness and self-sacrificing devotion, of unutterable misery and dazzling happiness, twine and clasp round the fabric of religion. Language, dropping at times from such words as soul and spirit their mere philosophic meaning, can use them in full conformity with this tendency of the religious mind, as phrases to convey a mystic sense of transcendent emotion. Yet of all this religion, the religion of vision and of passion, little indeed has been said in these pages, and even that little rather in incidental touches than with purpose. Those to whom religion means above all things religious feeling, may say of my argument that I have written soullessly of the soul, and unspiritually of spiritual things. Be it so: I accept the phrase not as needing an apology, but as expressing a plan. Scientific progress is at times most furthered by working along a distinct intellectual line, without being tempted to diverge from the main object to what lies beyond, in however intimate connexion. The anatomist does well to discuss bodily structure independently of the world of happiness and misery which depends upon it. It would be thought a mere impertinence for a strategist to preface a dissertation on the science of war, by an enquiry how far it is lawful for a Christian man to bear weapons and serve in the wars. My task has been here not to discuss Religion in all its bearings, but to portray in outline the great doctrine of Animism, as found in what I conceive to be its earliest stages among the lower races of mankind, and to show its transmission along the lines of religious thought.
Lastly, I should explain the topics that this survey includes and excludes. For those used to theological subjects being approached in a dogmatic, emotional, and ethical way rather than through an ethnographic lens, this investigation may seem misleading because it's one-sided. However, this one-sided approach has been taken with careful thought. Although the doctrines examined here relate not only to the development but also to the actual truth of religious systems, I have felt neither able nor willing to fully engage in this vast topic, while my experience has shown that addressing such questions with brief authoritative statements is a significant mistake. The scientific value of descriptions of primitive and barbaric religions, made by travelers and especially by missionaries, is often diminished by their argumentative tone and the pretense of infallibility with which they settle their relationship to absolute truth. It’s somewhat tragic how a narrow scholar judges the doctrines of a foreign religion based solely on how they either oppose or align with his own beliefs, especially in matters where there’s deep disagreement among the most knowledgeable thinkers. The organization of lesser religions, condensing their many details into the few simple ideas of primitive philosophy that provide a common foundation for them all, seemed to me a crucial contribution to the study of religion. I have strived to carry this out to the best of my ability and can now only leave the results to other scholars, whose role is to tackle such evidence within broader arguments. Again, I have focused more on the intellectual aspects of religion rather than the emotional ones. Even in the life of the most primitive person, religious belief is intertwined with intense feelings—deep reverence, overwhelming fear, and ecstatic moments when thought and perception surpass the ordinary flow of daily life. How much more so in faiths where believers not only feel such passion but also experience the fullest emotions of love and hope, justice and compassion, courage and kindness, selfless devotion, profound sorrow, and overwhelming joy, all entwined with the essence of religion. Language, at times shedding its purely philosophical meanings for words like soul and spirit, can express these terms in alignment with the religious mind’s inclination to convey a mystical sense of transcendent emotion. Yet, very little has been addressed about this aspect of religion, the religion of vision and passion, and even that has been mentioned rather incidentally than purposefully. Those who see religion primarily as a matter of feeling may argue that I have discussed the soul in a soulless way and spiritual matters unspiritually. That’s fine: I accept this criticism not as a need for apology but as part of my plan. Scientific progress is sometimes best advanced by following a clear intellectual path without being tempted to stray from the main subject into related areas, no matter how intimately connected they may be. An anatomist does well to examine bodily structure separately from the world of happiness and suffering that relies on it. It would be deemed presumptuous for a military strategist to begin a discussion on the science of war by questioning how acceptable it is for a Christian to wield weapons and participate in conflict. My aim here has not been to discuss Religion in all its aspects but to outline the significant doctrine of Animism as it appears in what I believe are its earliest forms among the lower races of humanity, and to illustrate its continuity through the progression of religious thought.
The almost entire exclusion of ethical questions from 360this investigation has more than a mere reason of arrangement. It is due to the very nature of the subject. To some the statement may seem startling, yet the evidence seems to justify it, that the relation of morality to religion is one that only belongs in its rudiments, or not at all, to rudimentary civilization. The comparison of savage and civilized religions bring into view, by the side of a deep-lying resemblance in their philosophy, a deep-lying contrast in their practical action on human life. So far as savage religion can stand as representing natural religion, the popular idea that the moral government of the universe is an essential tenet of natural religion simply falls to the ground. Savage animism is almost devoid of that ethical element which to the educated modern mind is the very mainspring of practical religion. Not, as I have said, that morality is absent from the life of the lower races. Without a code of morals, the very existence of the rudest tribe would be impossible; and indeed the moral standards of even savage races are to no small extent well-defined and praiseworthy. But these ethical laws stand on their own ground of tradition and public opinion, comparatively independent of the animistic belief and rites which exist beside them. The lower animism is not immoral, it is unmoral. For this plain reason, it has seemed desirable to keep the discussion of animism, as far as might be, separate from that of ethics. The general problem of the relation of morality to religion is difficult, intricate, and requiring immense array of evidence, and may be perhaps more profitably discussed in connexion with the ethnography of morals. To justify their present separation, it will be enough to refer in general terms to the accounts of savage tribes whose ideas have been little affected by civilized intercourse; proper caution being used not to trust vague statements about good and evil, but to ascertain whether these are what philosophic moralists would call virtue and vice, righteousness and wickedness, or whether they are mere personal advantage and disadvantage. The essential connexion 361of theology and morality is a fixed idea in many minds. But it is one of the lessons of history that subjects may maintain themselves independently for ages, till the event of coalescence takes place. In the course of history, religion has in various ways attached to itself matters small and great outside its central scheme, such as prohibition of special meats, observance of special days, regulation of marriage as to kinship, division of society into castes, ordinance of social law and civil government. Looking at religion from a political point of view, as a practical influence on human society, it is clear that among its greatest powers have been its divine sanction of ethical laws, its theological enforcement of morality, its teaching of moral government of the universe, its supplanting the ‘continuance-doctrine’ of a future life by the ‘retribution-doctrine’ supplying moral motive in the present. But such alliance belongs almost or wholly to religions above the savage level, not to the earlier and lower creeds. It will aid us to see how much more the fruit of religion belongs to ethical influence than to philosophical dogma, if we consider how the introduction of the moral element separates the religions of the world, united as they are throughout by one animistic principle, into two great classes, those lower systems whose best result is to supply a crude childlike natural philosophy, and those higher faiths which implant on this the law of righteousness and of holiness, the inspiration of duty and of love.
The almost complete exclusion of ethical questions from 360° this investigation isn't just about how it's organized. It's because of the nature of the subject itself. Some might find this claim surprising, but the evidence seems to support it: the connection between morality and religion primarily appears in its most basic form, or not at all, in early civilization. When we compare primitive and advanced religions, we see a fundamental similarity in their philosophies alongside a significant difference in how they practically influence human life. As far as primitive religion represents natural religion, the common belief that the moral governance of the universe is a key aspect of natural religion simply doesn't hold up. Primitive animism is almost lacking in the ethical element that is, for educated modern individuals, the core of practical religion. But, as I mentioned, it's not that morality is completely absent from the lives of lower societies. Without some form of moral code, even the most basic tribe couldn't survive; in fact, the moral standards of even primitive groups are often quite defined and commendable. However, these ethical laws are grounded in tradition and public opinion and are relatively independent of the animistic beliefs and rituals that exist alongside them. Lower animism isn’t immoral; it’s amoral. For this simple reason, it seems important to keep the discussion of animism largely separate from ethics. The broader issue of how morality relates to religion is complex, intricate, and requires a substantial amount of evidence, and might be better addressed in relation to the study of moral ethnography. To justify their current separation, it's enough to refer generally to accounts of primitive tribes whose beliefs have been little influenced by interaction with civilized cultures; caution should be exercised not to rely on vague claims about good and evil but rather to determine whether these are what philosophical moralists would categorize as virtue and vice, righteousness and wickedness, or merely personal gain and loss. The essential link between theology and morality is a firmly held notion among many. But history teaches us that subjects can exist independently for long periods until they eventually merge. Throughout history, religion has, in various ways, attached itself to both minor and major matters outside its core framework, such as dietary restrictions, observance of special days, marriage regulations concerning kinship, social class divisions, and civil laws. When we examine religion from a political perspective, as a practical force in human society, it's evident that one of its greatest powers has been its divine endorsement of ethical laws, its theological enforcement of morality, its teaching of the universe's moral governance, and its replacement of the “continuance-doctrine” of an afterlife with the “retribution-doctrine,” which provides a moral incentive in the here and now. However, this connection largely belongs to religions above the primitive level and not to the earlier, more basic beliefs. It helps us see how much more the impact of religion relates to ethical influence than to philosophical doctrine when we consider how the introduction of the moral element divides the world's religions, united as they are by one animistic principle, into two major categories: those lower systems that best provide a rudimentary, childlike natural philosophy, and those higher faiths that build on this with laws of righteousness and holiness, along with the inspiration of duty and love.
CHAPTER XVIII.
RITES AND CEREMONIES.
Religious Rites: their purpose practical or symbolic—Prayer: its continuity from low to high levels of Culture; its lower phases Unethical; its higher phases Ethical—Sacrifice: its original Gift-theory passes into the Homage-theory and the Abnegation-theory—Manner of reception of Sacrifice by Deity—Material Transfer to elements, fetish-animals, priests; consumption of substance by deity or idol; offering of blood; transmission by fire; incense—Essential Transfer: consumption of essence, savour, &c.—Spiritual Transfer: consumption or transmission of soul of offering—Motive of Sacrificer—Transition from Gift-theory to Homage-theory: insignificant and formal offerings; sacrificial banquets—Abnegation-theory; sacrifice of children, &c.—Sacrifice of Substitutes: part given for whole; inferior life for superior; effigies—Modern survival of Sacrifice in folklore and religion—Fasting, as a means of producing ecstatic vision; its course from lower to higher Culture—Drugs used to produce ecstasy—Swoons and fits induced for religious purposes—Orientation: its relation to Sun-myth and Sun-worship; rules of East and West as to burial of dead, position of worship, and structure of temple—Lustration by Water and Fire: its transition from material to symbolic purification; its connexion with special events of life; its appearance among the lower races—Lustration of new-born children; of women; of those polluted by bloodshed or the dead—Lustration continued at higher levels of Culture—Conclusion.
Religious Rites: their purpose practical or symbolic—Prayer: its continuity from low to high levels of culture; its lower phases unethical; its higher phases ethical—Sacrifice: its original Gift-theory evolves into the Homage-theory and the Abnegation-theory—Manner of receiving Sacrifice by Deity—Material Transfer to elements, fetish-animals, priests; consumption of substance by deity or idol; offering of blood; transmission by fire; incense—Essential Transfer: consumption of essence, flavor, etc.—Spiritual Transfer: consumption or transmission of the soul of the offering—Motive of the Sacrificer—Transition from Gift-theory to Homage-theory: insignificant and formal offerings; sacrificial banquets—Abnegation-theory; sacrifice of children, etc.—Sacrifice of Substitutes: part given for whole; inferior life for superior; effigies—Modern survival of Sacrifice in folklore and religion—Fasting, as a means of achieving ecstatic vision; its progression from lower to higher culture—Drugs used to induce ecstasy—Swoons and fits induced for religious purposes—Orientation: its relation to Sun-myth and Sun-worship; rules of East and West regarding burial of the dead, position of worship, and structure of the temple—Lustration by Water and Fire: its transition from material to symbolic purification; its connection with special life events; its presence among lower races—Lustration of newborn children; of women; of those polluted by bloodshed or the dead—Lustration continues at higher levels of culture—Conclusion.
Religious rites fall theoretically into two divisions, though these blend in practice. In part, they are expressive and symbolic performances, the dramatic utterance of religious thought, the gesture-language of theology. In part, they are means of intercourse with and influence on spiritual beings, and as such, their intention is as directly practical as any chemical or mechanical process, for doctrine and worship correlate as theory and practice. In the science of religion, the study of ceremony has its 363strong and weak sides. On the one hand, it is generally easier to obtain accurate accounts of ceremonies by eye-witnesses, than anything like trustworthy and intelligible statements of doctrine; so that very much of our knowledge of religion in the savage and barbaric world consists in acquaintance with its ceremonies. It is also true that some religious ceremonies are marvels of permanence, holding substantially the same form and meaning through age after age, and far beyond the range of historic record. On the other hand, the signification of ceremonies is not to be rashly decided on by mere inspection. In the long and varied course in which religion has adapted itself to new intellectual and moral conditions, one of the most marked processes has affected time-honoured religious customs, whose form has been faithfully and even servilely kept up, while their nature has often undergone transformation. In the religions of the great nations, the natural difficulty of following these changes has been added to by the sacerdotal tendency to ignore and obliterate traces of the inevitable change of religion from age to age, and to convert into mysteries ancient rites whose real barbaric meaning is too far out of harmony with the spirit of a later time. The embarrassments, however, which beset the enquirer into the ceremonies of a single religion, diminish in a larger comparative study. The ethnographer who brings together examples of a ceremony from different stages of culture can often give a more rational account of it, than the priest, to whom a special signification, sometimes very unlike the original one, has become matter of orthodoxy. As a contribution to the theory of religion, with especial view to its lower phases as explanatory of the higher, I have here selected for ethnographic discussion a group of sacred rites, each in its way full of instruction, different as these ways are. All have early place and rudimentary meaning in savage culture, all belong to barbaric ages, all have their representatives within the limits of modern Christendom. They are the rites of Prayer, Sacrifice, 364Fasting and other methods of Artificial Ecstasy, Orientation, Lustration.
Religious rituals can be categorized into two main types, even though they often blend together in real life. On one hand, they are expressive and symbolic acts, dramatically conveying religious ideas and serving as a kind of symbolic language for theology. On the other hand, they are ways to connect with and influence spiritual beings, making their purpose just as practical as any scientific or mechanical process, since doctrine and worship relate to theory and practice. In the study of religion, the examination of rituals has its strengths and weaknesses. For instance, it’s generally easier to find reliable accounts of rituals from eyewitnesses than to get accurate and understandable statements of doctrine; thus, a significant portion of our understanding of religion in primitive and ancient cultures comes from knowledge of their rituals. It’s also true that some religious rituals have shown remarkable consistency, maintaining essentially the same form and meaning across ages, even before we have historical records. However, the meaning of these rituals shouldn't be hastily judged just by observation. Throughout history, as religions have adapted to new intellectual and moral circumstances, many long-standing religious customs have changed in essence, even while their outward forms have been preserved meticulously. In the major world religions, the challenge of tracing these changes has been complicated by the religious leaders' tendency to ignore and erase evidence of the inevitable evolution of religion over time, and to turn ancient practices—whose original primitive meanings greatly conflict with later beliefs—into mysteries. Nevertheless, the obstacles faced by someone investigating the rituals of a single religion lessen when viewed from a broader comparative perspective. An ethnographer who collects examples of a ritual from various cultural contexts can often provide a clearer explanation than a priest, who may hold a specific meaning—often quite different from the original—due to tradition. As a contribution to understanding religion, particularly how its simpler forms help explain the more complex ones, I have chosen a set of sacred rituals for ethnographic discussion, each offering valuable insights in its own way, despite their differences. All of these have early origins and basic meanings in primitive cultures, belong to ancient times, and have modern representatives within Christianity. They include the rituals of Prayer, Sacrifice, Fasting, other methods of Artificial Ecstasy, Orientation, and Lustration.
Prayer, ‘the soul’s sincere desire, uttered or unexpressed,’ is the address of personal spirit to personal spirit. So far as it is actually addressed to disembodied or deified human souls, it is simply an extension of the daily intercourse between man and man; while the worshipper who looks up to other divine beings, spiritual after the nature of his own spirit, though of place and power in the universe far beyond his own, still has his mind in a state where prayer is a reasonable and practical act. So simple and familiar indeed is the nature of prayer, that its study does not demand that detail of fact and argument which must be given to rites in comparison practically insignificant. It has not indeed been placed everywhere on record as the necessary outcome of animistic belief, for especially at low levels of civilization there are many races who distinctly admit the existence of spirits, but are not positively known to pray to them. Beyond this lower level, however, animism and ceremonial prayer become nearly conterminous; and a view of their relation in their earlier stages may be best gained from a selection of actual prayers taken down word for word, within the limits of savage and barbaric life. These agree with an opinion that prayer appeared in the religion of the lower culture, but that in this its earlier stage it was unethical. The accomplishment of desire is asked for, but desire is as yet limited to personal advantage. It is at later and higher moral levels, that the worshipper begins to add to his entreaty for prosperity the claim for help toward virtue and against vice, and prayer becomes an instrument of morality.
Prayer, “the soul’s sincere desire, spoken or unspoken,” is the connection of one spirit to another. When it’s directed towards disembodied or divine beings, it’s just an extension of the daily interactions between people. The worshiper who looks up to other divine beings, spiritual like his own, but with a place and power in the universe far beyond his own, still finds that prayer is a sensible and practical action. Prayer’s nature is so simple and familiar that studying it doesn’t require the detailed facts and arguments needed for less significant rituals. It hasn’t been documented everywhere as the essential result of animistic belief; particularly in lesser developed societies, many groups acknowledge the existence of spirits but aren’t known to pray to them. However, beyond this basic level, animism and formal prayer almost overlap, and we can best understand their relationship in their early stages by looking at actual prayers recorded word for word from primitive and barbaric cultures. These support the idea that prayer emerged within the religion of lower cultures, though in its earlier form it was unethical. People ask for their desires to be fulfilled, but desire is still limited to personal gain. It’s only at later and higher moral levels that worshipers start to include requests for help in achieving virtue and resisting vice, and prayer transforms into a tool for morality.
In the Papuan Island of Tanna, where the gods are the spirits of departed ancestors, and preside over the growth of fruits, a prayer after the offering of first-fruits is spoken aloud by the chief who acts as high priest to the silent assembly: ‘Compassionate father! Here is some food for you; eat it; be kind to us on account of it!’ Then 365all shout together.[844] In the Samoan Islands, when the libation of ava was poured out at the evening meal, the head of the family prayed thus:—
In the Papuan Island of Tanna, where the gods are the spirits of ancestors who have passed away and oversee the growth of fruits, the chief, who acts as high priest, speaks a prayer aloud after the offering of first fruits to the silent crowd: ‘Compassionate Father! Here is some food for you; eat it; be kind to us because of it!’ Then everyone shouts together. 365 In the Samoan Islands, when the libation of ava was poured out during the evening meal, the head of the family prayed like this:—
‘Here is ava for you, O gods! Look kindly towards this family: let it prosper and increase; and let us all be kept in health. Let our plantations be productive; let food grow; and may there be abundance of food for us, your creatures. Here is ava for you, our war gods! Let there be a strong and numerous people for you in this land.
‘Here is ava for you, O gods! Look favorably upon this family: let it thrive and grow; and may we all stay healthy. May our crops yield plentifully; let food flourish; and may there be an abundance of food for us, your creatures. Here is ava for you, our war gods! Let there be a strong and numerous people for you in this land.
‘Here is ava for you, O sailing gods (gods who come in Tongan canoes and foreign vessels). Do not come on shore at this place; but be pleased to depart along the ocean to some other land.’[845]
‘Here is an offering for you, O sailing gods (gods who travel in Tongan canoes and foreign ships). Please do not come ashore at this spot; instead, kindly sail away across the ocean to some other land.’[845]
Among the Indians of North America, more or less under European influence, the Sioux will say, ‘Spirits of the dead, have mercy on me!’ then they will add what they want, if good weather they say so, if good luck in hunting, they say so.[846] Among the Osages, prayers used not long since to be offered at daybreak to Wohkonda, the Master of Life. The devotee retired a little from the camp or company, and with affected or real weeping, in loud uncouth voice of plaintive piteous tone, howled such prayers as these:— ‘Wohkonda, pity me, I am very poor; give me what I need; give me success against mine enemies, that I may avenge the death of my friends. May I be able to take scalps, to take horses! &c.’ Such prayers might or might not have allusion to some deceased relative or friend.[847] How an Algonquin Indian undertakes a dangerous voyage, we may judge from John Tanner’s account of a fleet of frail Indian bark canoes setting out at dawn one calm morning on Lake Superior. We had proceeded, he writes, about two hundred yards into the lake, when the canoes all stopped together, and the chief, in a very loud voice, addressed a prayer to the Great Spirit, entreating him to 366give us a good look to cross the lake. ‘You,’ said he, ‘have made this lake, and you have made us, your children; you can now cause that the water shall remain smooth while we pass over in safety.’ In this manner he continued praying for five or ten minutes; he then threw into the lake a small quantity of tobacco, in which each of the canoes followed his example.[848] A Nootka Indian, preparing for war, prayed thus: ‘Great Quahootze, let me live, not be sick, find the enemy, not fear him, find him asleep, and kill a great many of him.’[849] There is more pathos in these lines from the war-song of a Delaware:—
Among the Native Americans of North America, influenced by European culture, the Sioux would say, ‘Spirits of the dead, have mercy on me!’ Then they would add their requests, whether it’s for good weather or good luck in hunting.[846] Among the Osages, prayers were offered at dawn to Wohkonda, the Master of Life. The person praying would move away from the camp or group and, whether genuinely or theatrically weeping, would loudly lament with prayers like these: ‘Wohkonda, have mercy on me, I’m very poor; grant me what I need; give me victory over my enemies, so I can avenge my friends’ deaths. May I be able to take scalps, to take horses! etc.’ These prayers might or might not reference a deceased relative or friend.[847] We can understand how an Algonquin Indian approaches a dangerous journey from John Tanner’s description of a flotilla of fragile Indian bark canoes departing at dawn on a calm morning on Lake Superior. He wrote that they had traveled about two hundred yards into the lake when all the canoes suddenly halted, and the chief, speaking loudly, prayed to the Great Spirit, asking him to grant them a safe passage across the lake. ‘You,’ he said, ‘created this lake, and you made us, your children; you can ensure that the water stays calm while we cross safely.’ He continued praying for five or ten minutes, then he tossed a small amount of tobacco into the lake, and each of the canoes followed suit.[848] A Nootka Indian preparing for war prayed like this: ‘Great Quahootze, let me live, be healthy, find the enemy, fear him not, find him asleep, and kill many of him.’[849] There is more emotion in these lines from a Delaware war song:—
The following two prayers are among those recorded by Molina, from the memory of aged men who described to him the religion of Peru under the Incas, in whose rites they had themselves borne part. The first is addressed to the Sun, the second to the World-creator:—
The following two prayers are among those noted by Molina, from the memories of older men who shared with him the religion of Peru during the Inca era, in which they had themselves participated. The first is directed to the Sun, and the second to the World-creator:—
‘O Sun! Thou who hast said, let there be Cuzcos and Tampus, grant that these thy children may conquer all other people. We beseech thee that thy children the Yncas may be the conquerors always, for this hast thou created them.’
‘O Sun! You who have said, let there be Cuzcos and Tampus, grant that these your children may conquer all other people. We ask that your children the Yncas may always be the conquerors, for you have created them for this purpose.’
‘O conquering Uiracocha! Ever present Uiracocha! Thou who art in the ends of the earth without equal! Thou who gavest life and valour to men, saying “Let this be a man!” and to women, saying, “Let this be a woman!” Thou who madest them and gavest them being! Watch over them that they may live in health and peace. Thou who art in the 367high heavens, and among the clouds of the tempest, grant this with long life, and accept this sacrifice, O Uiracocha!’[851]
‘O conquering Uiracocha! Ever-present Uiracocha! You who are unmatched at the ends of the earth! You who brought life and courage to men, saying “Let this be a man!” and to women, saying, “Let this be a woman!” You who created them and gave them existence! Watch over them so they may live in health and peace. You who are in the 367high heavens and among the storm clouds, grant this for a long life, and accept this sacrifice, O Uiracocha!’[851]
In Africa, the Zulus, addressing the spirits of their ancestors, think it even enough to call upon them without saying what they want, taking it for granted that the spirits know, so that the mere utterance ‘People of our house!’ is a prayer. When a Zulu sneezes, and is thus for the moment in close relation to the divine spirits, it is enough for him to mention what he wants (‘to wish a wish,’ as our own folklore has it), and thus the words ‘A cow!’ ‘Children!’ are prayers. Fuller forms are such as these: ‘People of our house! Cattle!’—‘People of our house! Good luck and health!’—‘People of our house! Children!’ On occasions of ancestral cattle-sacrifice the prayers extend to actual harangues, as when, after the feast is over, the headman speaks thus amid dead silence: ‘Yes, yes, our people, who did such and such noble acts, I pray to you—I pray for prosperity after having sacrificed this bullock of yours. I say, I cannot refuse to give you food, for these cattle which are here you gave me. And if you ask food of me which you have given me, is it not proper that I should give it to you? I pray for cattle, that they may fill this pen. I pray for corn, that many people may come to this village of yours, and make a noise, and glorify you. I ask also for children, that this village may have a large population, and that your name may never come to an end.’ So he finishes.[852] From among the negro races near the equator, the following prayers may be cited, addressed to that Supreme Deity whose nature is, as we have seen, more or less that of the Heaven-god. The Gold Coast negro would raise his eyes to Heaven and thus address him: ‘God, give me to-day rice and yams, gold and agries, give me 368slaves, riches, and health, and that I may be brisk and swift!’ The fetish-man will often in the morning take water in his mouth and say, ‘Heaven! grant that I may have something to eat to-day;’ and when giving medicine shown him by the fetish, he will hold it up to heaven first, and say, ‘Ata Nyongmo! (Father Heaven!) bless this medicine that I now give.’ The Yebu would say, ‘God in heaven, protect me from sickness and death. God give me happiness and wisdom!’[853] When the Manganja of Lake Nyassa were offering to the Supreme Deity a basketful of meal and a pot of native beer, that he might give them rain, the priestess dropped the meal handful by handful on the ground, each time calling, in a high-pitched voice, ‘Hear thou, O God, and send rain!’ and the assembled people responded, clapping their hands softly and intoning (they always intone their prayers) ‘Hear thou, O God!’[854]
In Africa, the Zulus call on the spirits of their ancestors by simply saying their names, assuming the spirits understand their needs, so saying ‘People of our house!’ is considered a prayer. When a Zulu sneezes, creating a moment of connection to the divine, it suffices to state what they desire (‘to wish a wish,’ as our own folklore puts it), meaning that saying ‘A cow!’ or ‘Children!’ are prayers. Longer variations include: ‘People of our house! Cattle!’—‘People of our house! Good luck and health!’—‘People of our house! Children!’ During ancestral cattle sacrifices, prayers can develop into speeches, such as when the headman, speaking in a quiet atmosphere after the feast, says: ‘Yes, yes, our people, who performed such noble deeds, I pray to you—I ask for prosperity after this bullock of yours has been sacrificed. I say, I cannot refuse to offer you food, because these cattle here were given to me by you. If you ask me for food which you’ve given me, is it not right for me to give it back? I pray for cattle, that this pen may be filled. I pray for corn, that many visitors may come to your village, making noise and glorifying you. I ask also for children, that this village may grow in population, and that your name may never fade away.’ And with that, he concludes.[852] From among the African tribes near the equator, there are prayers addressed to the Supreme Deity, whose nature resembles that of the Heaven-god. A person from the Gold Coast would look up to Heaven and say: ‘God, give me rice and yams today, gold and agries, grant me slaves, wealth, and health, and let me be lively and swift!’ The fetish-man often takes water in his mouth in the morning and says, ‘Heaven! please grant that I will have something to eat today;’ and when presenting medicine from the fetish, he holds it up to heaven first and says, ‘Ata Nyongmo! (Father Heaven!) bless this medicine that I now give.’ The Yebu would say, ‘God in heaven, protect me from illness and death. God, grant me happiness and wisdom!’[853] When the Manganja people near Lake Nyassa offered a basket of meal and a pot of local beer to the Supreme Deity to ask for rain, the priestess dropped the meal handful by handful on the ground, each time calling out in a high voice, ‘Hear me, O God, and send rain!’ and the gathered people responded by softly clapping their hands and chanting (they always chant their prayers) ‘Hear me, O God!’[854]
Typical forms of prayer may be selected in Asia near the junction-line of savage and barbaric culture. Among the Karens of Burma, the Harvest-goddess has offerings made to her in a little house in the paddy-field, in which two strings are put for her to bind the spirits of any persons who may enter her field. Then they entreat her on this wise: ‘Grandmother, thou guardest my field, thou watchest over my plantation. Look out for men entering; look sharp for people coming in. If they come, bind them with this string, tie them with this rope, do not let them go!’ And at the threshing of the rice they say: ‘Shake thyself, Grandmother, shake thyself! Let the paddy ascend till it equals a hill, equals a mountain. Shake thyself, Grandmother, shake thyself!’[855] The following are extracts from the long-drawn prayers of the Khonds of Orissa: ‘O Boora Pennu! and O Tari Pennu, and all other gods! (naming them). You, O Boora Pennu! created us, giving us the attribute of hunger; thence corn food was necessary to us, 369and thence were necessary producing fields. You gave us every seed, and ordered us to use bullocks, and to make ploughs, and to plough. Had we not received this art, we might still indeed have existed upon the natural fruits of the jungle and the plain, but, in our destitution, we could not have performed your worship. Do you, remembering this—the connexion betwixt our wealth and your honour—grant the prayers which we now offer. In the morning, we rise before the light to our labour, carrying the seed. Save us from the tiger, and the snake, and from stumblingblocks. Let the seed appear earth to the eating birds, and stones to the eating animals of the earth. Let the grain spring up suddenly like a dry stream that is swelled in a night. Let the earth yield to our ploughshares as wax melts before hot iron. Let the baked clods melt like hailstones. Let our ploughs spring through the furrows with a force like the recoil of a bent tree. Let there be such a return from our seed, that so much shall fall and be neglected in the fields, and so much on the roads in carrying it home, that, when we shall go out next year to sow, the paths and the fields shall look like a young corn-field. From the first times we have lived by your favour. Let us continue to receive it. Remember that the increase of our produce is the increase of your worship, and that its diminution must be the diminution of your rites.’ The following is the conclusion of a prayer to the Earth-goddess: ‘Let our herds be so numerous that they cannot be housed; let children so abound that the care of them shall overcome their parents—as shall be seen by their burned hands; let our heads ever strike against brass pots innumerable hanging from our roofs; let the rats form their nests of shreds of scarlet cloth and silk; let all the kites in the country be seen in the trees of our village, from beasts being killed there every day. We are ignorant of what it is good to ask for. You know what is good for us. Give it to us!’[856]
Typical forms of prayer can be found in Asia at the crossroads of primitive and more developed cultures. Among the Karens of Burma, offerings are made to the Harvest goddess in a small shelter in the rice field, where two strings are placed for her to bind the spirits of anyone who might enter her field. They then plead with her, saying: “Grandmother, you protect my field and watch over my crops. Keep an eye out for anyone entering; be vigilant for people coming in. If they come, bind them with this string, tie them with this rope, and don’t let them go!” And during the rice threshing, they say: “Shake yourself, Grandmother, shake yourself! Let the rice rise until it’s as high as a hill, as high as a mountain. Shake yourself, Grandmother, shake yourself!”[855] The following are excerpts from the lengthy prayers of the Khonds of Orissa: “O Boora Pennu! and O Tari Pennu, and all other gods! (naming them). You, O Boora Pennu! created us, giving us the need for food; thus, we needed crops. You provided us with every seed, ordered us to use oxen, and to make plows and plow the fields. If we hadn’t received this knowledge, we might still have existed on the fruit of the jungle and the plains, but in our need, we could not have honored you. Remember this—the connection between our wealth and your honor—grant the requests we now offer. In the morning, we rise before dawn for our work, carrying the seed. Protect us from tigers, snakes, and obstacles. Make the seed appear as earth to the birds and stones to the animals. Let the grain spring up suddenly like a dry stream swelling overnight. Let the ground yield to our plows like wax melts before hot iron. Let the hardened clods dissolve like hailstones. Let our plows cut through the furrows with a force like a bent tree snapping back. May our harvest be so abundant that plenty will fall and be left behind in the fields, and so much will spill on the roads while carrying it home, that when we go out to sow next year, the paths and fields will look like a young cornfield. From the beginning, we have thrived by your support. Let us continue to receive it. Remember that the growth of our crops is the growth of your worship, and that any decline must mean a decline in your rituals.” The conclusion of a prayer to the Earth goddess states: “Let our herds be so numerous that they can't be contained; let children be so plentiful that caring for them overwhelms their parents—evident from their burned hands; let our heads always bump against countless brass pots hanging from our roofs; let the rats make their nests from pieces of red cloth and silk; let all the kites in the area be seen in the trees of our village, from the animals being killed there every day. We don’t know what is best to ask for. You know what’s good for us. Give it to us!”[856]
370Such are types of prayer in the lower levels of culture, and in no small degree they remain characteristic of the higher nations. If, in long-past ages, the Chinese raised themselves from the condition of rude Siberian tribes to their peculiar culture, at any rate their consecutive religion has scarce changed the matter-of-fact prayers for rain and good harvest, wealth and long life, addressed to manes and nature-spirits and merciful Heaven.[857] In other great national religions of the world, not the whole of prayer, but a smaller or larger part of it, holds closely to the savage definition. This is a Vedic prayer: ‘What, Indra, has not yet been given me by thee, Lightning-hurler, all good things bring us hither with both hands ... with mighty riches fill me, with wealth of cattle, for thou art great!’[858] This is Moslem: ‘O Allah! unloose the captivity of the captives, and annul the debts of the debtors: and make this town to be safe and secure, and blessed with wealth and plenty, and all the towns of the Moslems, O Lord of all creatures! and decree safety and health to us and to all travellers, and pilgrims, and warriors, and wanderers, upon thy earth, and upon thy sea, such as are Moslems, O Lord of all creatures!’[859] Thus also, throughout the rituals of Christendom, stand an endless array of supplications unaltered in principle from savage times—that the weather may be adjusted to our local needs, that we may have the victory over all our enemies, that life and health and wealth and happiness may be ours.
370These are types of prayer in the lower levels of culture, and they still show up in more advanced nations. If, in ancient times, the Chinese evolved from primitive Siberian tribes to their unique culture, their ongoing religion has hardly changed from straightforward prayers for rain, good harvests, wealth, and long life directed toward ancestors, nature spirits, and a compassionate Heaven.[857] In other major national religions worldwide, while not every prayer fits this category, a significant part still aligns with this primitive notion. For example, in a Vedic prayer: ‘What, Indra, have you not yet given me, Lightning-hurler? Bring us all good things here with both hands... fill me with great wealth, with riches in cattle, for you are great!’[858] And in Islam: ‘O Allah! Free the captives from captivity, forgive the debts of debtors, and make this town safe, blessed with wealth and abundance, along with all Muslim towns, O Lord of all beings! Grant safety and health to us, all travelers, pilgrims, warriors, and wanderers on your earth and sea, who are Muslims, O Lord of all beings!’[859] Similarly, in Christian rituals, there exists a never-ending list of requests that remain unchanged in essence from ancient times—that the weather be suitable for our local needs, that we achieve victory over our enemies, and that we have life, health, wealth, and happiness.
So far, then, is permanence in culture: but now let us glance at the not less marked lines of modification and new formation. The vast political effect of a common faith in developing the idea of exclusive nationality, a process scarcely expanding beyond the germ among savage tribes, but reaching its full growth in the barbaric world, is apt to have its outward manifestation in hostility to those of another 371creed, a sentiment which finds vent in characteristic prayers. Such are these from the Rig-Veda: ‘Take away our calamities. By sacred verses may we overcome those who employ no holy hymns! Distinguish between the Aryas and those who are Dasyus: chastising those who observe no sacred rites, subject them to the sacrificer.... Indra subjects the impious to the pious, and destroys the irreligious by the religious.’[860] The following is from the closing prayer which the boys in many schools in Cairo used to repeat some years ago, and very likely do still: ‘I seek refuge with Allah from Satan the accursed. In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful ... O Lord of all creatures! O Allah! destroy the infidels and polytheists, thine enemies, the enemies of the religion! O Allah! make their children orphans, and defile their abodes, and cause their feet to slip, and give them and their families and their households and their women and their children and their relations by marriage and their brothers and their friends and their possessions and their race and their wealth and their lands as booty to the Moslems! O Lord of all creatures!’[861] Another powerful tendency of civilization, that of regulating human affairs by fixed ordinance, has since early ages been at work to arrange worship into mechanical routine. Here, so to speak, religion deposits itself in sharply defined shape from a supersaturated solution, and crystallizes into formalism. Thus prayers, from being at first utterances as free and flexible as requests to a living patriarch or chief, stiffened into traditional formulas, whose repetition required verbal accuracy, and whose nature practically assimilated more or less to that of charms. Liturgies, especially in those three quarters of the world where the ancient liturgical language has become at once unintelligible and sacred, are crowded with examples of this historical process. Its extremest development in Europe is connected with the use of the rosary. This devotional 372calculating-machine is of Asiatic invention; it had if not its origin at least its special development among the ancient Buddhists, and its 108 balls still slide through the modern Buddhist’s hands as of old, measuring out the sacred formulas whose reiteration occupies so large a fraction of a pious life. It was not till toward the middle ages that the rosary passed into Mohammedan and Christian lands, and finding there conceptions of prayer which it was suited to accompany, has flourished ever since. How far the Buddhist devotional formulas themselves partake of the nature of prayer, is a question opening into instructive considerations, which need only be suggested here. By its derivation from Brahmanism and its fusion with the beliefs of rude spirit-worshipping populations, Buddhism practically retains in no small measure a prayerful temper and even practice. Yet, according to strict and special Buddhist philosophy, where personal divinity has faded into metaphysical idea, even devotional utterances of desire are not prayers; as Köppen says, there is no ‘Thou!’ in them. It must be only with reservation that we class the rosary in Buddhist hands as an instrument of actual prayer. The same is true of the still more extreme development of mechanical religion, the prayer-mill of the Tibetan Buddhists. This was perhaps originally a symbolic ‘chakra’ or wheel of the law, but has become a cylinder mounted on an axis, which by each rotation is considered to repeat the sentences written on the papers it is filled with, usually the ‘Om mani padme hûm!’ Prayer-mills vary in size, from the little wooden toys held in the hand, to the great drums turned by wind or water-power, which repeat their sentences by the million.[862] The Buddhist idea, that ‘merit’ is produced by the recitation of these sentences, may perhaps lead us to form an opinion of large application in the study of religion and superstition, namely, that the theory of prayers may explain the origin of charms. Charm-formulas are in very many cases actual 373prayers, and as such are intelligible. Where they are mere verbal forms, producing their effect on nature and man by some unexplained process, may not they or the types they were modelled on have been originally prayers, since dwindled into mystic sentences?
So far, we’ve seen the consistency in culture: but now let’s take a look at the noticeable changes and new developments. The significant political impact of a shared belief in creating the idea of exclusive nationality, a process that barely evolves among primitive tribes, but fully develops in the barbaric world, tends to show itself outwardly in hostility toward those of different beliefs, a feeling that finds expression in characteristic prayers. Here are some from the Rig-Veda: ‘Take away our misfortunes. Through sacred verses may we defeat those who don’t use holy hymns! Distinguish between the Aryas and those who are Dasyus: punish those who don’t observe sacred rites, subject them to the sacrificer.... Indra submits the impious to the pious, and destroys the irreligious by the religious.’[860] The following comes from the closing prayer that boys in many schools in Cairo used to recite a few years ago, and likely still do: ‘I seek refuge with Allah from the accursed Satan. In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful ... O Lord of all creatures! O Allah! destroy the infidels and polytheists, Your enemies, the enemies of the religion! O Allah! make their children orphans, defile their homes, cause them to stumble, and give them and their families and their households and their women and their children and their relatives and their brothers and their friends and their possessions and their race and their wealth and their lands as spoils to the Muslims! O Lord of all creatures!’[861] Another strong aspect of civilization, which is the regulation of human affairs through fixed rules, has been working since ancient times to structure worship into a mechanical routine. Here, so to speak, religion settles into a well-defined form from an oversaturated solution and crystallizes into formalism. Thus, prayers, initially spontaneous utterances as flexible as requests to a living patriarch or chief, became rigid traditional formulas, whose repeated recitation required precise wording and whose nature closely resembled that of charms. Liturgies, especially in the three quarters of the world where the ancient liturgical language has become both unintelligible and sacred, are full of examples of this historical development. Its most extreme manifestation in Europe is linked to the use of the rosary. This devotional counting tool was invented in Asia; it perhaps originated, or at least developed, among ancient Buddhists, and its 108 beads still pass through the hands of modern Buddhists as before, measuring out the sacred phrases whose repetition occupies a significant portion of a devout life. It wasn’t until the Middle Ages that the rosary entered Muslim and Christian lands, where it found prayer concepts that it suited and has thrived ever since. The extent to which Buddhist devotional formulas themselves reflect the essence of prayer raises interesting questions, which only need to be suggested here. Due to its roots in Brahmanism and its blending with the beliefs of primitive spirit-worshipping peoples, Buddhism still somewhat retains a prayerful attitude and practice. However, according to strict and specific Buddhist philosophy, where personal divinity has faded into a metaphysical concept, even devotional expressions of desire are not considered prayers; as Köppen notes, there is no ‘You!’ in them. We must regard the rosary in Buddhist hands with some caution as a tool of genuine prayer. The same applies to the even more extreme form of mechanical religion, the prayer mill of Tibetan Buddhists. This was likely originally a symbolic ‘chakra’ or wheel of the law, but has transformed into a cylinder mounted on an axis, which is believed to repeat the sentences written on the papers inside it with each turn, usually the ‘Om mani padme hûm!’ Prayer mills vary in size, from small wooden toys held in hand to large drums spun by wind or water power, which can repeat their phrases by the millions.[862] The Buddhist idea that ‘merit’ is generated by reciting these phrases may help us form a broader understanding in the study of religion and superstition, specifically that the theory of prayers might shed light on the origin of charms. Charm-formulas are often actual prayers, and as such are understandable. If they are merely verbal forms, affecting nature and humanity through some undisclosed process, could they, or the models they were based on, have originally been prayers, which have now faded into mystical phrases?
The worshipper cannot always ask wisely what is for his good, therefore it may be well for him to pray that the greater power of the deity may be guided by his greater wisdom—this is a thought which expands and strengthens in the theology of the higher nations. The simple prayer of Sokrates, that the gods would give such things as are good, for they know best what are good,[863] raises a strain of supplication which has echoed through Christendom from its earliest ages. Greatest of all changes which difference the prayers of lower from those of higher nations, is the working out of the general principle that the ethical element, so scanty and rudimentary in the lower forms of religion, becomes in the higher its most vital point; while it scarcely appears as though any savage prayer, authentically native in its origin, were ever directed to obtain moral goodness or to ask pardon for moral sin. Among the semi-civilized Aztecs, in the elaborate ritual which from its early record and its original characteristics may be thought to have a partial authenticity, we mark the appearance of ethical prayer. Such is the supplication concerning the newly-elect ruler: ‘Make him, Lord, as your true image, and permit him not to be proud and haughty in your throne and court; but vouchsafe, Lord, that he may calmly and carefully rule and govern them whom he has in charge, the people, and permit not, Lord, that he may injure or vex his subjects, nor without reason and justice cause loss to any; and permit not, Lord, that he may spot or soil your throne or court with any injustice or wrong, &c.’[864] Moral prayer, sometimes appearing in rudiment, sometimes shrunk into 374insignificance, sometimes overlaid by formalism, sometimes maintained firm and vigorous in the inmost life, has its place without as well as within the Jewish-Christian scheme. The ancient Aryan prayed: ‘Through want of strength, thou strong and bright god, have I gone wrong; have mercy, almighty, have mercy!... Whenever we men, O Varuna, commit an offence before the heavenly host, whenever we break the law through thoughtlessness, have mercy, almighty, have mercy!’[865] The modern Parsi prays: ‘Of my sins which I have committed against the ruler Ormazd, against men, and the different kinds of men.... Deceit, contempt, idol-worship, lies, I repent of.... All and every kind of sin which men have committed because of me, or which I have committed because of men; pardon, I repent with confession!’[866] As a general rule it would be misleading to judge utterances of this kind in the religions of classic Greece and Rome as betokening the intense habitual prayerfulness which pervades the records of Judaism, Mohammedanism, Christianity. Moralists admit that prayer can be made an instrument of evil, that it may give comfort and hope to the superstitious robber, that it may strengthen the heart of the soldier to slay his foes in an unrighteous war, that it may uphold the tyrant and the bigot in their persecution of freedom in life and thought. Philosophers dwell on the subjective operation of prayer, as acting not directly on outward events, but on the mind and will of the worshipper himself, which it influences and confirms. The one argument tends to guide prayer, the other to suppress it. Looking on prayer in its effect on man himself through the course of history, both must recognize it as even in savage religion a means of strengthening emotion, of sustaining courage and exciting hope, while in higher faiths it becomes a great motive power of the ethical system, controlling and enforcing, under an ever-present sense of supernatural intercourse and aid, the emotions and energies of moral life.
The worshipper doesn’t always know what’s best for him, so it might be a good idea to pray that the deity’s greater power is guided by their greater wisdom. This idea is something that grows and strengthens in the theology of more advanced cultures. The simple prayer of Socrates, asking the gods to give what is good because they know best what is good,[863] raises a type of supplication that has resonated throughout Christianity since its early days. The biggest difference between the prayers of lesser and greater nations is that the ethical element, which is minimal and basic in lower forms of religion, becomes the most important aspect in higher religions; it seems that no genuine savage prayer has ever been directed toward seeking moral goodness or asking for forgiveness for moral wrongdoing. Among the semi-civilized Aztecs, in the complex rituals that show some degree of authenticity from their early records, we see the emergence of ethical prayer. For example, there’s a supplication for the newly elected ruler: “Make him, Lord, your true image, and don’t let him be proud and haughty in your throne and court; instead, grant, Lord, that he may rule calmly and carefully over the people he is in charge of, and don’t allow him to harm or annoy his subjects, nor unjustly cause loss to anyone; and don’t let him stain or soil your throne or court with any injustice or wrongdoing,” etc.[864] Moral prayer, sometimes appearing in its early form, sometimes diminished to insignificance, sometimes overshadowed by formalism, and sometimes remaining strong and vigorous in the deepest aspects of life, exists both within and outside the Jewish-Christian tradition. The ancient Aryan prayed: “Because of my lack of strength, you strong and bright god, I have gone astray; have mercy, almighty, have mercy!... Whenever we men, O Varuna, commit an offense before the heavenly beings, whenever we break the law by mistake, have mercy, almighty, have mercy!”[865] The modern Parsi prays: “For my sins against the ruler Ormazd, against people, and various kinds of people.... Deceit, contempt, idol-worship, lies, I repent of.... For all the sins that people have committed because of me, or that I have committed because of others; I ask for pardon, I repent with confession!”[866] Generally, it would be misleading to interpret statements like these in the religions of ancient Greece and Rome as showing the deep, ongoing prayerfulness that characterizes the records of Judaism, Islam, and Christianity. Moralists acknowledge that prayer can be a tool for evil, offering comfort and hope to superstitious thieves, strengthening a soldier's heart to kill in an unjust war, and supporting tyrants and bigots in their oppression of freedom in life and thought. Philosophers focus on the subjective impact of prayer, which doesn’t directly influence external events but affects the mind and will of the worshipper, influencing and confirming them. One perspective aims to guide prayer, while the other seeks to restrict it. Looking at prayer’s effect on humanity throughout history, both sides must recognize it as, even in primitive religion, a means of boosting emotion, sustaining courage, and sparking hope, while in more developed faiths, it becomes a significant driving force of the ethical system, controlling and reinforcing, under a constant awareness of supernatural presence and assistance, the emotions and energies of moral life.
375Sacrifice has its apparent origin in the same early period of culture and its place in the same animistic scheme as prayer, with which through so long a range of history it has been carried on in the closest connexion. As prayer is a request made to a deity as if he were a man, so sacrifice is a gift made to a deity as if he were a man. The human types of both may be studied unchanged in social life to this day. The suppliant who bows before his chief, laying a gift at his feet and making his humble petition, displays the anthropomorphic model and origin at once of sacrifice and prayer. But sacrifice, though in its early stages as intelligible as prayer is in early and late stages alike, has passed in the course of religious history into transformed conditions, not only of the rite itself but of the intention with which the worshipper performs it. And theologians, having particularly turned their attention to sacrifice as it appears in the higher religions, have been apt to gloss over with mysticism ceremonies which, when traced ethnographically up from their savage forms, seem open to simply rational interpretation. Many details of offerings have already been given incidentally here, as a means of elucidating the nature of the deities they are offered to. Moreover, a main part of the doctrine of sacrifice has been anticipated in examining the offerings to spirits of the dead, and indeed the ideal distinction between soul and deity breaks down among the lower races, when it appears how often the deities receiving sacrifice are themselves divine human souls. In now attempting to classify sacrifice in its course through the religions of the world, it seems a satisfactory plan to group the evidence as far as may be according to the manner in which the offering is given by the worshipper, and received by the deity. At the same time, the examples may be so arranged as to bring into view the principal lines along which the rite has undergone alteration. The ruder conception that the deity takes and values the offering for itself, gives place on the one hand to the idea of mere homage expressed by a gift, and on the other to the negative view 376that the virtue lies in the worshipper depriving himself of something prized. These ideas may be broadly distinguished as the gift-theory, the homage-theory, and the abnegation-theory. Along all three the usual ritualistic change may be traced, from practical reality to formal ceremony. The originally valuable offering is compromised for a smaller tribute or a cheaper substitute, dwindling at last to a mere trifling token or symbol.
375 Sacrifice has its clear roots in the early stages of culture and fits into the same animistic framework as prayer, which has been closely related to it throughout history. Just as prayer is a request made to a deity as if the deity were human, sacrifice is a gift offered to a deity in the same way. We can still see human examples of both in social life today. The person who bows before their leader, placing a gift at their feet and making a humble request, illustrates the human-like origin of both sacrifice and prayer. However, while sacrifice, like prayer, is easily understood in both its early and later forms, it has evolved through the history of religion into different practices and intentions behind the worshipper's actions. Theologians, in focusing on how sacrifice appears in major religions, often add layers of mysticism to ceremonies that, when examined through an ethnographic lens from their primitive forms, seem open to straightforward explanation. Many details about offerings have been mentioned here to help clarify the nature of the deities receiving them. Additionally, a significant part of the concept of sacrifice has already been covered when looking at offerings made to the spirits of the dead, exposing how the distinction between soul and deity breaks down in lower cultures, as many deities receiving sacrifices are actually divine human souls. When trying to classify sacrifice across various religions, it seems practical to organize the evidence based on how the offering is presented by the worshipper and received by the deity. At the same time, the examples can be arranged to highlight the main ways in which the ritual has changed. The basic idea that the deity appreciates and values the offering itself shifts to the notion of simply honoring the deity with a gift, and on the other hand, to the understanding that real virtue lies in the worshipper giving up something cherished. These perspectives can be broadly categorized as the gift-theory, the homage-theory, and the abnegation-theory. We can trace the usual ritual changes through all three, moving from practical acts to formal ceremonies. The originally valuable offerings are often replaced by smaller tributes or cheaper substitutes, ultimately dwindling down to a mere token or symbol. 376
The gift-theory, as standing on its own independent basis, properly takes the first place. That most childlike kind of offering, the giving of a gift with as yet no definite thought how the receiver can take and use it, may be the most primitive as it is the most rudimentary sacrifice. Moreover, in tracing the history of the ceremony from level to level of culture, the same simple unshaped intention may still largely prevail, and much of the reason why it is often found difficult to ascertain what savages and barbarians suppose to become of the food and valuables they offer to the gods, may be simply due to ancient sacrificers knowing as little about it as modern ethnologists do, and caring less. Yet rude races begin and civilized races continue to furnish with the details of their sacrificial ceremonies the key also to their meaning, the explanation of the manner in which the offering is supposed to pass into the possession of the deity.
The gift theory, standing on its own merit, rightly takes the top spot. That most innocent type of offering, giving a gift without any clear thought on how the recipient might receive or use it, may be the most basic form of sacrifice. Additionally, as we look at the history of this ceremony across different cultures, the same simple, undefined intention often remains, and much of the reason it can be hard to understand what primitive peoples think happens to the food and valuables they give to the gods might simply stem from ancient sacrificers knowing as little about it as modern anthropologists do, and caring even less. However, both primitive and civilized societies provide details of their sacrificial ceremonies that also offer insight into their meaning and explain how the gift is intended to transfer into the possession of the deity.
Beginning with cases in which this transmission is performed bodily, it appears that when the deity is the personal Water, Earth, Fire, Air, or a fetish-spirit animating or inhabiting such element, he can receive and sometimes actually consume the offerings given over to this material medium. How such notions may take shape is not ill shown in the quaintly rational thought noticed in old Peru, that the Sun drinks the libations poured out before him; and in modern Madagascar, that the Angatra drinks the arrack left for him in the leaf-cup. Do not they see the liquids diminish from day to day?[867] The sacrifice to Water 377is exemplified by Indians caught in a storm on the North American lakes, who would appease the angry tempest-raising deity by tying the feet of a dog and throwing it overboard.[868] The following case from Guinea well shows the principle of such offerings. Once in 1693, the sea being unusually rough, the headmen complained to the king, who desired them to be easy, and he would make the sea quiet next day. Accordingly he sent his fetishman with a jar of palm oil, a bag of rice and corn, a jar of pitto, a bottle of brandy, a piece of painted calico, and several other things to present to the sea. Being come to the sea-side, he made a speech to it, assuring it that his king was its friend, and loved the white men; that they were honest fellows and came to trade with him for what he wanted; and that he requested the sea not to be angry, nor hinder them to land their goods; he told it, that if it wanted palm oil, his king had sent it some; and so threw the jar with the oil into the sea, as he did, with the same compliment, the rice, corn, pitto, brandy, calico, &c.[869] Among the North American Indians the Earth also receives offerings buried in it. The distinctness of idea with which such objects may be given is well shown in a Sioux legend. The Spirit of the earth, it seems, requires an offering from those who perform extraordinary achievements, and accordingly the prairie gapes open with an earthquake before the victorious hero of the tale; he casts a partridge into the crevice, and springs over.[870] One of the most explicit recorded instances of the offering to the Earth is the hideous sacrifice to the Earth-goddess among the Khonds of Orissa, the tearing of the flesh of the human victim from the bones, the priest burying half of it in a hole in the earth behind his back without 378looking round, and each householder carrying off a particle to bury in like manner in his favourite field.[871] For offerings to the Fire, we may take for an example the Yakuts, who not only give him the first spoonful of food, but instead of washing their earthen pots allow him to clean out the remains.[872] Here is a New Zealand charm called Wangaihau, i.e., feeding the Wind:—
Beginning with instances where this transmission is done physically, it seems that when the deity embodies elements like Water, Earth, Fire, or Air, or a spirit linked to these elements, they can receive and sometimes actually consume the offerings made to this physical medium. An interesting example of this belief can be seen in ancient Peru, where it was thought that the Sun drinks the libations that are poured out for him; similarly, in modern Madagascar, it's believed that the Angatra drinks the arrack left for him in a leaf-cup. Don’t they notice the liquids decreasing every day?[867] The sacrifice made to Water is demonstrated through the behavior of Native Americans caught in a storm on the Great Lakes, who would appease the aggressive storm deity by tying the feet of a dog and throwing it overboard.[868] A case from Guinea illustrates this principle of offerings well. In 1693, when the sea was unusually rough, the headmen reported to the king, who reassured them that he would calm the sea the next day. He sent his fetishman with a jar of palm oil, a bag of rice and corn, a jar of pitto, a bottle of brandy, a piece of painted fabric, and several other items to present to the sea. Upon reaching the shore, the fetishman made a speech, telling the sea that his king was its friend and loved the white men, who were honest traders; he requested the sea not to be angry and to allow them to land their goods. He informed the sea that if it wanted palm oil, his king had sent some, and he threw the jar of oil into the water, along with the rice, corn, pitto, brandy, fabric, etc., as a gesture of goodwill.[869] Among Native Americans, Earth also receives offerings buried within it. The clarity of intention behind such offerings is well illustrated in a Sioux legend. The Spirit of the earth, it appears, requires an offering from those who achieve extraordinary feats, leading to the ground opening up in an earthquake before the tale’s hero; he throws a partridge into the crevice and jumps over.[870] One of the most explicit recorded examples of an offering to the Earth is the gruesome sacrifice to the Earth-goddess among the Khonds of Orissa, involving the severing of flesh from bones, with the priest burying half of it in a hole in the ground without turning back, and each householder taking a piece to bury similarly in their preferred field.[871] For offerings to Fire, we can look at the Yakuts, who not only give the first spoonful of food to Fire but also let him clean out the remnants of their earthen pots without washing them.[872] Here is a New Zealand charm called Wangaihau, meaning feeding the Wind:—
Beside this may be set the quaint description of the Fanti negroes assisting at the sacrifice of men and cattle to the local fetish; the victims were considered to be carried up in a whirlwind out of the midst of the small inner ring of priests and priestesses; this whirlwind was, however, not perceptible to the senses of the surrounding worshippers.[874] These series of details collected from the lower civilization throw light on curious problems as to sacrificial ideas in the religions of the classic world; such questions as what Xerxes meant when he threw the golden goblet and the sword into the Hellespont, which he had before chained and scourged; why Hannibal cast animals into the sea as victims to Poseidon; what religious significance underlay the patriotic Roman legend of the leap of Marcus Curtius.[875]
Next to this, we can look at the interesting account of the Fanti people conducting sacrifices of humans and cattle to their local deity; the victims were believed to be lifted away in a whirlwind from the small inner circle of priests and priestesses; however, this whirlwind was not noticeable to the senses of the worshippers surrounding them.[874] These details gathered from a lower civilization shed light on intriguing questions regarding sacrificial practices in the religions of the classical world; such as what Xerxes intended when he threw the golden goblet and sword into the Hellespont, which he had previously chained and whipped; why Hannibal threw animals into the sea as offerings to Poseidon; and what religious meaning lay behind the patriotic Roman story of Marcus Curtius's leap.[875]
Sacred animals, in their various characters of divine beings, incarnations, representatives, agents, symbols, naturally receive meat and drink offerings, and sometimes other gifts. For examples, may be mentioned the sun-birds (tonatzuli), for which the Apalaches of Florida set out 379crushed maize and seed;[876] the Polynesian deities coming incarnate in the bodies of birds to feed on the meat-offerings and carcases of human victims set out upon the altar-scaffolds;[877] the well-fed sacred snakes of West Africa, and local fetish animals like the alligator at Dix Cove which will come up at a whistle, and follow a man half a mile if he carries a white fowl in his hands, or the shark at Bonny that comes to the river bank every day to see if a human victim has been provided for his repast;[878] in modern India the cows reverently fed with fresh grass, Durga’s meat-offerings laid out on stones for the jackals, the famous alligators in their temple-tanks.[879] The definition of sacred animal from this point of view distinctly includes man. Such in Mexico was the captive youth adored as living representative of Tezcatlipoca, and to whom banquets were made during the luxurious twelvemonth which preceded his sacrifice at the festival of the deity whom he personated: such still more definitely was Cortes himself, when Montezuma supposed him to be the incarnate Quetzalcoatl come back into the land, and sent human victims accordingly to be slaughtered before him, should he seem to lust for blood.[880] Such in modern India is the woman who as representative of Radha eats and drinks the offerings at the shameless orgies of the Saktas.[881] More usually it is the priest who as minister of the deities has the lion’s share of the offerings or the sole privilege of consuming them, from the Fijian priest who watches for the turtle and puddings apportioned to his god,[882] and the West African priest who carries the allowances of food sent to the local spirits of mountain, or river, or grove, which food he eats himself as the spirit’s 380proxy,[883] to the Brahmans who receive for the divine ancestors the oblation of a worshipper who has no sacred fire to consume it, ‘for there is no difference between the Fire and a Brahman, such is the judgment declared by them who know the Veda.’[884] It is needless to collect details of a practice so usual in the great systematic religions of the world, where priests have become professional ministers and agents of deity, as for them to partake of the sacrificial meats. It by no means follows from this usage that the priest is necessarily supposed to consume the food as representative of his divinity; in the absence of express statement to such effect, the matter can only be treated as one of ceremonial ordinance. Indeed, the case shows the caution needed in interpreting religious rites, which in particular districts may have meanings attached to them quite foreign to their general intent.
Sacred animals, in their various roles as divine beings, incarnations, representatives, agents, and symbols, naturally receive offerings of meat and drink, along with other gifts at times. For example, the sun-birds (tonatzuli), for which the Apalaches of Florida set out crushed maize and seeds; the Polynesian deities manifesting in the bodies of birds to consume the meat offerings and carcasses of human victims placed on altar-scaffolds; the well-fed sacred snakes of West Africa; and local fetish animals like the alligator at Dix Cove, which will come at a whistle and follow a person half a mile if they carry a white fowl, or the shark at Bonny that visits the riverbank daily to check if a human sacrifice has been provided for its meal; in modern India, cows are reverently fed with fresh grass, Durga’s meat offerings laid out on stones for jackals, and the famous alligators in their temple tanks. The definition of sacred animal from this perspective clearly includes humans. In Mexico, the captive youth honored as the living representative of Tezcatlipoca, to whom banquets were held during the lavish year leading up to his sacrifice at the festival of the deity he embodied; similarly, Cortes was perceived by Montezuma as the incarnate Quetzalcoatl returned to the land, prompting the sending of human victims to be slaughtered before him if he seemed to desire blood. In modern India, a woman representing Radha consumes the offerings at the unrestrained rites of the Saktas. More commonly, it is the priest, as the minister of the deities, who gets the lion’s share of the offerings or has the exclusive right to consume them, from the Fijian priest who watches for the turtle and the puddings allocated to his god, to the West African priest who eats the food sent to the local spirits of mountains, rivers, or groves as the spirit’s proxy, to the Brahmans who accept the offerings for divine ancestors from a worshipper lacking a sacred fire to consume them, “for there is no difference between the Fire and a Brahman, such is the judgment of those who know the Veda.” It is unnecessary to gather details on a practice so common in the major organized religions of the world, where priests have become professional ministers and agents of the divine, partaking in the sacrificial meats. However, it does not necessarily mean that the priest is expected to consume the food as a representative of their deity; in the absence of a clear statement to that effect, this can only be viewed as a matter of ceremonial practice. Indeed, this scenario highlights the caution required in interpreting religious ceremonies, which in specific regions may carry meanings unrelated to their general purpose.
The feeding of an idol, as when Ostyaks would pour daily broth into the dish at the image’s mouth,[885] or when the Aztecs would pour the blood and put the heart of the slaughtered human victim into the monstrous idol’s mouth,[886] seems ceremonial make-believe, but shows that in each case the deity was somehow considered to devour the meal. The conception among the lower races of deity, as in disembodied spiritual form, is even less compatible with the notion that such a being should consume solid matter. It is true that the notion does occur. In old times it appears in the legend of Bel and the Dragon, where the footprints in the strewn ashes betray the knavish priests who come by secret doors to eat up the banquet set before Bel’s image.[887] In modern centuries, it may be exemplified by the negroes of Labode, who could hear the noise of their god Jimawong emptying one after another the bottles of brandy handed in 381at the door of his straw-roofed temple;[888] or among the Ostyaks, who, as Pallas relates, used to leave a horn of snuff for their god, with a shaving of willow bark to stop his nostrils with after the country fashion; the traveller describes their astonishment when sometimes an unbelieving Russian has emptied it in the night, leaving the simple folk to conclude that the deity must have gone out hunting to have snuffed so much.[889] But these cases turn on fraud, whereas absurdities in which low races largely agree are apt to have their origin rather in genuine error. Indeed, their dominant theories of the manner in which deities receive sacrifice are in accordance not with fraud but with facts, and must be treated as strictly rational and honest developments of the lower animism. The clearest and most general of these theories are as follows.
The act of feeding an idol, like the Ostyaks pouring broth into the dish at the idol's mouth,[885] or the Aztecs pouring blood and placing a human heart into the mouth of their monstrous idol,[886] might seem like ceremonial pretense, but it indicates that, in each case, the deity was considered to somehow consume the offering. The idea among simpler cultures of a deity existing in a disembodied spiritual form is even less compatible with the belief that such a being would consume physical food. While the idea does sometimes arise, as in the ancient story of Bel and the Dragon, where the footprints in the scattered ashes reveal the deceitful priests sneaking in through secret doors to eat the feast left for Bel's image,[887] modern examples include the people of Labode, who could hear their god Jimawong drinking all the bottles of brandy handed to him at the door of his straw-roofed temple;[888] or the Ostyaks, who, as Pallas noted, would leave a horn of snuff for their god, along with a piece of willow bark to plug his nostrils in the local fashion; the traveler describes their shock when, at times, a skeptical Russian would empty it overnight, leading the simple people to conclude that their god had gone out hunting since he snuffed so much.[889] However, these instances involve deceit, while absurd beliefs that many low cultures share likely stem from genuine misunderstandings. In fact, their prevalent theories about how deities receive sacrifices align not with deceit but with reality and must be seen as logical and honest extensions of early animism. The clearest and most widely accepted of these theories are as follows.
When the deity is considered to take actual possession of the food or other objects offered, this may be conceived to happen by abstraction of their life, savour, essence, quality, and in yet more definite conception their spirit or soul. The solid part may die, decay, be taken away or consumed or destroyed, or may simply remain untouched. Among this group of conceptions, the most materialized is that which carries out the obvious primitive world-wide doctrine that the life is the blood. Accordingly, the blood is offered to the deity, and even disembodied spirits are thought capable of consuming it, like the ghosts for whom Odysseus entering Hades poured into the trench the blood of the sacrificed ram and black ewe, and the pale shades drank and spoke;[890] or the evil spirits which the Mintira of the Malay Peninsula keep away from the wife in childbirth by placing her near the fire, for the demons are believed to drink human blood when they can find it.[891] Thus in Virginia the Indians (in pretence or reality) sacrificed children, whose blood the oki or spirit was said 382to suck from their left breast.[892] The Kayans of Borneo used to offer human sacrifice when a great chief took possession of a newly built house; in one late case, about 1847, a Malay slave girl was bought for the purpose and bled to death, the blood, which alone is efficacious, being sprinkled on the pillars and under the house, and the body being thrown into the river.[893] The same ideas appear among the indigenes of India, alike in North Bengal and in the Deccan, where the blood alone of the sacrificed animal is for the deities, and the votary retains the meat.[894] Thus, in West Africa, the negroes of Benin are described as offering a cock to the idol, but it receives only the blood, for they like the flesh very well themselves;[895] while in the Yoruba country, when a beast is sacrificed for a sick man, the blood is sprinkled on the wall and smeared on the patient’s forehead, with the idea, it is said, of thus transferring to him the victim’s life.[896] The Jewish law of sacrifice marks clearly the distinction between shedding the blood as life, and offering it as food. As the Israelites themselves might not eat with the flesh the blood which is the life, but must pour it on the earth as water, so the rule applies to sacrifice. The blood must be sprinkled before the sanctuary, put upon the horns of the altar, and there sprinkled or poured out, but not presented as a drink offering—‘their drink-offerings of blood will I not offer.’[897]
When people believe that a deity actually takes possession of food or other offerings, it can be understood as the deity absorbing their life, flavor, essence, quality, or more specifically, their spirit or soul. The physical remains might die, decay, be removed, consumed, or destroyed, or they might just remain untouched. Among these ideas, the most concrete is the basic and widespread belief that life is in the blood. Therefore, blood is offered to the deity, and even disembodied spirits are thought to be able to consume it, just like the ghosts for whom Odysseus poured the blood of a sacrificed ram and black ewe into a trench when he entered Hades, and the pale shades drank and spoke; or like the evil spirits that the Mintira of the Malay Peninsula keep away from a woman in childbirth by placing her near the fire, since demons are believed to drink human blood whenever they can find it. Similarly, in Virginia, the Indians (whether it was real or just a pretense) sacrificed children, whose blood the oki or spirit was said to suck from their left breast. The Kayans of Borneo used to perform human sacrifices when a great chief moved into a newly built house; in one later instance, around 1847, a Malay slave girl was purchased for this purpose and bled to death, with the blood, which was believed to be the only effective part, being sprinkled on the pillars and underneath the house, while the body was thrown into the river. The same beliefs can be found among the indigenous people of India, both in North Bengal and the Deccan, where only the blood from the sacrificed animal is offered to the deities, and the worshipper keeps the meat. In West Africa, the people of Benin are said to offer a cock to the idol, but it only receives the blood, as they enjoy the flesh themselves; while in the Yoruba region, when an animal is sacrificed for a sick person, the blood is sprinkled on the wall and smeared on the patient’s forehead, with the idea that this transfers the victim’s life to them. The Jewish laws regarding sacrifice clearly distinguish between shedding blood as life and offering it as food. Just as the Israelites themselves could not eat the blood, which represented life, but had to pour it on the ground like water, the same rule applied to sacrifices. The blood had to be sprinkled before the sanctuary, put on the horns of the altar, and then sprinkled or poured out, but not presented as a drink offering—"I will not offer their drink-offerings of blood."
Spirit being considered in the lower animism as somewhat of the ethereal nature of smoke or mist, there is an 383obvious reasonableness in the idea that offerings reduced to this condition are fit to be consumed by, or transmitted to, spiritual beings towards whom the vapour rises in the air. This idea is well shown in the case of incense, and especially a peculiar kind of incense offered among the native tribes of America. The habit of smoking tobacco is not suggestive of religious rites among ourselves, but in its native country, where it is so widely diffused as to be perhaps the best point assignable in favour of a connexion in the culture of the northern and southern continent, its place in worship is very important. The Osages would begin an undertaking by smoking a pipe, with such a prayer as this: ‘Great Spirit, come down to smoke with me as a friend! Fire and Earth, smoke with me and help me to overthrow my foes!’ The Sioux in Hennepin’s time would look toward the Sun when they smoked, and when the calumet was lighted, they presented it to him, saying: ‘Smoke, Sun!’ The Natchez chief at sunrise smoked first to the east and then to the other quarters; and so on. It is not merely, however, that puffs from the tobacco-pipe are thus offered to deities as drops of drink or morsels of food might be. The calumet is a special gift of the Sun or the Great Spirit, tobacco is a sacred herb, and smoking is an agreeable sacrifice ascending into the air to the abode of gods and spirits.[898] Among the Caribs, the native sorcerer evoking a demon would puff tobacco-smoke into the air as an agreeable perfume to attract the spirit; while among Brazilian tribes the sorcerers smoked round upon the bystanders and on the patient to be cured.[899] How thoroughly incense and burnt-offering are of the same nature, the Zulus well show, burning incense together with the fat of the caul of the slaughtered beast, to give the spirits of the people a sweet 384savour.[900] As to incense more precisely of the sort we are familiar with, it was in daily use in the temples of Mexico, where among the commonest antiquarian relics are the earthen incense-pots in which ‘copalli’ (whence our word copal) and bitumen were burnt.[901] Though incense was hardly usual in the ancient religion of China, yet in modern Chinese houses and temples the ‘joss-stick’ and censer do honour to all divine beings, from the ancestral manes to the great gods and Heaven and Earth.[902] The history of incense in the religion of Greece and Rome points the contrast between old thrift and new extravagance, where the early fumigations with herbs and chips of fragrant wood are contrasted with the later oriental perfumes, myrrh and cassia and frankincense.[903] In the temples of ancient Egypt, numberless representations of sacrificial ceremony show the burning of the incense-pellets in censers before the images of the gods; and Plutarch speaks of the incense burnt thrice daily to the Sun, resin at his rising, myrrh at his meridian, kuphi at his setting.[904] The ordinance held as prominent a place among the Semitic nations. At the yearly festival of Bel in Babylon, the Chaldæans are declared by Herodotus to have burned a thousand talents of incense on the large altar in the temple where sat his golden image.[905] In the records of ancient Israel, there has come down to us the very recipe for compounding incense after the art of the apothecary. The priests carried every man his censer, and on the altar of incense, overlaid with gold, standing before the vail in the tabernacle, sweet spices 385were burned morn and even, a perpetual incense before the Lord.[906]
Spirit is seen in lower animism as something like the ethereal essence of smoke or mist, which makes it reasonable to think that offerings reduced to this state are suitable for spiritual beings to consume or receive as the vapor rises into the air. This concept is particularly evident in the use of incense, especially a specific type offered among Native American tribes. While smoking tobacco doesn't imply religious rituals in our culture, in its homeland, where it's so widespread that it might be the strongest link between the cultures of North and South America, it plays a significant role in worship. The Osages would kick off an endeavor by smoking a pipe, offering a prayer like: “Great Spirit, come down to smoke with me as a friend! Fire and Earth, smoke with me and help me overcome my enemies!” The Sioux, during Hennepin’s time, would face the Sun while smoking, and when the calumet was lit, they would present it to him, saying: “Smoke, Sun!” The Natchez chief would begin his rituals at sunrise by smoking towards the east and then to other directions. However, it's not just that smoke from the tobacco pipe is offered to deities like drops of drink or bites of food. The calumet is a special gift from the Sun or the Great Spirit, tobacco is considered a sacred herb, and smoking is a pleasant offering that rises into the air to reach the realms of gods and spirits. Among the Caribs, the native sorcerer would blow tobacco smoke into the air to attract a spirit, while Brazilian sorcerers would circulate smoke around the people present and the person needing healing. The Zulus demonstrate how incense and burnt offerings are similar, burning incense with the fat from a slaughtered beast to provide a sweet aroma for the spirits of the people. In terms of the incense we’re familiar with, it was used daily in the temples of Mexico, where some of the most common archaeological finds are the earthen incense pots used to burn 'copalli' (which is where we get the word copal) and bitumen. Although incense wasn’t common in ancient Chinese religion, modern Chinese homes and temples honor all divine beings, from ancestral spirits to the great gods of Heaven and Earth, with 'joss-sticks' and censers. The history of incense in Greek and Roman religions highlights the shift from ancient frugality to modern lavishness, contrasting early fumigations with herbs and fragrant wood chips against later exotic perfumes like myrrh, cassia, and frankincense. In ancient Egyptian temples, countless depictions of sacrificial ceremonies show the burning of incense pellets in censers before the god images, and Plutarch mentions incense being burned three times daily for the Sun: resin at rising, myrrh at noon, and kuphi at sunset. The practice also held a prominent place among Semitic nations. At the annual festival of Bel in Babylon, Herodotus stated that the Chaldæans burned a thousand talents of incense on the large altar in the temple housing his golden statue. Ancient Israel’s records provide us with the exact recipe for making incense following an apothecary's methods. Each priest carried his censer, and on the golden-overlay altar of incense, located before the veil in the tabernacle, sweet spices were burned morning and evening as a continual incense before the Lord.
The sacrifice by fire is familiar to the religion of North American tribes. Thus the Algonquins knew the practice of casting into the fire the first morsel of the feast; and throwing fat into the flames for the spirits, they would pray to them ‘make us find food.’ Catlin has described and sketched the Mandans dancing round the fire where the first kettleful of the green-corn is being burned, an offering to the Great Spirit before the feast begins.[907] The Peruvians burnt llamas as offerings to the Creator, Sun, Moon, and Thunder, and other lesser deities. As to the operation of sacrifice, an idea of theirs comes well into view in the legend of Manco Ccapac ordering the sacrifice of the most beautiful of his sons, ‘cutting off his head, and sprinkling the blood over the fire, that the smoke might reach the Maker of heaven and earth.’[908] In Siberia the sacrifices of the Tunguz and Buraets, in the course of which bits of meat and liver and fat are cast into the fire, carry on the same idea.[909] Chinese sacrifices to sun and moon, stars and constellations, show their purpose in most definite fashion; beasts and even silks and precious stones are burned, that their vapour may ascend to these heavenly spirits.[910] No less significant, though in a different sense, is the Siamese offering to the household deity, incense and arrack and rice steaming hot; he does not eat it all, not always any part of it, it is the fragrant steam which he loves to inhale.[911] Looking now to the records of Aryan sacrifice, views similar to these are not obscurely expressed. When the Brahman burns the offerings on the altar-fire, they are received by 386Agni the divine Fire, mouth of the gods, messenger of the All-knowing, to whom is chanted the Vedic strophe, ‘Agni! the sacrifice which thou encompassest whole, it goes unto the gods!’[912] The Homeric poems show the plain meaning of the hecatombs of old barbaric Greece, where the savour of the burnt offering went up in wreathing smoke to heaven, ‘Κνίσση δ’ οὐρανὸν ἶκεν ἐλισσομένη περὶ καπνῷ.’[913] Passed into a far other stage of history, men’s minds had not lost sight of the archaic thought even in Porphyry’s time, for he knows how the demons who desire to be gods rejoice in the libations and fumes of sacrifice, whereby their spiritual and bodily substance fattens, for this lives on the steam and vapours and is strengthened by the fumes of the blood and flesh.[914]
The practice of sacrificing by fire is well-known in North American tribal religions. For example, the Algonquins practiced the ritual of throwing the first bite of the feast into the fire, and they would also toss fat into the flames for the spirits, praying to them to “help us find food.” Catlin described and illustrated the Mandans dancing around the fire as they burned the first pot of green corn, making an offering to the Great Spirit before the feast began.[907] The Peruvians burned llamas as offerings to the Creator, Sun, Moon, Thunder, and other lesser deities. Their idea of sacrifice is captured well in the legend of Manco Ccapac, who ordered the sacrifice of his most beautiful son by “cutting off his head and sprinkling the blood over the fire to let the smoke reach the Maker of heaven and earth.”[908] In Siberia, the sacrifices of the Tunguz and Buraets also reflect this concept, as they throw pieces of meat, liver, and fat into the fire.[909] Chinese sacrifices to the sun, moon, stars, and constellations show their intentions clearly; animals and even silks and precious stones are burned so that their smoke might rise to these heavenly beings.[910] Equally important, though in a different way, is the Siamese offering to the household deity of incense, arrack, and steaming hot rice; the deity doesn’t consume it all, sometimes not even a part of it—it's the fragrant steam he enjoys inhaling.[911] Now looking at the records of Aryan sacrifice, similar views are clearly expressed. When a Brahman burns offerings on the altar-fire, they are received by Agni, the divine Fire, the mouth of the gods, and messenger of the All-knowing, to whom the Vedic hymn is chanted: “Agni! the sacrifice that you envelop entirely goes to the gods!”[912] The Homeric poems clearly illustrate the meaning of the hecatombs of ancient barbaric Greece, where the smell of the burnt offerings rose in curling smoke to heaven, "She approached the sky, swirling around the smoke."[913] Even in a much later historical context, people hadn’t forgotten this ancient concept, as shown in Porphyry’s writings. He notes how the demons who seek to be gods delight in the libations and smoke of sacrifices, which nourish their spiritual and physical essence, as they thrive on the steam and vapors and are strengthened by the smoke of blood and flesh.[914]
The view of commentators that sacrifice, as a religious act of remote antiquity and world-wide prevalence, was adopted, regulated, and sanctioned in the Jewish law, is in agreement with the general ethnography of the subject. Here sacrifice appears not with the lower conception of a gift acceptable and even beneficial to deity, but with the higher significance of devout homage or expiation for sin. As is so usual in the history of religion, the offering consisted in general of food, and the consummation of the sacrifice was by fire. To the ceremonial details of the sacrificial rites of Israel, whether prescribing the burning of the carcases of oxen and sheep or of the bloodless gifts of flour mingled with oil, there is appended again and again the explanation of the intent of the rite; it is ‘an offering made by fire, of a sweet savour unto the Lord.’ The copious records of sacrifice in the Old Testament enable us to follow its expansion from the simple patriarchal forms of a pastoral tribe, to the huge and complex system organized to carry on the ancient service in a now populous and settled kingdom. Among writers on the Jewish religion, Dean Stanley has vividly portrayed 387the aspect of the Temple, with the flocks of sheep and droves of cattle crowding its courts, the vast apparatus of slaughter, the great altar of burnt-offering towering above the people, where the carcases were laid, the drain beneath to carry off the streams of blood. To this historian, in sympathy rather with the spirit of the prophet than the ceremony of the priest, it is a congenial task to dwell upon the great movement in later Judaism to maintain the place of ethical above ceremonial religion.[915] In those times of Hebrew history, the prophets turned with stern rebuke on those who ranked ceremonial ordinance above weightier matters of the law. ‘I desired mercy and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.’ ‘I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats.... Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes. Cease to do evil, learn to do well.’
The view of commentators that sacrifice, as a religious act with ancient origins and widespread practice, was adopted, regulated, and sanctioned in Jewish law aligns with the overall ethnography of the topic. Here, sacrifice represents not merely a gift that's acceptable and even beneficial to a deity, but carries a deeper meaning of sincere homage or atonement for sin. As is often the case in the history of religion, the offering generally consisted of food, and the completion of the sacrifice involved fire. The ceremonial details of Israel's sacrificial rites, whether they specified the burning of the carcasses of oxen and sheep or the bloodless offerings of flour mixed with oil, repeatedly include an explanation of the rite's purpose; it is 'an offering made by fire, of a sweet savor unto the Lord.' The extensive records of sacrifices in the Old Testament allow us to trace its evolution from the simple patriarchal practices of a pastoral tribe to the vast and intricate system developed to conduct the ancient rituals in a now populous and established kingdom. Among scholars of the Jewish faith, Dean Stanley vividly illustrates the scene of the Temple, filled with flocks of sheep and herds of cattle crowding its courtyards, the massive setup for slaughter, the significant altar of burnt offerings towering over the people, where the carcasses were placed, and the drain below to carry away the blood. To this historian, who resonates more with the spirit of the prophet than the ritual of the priest, it's rewarding to reflect on the significant movement in later Judaism that prioritized ethics over ceremonial religion. In those periods of Hebrew history, the prophets sternly admonished those who placed ceremonial practices above the more important aspects of the law. "I desired mercy and not sacrifice, and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings." "I don't take pleasure in the blood of bulls, lambs, or goats... Clean yourselves; remove the evil of your actions from my sight. Stop doing wrong, learn to do right."
Continuing the enquiry into the physical operation ascribed to sacrifice, we turn to a different conception. It is an idea well vouched for in the lower culture, that the deity, while leaving apparently untouched the offering set out before him, may nevertheless partake of or abstract what in a loose way may be described as its essence. The Zulus leave the flesh of the sacrificed bullock all night, and the divine ancestral spirits come and eat, yet next morning everything remains just as it was. Describing this practice, a native Zulu thus naïvely comments on it: ‘But when we ask, “What do the Amadhlozi eat? for in the morning we still see all the meat,” the old men say, “The Amatongo lick it.” And we are unable to contradict them, but are silent, for they are older than we, and tell us all things and we listen; for we are told all things, and assent without seeing clearly whether they are true or not.’[916] Such imagination 388was familiar to the native religion of the West Indian islands. In Columbus’ time, and with particular reference to Hispaniola, Roman Pane describes the native mode of sacrifice. Upon any solemn day, when they provide much to eat, whether fish, flesh, or any other thing, they put it all into the house of the cemis, that the idol may feed on it. The next day they carry all home, after the cemi has eaten. And God so help them (says the friar), as the cemi eats of that or anything else, they being inanimate stocks or stones. A century and a half later, a similar notion still prevailed in these islands. Nothing could show it more neatly than the fancy of the Caribs that they could hear the spirits in the night moving the vessels and champing the food set out for them, yet next morning there was nothing touched; it was held that the viands thus partaken of by the spirits had become holy, so that only the old men and considerable people might taste them, and even these required a certain bodily purity.[917] Islanders of Pulo Aur, though admitting that their banished disease-spirits did not actually consume the grains of rice set out for them, nevertheless believed them to appropriate its essence.[918] In India, among the indigenes of the Garo hills, we hear of the head and blood of the sacrificed animal being placed with some rice under a bamboo arch covered with a white cloth; the god comes and takes what he wants, and after a time this special offering is dressed for the company with the rest of the animal.[919] The Khond deities live on the flavours and essences drawn from the offerings of their votaries, or from animals or grain which they cause to die or disappear.[920] When the Buraets of Siberia have sacrificed a sheep and boiled the mutton, they set it up on a scaffold for the gods while the shaman is 389chanting his song, and then themselves fall to.[921] And thus, in the folklore of mediæval Europe, Domina Abundia would come with her dames into the houses at night, and eat and drink from the vessels left uncovered for their increase-giving visit, yet nothing was consumed.[922]
Continuing the exploration of the physical act associated with sacrifice, we look at a different idea. It's a well-supported belief in simpler cultures that the deity, while seemingly leaving the offering in front of them untouched, can still consume or take what might be loosely described as its essence. The Zulus leave the meat of the sacrificed bullock out all night, and the divine ancestral spirits come and eat, yet by morning, everything looks exactly the same. A Zulu person describes this practice simply: "But when we ask, 'What do the Amadhlozi eat? For in the morning, we still see all the meat,' the elders say, 'The Amatongo lick it.' And we can’t argue with them, so we stay quiet, because they are older than us, and they tell us everything while we listen; we’re told everything and agree without clearly knowing if it's true or not." Such imagination was familiar to the native religions of the West Indian islands. In Columbus’ time, particularly concerning Hispaniola, Roman Pane describes the native way of sacrifice. On any important day when they have a lot to eat, whether fish, meat, or anything else, they place it all in the house of the cemis so the idol can feed on it. The next day, they take everything back home after the cemi has eaten. God help them (says the friar), as if the cemi eats any of that, being just lifeless logs or stones. A hundred and fifty years later, a similar belief was still common in these islands. Nothing illustrates this better than the Caribs’ idea that they could hear the spirits moving the dishes and crunching the food set out for them at night, yet by morning, nothing was touched; it was believed that the food consumed by the spirits had become holy, allowing only the elders and prominent people to taste it, and even they needed a certain level of physical purity. Islanders of Pulo Aur, although acknowledging that their exiled disease-spirits didn’t actually eat the rice set out for them, still believed they took its essence. In India, among the indigenous people of the Garo hills, we find that the head and blood of the sacrificed animal are placed with some rice under a bamboo arch covered with a white cloth; the god comes and takes what they want, and after a while, this special offering is cooked for everyone else along with the rest of the animal. The Khond deities thrive on the flavors and essences taken from the offerings of their followers, or from animals or grains that they cause to die or disappear. When the Buraets of Siberia sacrifice a sheep and boil the meat, they set it on a scaffold for the gods while the shaman chants, and then they themselves enjoy it. Similarly, in the folklore of medieval Europe, Domina Abundia would come with her ladies into homes at night, eating and drinking from the vessels left open for their bountiful visit, yet nothing was consumed.
The extreme animistic view of sacrifice is that the soul of the offered animal or thing is abstracted by or transmitted to the deity. This notion of spirits taking souls is in a somewhat different way exemplified among the Binua of Johore, who hold that the evil River-spirits inflict diseases on man by feeding on the ‘semangat,’ or unsubstantial body (in ordinary parlance the spirit) in which his life resides,[923] while the Karen demon devours not the body but the ‘la,’ spirit or vital principle; thus when it eats a man’s eyes, their material part remains, but they are blind.[924] Now an idea similar to this furnished the Polynesians with a theory of sacrifice. The priest might send commissions by the sacrificed human victim; spirits of the dead are eaten by the gods or demons; the spiritual part of the sacrifices is eaten by the spirit of the idol (i.e. the deity dwelling or embodied in the idol) before whom it is presented.[925] Of the Fijians it is observed that of the great offerings of food native belief apportions merely the soul to the gods, who are described as being enormous eaters; the substance is consumed by the worshippers. As in various other districts of the world, human sacrifice is here in fact a meat-offering; cannibalism is a part of the Fijian religion, and the gods are described as delighting in human flesh.[926] Such ideas are explicit among Indian tribes of the American lakes, who consider that offerings, whether abandoned or consumed by the worshippers, go in a spiritual form to the 390spirit they are devoted to. Native legends afford the clearest illustrations. The following is a passage from an Ottawa tale which recounts the adventures of Wassamo, he who was conveyed by the spirit-maiden to the lodge of her father, the Spirit of the Sand Downs, down below the waters of Lake Superior. ‘Son-in-law,’ said the Old Spirit, ‘I am in want of tobacco. You shall return to visit your parents, and can make known my wishes. For it is very seldom that those few who pass these Sand Hills, offer a piece of tobacco. When they do it, it immediately comes to me. Just so,’ he added, putting his hand out of the side of the lodge, and drawing in several pieces of tobacco, which some one at that moment happened to offer to the Spirit, for a smooth lake and prosperous voyage. ‘You see,’ he said, ‘every thing offered me on earth, comes immediately to the side of my lodge.’ Wassamo saw the women also putting their hands to the side of the lodge, and then handing round something, of which all partook. This he found to be offerings of food made by mortals on earth. The distinctly spiritual nature of this transmission is shown immediately after, for Wassamo cannot eat such mere spirit-food, wherefore his spirit-wife puts out her hand from the lodge and takes in a material fish out of the lake to cook for him.[927] Another Ottawa legend, the already cited nature-myth of the Sun and Moon, is of much interest not only for its display of this special thought, but as showing clearly the motives with which savage animists offer sacrifices to their deities, and consider these deities to accept them. Onowuttokwutto, the Ojibwa youth who has followed the Moon up to the lovely heaven-prairies to be her husband, is taken one day by her brother the Sun to see how he gets his dinner. The two look down together through the hole in the sky upon the earth below, the Sun points out a group of children playing beside a lodge, at the same time throwing a tiny stone to hit a beautiful boy. The child falls, they see him carried into the lodge, they 391hear the sound of the sheesheegwun (the rattle), and the song and prayer of the medicine-man that the child’s life may be spared. To this entreaty of the medicine-man, the Sun makes answer, ‘Send me up the white dog.’ Then the two spectators above could distinguish on the earth the hurry and bustle of preparation for a feast, a white dog killed and singed, and the people who were called assembling at the lodge. While these things were passing, the Sun addressed himself to Onowuttokwutto, saying, ‘There are among you in the lower world some whom you call great medicine-men; but it is because their ears are open, and they hear my voice, when I have struck any one, that they are able to give relief to the sick. They direct the people to send me whatever I call for and when they have sent it, I remove my hand from those I had made sick.’ When he had said this, the white dog was parcelled out in dishes for those that were at the feast; then the medicine-man when they were about to begin to eat, said, ‘We send thee this, Great Manito.’ Immediately the Sun and his Ojibwa companion saw the dog, cooked and ready to be eaten, rising to them through the air—and then and there they dined upon it.[928] How such ideas bear on the meaning of human sacrifice, we may perhaps judge from this prayer of the Iroquois, offering a human victim to the War-god: ‘To thee, O Spirit Arieskoi, we slay this sacrifice, that thou mayst feed upon the flesh, and be moved to give us henceforth luck and victory over our enemies!’[929] So among the Aztec prayers, there occurs this one addressed to Tezcatlipoca-Yautl in time of war: ‘Lord of battles; it is a very certain and sure thing, that a great war is beginning to make, ordain, form, and concert itself; the War-god opens his mouth, hungry to swallow the blood of many who shall die in this war; it seems that the Sun and the Earth-God Tlatecutli desire to rejoice; they desire to give meat and drink to the gods of Heaven and Hades, making them a 392banquet of the flesh and blood of the men who are to die in this war,’ &c.[930] There is remarkable definiteness in the Peruvian idea that the souls of human victims are transmitted to another life in divine as in funeral sacrifice; at one great ceremony, where children of each tribe were sacrificed to propitiate the gods, ‘they strangled the children, first giving them to eat and drink, that they might not enter the presence of the Creator discontented and hungry.’[931] Similar ideas of spiritual sacrifice appear in other regions of the world. Thus in West Africa we read of the tree-fetish enjoying the spirit of the food-offering, but leaving its substance, and an account of the religion of the Gold Coast mentions how each great wong or deity has his house, and his priest and priestess to clean the room and give him daily bread kneaded with palm-oil, ‘of which, as of all gifts of this kind, the wong eats the invisible soul.’[932] So, in India, the Limbus of Darjeeling make small offerings of grain, vegetables, and sugar-cane, and sacrifice cows, pigs, fowls, &c., on the declared principle ‘the life breath to the gods, the flesh to ourselves.’[933] It seems likely that such meaning may largely explain the sacrificial practices of other religions. In conjunction with these accounts, the unequivocal meaning of funeral sacrifices, whereby offerings are conveyed spiritually into the possession of spirits of the dead, may perhaps justify us in inferring that similar ideas of spiritual transmission prevail extensively among the many nations whose sacrificial rites we know in fact, but cannot trace with certainty to their original significance.
The extreme animistic belief about sacrifice is that the soul of the animal or object being offered is taken by or transferred to the deity. A similar idea is shown among the Binua of Johore, who believe that evil river spirits cause illnesses by feeding on the 'semangat,' or insubstantial body (commonly called the spirit) where a person’s life exists,[923] while the Karen demon consumes not the body but the 'la,' spirit or vital essence; thus, when it eats a person’s eyes, the physical part remains, but they are left blind.[924] A similar concept inspired the Polynesians’ understanding of sacrifice. The priest could send messages through the sacrificed human; spirits of the deceased are consumed by the gods or demons; and the spiritual part of the sacrifices is taken by the spirit of the idol (i.e., the deity residing in the idol) before whom the offering is made.[925] Among the Fijians, it's noted that for major food offerings, their belief assigns only the soul to the gods, who are said to be huge eaters; the physical substance is consumed by the worshippers. Like in various parts of the world, human sacrifice here is essentially a meat offering; cannibalism is part of the Fijian religion, and the gods are described as enjoying human flesh.[926] Such ideas are clear among Native American tribes from the Great Lakes, who believe that offerings, whether discarded or eaten by worshippers, take a spiritual form to the 390spirit to whom they are dedicated. Local legends provide the clearest examples. One story from the Ottawa recounts the adventures of Wassamo, who was taken by the spirit-maiden to her father’s lodge, the Spirit of the Sand Downs, beneath the waters of Lake Superior. ‘Son-in-law,’ said the Old Spirit, ‘I need tobacco. You will return to visit your parents and can let them know what I want. It’s very rare for those who pass these Sand Hills to offer me a piece of tobacco. When they do, it comes straight to me.’ He then added, reaching out of the lodge and bringing in several pieces of tobacco that someone had just offered to the Spirit for a calm lake and a successful journey. ‘You see,’ he said, ‘everything offered to me on earth comes immediately to my lodge.’ Wassamo observed women also reaching out to the side of the lodge, distributing something that everyone shared. He realized it was food offerings made by people on earth. The distinctly spiritual nature of this transfer is evident right afterward, as Wassamo cannot eat such spirit-food, so his spirit-wife reaches out from the lodge to bring in a real fish from the lake to cook for him.[927] Another Ottawa legend, the previously mentioned nature myth of the Sun and Moon, is particularly interesting not only for its illustration of this specific belief but also for clearly showing the motivations behind why animistic people offer sacrifices to their deities and how they believe these deities receive them. Onowuttokwutto, the Ojibwa youth who follows the Moon to the beautiful heavenly prairies to become her husband, is taken one day by her brother the Sun to observe how he has his dinner. The two look down together through a hole in the sky at the earth below; the Sun points out a group of children playing by a lodge and tosses a tiny stone to hit a beautiful boy. The child falls, and they see him being carried into the lodge, hearing the sound of the sheesheegwun (the rattle) and the song and prayer of the medicine-man asking for the child’s life to be spared. To the medicine-man's plea, the Sun replies, ‘Send me the white dog.’ Then the two onlookers could see the bustle on earth as preparations were made for a feast, with a white dog being killed and singed and the people being summoned to the lodge. As these things were happening, the Sun said to Onowuttokwutto, ‘There are some among you in the lower world called great medicine-men, but it’s because they can hear my voice, when I cause harm, that they are able to help the sick. They instruct the people to send me whatever I ask for, and when they do, I take my hand away from those I have harmed.’ After saying this, the white dog was divided into dishes for those at the feast; then the medicine-man, just before they began to eat, said, ‘We send this to you, Great Manito.’ Immediately, the Sun and his Ojibwa friend saw the dog, cooked and ready to eat, rising toward them through the air—and they dined on it right there.[928] How such concepts relate to the meaning of human sacrifice can perhaps be judged from this Iroquois prayer, offering a human victim to the War-god: ‘To you, O Spirit Arieskoi, we offer this sacrifice, so you may feed on the flesh and be moved to give us good fortune and victory over our enemies!’[929] Among the Aztec prayers, there is one addressed to Tezcatlipoca-Yautl during wartime: ‘Lord of battles; it’s clear that a great war is starting to form; the War-god opens his mouth, eager to consume the blood of many who will die in this conflict; it seems the Sun and the Earth-God Tlatecutli want to celebrate; they wish to prepare food and drink for the gods of Heaven and the Underworld, creating a feast of flesh and blood from the men who will die in this war,’ etc.[930] There is a striking clarity in the Peruvian belief that the souls of human victims are sent to another life in both divine and funeral sacrifice; at one major ceremony, where children from each tribe were sacrificed to appease the gods, ‘they strangled the children after giving them food and drink, so they wouldn’t arrive in the Creator’s presence discontented and hungry.’[931] Similar concepts of spiritual sacrifice are found in other parts of the world. For example, in West Africa, there are accounts of a tree-fetish enjoying the spirit of a food offering while leaving behind its physical form, and reports from the Gold Coast mention how each significant wong or deity has a house with a priest and priestess to clean it and provide daily bread mixed with palm oil, ‘of which, like all such gifts, the wong consumes the invisible soul.’[932] In India, the Limbus of Darjeeling make small offerings of grains, vegetables, and sugar cane and sacrifice cows, pigs, chickens, etc., based on the stated principle ‘the life breath to the gods, the flesh to ourselves.’[933] It appears likely that such meanings can largely explain the sacrificial practices of other religions. In connection with these accounts, the straightforward meaning of funeral sacrifices, through which offerings are spiritually transmitted into the possession of the spirits of the dead, may lead us to infer that similar ideas of spiritual transmission are widespread among many nations whose sacrificial rites we know exist but cannot trace back to their original significance with certainty.
Having thus examined the manner in which the operation of sacrifice is considered to take physical effect, whether indefinitely or definitely, and having distinguished its actual transmission as either substantial, essential, or spiritual, 393let us now follow the question of the sacrificer’s motive in presenting the sacrifice. Important and complex as this problem is, its key is so obvious that it may be almost throughout treated by mere statement of general principle. If the main proposition of animistic natural religion be granted, that the idea of the human soul is the model of the idea of deity, then the analogy of man’s dealings with man ought, inter alia, to explain his motives in sacrifice. It does so, and very fully. The proposition may be maintained in wide generality, that the common man’s present to the great man, to gain good or avert evil, to ask aid or to condone offence, needs only substitution of deity for chief, and proper adaptation of the means of conveying the gift to him, to produce a logical doctrine of sacrificial rites, in great measure explaining their purpose directly as they stand, and elsewhere suggesting what was the original meaning which has passed into changed shape in the course of ages. Instead of offering a special collection of evidence here on this proposition, it may be enough to ask attentive reference to any extensive general collection of accounts of sacrifice, such for instance as those cited for various purposes in these volumes. It will be noticed that offerings to divinities may be classed in the same way as earthly gifts. The occasional gift made to meet some present emergency, the periodical tribute brought by subject to lord, the royalty paid to secure possession or protection of acquired wealth, all these have their evident and well-marked analogues in the sacrificial systems of the world. It may impress some minds with a stronger sense of the sufficiency of this theory of sacrifice, to consider how the transition is made in the same imperceptible way from the idea of substantial value received, to that of ceremonial homage rendered, whether the recipient be man or god. We do not find it easy to analyse the impression which a gift makes on our own feelings, and to separate the actual value of the object from the sense of gratification in the giver’s good-will or respect, and thus we may well scruple to define closely how 394uncultured men work out this very same distinction in their dealings with their deities. In a general way it may be held that the idea of practical acceptableness of the food or valuables presented to the deity, begins early to shade into the sentiment of divine gratification or propitiation by a reverent offering, though in itself of not much account to so mighty a divine personage. These two stages of the sacrificial idea may be fairly contrasted, the one among the Karens who offer to a demon arrack or grain or a portion of the game they kill, considering invocation of no avail without a gift,[934] the other among the negroes of Sierra Leone, who sacrifice an ox ‘to make God glad very much, and do Kroomen good.’[935]
Having looked at how sacrifice is believed to have physical effects, whether vague or specific, and having categorized its actual nature as substantial, essential, or spiritual, 393 let’s now explore the motivations of the person making the sacrifice. This issue is both significant and intricate, but its core is so clear that it can mostly be addressed through general principles. If we accept the main idea of animistic natural religion, which suggests that the human soul serves as the model for the concept of deity, then the way people interact with one another should, inter alia, clarify their motivations for sacrifice. It does, and quite thoroughly. We can generally hold that when an ordinary person gives something to a person of power—whether to gain something good, avoid bad outcomes, request assistance, or seek forgiveness—it just requires swapping the deity for the chief, along with appropriately adjusting the method of presenting the gift to create a logical understanding of sacrificial practices. This largely explains their purpose as they exist today, and also hints at their original meaning, which has evolved over time. Rather than presenting a specific collection of evidence, it suffices to refer to any broad compilation of sacrificial accounts, like those mentioned for various reasons in these volumes. You’ll see that offerings to gods can be categorized similarly to earthly gifts. Gifts presented to address immediate needs, regular tributes paid by subjects to their rulers, and payments made to secure possession or protection of wealth all have clear parallels in the world’s sacrificial systems. To many, the strength of this sacrificial theory is shown in how people subtly shift from thinking about tangible value received to considering ceremonial respect shown, whether the recipient is a person or a god. Analyzing the emotional impact of a gift can be challenging, as it often involves separating the actual value of the item from the feelings of satisfaction derived from the giver’s goodwill or respect. Thus, it’s reasonable to hesitate to precisely define how less sophisticated individuals navigate this same distinction in their interactions with their deities. Generally, we can suggest that the initial idea of the food or valuables given to a deity starts to blend into the feeling of divine approval or appeasement through a respectful offering, even if it holds little real value to such a powerful divine figure. These two levels of the sacrificial concept can be effectively contrasted: one example being the Karens, who offer a demon arrack or grain or part of their game, believing that invocation is ineffective without a gift,[934] and the other being the people of Sierra Leone, who sacrifice an ox "to make God very happy and do good for the Kroomen."[935]
Hopeless as it may be in hundreds of accounts of sacrifice to guess whether the worshipper means to benefit or merely to gratify the deity, there are also numbers of cases in which the thought in the sacrificer’s mind can scarcely be more than an idea of ceremonial homage. One of the best-marked sacrificial rites of the world is that of offering by fire or otherwise morsels or libations at meals. This ranges from the religion of the North American Indian to that of the classic Greek and the ancient Chinese, and still holds its place in peasant custom in Europe.[936] Other groups of cases pass into yet more absolute formality of reverence. See the Guinea negro passing in silence by the sacred tree or cavern, and dropping a leaf or a sea-shell as an offering to the local spirit;[937] the Talein of Burma holding up the dish at his meal to offer it to the nat, before the company fall to;[938] the Hindu holding up a little of his rice in his fingers to the height of his forehead, and offering it in 395thought to Siva or Vishnu before he eats it.[939] The same argument applies to the cases ranging far and wide through religion, where, whatever may have been the original intent of the sacrifice, it has practically passed into a feast. A banquet where the deity has but the pretence and the worshippers the reality, may seem to us a mere mockery of sacrifice. Yet how sincerely men regard it as a religious ceremony, the following anecdote of a North American Indian tribe will show. A travelling party of Potawatomis, for three days finding no game, were in great distress for want of food. On the third night, a chief, named Saugana, had a dream, wherein a person appearing to him showed him that they were suffering because they had set out without a sacrificial feast. He had started, on this important journey, the dreamer said, ‘as a white man would,’ without making any religious preparation. Therefore the Great Spirit had punished them with scarcity. Now, however, twelve men were to go and kill four deer before the sun was thus high (about nine o’clock). The chief in his dream had seen these four deer lying dead, the hunters duly killed them, and the sacrificial feast was held.[940] Further illustrative examples of such sacred banquets may be chosen through the long range of culture. The Zulus propitiate the Heaven-god above with a sacrifice of black cattle, that they may have rain; the village chiefs select the oxen, one is killed, the rest are merely mentioned; the flesh of the slaughtered ox is eaten in the house in perfect silence, a token of humble submission; the bones are burnt outside the village; and after the feast they chant in musical sounds, a song without words.[941] The Serwatty Islanders sacrifice buffaloes, pigs, goats, and fowls to the idols when an individual or the community undertakes an affair or expedition of importance, and as the carcases are devoured by the devotees, this ensures a respectable 396attendance when the offerings are numerous.[942] Thus among rude tribes of Northern India, sacrifices of beasts are accompanied by libations of fermented liquor, and in fact sacrifice and feast are convertible words.[943] Among the Aztecs, prisoners of war furnished first an acceptable sacrifice to the deity, and then the staple of a feast for the captors and their friends;[944] while in ancient Peru whole flocks of sacrificed llamas were eaten by the people.[945] The history of Greek religion plainly records the transition from the early holocausts devoted by fire to the gods, to the great festivals where the sacrifices provided meat for the public banquets held to honour them in ceremonial homage.[946]
Hopeless as it may seem to guess whether the worshipper intends to benefit or simply please the deity based on countless accounts of sacrifice, there are many situations where the sacrificer's thoughts are hardly more than a form of ceremonial respect. One of the most well-known sacrificial rituals around the world involves offering food or drink during meals, ranging from the practices of North American Indians to those of ancient Greeks and Chinese, and it still exists in the customs of European peasants.[936] Other cases fall into even more rigid formalities of reverence. Observe the Guinea negro quietly passing by a sacred tree or cave and leaving a leaf or seashell as an offering to the local spirit;[937] the Talein of Burma lifting his dish during a meal to offer it to the nat before everyone begins to eat;[938] the Hindu raising a bit of rice to his forehead and offering it in thought to Siva or Vishnu before eating.[939] The same argument applies broadly across religions, where, regardless of the original purpose of the sacrifice, it has effectively transformed into a feast. A banquet where the deity only has the appearance of presence and the worshippers experience the reality might seem like a mere mockery of sacrifice to us. Yet, as the following anecdote about a North American Indian tribe illustrates, people take it very seriously as a religious ceremony. A group of Potawatomis, after three days without finding game, were very distressed due to hunger. On the third night, a chief named Saugana dreamed that someone told him they were suffering because they had set out without a sacrificial feast. The dreamer pointed out that he had started on this important journey ‘like a white man,’ without any religious preparation. As a result, the Great Spirit had punished them with scarcity. However, twelve men were to go and kill four deer before the sun reached a certain height (around nine o'clock). The chief had seen these four deer lying dead in his dream, the hunters managed to kill them, and the sacrificial feast was then held.[940] More examples of such sacred banquets can be found throughout cultural history. The Zulus offer a black cattle sacrifice to the Heaven-god to bring rain; the village chiefs select the oxen, one is killed while the others are simply acknowledged. The meat of the slaughtered ox is eaten in silence at home as a sign of humble submission; the bones are burnt outside the village; and after the meal, they sing a wordless chant.[941] The Serwatty Islanders sacrifice buffaloes, pigs, goats, and chickens to their idols when an individual or the community embarks on a significant undertaking, and as the carcasses are consumed by the worshippers, it guarantees a good turnout when the offerings are plentiful.[942] Similarly, among primitive tribes in Northern India, animal sacrifices are accompanied by offerings of fermented drink, and indeed, sacrifice and feast can be seen as interchangeable terms.[943] Among the Aztecs, prisoners of war were first offered as sacrifices to the deity and then eaten at a feast for their captors and friends;[944] while in ancient Peru, entire flocks of sacrificed llamas were consumed by the people.[945] The history of Greek religion clearly shows the progression from the early burnt offerings made by fire to the gods, to the large festivals where sacrifices provided meat for public banquets held to honor them in ceremonial respect.[946]
Beside this development from gift to homage, there arises also a doctrine that the gist of sacrifice is rather in the worshipper giving something precious to himself, than in the deity receiving benefit. This may be called the abnegation-theory, and its origin may be fairly explained by considering it as derived from the original gift-theory. Taking our own feelings again for a guide, we know how it satisfies us to have done our part in giving, even if the gift be ineffectual, and how we scruple to take it back if not received, but rather get rid of it in some other way—it is corban. Thus we may enter into the feelings of the Assinaboin Indians, who considered that the blankets and pieces of cloth and brass kettles and such valuables abandoned in the woods as a medicine-sacrifice, might be carried off by any friendly party who chanced to discover them;[947] or of the Ava Buddhists bringing to the temples offerings of boiled rice and sweetmeats and coco-nut fried 397in oil, and never attempting to disturb the crows and wild dogs who devoured it before their eyes;[948] of the modern Moslems sacrificing sheep, oxen, and camels in the valley of Muna on their return from Mekka, it being a meritorious act to give away a victim without eating any of it, while parties of Takruri watch around like vultures, ready to pounce upon the carcases.[949] If the offering to the deity be continued in ceremonial survival, in spite of a growing conviction that after all the deity does not need and cannot profit by it, sacrifice will be thus kept up in spite of having become practically unreasonable, and the worshipper may still continue to measure its efficacy by what it costs him. But to take this abnegation theory as representing the primitive intention of sacrifice would be, I think, to turn history upside down. The mere fact of sacrifices to deities, from the lowest to the highest levels of culture, consisting to the extent of nine-tenths or more of gifts of food and sacred banquets, tells forcibly against the originality of the abnegation-theory. If the primary motive had been to give up valuable property, we should find the sacrifice of weapons, garments, ornaments, as prevalent in the lower culture as in fact it is unusual. Looking at the subject in a general view, to suppose men to have started by devoting to their deities what they considered practically useless to them, in order that they themselves might suffer a loss which none is to gain, is to undervalue the practical sense of savages, who are indeed apt to keep up old rites after their meaning has fallen away, but seldom introduce new ones without a rational motive. In studying the religion of the lower races, men are found dealing with their gods in as practical and straightforward a way as with their neighbours, and where plain original purpose is found, it may well be accepted as sufficient explanation. Of the way in which gift can pass into abnegation, an instructive example is forthcoming 398in Buddhism. It is held that sinful men are liable to be re-born in course of transmigration as wandering, burning, miserable demons (preta). Now these demons may receive offerings of food and drink from their relatives, who can further benefit them by acts of merit done in their name, as giving food to priests, unless the wretched spirits be so low in merit that this cannot profit them. Yet even in this case it is held that though the act does not benefit the spirit whom it is directed to, it does benefit the person who performs it.[950] Unequivocal examples of abnegation in sacrifice may be best found among those offerings of which the value to the offerer utterly exceeds the value they can be supposed to have to the deity. The most striking of these found among nations somewhat advanced in general culture, appear in the history of human sacrifice among Semitic nations. The king of Moab, when the battle was too sore for him, offered up his eldest son for a burnt-offering on the wall. The Phœnicians sacrificed the dearest children to propitiate the angry gods, they enhanced their value by choosing them of noble families, and there was not wanting among them even the utmost proof that the efficacy of the sacrifice lay in the sacrificer’s grievous loss, for they must have for yearly sacrifice only-begotten sons of their parents (Κρόνῳ γαρ Φοίνικες καθ’ ἕκαστον ἔτος ἔθυον τὰ ἀγαπητὰ καὶ μονογενῆ τῶν τέκνων). Heliogabalus brought the hideous Oriental rite into Italy, choosing for victims to his solar divinity high-born lads throughout the land. Of all such cases, the breaking of the sacred law of hospitality by sacrificing the guest to Jupiter hospitalis, Ζεὺς ξένιος, shows in the strongest light in Semitic regions how the value to the offerer might become the measure of acceptableness to the god.[951] In such ways, slightly within the range of the lower culture, but strongly in the religion of the higher 399nations, the transition from the gift-theory to the abnegation theory seems to have come about. Our language displays it in a word, if we do but compare the sense of presentation and acceptance which ‘sacrificium’ had in a Roman temple, with the sense of mere giving up and loss which ‘sacrifice’ conveys in an English market.
Beside this shift from gift to homage, there's also a belief that the essence of sacrifice lies more in the worshipper giving up something valuable to themselves, rather than in the deity receiving any benefit. This can be called the abnegation-theory, and we can reasonably explain its origin as arising from the initial gift-theory. Drawing from our own feelings, we understand how satisfying it is to have given, even if the gift is ineffective, and how we hesitate to take it back if it hasn’t been received, preferring instead to dispose of it in another way—it’s corban. This way, we can relate to the Assinaboin Indians, who believed that the blankets, cloth, brass kettles, and other valuables left in the woods as a medicine sacrifice could be taken by any friendly party who happened upon them; or to the Ava Buddhists who brought offerings of boiled rice, sweets, and coconut fried in oil to temples, never disrupting the crows and wild dogs that devoured them in front of their eyes; or to modern Muslims sacrificing sheep, oxen, and camels in the valley of Muna upon their return from Mekka, as it’s a noble act to give away a sacrifice without consuming any part of it, while groups of Takruri watch around like vultures, ready to swoop down on the carcasses. If the offering to the deity continues in ceremonial form, despite an increasing belief that the deity doesn’t need or gain from it, then sacrifice will be maintained even if it seems unreasonable, and worshippers may still gauge its effectiveness by what it costs them. However, to take this abnegation theory as the original intent of sacrifice would, I believe, distort history. The simple fact that sacrifices to deities, across all cultural levels, mainly consist of food offerings and sacred banquets—typically accounting for nine-tenths or more—undermines the notion that abnegation-theory was the original intention. If the primary motive was to give up valuable property, we should see the sacrifice of weapons, clothing, and ornaments as common in lower cultures, but it is indeed rare. Looking at the overall picture, to think that people began by dedicating what they considered practically useless items to their deities, just to incur a loss that serves no one’s profit, is to underestimate the pragmatic nature of early humans. While they often maintain old rituals long after their original meaning has faded, they rarely adopt new ones without a reasonable purpose. In examining the religion of primitive races, individuals approach their deities as practically and straightforwardly as they do their neighbors, and when a clear original purpose is identified, it is likely a satisfactory explanation. An insightful instance of how gifts can turn into abnegation can be seen in Buddhism. It is believed that sinful individuals may be reborn as wandering, tormented demons (preta). These demons can receive food and drink offerings from their relatives, who can further help them through merit-actions conducted in their honor, such as giving food to priests, unless the spirits are so lacking in merit that these efforts won’t be beneficial. Yet, even in this scenario, it is thought that even if the act doesn’t help the spirit it’s meant for, it still benefits the person performing the act. Clear examples of sacrifice based on abnegation are best illustrated by offerings where the value to the offerer far exceeds what they can be presumed to mean to the deity. The most striking examples found among somewhat more culturally advanced nations can be seen in the history of human sacrifice among Semitic people. The king of Moab, when faced with a losing battle, offered his eldest son as a burnt offering on the wall. The Phoenicians sacrificed their most beloved children to appease the angry gods, enhancing their worth by selecting them from noble families; there’s even strong evidence that the efficacy of the sacrifice lay in the tremendous loss to the sacrificer, for they could only use the firstborn sons of their parents for yearly sacrifices. Heliogabalus imported this horrific Eastern rite to Italy, selecting high-born boys from all over the land as victims for his solar deity. Among all such cases, the violation of the sacred law of hospitality through the sacrifice of a guest to Jupiter hospitalis, shows most clearly in Semitic regions how the value to the offerer could become the measure of its acceptability to the god. In such ways, slightly outside the realm of lower culture but strongly present in higher national religions, the transition from the gift-theory to the abnegation theory appears to have occurred. Our language reflects this difference: if we compare the meaning of ‘sacrificium’ in a Roman temple, which implied presentation and acceptance, with the sense of mere loss and relinquishment that ‘sacrifice’ conveys in an English market.
Through the history of sacrifice, it has occurred to many nations that cost may be economized without impairing efficiency. The result is seen in ingenious devices to lighten the burden on the worshipper by substituting something less valuable than what he ought to offer, or pretends to. Even in such a matter as this, the innate correspondence in the minds of men is enough to produce in distant and independent races so much uniformity of development, that three or four headings will serve to class the chief divisions of sacrificial substitution among mankind.
Throughout the history of sacrifice, many nations have realized that costs can be reduced without sacrificing efficiency. This leads to clever ways to ease the burden on the worshipper by replacing what they should ideally offer with something of lesser value, or what they pretend to offer. Even in this matter, the natural connections in people's minds are strong enough to create significant similarities in development among distant and independent cultures, so that three or four categories can effectively classify the main types of sacrificial substitutes across humanity.
To give part for the whole is a proceeding so closely conformed to ordinary tribute by subject to lord, that in great measure it comes directly under the gift-theory, and as such has already had its examples here. It is only when the part given to the gods is of contemptible value in proportion to the whole, that full sacrifice passes gradually into substitution. This is the case when in Madagascar the head of the sacrificed beast is set up on a pole, and the blood and fat are rubbed on the stones of the altar, but the sacrificers and their friends and the officiating priest devour the whole carcase;[952] when rich Guinea negroes sacrifice a sheep or goat to the fetish, and feast on it with their friends, only leaving for the deity himself part of the entrails;[953] when Tunguz, sacrificing cattle, would give a bit of liver and fat and perhaps hang up the hide in the woods as the god’s share, or Mongols would set the heart of the beast before the idol till next day.[954] Thus the most ancient whole 400burnt-offering of the Greeks dwindled to burning for the gods only the bones and fat of the slaughtered ox, while the worshippers feasted themselves on the meat, an economic rite which takes mythic shape in the legend of the sly Prometheus giving Zeus the choice of the two parts of the sacrificed ox he had divided for gods and mortals, on the one side bones covered seemly with white fat, on the other the joints hidden under repulsive hide and entrails.[955] With a different motive, not that of parsimony, but of keeping up in survival an ancient custom, the Zarathustrian religion performed by substitution the old Aryan sacrifice by fire. The Vedic sacrifice Agnishtoma required that animals should be slain, and their flesh partly committed to the gods by fire, partly eaten by sacrificers and priests. The Parsi ceremony Izeshne, formal successor of this bloody rite, requires no animal to be killed, but it suffices to place the hair of an ox in a vessel, and show it to the fire.[956]
To give part of something to represent the whole is a practice that closely resembles the typical tribute from subjects to their rulers. This primarily falls under the gift-theory, and there are already examples of this here. It’s only when the portion given to the gods is negligible compared to the whole that the full sacrifice shifts gradually into substitution. This happens in Madagascar when the head of the sacrificed animal is placed on a pole, and the blood and fat are smeared on the altar stones, while the sacrificers, their friends, and the officiating priest eat the entire carcass;[952] when wealthy Guinea people sacrifice a sheep or goat to their fetish and feast on it with friends, leaving only part of the entrails for the deity;[953] when Tunguz people sacrifice cattle, giving a piece of liver and fat, maybe hanging the hide in the woods as the god's portion, or Mongols putting the heart of the animal before the idol until the next day.[954] Thus, the oldest whole burnt-offering of the Greeks reduced to only burning the bones and fat of the sacrificed ox for the gods, while the worshippers enjoyed the meat, an economic rite reflected in the legend of the cunning Prometheus presenting Zeus with a choice between two parts of the sacrificed ox he divided for gods and humans, with one side being bones covered with white fat and the other being the joints concealed under foul hide and entrails.[955] For a different reason—not out of thriftiness but to preserve an ancient practice—the Zarathustrian faith performed the old Aryan fire sacrifice by means of substitution. The Vedic sacrifice Agnishtoma required that animals be killed, with their flesh partly offered to the gods by fire and partly consumed by the sacrificers and priests. The Parsi ceremony Izeshne, a formal successor to this bloody rite, doesn’t require an animal to be killed; it’s enough to place the hair of an ox in a container and show it to the fire.[956]
The offering of a part of the worshipper’s own body is a most usual act, whether its intention is simply that of gift or tribute, or whether it is considered as a pars pro toto representing the whole man, either in danger and requiring to be ransomed, or destined to actual sacrifice for another and requiring to be redeemed. How a finger-joint may thus represent a whole body, is perfectly shown in the funeral sacrifices of the Nicobar islanders; they bury the dead man’s property with him, and his wife has a finger-joint cut off (obviously a substitute for herself), and if she refuses even this, a deep notch is cut in a pillar of the house.[957] We are now concerned, however, with the finger-offering, not as a sacrifice to the dead, but as addressed to other deities. This idea is apparently worked out in the Tongan custom of tutu-nima, the chopping off a portion of the little finger with a hatchet or sharp stone as a sacrifice to the gods, for the recovery of a sick relation of higher rank; Mariner saw 401children of five years old quarrelling for the honour of having it done to them.[958] In the Mandan ceremonies of initiation into manhood, when the youth at last hung senseless and (as they called it) lifeless by the cords made fast to splints through his flesh, he was let down, and coming to himself crawled on hands and feet round the medicine-lodge to where an old Indian sat with hatchet in his hand and a buffalo skull before him; then the youth, holding up the little finger of his left hand to the Great Spirit, offered it as a sacrifice, and it was chopped off, and sometimes the fore-finger afterwards, upon the skull.[959] In India, probably as a Dravidian rather than Aryan rite, the practice with full meaning comes into view; as Siva cut off his finger to appease the wrath of Kali, so in the southern provinces mothers will cut off their own fingers as sacrifices lest they lose their children, and one hears of a golden finger being allowed instead, the substitute of a substitute.[960] The New Zealanders hang locks of hair on branches of trees in the burying-ground, a recognised place for offerings.[961] That hair may be a substitute for its owner is well shown in Malabar, where we read of the demon being expelled from the possessed patient and flogged by the exorcist to a tree; there the sick man’s hair is nailed fast, cut away, and left for a propitiation to the demon.[962] Thus there is some ground for interpreting the consecration of the boy’s cut hair in Europe as a representative sacrifice.[963] As for the formal shedding of blood, it may represent fatal bloodshed, as when 402the Jagas or priests in Quilombo only marked with spears the children brought in, instead of running them through;[964] or when in Greece a few drops of human blood had come to stand instead of the earlier and more barbaric human sacrifice;[965] or when in our own time and under our own rule a Vishnuite who has inadvertently killed a monkey, a garuda, or a cobra, may expiate his offence by a mock sacrifice, in which a human victim is wounded in the thigh, pretends to die, and goes through the farce of resuscitation, his drawn blood serving as substitute for his life.[966] One of the most noteworthy cases of the survival of such formal bloodshed within modern memory in Europe must be classed as not Aryan but Turanian, belonging as it does to the folklore of Esthonia. The sacrificer had to draw drops of blood from his forefinger, and therewith to pray this prayer, which was taken down verbatim from one who remembered it:—‘I name thee with my blood and betroth thee with my blood, and point thee out my buildings to be blessed, stables and cattle-pens and hen-roosts; let them be blessed through my blood and thy might!’ ‘Be my joy, thou Almighty, upholder of my forefathers, my protector and guardian of my life! I beseech thee by strength of flesh and blood; receive the food that I bring thee to thy sustenance and the joy of my body; keep me as thy good child, and I will thank and praise thee. By the help of the Almighty, my own God, hearken to me! What through negligence I have done imperfectly toward thee, do thou forget! But keep it truly in remembrance, that I have honestly paid my gifts to my parents’ honour and joy and requital. Moreover falling down I thrice kiss the earth. Be with me quick in doing, and peace be with thee hitherto!’[967] These various rites of finger-cutting, hair-cutting, and blood-letting, have required mention here from the special point of view of their 403connexion with sacrifice. They belong to an extensive series of practices, due to various and often obscure motives, which come under the general heading of ceremonial mutilations.
The offering of part of a worshipper’s own body is a common act, whether it’s seen as a gift or tribute, or as a pars pro toto representing the whole person, either in danger and needing to be redeemed, or destined for actual sacrifice for someone else and needing to be atoned. The way a finger joint can represent an entire body is clearly shown in the funeral sacrifices of the Nicobar islanders; they bury the deceased man’s belongings with him, and his wife has a finger joint cut off (obviously symbolizing herself), and if she refuses even this, a deep notch is made in a post of the house.[957] We are now focused, however, on the finger-offering, not as a sacrifice for the dead, but as an offering to other deities. This idea is apparently illustrated in the Tongan custom of tutu-nima, where a part of the little finger is chopped off with a hatchet or sharp stone as a sacrifice to the gods for the recovery of a sick relative of higher rank; Mariner observed children as young as five arguing over the honor of having it done to them.[958] In the Mandan initiation ceremonies into manhood, when the youth was finally hung derelict and (as they termed it) lifeless by cords attached to splints through his flesh, he was lowered, and when he recovered, he crawled on hands and knees around the medicine lodge to where an elder sat with a hatchet in hand and a buffalo skull in front of him; then the youth, holding up the little finger of his left hand to the Great Spirit, offered it as a sacrifice, and it was cut off, sometimes followed by the forefinger on the skull.[959] In India, likely as a Dravidian rather than Aryan tradition, the practice becomes clear; just as Siva cut off his finger to calm Kali’s anger, mothers in the southern provinces will cut off their own fingers as sacrifices to ensure they don’t lose their children, and sometimes a golden finger is permitted as a substitute for a substitute.[960] The New Zealanders hang locks of hair on tree branches in the burial ground, which is a recognized place for offerings.[961] That hair can stand in for its owner is well illustrated in Malabar, where it is reported that a demon was expelled from a possessed person and beaten by the exorcist to a tree; there, the sick man’s hair is nailed down, cut off, and left as an offering to the demon.[962] Thus, there is some basis for interpreting the consecration of a boy’s cut hair in Europe as a symbolic sacrifice.[963] Regarding the formal shedding of blood, it may symbolize fatal bloodshed, as when the Jagas or priests in Quilombo only marked the children brought to them with spears instead of killing them;[964] or when in Greece a few drops of human blood symbolized the earlier, more brutal human sacrifices;[965] or in our time, a Vishnuite who accidentally kills a monkey, a garuda, or a cobra may atone by a mock sacrifice, where a human victim is wounded in the thigh, pretends to die, and goes through a charade of resurrection, with his drawn blood serving as a substitute for his life.[966] One of the most notable examples of the survival of such formal bloodshed in modern memory in Europe should be categorized as not Aryan but Turanian, as it belongs to Estonian folklore. The sacrificer was required to draw drops of blood from his forefinger, and with that, he would recite this prayer, which was recorded verbatim from someone who remembered it:—‘I dedicate you with my blood and betroth you with my blood, and point out my buildings to be blessed, stables and animal pens and hen houses; let them be blessed through my blood and your strength! ‘Be my joy, you Almighty, upholder of my forefathers, my protector and guardian of my life! I plead with you by the might of flesh and blood; accept the offering I present to you for your sustenance and the joy of my body; keep me as your good child, and I will give you thanks and praise. With the aid of the Almighty, my own God, listen to me! What I may have done imperfectly through negligence toward you, please forget! But keep this in mind, that I have genuinely honored my gifts to my parents’ memory and satisfaction. Moreover, I humbly kiss the ground three times. Be with me swiftly in action, and peace be with you henceforth!’[967] These various rites of cutting fingers, cutting hair, and shedding blood have been mentioned here from the specific perspective of their connection with sacrifice. They are part of a wide range of practices, motivated by various and often unclear reasons, that fall under the general category of ceremonial mutilations.
When a life is given for a life, it is still possible to offer a life less valued than the life in danger. When in Peru the Inca or some great lord fell sick, he would offer to the deity one of his sons, imploring him to take this victim in his stead.[968] The Greeks found it sufficient to offer to the gods criminals or captives;[969] and the like was the practice of the heathen tribes of northern Europe, to whom indeed Christian dealers were accused of selling slaves for sacrificial purposes.[970] Among such accounts, the typical story belongs to Punic history. The Carthaginians, overcome and hard pressed in the war with Agathokles, set down the defeat to divine wrath. Now Kronos had in former times received his sacrifice of the chosen of their sons, but of late they had put him off with children bought and nourished for the purpose. In fact they had obeyed the sacrificer’s natural tendency to substitution, but now in time of misfortune the reaction set in. To balance the account and condone the parsimonious fraud, a monstrous sacrifice was celebrated. Two hundred children, of the noblest of the land, were brought to the idol. ‘For there was among them a brazen statue of Kronos, holding out his hands sloping downward, so that the child placed on them rolled off and fell into a certain chasm full of fire.’[971] The Phœnician god here called Kronos is commonly though not certainly identified with Moloch. Next, it will help us to realize how the sacrifice of an animal may atone for a human life, if we notice in South Africa how a Zulu will redeem a lost child from the finder by a bullock, or a Kimbunda will expiate the blood of a slave by the offering of an ox, whose blood 404will wash away the other.[972] For instances of the animal substituted for man in sacrifice the following may serve. Among the Khonds of Orissa, when Colonel Macpherson was engaged in putting down the sacrifice of human victims by the sect of the Earth-goddess, they at once began to discuss the plan of sacrificing cattle by way of substitutes. Now there is some reason to think that this same course of ceremonial change may account for the following sacrificial practice in the other Khond sect. It appears that those who worship the Light-god hold a festival in his honour, when they slaughter a buffalo in commemoration of the time when, as they say, the Earth-goddess was prevailing on men to offer human sacrifices to her, but the Light-god sent a tribe-deity who crushed the bloody-minded Earth-goddess under a mountain, and dragged a buffalo out of the jungle, saying, ‘Liberate the man, and sacrifice the buffalo!’[973] This legend, divested of its mythic garb, may really record a historical substitution of animal for human sacrifice. In Ceylon, the exorcist will demand the name of the demon possessing a demoniac, and the patient in frenzy answers, giving the demon’s name, ‘I am So-and-so, I demand a human sacrifice and will not go out without!’ The victim is promised, the patient comes to from the fit, and a few weeks later the sacrifice is made, but instead of a man they offer a fowl.[974] Classic examples of substitution of this sort may be found in the sacrifice of a doe for a virgin to Artemis in Laodicæa, a goat for a boy to Dionysos at Potniæ. There appears to be Semitic connexion here, as there clearly is in the story of the Æolians of Tenedos sacrificing to Melikertes (Melkarth) instead of a new-born child a new-born calf, shoeing it with buskins and tending the mother-cow as if a human mother.[975]
When a life is sacrificed for another, it’s still possible to offer a life that’s considered less valuable than the one in danger. In Peru, when an Inca or a high-ranking lord fell ill, he would offer one of his sons to the deity, begging the god to accept this child instead of him. The Greeks found that offering criminals or captives to the gods was sufficient, and similar practices were followed by pagan tribes in northern Europe, who even accused Christian merchants of selling slaves for human sacrifice. Among such tales, a typical example comes from Punic history. The Carthaginians, overwhelmed in their war against Agathokles, attributed their defeat to divine anger. In the past, Kronos had received sacrifices of their chosen sons, but recently they had been offering him children bought and raised specifically for this purpose. They had indulged the natural tendency to substitute, but now, in difficult times, they turned back to what they had neglected. To make amends and atone for their stinginess, a horrific sacrifice was performed. Two hundred children, the noblest in the land, were brought to the idol. There was a bronze statue of Kronos with hands outstretched downward, so when a child was placed on them, they rolled off and fell into a pit of fire. The Phoenician god referred to here as Kronos is commonly, though not certainly, identified with Moloch. Next, we can understand how the sacrifice of an animal can atone for a human life by looking at how a Zulu in South Africa will redeem a lost child from the finder by giving them a bull, or how a Kimbunda will compensate for the death of a slave with the offering of an ox, whose blood washes away the other’s. For instances of animals being substituted for humans in sacrifice, consider this: Among the Khonds of Orissa, when Colonel Macpherson was working to stop the human sacrifices by the sect of the Earth-goddess, they immediately began discussing the idea of sacrificing cattle instead. There’s some evidence that this shift in ceremonial practice might explain the following sacrificial practice among another Khond sect. Those who worship the Light-god have a festival in his honor, during which they slaughter a buffalo to commemorate a time when, as they say, the Earth-goddess was pushing men to offer human sacrifices, but the Light-god sent a tribal deity who crushed the bloody Earth-goddess under a mountain, dragged a buffalo out from the jungle, and said, “Release the man, and sacrifice the buffalo!” This legend, stripped of its mythical elements, may actually record a historical substitution of animal sacrifice for human sacrifice. In Ceylon, an exorcist will ask for the name of the demon possessing someone, and in a fit, the afflicted person responds, giving the demon’s name, “I am So-and-so, I demand a human sacrifice and won’t leave without one!” A victim is promised, the person recovers from the fit, and a few weeks later the sacrifice is made, but instead of a human, they offer a bird. Classic examples of this sort of substitution can be seen in the sacrifice of a doe for a virgin to Artemis in Laodicæa, or a goat for a boy to Dionysos at Potniæ. There seems to be a Semitic connection here, as there clearly is in the story of the Æolians of Tenedos, who sacrificed a newborn calf to Melikertes (Melkarth) instead of a newborn child, dressing the calf in shoes and tending to the mother cow as if she were a human mother.
One step more in the course of substitution leads the 405worshipper to make his sacrifice by effigy. An instructive example of the way in which this kind of substitution arises may be found in the rites of ancient Mexico. At the yearly festival of the water-gods and mountain-gods, certain actual sacrifices of human victims took place in the temples. At the same time, in the houses of the people, there was celebrated an unequivocal but harmless imitation of this bloody rite. They made paste images, adored them, and in due pretence of sacrifice cut them open at the breast, took out their hearts, cut off their heads, divided and devoured their limbs.[976] In the classic religions of Greece and Rome, the desire to keep up the consecrated rites of ages more barbaric, more bloodthirsty, or more profuse, worked itself out in many a compromise of this class, such as the brazen statues offered for human victims, the cakes of dough or wax in the figure of the beasts for which they were presented as symbolic substitutes.[977] Not for economy, but to avoid taking life, Brahmanic sacrifice has been known to be brought down to offering models of the victim-animals in meal and butter.[978] The modern Chinese, whose satisfaction in this kind of make-believe is so well shown by their despatching paper figures to serve as attendants for the dead, work out in the same fanciful way the idea of the sacrificial effigy, in propitiating the presiding deity of the year for the cure of a sick man. The rude figure of a man is drawn on or cut out of a piece of paper, pasted on a slip of bamboo, and stuck upright in a packet of mock-money. With proper exorcism, this representative is carried out into the street with the disease, the priest squirts water from his mouth over patient, image, and mock-money, the two latter are burnt, and the company eat up the little feast 406laid out for the year-deity.[979] There is curious historical significance in the custom at the inundation of the Nile at Cairo, of setting up a conical pillar of earth which the flood washes away as it rises. This is called the arûseh or bride, and appears to be a substitute introduced under humaner Moslem influence, for the young virgin in gay apparel who in older time was thrown into the river, a sacrifice to obtain a plentiful inundation.[980] Again, the patient’s offering the model of his diseased limb is distinctly of the nature of a sacrifice, whether it be propitiatory offering before cure, or thank-offering after. On the one hand, the ex-voto models of arms and ears dedicated in ancient Egyptian temples are thought to be grateful memorials,[981] as seems to have been the case with metal models of faces, breasts, hands, &c., in Bœotian temples.[982] On the other hand, there are cases where the model and, as it were, substitute of the diseased part is given to obtain a cure; thus in early Christian times in Germany protest was made against the heathen custom of hanging up carved wooden limbs to a helpful idol for relief,[983] and in modern India the pilgrim coming for cure will deposit in the temple the image of his diseased limb, in gold or silver or copper according to his means.[984]
One more step in the process of substitution leads the 405worshipper to make his sacrifice through a representation. A clear example of how this kind of substitution occurs can be found in the rituals of ancient Mexico. During the annual festival of the water-gods and mountain-gods, actual sacrifices of human victims took place in the temples. At the same time, in people's homes, there was a clear but harmless imitation of this bloody rite. They created paste images, worshiped them, and, in a show of sacrifice, cut them open at the chest, took out their hearts, removed their heads, divided up their limbs, and shared them. [976] In the classic religions of Greece and Rome, the desire to maintain the sacred rituals of earlier, more barbarous, bloodthirsty, or extravagant times led to many compromises like offering bronze statues in place of human victims and using cakes of dough or wax shaped like the animals they symbolized. [977] Not for cost savings, but to avoid taking life, Brahmanic sacrifice has been known to be simplified to offering models of the victim-animals made of meal and butter. [978] Modern Chinese customs reflect a similar satisfaction with this make-believe, as evidenced by their practice of sending paper figures to act as attendants for the dead. They also use a symbolic sacrificial effigy to appease the presiding deity of the year for the healing of a sick person. A crude figure of a person is drawn or cut out from a piece of paper, attached to a slip of bamboo, and placed upright in a bundle of mock-money. After a proper ritual, this figure is taken into the street along with the illness, and the priest sprays water from his mouth over the sick person, the figure, and the mock-money. The latter two are then burned, and everyone shares the small feast prepared for the annual deity. 406 [979] There is interesting historical significance in the custom during the Nile floods in Cairo, where a conical pillar of earth is set up that the rising water washes away. This is called the arûseh or bride and seems to be a substitute introduced under more humane Muslim influence for the young virgin dressed in colorful clothing who, in earlier times, was thrown into the river as a sacrifice to ensure a bountiful flood. [980] Additionally, a patient's offering of a model of their diseased limb is clearly a form of sacrifice, whether it’s a propitiatory offering made before a cure or a thank-you offering afterward. On one hand, the ex-voto models of arms and ears dedicated in ancient Egyptian temples are regarded as grateful memorials, [981] similar to the metal models of faces, chests, hands, etc., found in Bœotian temples. [982] On the other hand, there are instances where the model and, in a sense, substitute for the diseased part is offered to receive a cure. For example, in early Christian times in Germany, there was resistance to the pagan custom of hanging carved wooden limbs up to a helpful idol for relief, [983] and in modern India, a pilgrim seeking healing will leave an image of their diseased limb at the temple, made of gold, silver, or copper depending on their means. [984]
If now we look for the sacrificial idea within the range of modern Christendom, we shall find it in two ways not obscurely manifest. It survives in traditional folklore, and it holds a place in established religion. One of its most remarkable survivals may be seen in Bulgaria, where sacrifice of live victims is to this day one of the accepted rites of the land. They sacrifice a lamb on St. George’s day, telling to account for the custom a legend which combines the episodes of the offering of Isaac and the miracle of the Three Children. 407On the feast of the Panagia (Virgin Mary) sacrifices of lambs, kids, honey, wine, &c., are offered in order that the children of the house may enjoy good health throughout the year. A little child divines by touching one of three saints’ candles to which the offering is to be dedicated; when the choice is thus made, the bystanders each drink a cup of wine, saying ‘Saint So-and-So, to thee is the offering.’ Then they cut the throat of the lamb, or smother the bees, and in the evening the whole village assembles to eat the various sacrifices, and the men end the ceremony with the usual drunken bout.[985] Within the borders of Russia, many and various sacrifices are still offered; such is the horse with head smeared with honey and mane decked with ribbons, cast into the river with two millstones to its neck to appease the water-spirit, the Vodyany, at his spiteful flood-time in early spring; and such is the portion of supper left out for the house-demon, the domovoy, who if not thus fed is apt to turn spirit-rapper, and knock the tables and benches about at night.[986] In many another district of Europe, the tenacious memory of the tiller of the soil has kept up in wondrous perfection heirlooms from præ-Christian faiths. In Franconia, people will pour on the ground a libation before drinking; entering a forest they will put offerings of bread and fruit on a stone, to avert the attacks of the demon of the woods, the ‘bilberry-man;’ the bakers will throw white rolls into the oven flue for luck, and say, ‘Here, devil, they are thine!’ The Carinthian peasant will fodder the wind by setting up a dish of food in a tree before his house, and the fire by casting in lard and dripping, in order that gale and conflagration may not hurt him. At least up to the end of the 18th century this most direct elemental sacrifice might be seen in Germany at the midsummer festival in the most perfect form; some of the porridge 408from the table was thrown into the fire, and some into running water, some was buried in the earth, and some smeared on leaves and put on the chimney-top for the winds.[987] Relics of such ancient sacrifice may be found in Scandinavia to this day; to give but one example, the old country altars, rough earth-fast stones with cup-like hollows, are still visited by mothers whose children have been smitten with sickness by the trolls, and who smear lard into the hollows and leave rag-dolls as offerings.[988] France may be represented by the country-women’s custom of beginning a meal by throwing down a spoonful of milk or bouillon; and by the record of the custom of Andrieux in Dauphiny, where at the solstice the villagers went out upon the bridge when the sun rose, and offered him an omelet.[989] The custom of burning alive the finest calf, to save a murrain-struck herd, had its last examples in Cornwall in the 19th century; the records of bealtuinn sacrifices in Scotland continue in the Highlands within a century ago; and Scotchmen still living remember the corner of a field being left untilled for the Goodman’s Croft (i.e., the Devil’s), but the principle of ‘cheating the devil’ was already in vogue, and the piece of land allotted was but a worthless scrap.[990] It is a remnant of old sacrificial rite, when the Swedes still bake at yule-tide a cake in the shape of a boar, representing the boar sacrificed of old to Freyr, and Oxford to this day commemorates the same ancestral ceremony, when the boar’s head is carried in to the Christmas feast at Queen’s College, with its appointed carol, ‘Caput apri defero, Reddens laudes Domino.’[991] With a lingering recollection of the old 409libations, the German toper’s saying still runs that heeltaps are a devil’s offering.[992]
If we look for the idea of sacrifice in modern Christianity, we can find it in two clear ways. It remains in traditional folklore and has a place in established religion. One of the most notable examples is in Bulgaria, where the sacrifice of live animals is still an accepted practice today. They sacrifice a lamb on St. George’s Day, explaining the custom with a legend that combines the story of Isaac's offering and the miracle of the Three Children. On the feast of the Virgin Mary, they offer sacrifices of lambs, kids, honey, and wine, hoping for the good health of the household's children throughout the year. A small child chooses one of three saints' candles to dedicate the offering; once the choice is made, everyone drinks a cup of wine, saying, “Saint So-and-So, this is for you.” They then cut the throat of the lamb or smother the bees, and in the evening, the whole village gathers to eat the various offerings, concluding the ceremony with a typical drunken celebration. Within Russia, many different sacrifices are still made, like a horse with its head coated in honey and its mane decorated with ribbons, thrown into the river with two millstones tied to its neck to appease the water spirit, the Vodyany, during its vengeful flood time in early spring; and leaving a part of supper for the household spirit, the domovoy, who, if not fed, might cause disturbances at night. In many other parts of Europe, the strong memory of the farmers has preserved old traditions from pre-Christian beliefs. In Franconia, people pour a drink on the ground before drinking; when entering a forest, they leave offerings of bread and fruit on a stone to ward off the woodland spirit, the ‘bilberry-man’; bakers toss white rolls into the oven flue for luck, saying, “Here, devil, these are for you!” The Carinthian peasant will leave food in a tree for the wind and throw in lard and dripping to protect himself from storms and fire. At least until the end of the 18th century, this direct elemental sacrifice could be observed in Germany during the midsummer festival in its most perfect form; some porridge from the table was thrown into the fire, some into running water, some was buried in the earth, and some smeared on leaves and placed on the chimney for the winds. Remnants of such ancient sacrifices can still be found in Scandinavia; for example, mothers still visit old country altars, which are rough stones with cup-like hollows, to leave lard in the hollows and rag-dolls as offerings for children afflicted by trolls. In France, countrywomen begin meals by pouring a spoonful of milk or broth on the ground. The village custom in Dauphiny has records of villagers going out onto the bridge at sunrise during the solstice to offer an omelet to the sun. The practice of burning the finest calf alive to save a murrain-stricken herd continued in Cornwall until the 19th century; records of bealtuinn sacrifices in Scotland persisted in the Highlands up until a century ago, and older Scots still remember leaving a corner of a field untilled for the Goodman’s Croft (the Devil’s), although the principle of 'cheating the devil' was already in play, and the plot of land set aside was just a worthless piece. A remnant of old sacrificial rites remains when Swedes bake a cake in the shape of a boar at Yule, representing the boar sacrificed to Freyr, while Oxford still commemorates the same ancestral ceremony by bringing in a boar's head for the Christmas feast at Queen’s College, along with its designated carol, “Caput apri defero, Reddens laudes Domino.” Echoes of ancient offerings persist in Germany, where the expression about heel taps suggests that they are a devil's offering.
As for sacrificial rites most fully and officially existing in modern Christendom, the presentation of ex-votos is one. The ecclesiastical opposition to the continuance of these classic thank-offerings was but temporary and partial. In the 5th century it seems to have been usual to offer silver and gold eyes, feet, &c., to saints in acknowledgment of cures they had effected. At the beginning of the 16th century, Polydore Vergil, describing the classic custom, goes on to say: ‘In the same manner do we now offer up in our churches sigillaria, that is, little images of wax, and oscilla. As oft as any part of the body is hurt, as the hand, foot, breast, we presently make a vow to God, and his saints, to whom upon our recovery we make an offering of that hand or foot or breast shaped in wax, which custom has so far obtained that this kind of images have passed to the other animals. Wherefore so for an ox, so for a horse, so for a sheep, we place puppets in the temples. In which thing any modestly scrupulous person may perhaps say he knows not whether we are rivalling the religion or the superstition of the ancients.’[993] In modern Europe the custom prevails largely, but has perhaps somewhat subsided into low levels of society, to judge by the general use of mock silver and such-like worthless materials for the dedicated effigies. In Christian as in præ-Christian temples, clouds of incense rise as of old. Above all, though the ceremony of sacrifice did not form an original part of Christian worship, its prominent place in the ritual was obtained in early centuries. In that Christianity was recruited among nations to whom the conception of sacrifice was among the deepest of religious ideas, and the ceremony of sacrifice among the sincerest efforts of worship, there arose an observance suited to supply the vacant place. 410This result was obtained not by new introduction, but by transmutation. The solemn eucharistic meal of the primitive Christians in time assumed the name of the sacrifice of the mass, and was adapted to a ceremonial in which an offering of food and drink is set out by a priest on an altar in a temple, and consumed by priest and worshippers. The natural conclusion of an ethnographic survey of sacrifice, is to point to the controversy between Protestants and Catholics, for centuries past one of the keenest which have divided the Christian world, on this express question whether sacrifice is or is not a Christian rite.
As for sacrificial rituals that are still officially recognized in modern Christianity, the offering of ex-votos is one of them. The church's resistance to maintaining these traditional thank-offerings was only temporary and limited. In the 5th century, it seems common to present silver and gold replicas of eyes, feet, etc., to saints in gratitude for healings they facilitated. At the start of the 16th century, Polydore Vergil described this ancient practice, stating: ‘In the same way, we now offer sigillaria in our churches—small wax figures—and oscillas. Whenever a part of the body is injured, such as a hand, foot, or chest, we quickly make a vow to God and his saints, and upon our recovery, we present an offering of that hand, foot, or chest fashioned in wax. This practice has continued so much that this type of imagery has extended to other animals. So, for an ox, a horse, or a sheep, we place puppets in the temples. A person who is modestly cautious may wonder whether we are imitating the religion or the superstition of the ancients.’ [993] In modern Europe, this custom still exists to a large extent but has perhaps dwindled to lower levels of society, judging by the prevalent use of mock silver and other worthless materials for these dedicated figures. Incense continues to rise in Christian and pre-Christian temples as it did in the past. Although the act of sacrifice was not originally part of Christian worship, it acquired a significant role in the ritual early on. Christianity was introduced among cultures for whom the concept of sacrifice held deep religious significance, and the ritual of sacrifice became one of the most sincere expressions of worship, leading to the establishment of a practice that filled that vacant role. 410 This development was not the result of new practices but of transformation. The solemn eucharistic meal of the early Christians eventually took on the name of the sacrifice of the mass and was adapted to a ceremony in which a priest presents offerings of food and drink on an altar in a temple, which are then shared by the priest and worshippers. An ethnographic examination of sacrifice naturally leads to the ongoing debate between Protestants and Catholics, which has long been one of the sharpest divisions in the Christian world, regarding whether sacrifice is or is not a Christian ritual.
The next group of rites to be considered comprises Fasting and certain other means of producing ecstasy and other morbid exaltation for religious ends. In the foregoing researches on animism, it is frequently observed or implied that the religious beliefs of the lower races are in no small measure based on the evidence of visions and dreams, regarded as actual intercourse with spiritual beings. From the earliest phases of culture upward, we find religion in close alliance with ecstatic physical conditions. These are brought on by various means of interference with the healthy action of body and mind, and it is scarcely needful to remind the reader that, according to philosophic theories antecedent to those of modern medicine, such morbid disturbances are explained as symptoms of divine visitation, or at least of superhuman spirituality. Among the strongest means of disturbing the functions of the mind so as to produce ecstatic vision, is fasting, accompanied as it so usually is with other privations, and with prolonged solitary contemplation in the desert or the forest. Among the ordinary vicissitudes of savage life, the wild hunter has many a time to try involuntarily the effects of such a life for days and weeks together, and under these circumstances he soon comes to see and talk with phantoms which are to him visible personal spirits. The secret of spiritual intercourse thus learnt, he has thenceforth but to reproduce the cause in order to renew the effects.
The next group of rituals to be discussed includes fasting and other methods of inducing ecstasy and various heightened emotional states for religious purposes. In previous studies on animism, it’s often noted or suggested that the religious beliefs of less advanced cultures are significantly based on visions and dreams, which they perceive as real interactions with spiritual entities. From the earliest stages of culture onward, we see that religion closely connects with ecstatic physical states. These states are achieved through different ways of disrupting the normal functioning of the body and mind, and it’s important to note that, according to philosophical ideas that predate modern medicine, such disruptions are interpreted as signs of divine interaction or at least of a higher spiritual presence. One of the most effective methods for altering mental functions to create ecstatic visions is fasting, often combined with other deprivations, and extended solitary meditation in deserts or forests. In the everyday struggles of primitive life, wild hunters frequently experience this lifestyle involuntarily for days or weeks, and in such conditions, they soon begin to see and communicate with apparitions they perceive as real personal spirits. Once they learn the secret of this spiritual connection, all they need to do is recreate the conditions to experience the effects again.
411The rite of fasting, and the utter objective reality ascribed to what we call its morbid symptoms, are shown in striking details among the savage tribes of North America. Among the Indians (the accounts mostly refer to the Algonquin tribes), long and rigorous fasting is enjoined among boys and girls from a very early age; to be able to fast long is an enviable distinction, and they will abstain from food three to seven days, or even more, taking only a little water. During these fasts, especial attention is paid to dreams. Thus Tanner tells the story of a certain Net-no-kwa, who at twelve years old fasted ten successive days, till in a dream a man came and stood before her, and after speaking of many things gave her two sticks, saying, ‘I give you these to walk upon, and your hair I give it to be like snow;’ this assurance of extreme old age was through life a support to her in times of danger and distress. At manhood the Indian lad, retiring to a solitary place to fast and meditate and pray, receives visionary impressions which stamp his character for life, and especially he waits till there appears to him in a dream some animal or thing which will be henceforth his ‘medicine,’ the fetish-representative of his manitu or protecting genius. For instance, an aged warrior who had thus in his youth dreamed of a bat coming to him, wore the skin of a bat on the crown of his head henceforth, and was all his life invulnerable to his enemies as a bat on the wing. In after life, an Indian who wants anything will fast till he has a dream that his manitu will grant it him. While the men are away hunting, the children are sometimes made to fast, that in their dreams they may obtain omens of the chase. Hunters fasting before an expedition are informed in dreams of the haunts of the game, and the means of appeasing the wrath of the bad spirits; if the dreamer fancies he sees an Indian who has been long dead, and hears him say, ‘If thou wilt sacrifice to me thou shalt shoot deer at pleasure,’ he will prepare a sacrifice, and burn the whole or part of a deer, in honour of the apparition. Especially the ‘meda’ or 412‘medicine-man’ receives in fasts much of his qualification for his sacred office. The Ojibwa prophetess, known in after life as Catherine Wabose, in telling the story of her early years, relates how at the age of womanhood she fasted in her secluded lodge till she went up into the heavens and saw the spirit at the entrance, the Bright Blue Sky; this was the first supernatural communication of her prophetic career. The account given to Schoolcraft by Chingwauk, an Algonquin chief deeply versed in the mystic lore and picture-writing of his people, is as follows: ‘Chingwauk began by saying that the ancient Indians made a great merit of fasting. They fasted sometimes six or seven days, till both their bodies and minds became free and light, which prepared them to dream. The object of the ancient seers was to dream of the sun, as it was believed that such a dream would enable them to see everything on the earth. And by fasting long and thinking much on the subject, they generally succeeded. Fasts and dreams were at first attempted at an early age. What a young man sees and experiences during these dreams and fasts, is adopted by him as truth, and it becomes a principle to regulate his future life. He relies for success on these revelations. If he has been much favoured in his fasts, and the people believe that he has the art of looking into futurity, the path is open to the highest honours. The prophet, he continued, begins to try his power in secret, with only one assistant, whose testimony is necessary should he succeed. As he goes on, he puts down the figures of his dreams and revelations, by symbols, on bark or other material, till a whole winter is sometimes passed in pursuing the subject, and he thus has a record of his principal revelations. If what he predicts is verified, the assistant mentions it, and the record is then appealed to as proof of his prophetic power and skill. Time increases his fame. His kee-keé-wins, or records, are finally shown to the old people, who meet together and consult upon them, for the whole nation 413believe in these revelations. They in the end give their approval, and declare that he is gifted as a prophet—is inspired with wisdom, and is fit to lead the opinions of the nation. Such, he concluded, was the ancient custom, and the celebrated old war-captains rose to their power in this manner.’ It remains to say that among these American tribes, the ‘jossakeed’ or soothsayer prepares himself by fasting and the use of the sweating-bath for the state of convulsive ecstasy in which he utters the dictates of his familiar spirits.[994]
411The practice of fasting, along with the very real physical effects associated with what we term its negative symptoms, is clearly illustrated among the indigenous tribes of North America. In particular, the Indian tribes (primarily the Algonquin tribes) impose long and strict fasting on boys and girls from a young age; being able to fast for an extended period is seen as a mark of honor. They may go without food for anywhere from three to seven days, or even longer, consuming only a bit of water. During these fasts, significant attention is given to dreams. For example, Tanner recounts the story of a girl named Net-no-kwa, who fasted for ten days at the age of twelve. In a dream, a man appeared before her and, after discussing many topics, handed her two sticks, saying, "I give you these to walk upon, and your hair will be as white as snow." This promise of extreme old age served as a source of strength for her during difficult times throughout her life. As they reach adulthood, young Indian men would isolate themselves to fast, reflect, and pray, receiving visions that would shape their character permanently. They specifically wait for a dream in which an animal or object appears, which will then become their "medicine" or a representation of their spirit guide. For instance, an elderly warrior who had dreamed of a bat in his youth wore a bat's skin on his head from then on, believing it made him invulnerable to his enemies, just like a bat in flight. Later in life, when an Indian desires something, he will fast until he dreams that his spirit guide will grant it. While the men are away hunting, children may also fast in order to receive dreams that would provide insights about the hunt. Hunters fasting before a journey often receive guidance in their dreams about where to find game and how to appease any angry spirits. If a dreamer sees the spirit of a long-dead Indian who says, "If you sacrifice to me, you'll shoot deer at will," he will prepare an offering, burning part or all of a deer in honor of the vision. Notably, the 'meda' or 'medicine-man' derives much of his spiritual power from these fasting experiences. The Ojibwa prophetess, later known as Catherine Wabose, describes how, as a young woman, she fasted in her secluded lodge until she ascended to the heavens and saw the spirit at the entrance of the Bright Blue Sky; this was her first divine encounter in her prophetic journey. According to Chingwauk, an Algonquin chief knowledgeable in the mystical traditions and pictographs of his people, "The ancient Indians placed great importance on fasting. They sometimes fasted for six or seven days, which helped to clear their bodies and minds, making them more receptive to dreams. The goal of the ancient visionaries was to dream of the sun, as it was believed that such a dream would allow them to see everything on Earth. Through prolonged fasting and deep contemplation, they often succeeded. Young people would begin fasting and dreaming at an early age. What they perceive during these experiences becomes their truth and guides their future actions. They depend on these visions for success. If a young man has favorable experiences during his fasts and people believe he can foresee the future, he can achieve great honor. The prophet begins testing his abilities in private, typically with just one other person, whose testimony is crucial should he be successful. He records the symbols of his dreams and revelations on bark or other materials, sometimes spending an entire winter on this endeavor, creating a record of his key revelations. If what he predicts comes true, the assistant mentions it, and this record is then used as proof of his prophetic abilities. Over time, his reputation grows. His kee-keé-wins, or records, are eventually shown to the elders, who gather to discuss them, as the entire community believes in these visions. Ultimately, they endorse him and declare him a gifted prophet, filled with wisdom, and worthy to guide the beliefs of the people. This, he concluded, was the traditional practice, and many celebrated war leaders gained their power in this way." Lastly, among these tribes, the 'jossakeed' or soothsayer prepares himself through fasting and using the sweating-bath to achieve a state of ecstatic trance where he speaks the messages of his spirit guides.[994]
The practice of fasting is described in other districts of the uncultured world as carried on to produce similar ecstasy and supernatural converse. The account by Roman Pane in the Life of Colon describes the practice in Hayti of fasting to obtain knowledge of future events from the spirits (cemi); and a century or two later, rigorous fasting formed part of the apprentice’s preparation for the craft of ‘boyé’ or sorcerer, evoker, consulter, propitiator, and exorciser of spirits.[995] The ‘keebèt’ or conjurers of the Abipones were believed by the natives to be able to inflict disease and death, cure all disorders, make known distant and future events, cause rain, hail, and tempests, call up the shades of the dead, put on the form of tigers, handle serpents unharmed, &c. These powers were imparted by diabolical assistance, and Father Dobrizhoffer thus describes the manner of obtaining them:—‘Those who aspire to the office of juggler are said to sit upon an aged willow, overhanging some lake, and to abstain from food for several days, till they begin to see into futurity. It always appeared probable to me that these rogues, from long fasting, contract a weakness of brain, a giddiness, and kind 414of delirium, which makes them imagine that they are gifted with superior wisdom, and give themselves out for magicians. They impose upon themselves first, and afterwards upon others.’[996] The Malay, to make himself invulnerable, retires for three days to solitude and scanty food in the jungle, and if on the third day he dreams of a beautiful spirit descending to speak to him, the charm is worked.[997] The Zulu doctor qualifies himself for intercourse with the ‘amadhlozi,’ or ghosts, from whom he is to obtain direction in his craft, by spare abstemious diet, want, suffering, castigation, and solitary wandering, till fainting fits or coma bring him into direct intercourse with the spirits. These native diviners fast often, and are worn out by fastings, sometimes of several days’ duration, when they become partially or wholly ecstatic, and see visions. So thoroughly is the connexion between fasting and spiritual intercourse acknowledged by the Zulus, that it has become a saying among them, ‘The continually stuffed body cannot see secret things.’ They have no faith in a fat prophet.[998]
The practice of fasting in other parts of the uncivilized world is seen as a way to achieve similar ecstasy and supernatural communication. Roman Pane's account in the Life of Colon describes how people in Hayti fast to gain knowledge about future events from spirits (cemi); and a century or two later, strict fasting was part of the training for apprentices in the craft of ‘boyé’ or sorcerers, evokers, counselors, propitiators, and exorcists of spirits.[995] The ‘keebèt’ or conjurers of the Abipones were believed by the locals to be able to cause illness and death, heal all ailments, foretell distant and future events, summon rain, hail, and storms, call up the spirits of the dead, take the form of tigers, and handle snakes without harm, etc. These abilities were granted through diabolical assistance, and Father Dobrizhoffer describes how they obtained them: ‘Those who seek to be jugglers reportedly sit on an old willow tree overhanging a lake and fast for several days until they begin to perceive the future. It always seemed likely to me that these tricksters, through prolonged fasting, develop a mental weakness, dizziness, and a kind of delirium that leads them to believe they possess superior wisdom and proclaim themselves as magicians. They deceive themselves first, and then others.’[996] To become invulnerable, the Malay retreats for three days into solitude with minimal food in the jungle, and if on the third day he dreams of a beautiful spirit coming down to speak with him, he believes the charm has worked.[997] The Zulu doctor prepares for communication with the ‘amadhlozi,’ or ghosts, from whom he seeks guidance in his craft, through a strict diet, hardship, self-punishment, and solitary wandering, until fainting spells or coma allow him to directly connect with the spirits. These native diviners often fast, sometimes for several days, until they enter a state of partial or complete ecstasy and see visions. The connection between fasting and spiritual communication is so recognized by the Zulus that it has become a saying among them, ‘A constantly stuffed body cannot perceive secret things.’ They do not believe in a fat prophet.[998]
The effects thus looked for and attained by fasting among uncultured tribes continue into the midst of advanced civilization. No wonder that, in the Hindu tale, king Vasavadatta and his queen after a solemn penance and a three days’ fast should see Siva in a dream and receive his gracious tidings; no wonder that, in the actual experience of to-day, the Hindu yogi should bring on by fasting a state in which he can with bodily eyes behold the gods.[999] The Greek oracle-priests recognized fasting as a means of bringing on prophetic dreams and visions; the Pythia of Delphi herself fasted for inspiration; Galen remarks that fasting dreams are the clearer.[1000] Through after ages, both cause 415and consequence have held their places in Christendom. Thus Michael the Archangel, with sword in right hand and scales in left, appears to a certain priest of Siponte, who during a twelvemonth’s course of prayer and fasting had been asking if he would have a temple built in his honour:—
The effects that were sought and achieved through fasting among primitive tribes continue even in advanced civilization. It's no surprise that in the Hindu story, King Vasavadatta and his queen, after a serious penance and a three-day fast, should dream of Siva and receive his kind messages; it's no wonder that today, the Hindu yogi can induce a state through fasting where he can physically see the gods.[999] The Greek oracle-priests acknowledged fasting as a way to provoke prophetic dreams and visions; even the Pythia of Delphi fasted for inspiration; Galen noted that fasting dreams are clearer.[1000] Through the ages, both cause and effect have remained prominent in Christianity. Thus, Michael the Archangel, with a sword in his right hand and scales in his left, appears to a certain priest of Siponte, who, after a year of prayer and fasting, had been asking if he would have a temple built in his honor:—
Reading the narratives of the wondrous sights seen by St. Theresa and her companions, how the saint went in spirit into hell and saw the darkness and fire and unutterable despair, how she had often by her side her good patrons Peter and Paul, how when she was raised in rapture above the grate at the nunnery where she was to take the sacrament, Sister Mary Baptist and others being present, they saw an angel by her with a golden fiery dart at the end whereof was a little fire, and he thrust it through her heart and bowels and pulled them out with it, leaving her wholly inflamed with a great love of God—the modern reader naturally looks for details of physical condition and habit of life among the sisterhood, and as naturally finds that St. Theresa was of morbid constitution and subject to trances from her childhood, in after life subduing her flesh by long watchings and religious discipline, and keeping severe fast during eight months of the year.[1002] It is needless to multiply such mediæval records of fasts which have produced their natural effects in beatific vision—are they not written page after page in the huge folios of the Bollandists? So long as fasting is continued as a religious rite, so long its consequences in morbid mental exaltation will continue the old and savage doctrine that morbid phantasy is supernatural experience. Bread and meat would have robbed the ascetic of many an angel’s visit; the opening of the refectory door must many a time have closed the gates of heaven to his gaze.
Reading the accounts of the amazing visions experienced by St. Theresa and her companions, how the saint’s spirit traveled to hell where she witnessed darkness, fire, and indescribable despair, how she often had her good patrons Peter and Paul by her side, and how when she was lifted in ecstasy above the grate at the convent where she was to take the sacrament, Sister Mary Baptist and others present saw an angel with a golden fiery dart, the tip glowing with a small fire, who pierced her heart and insides and pulled them out, leaving her completely filled with overwhelming love for God—the modern reader naturally looks for details about the physical condition and lifestyle of the sisterhood, and understandably finds that St. Theresa had a delicate constitution and was prone to trances from childhood, later controlling her body through long vigils and strict religious practices, and maintaining severe fasting for eight months each year. It is unnecessary to elaborate on such medieval accounts of fasts that have naturally led to ecstatic visions—aren’t they documented page after page in the extensive volumes of the Bollandists? As long as fasting is still practiced as a religious ritual, its effects on exaggerated mental states will persist, perpetuating the old and brutal belief that distorted fantasies are supernatural experiences. Bread and meat would have deprived the ascetic of many angelic visits; each opening of the refectory door must have often shut the gates of heaven from his sight.
416It is indeed not the complete theory of fasting as a religious rite, but only an important and perhaps original part of it, that here comes into view. Abstinence from food has a principal place among acts of self-mortification or penance, a province of religious ordinance into which the present argument scarcely enters. Looking at the practice of fasting here from an animistic point of view, as a process of bringing on dreams and visions, it will be well to mention with it certain other means by which ecstatic phenomena are habitually induced.
416It's not the complete theory of fasting as a religious practice, but rather an important and possibly original aspect of it that we’re looking at here. Abstaining from food plays a key role among acts of self-discipline or penance, a part of religious regulation that this discussion barely touches on. When examining fasting from an animistic perspective, as a way to provoke dreams and visions, it’s useful to also mention some other methods that are commonly used to induce ecstatic experiences.
One of these means is the use of drugs. In the West India Islands at the time of the discovery, Columbus describes the religious ceremony of placing a platter containing ‘cohoba’ powder on the head of the idol, the worshippers then snuffing up this powder through a cane with two branches put to the nose. Pane further describes how the native priest, when brought to a sick man, would put himself in communication with the spirits by thus snuffing cohoba, ‘which makes him drunk, that he knows not what he does, and so says many extraordinary things, wherein they affirm that they are talking with the cemis, and that from them it is told them that the infirmity came.’ On the Amazons, the Omaguas have continued to modern times the use of narcotic plants, producing an intoxication lasting twenty-four hours, during which they are subject to extraordinary visions; from one of these plants they obtain the ‘curupa’ powder which they snuff into their nostrils with a Y-shaped reed.[1003] Here the similar names and uses of the drug plainly show historical connexion between the Omaguas and the Antilles islanders. The Californian Indians would give children narcotic potions, in order to gain from the ensuing visions information about their enemies; and thus the Mundrucus 417of North Brazil, desiring to discover murderers, would administer such drinks to seers, in whose dreams the criminals appeared.[1004] The Darien Indians used the seeds of the Datura sanguinea to bring on in children prophetic delirium, in which they revealed hidden treasure. In Peru the priests who talked with the ‘huaca’ or fetishes used to throw themselves into an ecstatic condition by a narcotic drink called ‘tonca,’ made from the same plant, whence its name of ‘huacacacha’ or fetish-herb.[1005] The Mexican priests also appear to have used an ointment or drink made with seeds of ‘ololiuhqui,’ which produced delirium and visions.[1006] In both Americas tobacco served for such purposes. It must be noticed that smoking is more or less practised among native races to produce full intoxication, the smoke being swallowed for the purpose. By smoking tobacco, the sorcerers of Brazilian tribes raised themselves to ecstasy in their convulsive orgies, and saw spirits; no wonder tobacco came to be called the ‘holy herb.’[1007] So North American Indians held intoxication by tobacco to be supernatural ecstasy, and the dreams of men in this state to be inspired.[1008] This idea may explain a remarkable proceeding of the Delaware Indians. At their festival in honour of the Fire-god with his twelve attendant manitus, inside the house of sacrifice a small oven-hut was set up, consisting of twelve poles tied together at the top and covered with blankets, high enough for a man to stand nearly upright within it. After the feast this oven was heated with twelve red-hot stones, and twelve men crept inside. An old man threw twelve pipefulls of tobacco on these stones, and when the patients had borne to the utmost 418the heat and suffocating smoke, they were taken out, generally falling in a swoon.[1009] This practice, which was carried on in the last century, is remarkable for its coincidence with the Scythian mode of purification after a funeral, as described by Herodotus. He relates that they make their hut with three stakes sloping together at the top and covered in with wooden felts; then they cast red-hot stones into a trough placed within and throw hemp-seed on them, which sends forth fumes such as no Greek vapour-bath could exceed, and the Scyths in their sweating-hut roar with delight.[1010]
One way to achieve this is through the use of drugs. In the West Indies at the time of Columbus’s discovery, he describes a religious ceremony where worshippers place a platter containing ‘cohoba’ powder on the head of an idol, and then snuff the powder through a cane with two branches put to their noses. Pane further explains how a native priest, when summoned to a sick person, would connect with spirits by snorting cohoba, which gets him drunk to the point that he doesn’t know what he's doing and thus says many extraordinary things, claiming that he is communicating with the cemis, who reveal that the illness is caused by something specific. In the Amazon, the Omaguas have continued using narcotic plants even in modern times, which induce an intoxication lasting twenty-four hours, during which they experience extraordinary visions; from one of these plants, they obtain ‘curupa’ powder, which they snort through a Y-shaped reed.[1003] The similar names and uses of the drug clearly indicate a historical connection between the Omaguas and the islanders of the Antilles. California Indians would give their children narcotic potions to gain visions about their enemies; similarly, the Mundrucus of North Brazil would administer such drinks to seers, who would see the murderers in their dreams.[1004] The Darien Indians used the seeds of Datura sanguinea to induce prophetic delirium in children, who would then reveal hidden treasures. In Peru, priests who communicated with the ‘huaca’ or fetishes would enter an ecstatic state using a narcotic drink called ‘tonca,’ made from the same plant, hence its name ‘huacacacha’ or fetish-herb.[1005] Mexican priests also seemed to use an ointment or drink made from the seeds of ‘ololiuhqui,’ which produced delirium and visions.[1006] In both Americas, tobacco was used for these purposes. It should be noted that smoking is practiced among native cultures to achieve full intoxication, with the smoke being swallowed for that effect. By smoking tobacco, Brazilian sorcerers would elevate themselves to ecstasy during their convulsive ceremonies and see spirits; it’s no surprise that tobacco came to be known as the ‘holy herb.’[1007] North American Indians considered intoxication from tobacco to be a form of supernatural ecstasy, believing the dreams that came from it to be inspired.[1008] This notion may explain a remarkable practice of the Delaware Indians. During their festival in honor of the Fire-god and his twelve accompanying spirits, a small oven-hut was constructed inside the sacrificial house, made of twelve poles tied together at the top and covered with blankets, tall enough for a man to stand nearly upright inside. After the feast, this oven was heated with twelve red-hot stones, and twelve men crawled inside. An old man would toss in twelve pipefuls of tobacco onto these stones, and when the participants could no longer withstand the heat and suffocating smoke, they were pulled out, often collapsing into a faint.[1009] This practice, carried out in the last century, is notable for its similarity to the Scythian method of purification after a funeral, as described by Herodotus. He recounts that they build their hut with three stakes leaning together at the top and cover it with wooden felts; then they toss in red-hot stones into a trough placed inside and sprinkle hemp-seed on them, which releases fumes that no Greek steam bath could surpass, and the Scythians in their sweating hut roar with delight.[1010]
Not to dwell on the ancient Aryan deification of an intoxicating drink, the original of the divine Soma of the Hindus and the divine Haoma of the Parsis, nor on the drunken orgies of the worship of Dionysos in ancient Greece, we find more exact Old World analogues of the ecstatic medicaments used in the lower culture. Such are the decoctions of thalassægle which Pliny speaks of as drunk to produce delirium and visions; the drugs mentioned by Hesychius, whereby Hekate was evoked; the mediæval witch-ointments which brought visionary beings into the presence of the patient, transported him to the witches’ sabbath, enabled him to turn into a beast.[1011] The survival of such practices is most thorough among the Persian dervishes of our own day. These mystics are not only opium-eaters, like so large a proportion of their countrymen; they are hashish-smokers, and the effect of this drug is to bring them into a state of exaltation passing into utter hallucination. To a patient in this condition, says Dr. Polak, a little stone in the road will seem a great block that he must stride over; a gutter becomes a wide stream to his eyes, and he calls for a boat to ferry him 419across; men’s voices sound like thunder in his ears; he fancies he has wings and can rise from the ground. These ecstatic effects, in which miracle is matter of hourly experience, are considered in Persia as high religious developments; the visionaries and their rites are looked on as holy, and they make converts.[1012]
Not to focus too much on the ancient Aryan worship of a mind-altering drink—like the original divine Soma of the Hindus and the divine Haoma of the Parsis—or on the drunken revelries dedicated to Dionysos in ancient Greece, we find clearer Old World examples of the ecstatic substances used in less developed cultures. These include the decoctions of thalassægle that Pliny mentioned, which were consumed to induce delirium and visions; the drugs referenced by Hesychius that were used to summon Hekate; and the medieval witch ointments that brought visionary beings to the patient, transported him to the witches’ sabbath, and even allowed him to transform into a beast.[1011] The persistence of such practices is especially strong among the Persian dervishes of today. These mystics not only consume opium, like many of their fellow countrymen, but they also smoke hashish, which elevates them to a state of elation that can lead to full hallucination. According to Dr. Polak, a patient in this state might perceive a small stone in the road as a large obstacle he must step over; a gutter turns into a wide stream in his eyes, prompting him to ask for a boat to take him across; men’s voices seem to thunder in his ears; he imagines he has wings and can lift off the ground. These ecstatic effects, where miracles happen every hour, are regarded in Persia as significant spiritual experiences; the visionaries and their rituals are seen as sacred, and they attract followers.[1012]
Many details of the production of ecstasy and swoon by bodily exercises, chanting and screaming, &c., have been incidentally given in describing the doctrine of demoniacal possession. I will only further cite a few typical cases to show that the practice of bringing on swoons or fits by religious exercises, in reality or pretence, is one belonging originally to savagery, whence it has been continued into higher grades of civilization. We may judge of the mental and bodily condition of the priest or sorcerer in Guyana, by his preparation for his sacred office. This consisted in the first place in fasting and flagellation of extreme severity; at the end of his fast he had to dance till he fell senseless, and was revived by a potion of tobacco-juice causing violent nausea and vomiting of blood; day after day this treatment was continued till the candidate, brought into or confirmed in the condition of a ‘convulsionary,’ was ready to pass from patient into doctor.[1013] Again, at the Winnebago medicine-feast, members of the fraternity assemble in a long arched booth, and with them the candidates for initiation, whose preparation is a three days’ fast, with severe sweating and steaming with herbs, under the direction of the old medicine-men. The initiation is performed in the assembly by a number of medicine-men. These advance in line, as many abreast as there are candidates; holding their medicine-bags before them with both hands, they dance forward slowly at first, uttering low guttural sounds as they approach the candidates, their step and voice increasing in energy, until with a violent ‘Ough!’ they thrust their medicine-bags 420at their breasts. Instantly, as if struck with an electric shock, the candidates fall prostrate on their faces, their limbs extended, their muscles rigid and quivering. Blankets are now thrown over them, and they are suffered to lie thus a few moments; as soon as they show signs of recovering from the shock, they are assisted to their feet and led forward. Medicine-bags are then put in their hands, and medicine-stones in their mouths; they are now medicine men or women, as the case may be, in full communion and fellowship; and they now go round the bower in company with the old members, knocking others down promiscuously by thrusting their medicine-bags at them. A feast and dance to the music of drum and rattle carry on the festival.[1014] Another instance may be taken from among the Alfurus of Celebes, inviting Empong Lembej to descend into their midst. The priests chant, the chief priest with twitching and trembling limbs turns his eyes towards heaven; Lembej descends into him, and with horrible gestures he springs upon a board, beats about with a bundle of leaves, leaps and dances, chanting legends of an ancient deity. After some hours another priest relieves him, and sings of another deity. So it goes on day and night till the fifth day, and then the chief priest’s tongue is cut, he falls into a swoon like death, and they cover him up. They fumigate with benzoin the piece taken from his tongue, and swing a censer over his body, calling back his soul; he revives and dances about, lively but speechless, till they give him back the rest of his tongue, and with it his power of speech.[1015] Thus, in the religion of uncultured races, the phenomenon of being ‘struck’ holds so recognised a position that impostors will even counterfeit it. In its morbid nature, its genuine cases at least plainly correspond with the fits which history records among the convulsionnaires of St. Medard and the enthusiasts of the Cevennes. Nor need we go even a generation 421back to see symptoms of the same type accepted as signs of grace among ourselves. Medical descriptions of the scenes brought on by fanatical preachers at ‘revivals’ in England, Ireland, and America, are full of interest to students of the history of religious rites. I will but quote a single case. ‘A young woman is described as lying extended at full length; her eyes closed, her hands clasped and elevated, and her body curved in a spasm so violent that it appeared to rest arch-like upon her heels and the back portion of her head. In that position she lay without speech or motion for several minutes. Suddenly she uttered a terrific scream, and tore handfuls of hair from her uncovered head. Extending her open hands in a repelling attitude of the most appalling terror, she exclaimed, “Oh, that fearful pit!” During this paroxysm three strong men were hardly able to restrain her. She extended her arms on either side, clutching spasmodically at the grass, shuddering with terror, and shrinking from some fearful inward vision; but she ultimately fell back exhausted, nerveless, and apparently insensible.’[1016] Such descriptions carry us far back in the history of the human mind, showing modern men still in ignorant sincerity producing the very fits and swoons to which for untold ages savage tribes have given religious import. These manifestations in modern Europe indeed form part of a revival of religion, the religion of mental disease.
Many details about how ecstasy and fainting are produced through physical exercises, chanting, screaming, etc., have been mentioned while discussing the belief in demonic possession. I will cite a few typical cases to show that the practice of inducing ecstasy or fits through religious activities, whether real or feigned, originates from primitive societies and has continued into more advanced civilizations. We can assess the mental and physical state of the priest or sorcerer in Guyana by looking at his preparation for the sacred role. This preparation begins with an intense period of fasting and extreme self-flagellation; at the end of his fast, he must dance until he collapses, only to be revived by a potion made from tobacco juice that causes violent nausea and bloody vomiting. This treatment continues day after day until the candidate, now in a 'convulsionary' state, is ready to transition from being a patient to becoming a healer.[1013] Similarly, during the Winnebago medicine feast, members of the fraternity gather in a long arched booth with initiation candidates, who undergo a three-day fast accompanied by intense sweating and steaming with herbs, guided by the elder medicine men. The initiation occurs in front of the assembly by several medicine men, who form a line as many abreast as there are candidates. Holding their medicine bags in both hands, they start dancing slowly while making low guttural sounds. As they approach the candidates, their movements and vocal intensity escalate until, with a powerful 'Ough!' they thrust their medicine bags at the candidates' chests. As if struck by lightning, the candidates collapse face down, their limbs spread out, muscles tensed and trembling. Blankets are then placed over them, and they are allowed to lie still for a few moments. Once they show signs of recovering from the shock, they are helped to their feet and brought forward. Medicine bags are placed in their hands, and medicine stones in their mouths; they are now medicine men or women, fully accepted into the community. They then move around the bower with the older members, randomly knocking others over by thrusting their medicine bags at them. A feast and dance accompanied by drums and rattles ensue to continue the celebration.[1014] Another example comes from the Alfurus of Celebes, who call upon Empong Lembej to join them. The priests chant, with the chief priest exhibiting twitching and trembling limbs as he gazes towards the heavens; Lembej then descends into him. Riddled with terrifying movements, he jumps onto a board, thrashing about with a bundle of leaves, leaping and dancing while reciting tales of an ancient deity. After several hours, another priest takes over and sings about another deity. This cycle continues night and day until the fifth day, when the chief priest has his tongue cut, falls into a death-like trance, and is covered up. They fumigate the piece taken from his tongue with benzoin and swing a censer over his body, calling back his soul. He revives and dances around, lively but mute, until they return the rest of his tongue to him, restoring his ability to speak.[1015] Thus, in the religions of uncultured societies, the phenomenon of being 'struck' holds such an established place that fraudsters even mimic it. In its unhealthy nature, genuine cases correlate quite clearly with the episodes recorded in history among the convulsionnaires of St. Medard and the enthusiasts from the Cevennes. We don't even need to look back a generation to find symptoms of the same kind acknowledged as signs of grace in our own culture. Medical accounts of the scenes triggered by fervent preachers during 'revivals' in England, Ireland, and America are extremely interesting for those studying the history of religious practices. I'll just mention one case. 'A young woman is described as lying fully extended, her eyes shut, hands clasped and raised, her body contorted in such a severe spasm that it seemed to arch on her heels and the back of her head. She remained in this position for several minutes without speaking or moving. Suddenly, she let out a blood-curdling scream and pulled out handfuls of hair from her exposed head. With her hands outstretched in an attitude of utter terror, she shouted, “Oh, that fearful pit!” During this episode, three strong men struggled to hold her down. She reached out with her arms, clutching desperately at the grass, shaking with horror as she seemed to shrink from some terrifying inner vision; eventually, she fell back, exhausted, limp, and seemingly unconscious.'[1016] Such accounts take us deep into the history of the human mind, revealing that modern people, in their ignorance, still produce the exact fits and swoons that primitive tribes have attributed religious significance to for countless ages. These manifestations are indeed part of a religious revival in modern Europe, one that centers on mental illness.
From this series of rites, practical with often harmful practicality, we turn to a group of ceremonies whose characteristic is picturesque symbolism. In discussing sun-myth and sun-worship, it has come into view how deeply the association in men’s mind of the east with light and warmth, life and happiness and glory, of the west with darkness and chill, death and decay, has from remote ages rooted itself in religious belief. It will illustrate and confirm this view to observe how the same symbolism of east and west has taken shape in actual ceremony, giving rise to a series of practices 422concerning the posture of the dead in their graves and the living in their temples, practices which may be classed under the general heading of Orientation.
From this series of rituals, often practical but sometimes harmful, we shift our focus to a set of ceremonies marked by colorful symbolism. In discussing sun myths and sun worship, it has become clear how deeply rooted the association in people’s minds is between the east and light, warmth, life, happiness, and glory, and between the west and darkness, cold, death, and decay. This connection has been embedded in religious beliefs since ancient times. Observing how this same symbolism of east and west has manifested in actual ceremonies reveals a series of practices related to the positioning of the dead in their graves and the living in their temples, which can be categorized under the general idea of Orientation. 422
While the setting sun has shown to men, from savage ages onward, the western region of death, the rising sun has displayed a scene more hopeful, an eastern home of deity. It seems to be the working out of the solar analogy, on the one hand in death as sunset, on the other in new life as sunrise, that has produced two contrasted rules of burial, which agree in placing the dead in the sun’s path, the line of east and west. Thus the natives of Australia have in some districts well-marked thoughts of the western land of the dead, yet the custom of burying the dead sitting with face to the east is also known among them.[1017] The Samoans and Fijians, agreeing that the land of the departed lies in the far west, bury the corpse lying with head east and feet west;[1018] the body would but have to rise and walk straight onward to follow its soul home. This idea is stated explicitly among the Winnebagos of North America; they will sometimes bury a dead man sitting up to the breast in a hole in the ground, looking westward; or graves are dug east and west, and the bodies laid in them with the head eastward, with the motive ‘that they may look towards the happy land in the west.’[1019] With these customs may be compared those of certain South American tribes. The Yumanas bury their dead bent double with faces looking toward the heavenly region of the sunrise, the home of their great good deity, who they trust will take their souls with him to his dwelling;[1020] the Guarayos bury the corpses with heads turned to the east, for it is in the eastern sky that their god Tamoi, the Ancient of Heaven, has his happy hunting-grounds where the dead will meet again.[1021] 423On the other hand the Peruvian custom was to place the dead huddled up in a sitting posture and with faces turned to the west.[1022] Barbaric Asia may be represented by the modern Ainos of Yesso, burying the dead lying robed in white with the head to the east, ‘because that is where the sun rises;’ or by the Tunguz who bury with the head to the west; or by the mediæval Tatars, raising a great mound over the dead, and setting up thereon a statue with face turned toward the east, holding a drinking-cup in his hand before his navel; or by the modern Siamese, who do not sleep with their heads to the west, because it is in this significant position that the dead are burned.[1023] The burial of the dead among the ancient Greeks in the line of east and west, whether according to Athenian custom of the head toward the sunset, or the converse, is another link in the chain of custom.[1024] Thus it is not to late and isolated fancy, but to the carrying on of ancient and widespread solar ideas, that we trace the well-known legend that the body of Christ was laid with the head toward the west, thus looking eastward, and the Christian usage of digging graves east and west, which prevailed through mediæval times and is not yet forgotten. The rule of laying the head to the west, and its meaning that the dead shall rise looking toward the east, are perfectly stated in the following passage from an ecclesiastical treatise of the 16th century: ‘Debet autem quis sic sepeliri, ut capite ad occidentem posito, pedes dirigat ad orientem, in quo quasi ipsa positione orat: et innuit quod promptus est, ut de occasu festinet ad ortum: de mundo ad seculum.’[1025]
While the setting sun has indicated to people, from ancient times onward, the western land of the dead, the rising sun has shown a more hopeful scene, an eastern home of the divine. This seems to represent the solar analogy: on one hand, death as sunset, and on the other, new life as sunrise, which has led to two different burial practices that both place the dead in the sun's path along the east-west line. For example, in some regions, the Aboriginal Australians have distinct ideas about the western land of the dead, yet they also have the custom of burying the dead sitting up, facing east. The Samoans and Fijians believe that the land of the departed lies in the far west, so they bury the body lying down with the head to the east and feet to the west; this way, the body would only need to rise and move forward to follow its soul home. This belief is explicitly stated among the Winnebagos in North America; they sometimes bury a man sitting up to his chest in a hole, facing west, or dig graves east and west and lay the bodies in them with their heads facing east, so they can look toward the happy land in the west. Similar customs can be found among some South American tribes. The Yumanas bury their dead bent over, facing the heavenly region of the sunrise, trusting that their great god will take their souls with him; the Guarayos bury their dead with their heads turned to the east because their god Tamoi, the Ancient of Heaven, has his happy hunting grounds in the eastern sky where the deceased will reunite. On the other hand, the Peruvian custom had the dead positioned in a huddled sitting posture, facing west. In barbaric Asia, the contemporary Ainos of Yesso bury their dead lying down, dressed in white with their heads to the east, ‘because that is where the sun rises’; meanwhile, the Tunguz bury with the head to the west, and the medieval Tatars would build a large mound over the dead, placing a statue on top facing east, holding a drinking cup at its waist; modern Siamese people avoid sleeping with their heads to the west because it is considered significant, as this is the position in which the dead are burned. The ancient Greeks also buried their dead along the east-west line, aligning according to Athenian customs with heads toward the setting sun, or otherwise, further connecting these practices. Therefore, it’s not just a late or isolated idea, but rather a continuation of ancient and widespread solar beliefs that explains the well-known legend that Christ's body was laid with the head facing west, thus looking east, along with the Christian tradition of digging graves east and west, which persisted well into medieval times and is still remembered. The practice of positioning the head to the west, symbolizing that the dead shall rise facing east, is perfectly captured in this passage from a 16th-century ecclesiastical treatise: ‘Debet autem quis sic sepeliri, ut capite ad occidentem posito, pedes dirigat ad orientem, in quo quasi ipsa positione orat: et innuit quod promptus est, ut de occasu festinet ad ortum: de mundo ad seculum.’
424Where among the lower races sun-worship begins to consolidate itself in systematic ritual, the orientation of the worshipper and the temple becomes usual and distinct. The sun-worshipping Comanches, preparing for the war-path, will place their weapons betimes on the east side of the lodge to receive the sun’s first rays; it is a remnant of old solar rite, that the Christianized Pueblo Indians of New Mexico turn to the sun at his rising.[1026] It has been already noticed how in old times each morning at sunrise the Sun-chief of the Natchez of Louisiana stood facing the east at the door of his house, and smoked toward the sun first, before he turned to the other three quarters of the world.[1027] The cave-temple of the sun-worshipping Apalaches of Florida had its opening looking east, and within stood the priests on festival days at dawn, waiting till the first rays entered to begin the appointed rites of chant and incense and offering.[1028] In old Mexico, where sun-worship was the central doctrine of the complex religion, men knelt in prayer towards the east, and the doors of the sanctuaries looked mostly westward.[1029] It was characteristic of the solar worship of Peru that even the villages were habitually built on slopes toward the east, that the people might see and greet the national deity at his rising. In the temple of the sun at Cuzco, his splendid golden disc on the western wall looked out through the eastern door, so that as he rose his first beams fell upon it, reflected thence to light up the sanctuary.[1030]
424In cultures where sun-worship starts to take shape through organized rituals, the alignment of the worshipper and the temple becomes clear and consistent. The sun-worshipping Comanches, gearing up for battle, place their weapons early on the east side of their lodge to catch the sun’s first rays; this is an echo of ancient solar rituals, as the Christianized Pueblo Indians of New Mexico turn to face the sun at its rising.[1026] It has already been noted that in ancient times, every morning at sunrise, the Sun-chief of the Natchez in Louisiana would stand at his door facing east and first smoke toward the sun before turning to the other three directions.[1027] The cave temple of the sun-worshipping Apalaches in Florida had its entrance facing east, and on festival days at dawn, the priests would stand inside, waiting for the first rays to enter so they could begin the rituals of chants, incense, and offerings.[1028] In ancient Mexico, where sun-worship was the core of their complex religion, people knelt in prayer toward the east, while the doors of their sanctuaries were mostly oriented westward.[1029] A notable aspect of the solar worship in Peru was that even the villages were typically built on slopes facing east, allowing the people to see and honor their national deity at sunrise. In the temple of the sun at Cuzco, his magnificent golden disc on the western wall faced the eastern door, so that as he rose, his earliest rays would hit it, which then reflected light into the sanctuary.[1030]
In Asia, the ancient Aryan religion of the sun manifests itself not less plainly in rites of orientation. They have their place in the weary ceremonial routine which the Brahman 425must daily accomplish. When he has performed the dawn ablution, and meditated on the effulgent sun-light which is Brahma, the supreme soul, he proceeds to worship the sun, standing on one foot and resting the other against his ankle or heel, looking toward the east, and holding his hands open before him in a hollow form. At noon, when he has again adored the sun, it is sitting with his face to the east that he must read his daily portion of the Veda; it is looking toward the east that his offering of barley and water must be first presented to the gods, before he turns to north and south; it is with first and principal direction to the east that the consecration of the fire and the sacrificial implements, a ceremony which is the groundwork of all his religious acts, has to be performed.[1031] The significance of such reverence paid by adorers of the sun to the glorious eastern region of his rising, may be heightened to us by setting beside it a ceremony of a darker faith, displaying the awe-struck horror of the western home of death. The antithesis to the eastward consecration by the orthodox Brahmans is the westward consecration by the Thugs, worshippers of Kali the death-goddess. In honour of Kali their victims were murdered, and to her the sacred pickaxe was consecrated, wherewith the graves of the slain were dug. At the time of the suppression of Thuggee, Englishmen had the consecration of the pickaxe performed in make-believe in their presence by those who well knew the dark ritual. On the dreadful implement no shadow of any living thing must fall, its consecrator sits facing the west to perform the fourfold washing and the sevenfold passing through the fire, and then it being proved duly consecrated by the omen of the coco-nut divided at a single cut, it is placed on the ground, and the bystanders worship it, turning to the west.[1032]
In Asia, the ancient Aryan worship of the sun is clearly evident in orientation rituals. These rituals are part of the exhausting daily ceremonies that the Brahman must complete. After performing the morning cleansing and reflecting on the radiant sunlight that represents Brahma, the supreme soul, he then worships the sun by standing on one foot, resting the other against his ankle or heel, facing east, and holding his hands open in front of him in a cup-like shape. At noon, after honoring the sun once more, he must read his daily portion of the Veda while facing east. The offering of barley and water must also be presented to the gods while looking east before he turns north and south. The consecration of the fire and sacrificial tools, which forms the basis of all his religious actions, is performed primarily facing east. The importance of this reverence shown by sun worshippers towards the glorious eastern direction where the sun rises can be contrasted with a ceremony from a darker faith that reveals the fearful horror associated with the western realm of death. The opposite of the eastward ritual by the orthodox Brahmans is the westward ritual performed by the Thugs, worshippers of Kali, the goddess of death. In honor of Kali, their victims were killed, and a sacred pickaxe was consecrated for digging the graves of the slain. During the suppression of Thuggee, Englishmen witnessed a mock consecration of the pickaxe, performed by those familiar with the dark ritual. No shadow of any living creature was allowed to fall on the ominous tool. Its consecrator faced west to undertake the fourfold washing and the sevenfold passing through fire. Once confirmed as properly consecrated by the omen of a coconut split cleanly in one cut, the pickaxe was placed on the ground, and the spectators worshiped it while turning west.
These two contrasted rites of east and west established 426themselves and still remain established in modern European religion. In judging of the course of history that has brought about this state of things, it scarcely seems that Jewish influence was effective. The Jewish temple had the entrance in the east, and the sanctuary in the west. Sun-worship was an abomination to the Jews, and the orientation especially belonging to it appears as utterly opposed to Jewish usage, in Ezekiel’s horror-stricken vision: ‘and, behold, at the door of the temple of Jehovah, between the porch and the altar, about five-and-twenty men, with their backs toward the temple of Jehovah, and their faces toward the east, and they worshipped the sun toward the east.’[1033] Nor is there reason to suppose that in later ages such orientation gained ground in Jewish ceremony. The solar rites of other nations whose ideas were prominent in the early development of Christianity, are sufficient to account for the rise of Christian orientation. On the one hand there was the Asiatic sun-worship, perhaps specially related to the veneration of the rising sun in old Persian religion, and which has left relics in the east of the Turkish empire into modern years; Christian sects praying toward the sun, and Yezidis turning to the east as their kibleh and burying their dead looking thither.[1034] On the other hand, orientation was recognized in classic Greek religion, not indeed in slavish obedience to a uniform law, but as a principle to be worked out in converse ways. Thus it was an Athenian practice for the temple to have its entrance east, looking out through which the divine image stood to behold the rising sun. This rule it is that Lucian refers to, when he talks of the delight of gazing toward the loveliest and most longed-for of the day, of welcoming the sun as he peeps forth, of taking one’s fill of light through the wide-open doors, even as the 427ancients built their temples looking forth. Nor was the contrary rule as stated by Vitruvius less plain in meaning; the sacred houses of the immortal gods shall be so arranged, that if no reason prevents and choice is free, the temple and the statue erected in the cell shall look toward the west, so that they who approach the altar to sacrifice and vow and pray may look at once toward the statue and the eastern sky, the divine figures thus seeming to arise and look upon them. Altars of the gods were to stand toward the east.[1035]
These two contrasting rituals of the east and west established themselves and still exist in modern European religion. When looking at the historical developments that led to this situation, it hardly seems that Jewish influence was significant. The Jewish temple had its entrance in the east and the sanctuary in the west. Sun-worship was an abomination to the Jews, and the orientation associated with it appears completely contrary to Jewish practice, as seen in Ezekiel’s disturbing vision: ‘and, behold, at the door of the temple of Jehovah, between the porch and the altar, about twenty-five men, with their backs toward the temple of Jehovah, and their faces toward the east, and they worshipped the sun toward the east.’[1033] There is also no reason to think that later on such orientation became popular in Jewish ceremonies. The solar rituals of other nations, which played a significant role in the early development of Christianity, adequately explain the emergence of Christian orientation. On one hand, there was the Asiatic sun-worship, possibly linked to the reverence for the rising sun in ancient Persian religion, which has left traces in the east of the Turkish Empire even into modern times; Christian sects praying towards the sun and Yezidis turning to the east as their qibla while burying their dead looking that way.[1034] On the other hand, orientation was acknowledged in classical Greek religion, not necessarily as strict adherence to a uniform law, but as a principle to be interpreted in various ways. For example, it was common in Athens for the temple to have its entrance facing east, through which the divine image would look out upon the rising sun. This practice is what Lucian refers to when he mentions the joy of gazing at the most beautiful and desired part of the day, welcoming the sun as it rises and soaking in the light through the wide-open doors, just as the ancients built their temples facing outward. The opposing rule articulated by Vitruvius was equally clear in meaning; the sacred houses of the immortal gods should be arranged so that, if no obstacles prevent it and choices are free, the temple and the statue in the cell should face west, allowing those who approach the altar to sacrifice, vow, and pray to see both the statue and the eastern sky, making it seem as though the divine figures arise and look upon them. Altars of the gods were to stand facing east.[1035]
Unknown in primitive Christianity, the ceremony of orientation was developed within its first four centuries. It became an accepted custom to turn in prayer toward the east, the mystic region of the Light of the World, the Sun of Righteousness. Augustine says, ‘When we stand at prayer, we turn to the east, where the heaven arises, not as though God were only there, and had forsaken all other parts of the world, but to admonish our mind to turn to a more excellent nature, that is, to the Lord.’ No wonder that the early Christians were thought to practise in substance the rite of sun-worship which they practised in form. Thus Tertullian writes: ‘Others indeed with greater truth and verisimilitude believe the sun to be our God ... the suspicion arising from its being known that we pray toward the region of the east.’ Though some of the most ancient and honoured churches of Christendom stand to show that orientation was no original law of ecclesiastical architecture, yet it became dominant in early centuries. That the author of the ‘Apostolical Constitutions’ should be able to give directions for building churches toward the east (ὁ οἶκος ἔστω ἐπιμηκής, κατ’ ἀνατολὰς τετραμμένος), just as Vitruvius had laid down the rule as to the temples of the gods, is only a part of that assimilation of the church to the temple which took effect so largely in the scheme of worship. Of all Christian ceremony, however, it was in the rite of baptism that orientation took its fullest and most picturesque 428form. The catechumen was placed with face toward the west, and then commanded to renounce Satan with gestures of abhorrence, stretching out his hands against him, or smiting them together, and blowing or spitting against him thrice. Cyril of Jerusalem, in his ‘Mystagogic Catechism,’ thus depicts the scene: ‘Ye first came into the ante-room of the baptistery, and standing toward the west (πρὸς τὰς δυσμάς) ye were commanded to put away Satan, stretching out your hands as though he were present.... And why did ye stand toward the west? It was needful, for sunset is the type of darkness, and he is darkness and has his strength in darkness; therefore symbolically looking toward the west ye renounce that dark and gloomy ruler.’ Then turning round to the east, the catechumen took up his allegiance to his new master, Christ. The ceremony and its significance are clearly set forth by Jerome, thus: ‘In the mysteries [meaning baptism] we first renounce him who is in the west, and dies to us with our sins; and so, turning to the east, we make a covenant with the Sun of righteousness, promising to be his servants.’[1036] This perfect double rite of east and west, retained in the baptismal ceremony of the Greek Church, may be seen in Russia to this day. The orientation of churches and the practice of turning to the east as an act of worship, are common to both Greek and Latin ritual. In our own country they declined from the Reformation, till at the beginning of the 19th century they seemed falling out of use; since then, however, they have been restored to a certain prominence by the revived mediævalism of our own day. To the student of history, it is a striking example of the connexion of thought and ceremony through the religions of the lower and higher culture, to see surviving in our midst, with meaning dwindled into 429symbolism, this ancient solar rite. The influence of the divine Sun upon his rude and ancient worshippers still subsists before our eyes as a mechanical force, acting diamagnetically to adjust the axis of the church and turn the body of the worshipper.
Unknown in early Christianity, the practice of facing east during prayer developed within the first four centuries. It became common to turn towards the east, associated with the Light of the World, the Sun of Righteousness. Augustine states, "When we pray, we turn to the east, where heaven rises, not because God is only there and has abandoned other parts of the world, but to remind us to focus our minds on a higher nature, that is, the Lord." It’s no surprise that early Christians were believed to be practicing sun-worship in form, if not substance. Tertullian writes, "Others indeed with greater truth and credibility believe the sun to be our God... the suspicion arises from the fact that we pray toward the east." Although some of the oldest and most revered churches in Christendom demonstrate that this orientation was not an original requirement of church architecture, it became prevalent in the early centuries. The author of the 'Apostolic Constitutions' could give directions for building churches oriented toward the east (May the house be long and oriented towards the east.), just as Vitruvius had set rules for the temples of the gods, reflecting the significant assimilation of the church to the temple in worship practices. However, of all Christian ceremonies, orientation played its most vivid role in the rite of baptism. The catechumen would face west and was instructed to renounce Satan with gestures of disgust, stretching out their hands against him, clapping, and spitting or blowing at him three times. Cyril of Jerusalem describes the scene in his 'Mystagogic Catechism': "You first entered the ante-room of the baptistery, and standing toward the west (towards the sunset), you were told to put away Satan, stretching out your hands as if he were present…. And why did you face west? It was necessary, for sunset symbolizes darkness, and he embodies darkness and draws strength from it; therefore, symbolically facing west, you renounce that dark and gloomy ruler." Then, turning toward the east, the catechumen pledged loyalty to their new master, Christ. Jerome clearly outlines the ceremony and its meaning: "In the mysteries [meaning baptism], we first renounce him who is in the west and dies to us with our sins; then, turning to the east, we enter into a covenant with the Sun of righteousness, promising to be his servants." This perfect dual rite of east and west, still present in the baptismal ceremony of the Greek Church, can be observed in Russia today. The orientation of churches and the practice of facing east as a form of worship are common to both Greek and Latin rituals. In our own country, these practices declined after the Reformation, and by the beginning of the 19th century, they seemed to be fading from use; however, they have made a notable comeback due to the revival of medievalism in recent times. For the history student, it is a striking example of the connection between thought and ceremony throughout cultures, to see this ancient solar rite surviving among us, its meaning reduced to symbolism. The influence of the divine Sun on its primitive and ancient worshippers remains evident as a mechanical force, working diamagnetically to align the church's axis and turn the body of the worshipper.
The last group of rites whose course through religious history is to be outlined here, takes in the varied dramatic acts of ceremonial purification of Lustration. With all the obscurity and intricacy due to age-long modification, the primitive thought which underlies these ceremonies is still open to view. It is the transition from practical to symbolic cleansing, from removal of bodily impurity to deliverance from invisible, spiritual, and at last moral evil. Our language follows this ideal movement to its utmost stretch, where such words as cleansing and purification have passed from their first material meaning, to signify removal of ceremonial contamination, legal guilt, and moral sin. What we thus express in metaphor, the men of the lower culture began early to act in ceremony, purifying persons and objects by various prescribed rites, especially by dipping them in and sprinkling them with water, or fumigating them with and passing them through fire. It is the plainest proof of the original practicality of proceedings now passed into formalism, to point out how far the ceremonial lustrations still keep their connexion with times of life when real purification is necessary, how far they still consist in formal cleansing of the new-born child and the mother, of the man-slayer who has shed blood, or the mourner who has touched a corpse. In studying the distribution of the forms of lustration among the races of the world, while allowing for the large effect of their transmission from religion to religion, and from nation to nation, we may judge that their diversity of detail and purpose scarcely favours a theory of their being all historically derived from one or even several special religions of the ancient world. They seem more largely to exemplify independent working out, in different directions, of an idea common to mankind at large. This view may 430be justified by surveying lustration through a series of typical instances, which show its appearance and character in savage and barbaric culture, as being an act belonging to certain well-marked events of human life.
The last group of rituals we’re going to discuss in religious history includes the various dramatic acts of ceremonial purification known as Lustration. Despite the complexity and obscurity caused by centuries of change, the original idea behind these rituals is still visible. It represents the shift from practical to symbolic cleansing, from removing physical impurity to being freed from invisible spiritual and, ultimately, moral evil. Our language reflects this evolution, where words like cleansing and purification have moved from their original physical meanings to refer to the removal of ceremonial contamination, legal guilt, and moral sin. What we articulate as metaphor, people in earlier cultures began to enact through ceremonies, purifying individuals and objects with various prescribed rites, especially through immersion in or sprinkling with water, or by passing them through fire or fumigation. This highlights the practical origins of these ceremonies, now seen as formal rituals, showing how ceremonial purifications maintain connections to times in life when actual purification is necessary, such as formal cleansing for newborns and mothers, for someone who has caused death, or for those mourning a loss. When we examine the different practices of lustration across cultures, while considering the significant impact of their transfer from religion to religion and nation to nation, we can conclude that their differences in detail and purpose make it unlikely they all originated from one or even a few specific ancient religions. Instead, they appear to independently reflect a common idea shared by humanity as a whole. This perspective can be supported by looking at lustration through a series of typical examples, which reveal its presence and nature in primitive and barbaric cultures as an act tied to specific, significant events in human life.
The purification of the new-born child appears among the lower races in various forms, but perhaps in some particular instances borrowed from the higher. It should be noticed that though the naming of the child is often associated with its ceremonial cleansing, there is no real connexion between the two rites, beyond their coming due at the same early time of life. To those who look for the matter-of-fact origin of such ceremonies, one of the most suggestive of the accounts available is a simple mention of the two necessary acts of washing and name-giving, as done together in mere practical purpose, but not as yet passed into formal ceremony—the Kichtak Islanders, it is remarked, at birth wash the child, and give it a name.[1037] Among the Yumanas of Brazil, as soon as the child can sit up, it is sprinkled with a decoction of certain herbs, and receives a name which has belonged to an ancestor.[1038] Among some Jakun tribes of the Malay Peninsula, as soon as the child is born it is carried to the nearest stream and washed; it is then brought back to the house, the fire is kindled, and fragrant wood thrown on, over which it is passed several times.[1039] The New Zealanders’ infant baptism is no new practice, and is considered by them an old traditional rite, but nothing very similar is observed among other branches of the Polynesian race. Whether independently invented or not, it was thoroughly worked into the native religious scheme. The baptism was performed on the eighth day or earlier, at the side of a stream or elsewhere, by a native priest who sprinkled water on the child with a branch or twig; sometimes the child was immersed. With this lustration it received its name, the priest repeating a list of 431ancestral names till the child chose one for itself by sneezing at it. The ceremony was of the nature of a dedication, and was accompanied by rhythmical formulas of exhortation. The future warrior was bidden to flame with anger, to leap nimbly and ward off the spears, to be angry and bold and industrious, to work before the dew is off the ground; the future housewife was bidden to get food and go for firewood and weave garments with panting of breath. In after years, a second sacred sprinkling was performed to admit a lad into the rank of warriors. It has to be noticed with reference to the reason of this ceremonial washing, that a new-born child is in the highest degree tapu, and may only be touched by a few special persons till the restriction is removed.[1040] In Madagascar, a fire is kept up in the room for several days, then the child in its best clothes is in due form carried out of the house and back to its mother, both times being carefully lifted over the fire, which is made near the door.[1041] In Africa, some of the most noticeable ceremonies of the class are these. The people of Sarac wash the child three days after birth with holy water.[1042] When a Mandingo child was about a week old its hair was cut, and the priest, invoking blessings, took it in his arms, whispered in its ear, spat thrice in its face, and pronounced its name aloud before the assembled company.[1043] In Guinea, when a child is born, the event is publicly proclaimed, the new-born babe is brought into the streets, and the headman of the town or family sprinkles it with water from a basin, giving it a name and invoking blessings of health and wealth upon it; other friends follow the example, till the child is thoroughly drenched.[1044] In these various examples 432of lustration of infants, the purifications by fire have especial importance ethnologically, not because this proceeding is more natural to the savage mind than that of bathing or sprinkling with water, but because this latter ceremony may sometimes have been imitated from Christian baptism. The fact of savage and barbaric lustration of infants being in several cases associated with the belief in re-birth of ancestral souls seems to mark the rite as belonging to remote pre-Christian ages.[1045]
The cleansing of newborns appears in various forms among lower races, but some instances may have been influenced by higher cultures. It's important to note that while naming the child often coincides with its ceremonial cleansing, there’s really no connection between these two rituals other than their occurrence at similar early stages of life. For those interested in the practical origins of these ceremonies, one of the most revealing accounts simply mentions the necessary acts of washing and naming being done together for practical reasons rather than as formal ceremonies. The Kichtak Islanders, for instance, wash the child at birth and give it a name.[1037] Among the Yumanas of Brazil, as soon as the child can sit up, they sprinkle it with a herbal mixture and give it a name that belonged to an ancestor.[1038] Among some Jakun tribes of the Malay Peninsula, as soon as the child is born, it's taken to the nearest stream and washed. Then it’s brought back home, where a fire is lit and fragrant wood is thrown on it, and the child is passed over the smoke several times.[1039] The infant baptism practiced by New Zealanders isn’t a new tradition; they consider it an old rite. However, nothing very similar is found among other groups of Polynesians. Whether it was invented independently or not, it was fully integrated into the local religious practices. The baptism occurs on the eighth day or earlier, by a native priest who sprinkles water on the child from a branch by a stream or somewhere else; sometimes, the child is fully immersed. With this purification, the child receives its name, as the priest recites a list of ancestral names until the child chooses one by sneezing at it. The ceremony serves as a dedication, accompanied by rhythmic exhortations. The future warrior is encouraged to be fiery, agile, and ready to fight, while the future housewife is urged to gather food, collect firewood, and weave clothing with diligence. Later on, a second ritual sprinkling welcomes a boy into the warrior ranks. It’s noteworthy that a newborn child is extremely tapu and can only be touched by a select few until the restrictions are lifted.[1040] In Madagascar, a fire is kept burning in the room for several days, and then the child, dressed in its best clothes, is ceremoniously carried out of the house and back to its mother, being carefully lifted over the fire both times.[1041] In Africa, some prominent ceremonies include the practice among the Sarac people, who wash the child three days after birth with holy water.[1042] For a Mandingo child, when it’s about a week old, its hair is cut, and a priest invokes blessings while holding it, whispering in its ear, spitting three times in its face, and pronouncing its name aloud before everyone present.[1043] In Guinea, when a child is born, the news is shared publicly, and the newborn is brought into the streets, where the town or family head sprinkles it with water from a basin, names it, and invokes blessings for health and prosperity; others then follow suit until the child is thoroughly soaked.[1044] In these various examples of infant lustration, the purifications by fire hold special ethnological significance. This isn't because such a practice is more natural to primitive minds compared to bathing or sprinkling with water, but rather because the latter may have sometimes been influenced by Christian baptism. The fact that primitive and barbaric infant lustration rituals are linked to the belief in the rebirth of ancestral souls suggests that these rites belong to ancient, pre-Christian times.[1045]
The purification of women at childbirth, &c., is ceremonially practised by the lower races under circumstances which do not suggest adoption from more civilized nations. The seclusion and lustration among North American Indian tribes have been compared with those of the Levitical law, but the resemblance is not remarkably close, and belongs rather to a stage of civilization than to the ordinance of a particular nation. It is a good case of independent development in such customs, that the rite of putting out the fires and kindling ‘new fire’ on the woman’s return is common to the Iroquois and Sioux in North America,[1046] and the Basutos in South Africa. These latter have a well-marked rite of lustration by sprinkling, performed on girls at womanhood.[1047] The Hottentots considered mother and child unclean till they had been washed and smeared after the uncleanly native fashion.[1048] Lustrations with water were usual in West Africa.[1049] Tatar tribes in Mongolia used bathing, while in Siberia the custom of leaping over a fire answered the purpose of purification.[1050] The Mantras of the Malay Peninsula have made the bathing of the mother after 433childbirth into a ceremonial ordinance.[1051] It is so among the indigenes of India, where both in northern and southern districts the naming of the child comes into connexion with the purification of the mother, both ceremonies being performed on the same day.[1052] Without extending further this list of instances, it is sufficiently plain that we have before us the record of a practical custom becoming consecrated by traditional habit, and making its way into the range of religious ceremony.
The purification of women during childbirth is ceremonially practiced by less advanced societies in ways that don’t suggest influence from more civilized nations. The seclusion and cleansing rituals among North American Indian tribes have been compared to those in the Levitical law, but the similarities aren’t very strong and relate more to a level of civilization rather than a specific nation’s ordinance. A clear example of independent development in these customs is the practice of extinguishing old fires and starting a 'new fire' upon a woman’s return, which is found among both the Iroquois and Sioux in North America, and the Basutos in South Africa. The Basutos have a specific purification ritual involving sprinkling that is done for girls when they reach womanhood. The Hottentots regarded both mother and child as unclean until they were washed and anointed according to their traditional methods. Water purification rituals were common in West Africa. Tatar tribes in Mongolia practiced bathing, while in Siberia, jumping over a fire served the purpose of purification. The Mantras of the Malay Peninsula have turned the bathing of the mother after childbirth into a ceremonial act. This is also true among the indigenous people of India, where, in both northern and southern regions, the naming of the child is linked to the mother’s purification, with both ceremonies taking place on the same day. Without going into more examples, it is clear that we are witnessing a practical custom that has become sacred through tradition and has become integrated into religious ceremonies.
Much the same may be said of the purification of savage and barbaric races on occasion of contamination by bloodshed or funeral. In North America, the Dacotas use the vapour-bath not only as a remedy, but also for the removal of ceremonial uncleanness, such as is caused by killing a person, or touching a dead body.[1053] So among the Navajos, the man who has been deputed to carry a dead body to burial, holds himself unclean until he has thoroughly washed himself in water prepared for the purpose by certain ceremonies.[1054] In Madagascar, no one who has attended a funeral may enter the palace courtyard till he has bathed, and in all cases there must be an ablution of the mourner’s garments on returning from the grave.[1055] Among the Basutos of South Africa, warriors returning from battle must rid themselves of the blood they have shed, or the shades of their victims would pursue them and disturb their sleep. Therefore they go in procession in full armour to the nearest stream to wash, and their weapons are washed also. It is usual in this ceremony for a sorcerer higher up the stream to put in some magical ingredient, such as he also uses in the preparation of the holy water which is sprinkled over the people with a beast’s tail at the frequent public purifications. These Basutos, moreover, use fumigation with burning wood to purify growing corn, and cattle taken from the 434enemy. Fire serves for purification in cases too trifling to require sacrifice; thus when a mother sees her child walk over a grave, she hastens to call it, makes it stand before her, and lights a small fire at its feet.[1056] The Zulus, whose horror of a dead body will induce them to cast out and leave in the woods their sick people, at least strangers, purify themselves by an ablution after a funeral. It is to be noticed that these ceremonial practices have come to mean something distinct from mere cleanliness. Kaffirs who will purify themselves from ceremonial uncleanness by washing, are not in the habit of washing themselves or their vessels for ordinary purposes, and the dogs and the cockroaches divide between them the duty of cleaning out the milk-baskets.[1057] Mediæval Tatar tribes, some of whom had conscientious scruples against bathing, have found passing through fire or between two fires a sufficient purification, and the household stuff of the dead was lustrated in this latter way.[1058]
Much the same can be said about the purification of savage and barbaric cultures when it comes to contamination from bloodshed or funerals. In North America, the Dacotas use steam baths not just as a remedy, but also to cleanse themselves of ceremonial uncleanness, such as from killing someone or touching a dead body.[1053] Similarly, among the Navajos, the man chosen to carry a dead body to burial considers himself unclean until he has fully cleaned himself in water prepared for this purpose through specific ceremonies.[1054] In Madagascar, no one who has attended a funeral is allowed into the palace courtyard until they have bathed, and in all cases, the mourner’s clothing must be washed when returning from the grave.[1055] Among the Basutos of South Africa, warriors returning from battle must cleanse themselves of the blood they shed, or the spirits of their victims will haunt them and disrupt their sleep. So, they parade in full armor to the nearest stream to wash, and their weapons are cleaned as well. During this ceremony, a sorcerer upstream typically adds a magical ingredient to the water, similar to what is used in the holy water that gets sprinkled over people using a beast’s tail during frequent public purifications. These Basutos also use fumigation with burning wood to purify growing corn and cattle taken from enemies. Fire is employed for purification in situations that are too minor for sacrifices; for example, when a mother sees her child walking over a grave, she quickly calls it back, makes it stand in front of her, and lights a small fire at its feet.[1056] The Zulus, who are so horrified by a dead body that they will throw out and abandon their sick people, especially if they are strangers, purify themselves with a wash after a funeral. It's worth noting that these ceremonial practices have come to symbolize something more than mere cleanliness. Kaffirs who purify themselves from ceremonial uncleanness by washing do not generally wash themselves or their utensils for everyday purposes, and dogs and cockroaches take on the task of cleaning the milk baskets.[1057] Medieval Tatar tribes, some of whom had serious objections to bathing, found that passing through fire or between two fires was sufficient purification, and the belongings of the dead were purified in this manner.[1058]
In the organised nations of the semi-civilized and civilized world, where religion shapes itself into elaborate and systematic schemes, the practices of lustration familiar to the lower culture now become part of stringent ceremonial systems. It seems to be at this stage of their existence that they often take up in addition to their earlier ceremonial significance an ethical meaning, absent or all but absent from them at their first appearance above the religious horizon. This will be made evident by glancing over the ordinances of lustration in the great national religions of history. It will be well to notice first the usages of two semi-civilized nations of America, which though they have scarcely produced practical effect on civilization at large, give valuable illustration of a transition period in culture, leaving apart the obscure question of their special civilization 435having been influenced in early or late times from the Old World.
In the organized countries of the semi-civilized and civilized world, where religion develops into complex and structured systems, the practices of purification that are common in lower cultures become integrated into strict ceremonial systems. It seems that at this stage in their development, these practices often start to adopt an ethical meaning, which was either absent or minimal when they first emerged in the religious context. This will be clear by looking at the purification laws in the major national religions throughout history. It's important to first examine the customs of two semi-civilized nations in America, which, although they haven’t significantly impacted civilization as a whole, provide valuable insight into a transitional period in culture, not considering the uncertain question of whether their particular civilization was influenced by the Old World at any point. 435
In the religion of Peru, lustration is well-marked and characteristic. On the day of birth, the water in which the child has been washed was poured into a hole in the ground, charms being repeated by a wizard or priest; an excellent instance of the ceremonial washing away of evil influences. The naming of the child was also more or less generally accompanied with ceremonial washing, as in districts where at two years old it was weaned, baptized, had its hair ceremonially cut with a stone knife, and received its child-name; Peruvian Indians still cut off a lock of the child’s hair at its baptism. Moreover, the significance of lustration as removing guilt is plainly recorded in ancient Peru; after confession of guilt, an Inca bathed in a neighbouring river and repeated this formula, ‘O thou River, receive the sins I have this day confessed unto the Sun, carry them down to the sea, and let them never more appear.’[1059] In old Mexico, the first act of ceremonial lustration took place at birth. The nurse washed the infant in the name of the water-goddess, to remove the impurity of its birth, to cleanse its heart and give it a good and perfect life; then blowing on water in her right hand she washed it again, warning it of forthcoming trials and miseries and labours, and praying the invisible Deity to descend upon the water, to cleanse the child from sin and foulness, and to deliver it from misfortune. The second act took place some four days later, unless the astrologers postponed it. At a festive gathering, amid fires kept alight from the first ceremony, the nurse undressed the child sent by the gods into this sad and doleful world, bade it receive the life-giving water, and washed it, driving out evil from each limb and offering to the deities appointed prayers for virtue and blessing. It 436was then that the toy instruments of war or craft or household labour were placed in the boy’s or girl’s hand (a custom singularly corresponding with one usual in China), and the other children, instructed by their parents, gave the newcomer its child-name, here again to be replaced by another at manhood or womanhood. There is nothing unlikely in the statement that the child was also passed four times through the fire, but the authority this is given on is not sufficient. The religious character of ablution is well shown in Mexico by its forming part of the daily service of the priests. Aztec life ended as it had begun, with ceremonial lustration; it was one of the funeral ceremonies to sprinkle the head of the corpse with the lustral water of this life.[1060]
In Peru's religion, lustration is clearly defined and distinctive. On the day of a child's birth, the water used to wash the baby was poured into a hole in the ground while a wizard or priest recited charms. This is a great example of the ceremonial washing away of negative influences. Naming the child also typically involved ceremonial washing. In some areas, at two years old, a child would be weaned, baptized, have their hair ceremonially cut with a stone knife, and receive their child-name; Peruvian Indigenous people still cut a lock of the child’s hair at baptism. Additionally, the significance of lustration as a means of removing guilt is evident in ancient Peru; after confessing their sins, an Inca would bathe in a nearby river and recite, "O thou River, receive the sins I have confessed to the Sun today, carry them down to the sea, and let them never appear again." [1059] In ancient Mexico, the first act of ceremonial lustration occurred at birth. The nurse washed the infant in the name of the water goddess to remove any impurities from birth, cleanse its heart, and ensure a good and perfect life. Then, blowing on water in her right hand, she washed the child again, warning it of the trials, miseries, and labors to come, praying for the invisible Deity to descend upon the water to cleanse the child of sin and filth, and to protect it from misfortune. The second act occurred about four days later, unless postponed by astrologers. At a festive gathering, surrounded by fires lit from the first ceremony, the nurse undressed the child, sent by the gods into this sad world, encouraged it to receive the life-giving water, and washed it to drive out evil from each limb, offering the deities prayers for virtue and blessings. It was during this time that toy instruments of war, craft, or household labor were placed in the boy's or girl's hand (a custom that correlates with one common in China), and other children, guided by their parents, gave the newcomer its child-name, which would later be replaced by another at adulthood. It isn’t unlikely to say that the child was also passed through fire four times, but the evidence for this is not strong enough. The religious significance of ablution in Mexico is highlighted by its inclusion in the priests’ daily rituals. Aztec life concluded as it began, with ceremonial lustration; one of the funeral rituals involved sprinkling the corpse's head with the lustral water of this life. [1060]
Among the nations of East Asia, and across the more civilized Turanian districts of Central Asia, ceremonial lustration comes frequently into notice; but it would often bring in difficult points of ethnography to attempt a general judgment how far these may be native local rites, and how far ceremonies adopted from foreign religious systems. As examples may be mentioned in Japan the sprinkling and naming of the child at a month old, and other lustrations connected with worship;[1061] in China the religious ceremony at the first washing of the three days’ old infant, the lifting of the bride over burning coals, the sprinkling of holy-water over sacrifices and rooms and on the mourners after a funeral;[1062] in Burma the purification of the mother by fire, and the annual sprinkling-festival.[1063] Within the range of Buddhism in its Lamaist form, we find such instances as the Tibetan and 437Mongol lustration of the child a few days after birth, the lama blessing the water and immersing the child thrice, and giving its name; the Buraet consecration by threefold washing; the Tibetan ceremony where the mourners returning from the funeral stand before the fire, wash their hands with warm water over the hot coals, and fumigate themselves thrice with proper formulas.[1064] With this infant baptism of Tibetans and Mongols may be compared the rite of their ethnological kinsfolk in Europe. The Lapps in their semi-Christianized state had a form of baptism, in which a new name, that of the deceased ancestor who would live again in the child, as the mother was spiritually informed in a dream, was given with a threefold sprinkling and washing with warm water where mystic alder-twigs were put. This ceremony, though called by the Scandinavian name of ‘laugo’ or bath, was distinct from the Christian baptism to which the Lapps also conformed.[1065] The natural ethnographic explanation of these two baptismal ceremonies existing together in Northern Europe, is that Christianity had brought in a new rite, without displacing a previous native one.
Among the countries of East Asia, and throughout the more developed Turanian areas of Central Asia, ceremonial cleansing is often noted; however, it can be challenging to make a broad judgment on how much of this is traditional local practice versus ceremonies adopted from other religious traditions. In Japan, there’s the practice of sprinkling and naming a child at one month old, along with other rites related to worship; in China, there are religious ceremonies like the first washing of an infant three days old, lifting the bride over burning coals, sprinkling holy water over offerings and spaces, and on mourners after a funeral; in Burma, there’s the purification of a mother through fire and the annual sprinkling festival. In the context of Buddhism, particularly in its Lamaist form, examples include the Tibetan and Mongolian practice of cleansing a child a few days after birth, where a lama blesses the water, immerses the child three times, and gives it a name; the Buraet practice of threefold washing; and the Tibetan custom where mourners returning from a funeral stand before a fire, washing their hands with warm water over hot coals and fumigating themselves three times with specific formulas. This infant baptism among Tibetans and Mongols can be compared to the rite of their ethnic relatives in Europe. The Lapps, in their semi-Christianized form, had a type of baptism where a new name, that of a deceased ancestor who would live on in the child as revealed to the mother in a dream, was given with threefold sprinkling and washing with warm water and mystic alder twigs. This ceremony, although referred to by the Scandinavian term ‘laugo’ or bath, was different from the Christian baptism to which the Lapps also adhered. The most straightforward ethnographic explanation for the coexistence of these two baptismal rituals in Northern Europe is that Christianity introduced a new rite without replacing the existing native one.
Other Asiatic districts show lustration in more compact and characteristic religious developments. The Brahman leads a life marked by recurring ceremonial purification, from the time when his first appearance in the world brings uncleanness on the household, requiring ablution and clean garments to remove it, and thenceforth through his years from youth to old age, where bathing is a main part of the long minute ceremonial of daily worship, and further washings and aspersions enter into more solemn religious acts, till at last the day comes when his kinsfolk, on their way home from his funeral, cleanse themselves by a final bath from their contamination by his remains. For the means 438of some of his multifarious lustrations the Hindu has recourse to the sacred cow, but his more frequent medium of removing uncleanness of body and soul is water, the divine waters to which he prays, ‘Take away, O Waters, whatsoever is wicked in me, what I have done by violence or curse, and untruth!’[1066] The Parsi religion prescribes a system of lustrations which well shows its common origin with that of Hinduism by its similar use of cow’s urine and of water. Bathing or sprinkling with water, or applications of ‘nirang’ washed off with water, form part of the daily religious rites, as well as of such special ceremonies as the naming of the new-born child, the putting on of the sacred cord, the purification of the mother after childbirth, the purification of him who has touched a corpse, when the unclean demon, driven by sprinkling of the good water from the top of the head and from limb to limb, comes forth at the left toe and departs like a fly to the evil region of the north. It is, perhaps, the influence of this ancestral religion, even more than the actual laws of Islam, that makes the modern Persian so striking an example of the way in which ceremony may override reality. It is rather in form than in fact that his cleanliness is next to godliness. He carries the principle of removing legal uncleanness by ablution so far, that a holy man will wash his eyes when they have been polluted by the sight of an infidel. He will carry about a water-pot with a long spout for his ablutions, yet he depopulates the land by his neglect of the simplest sanitary rules, and he may be seen by the side of the little tank where scores of people have been in before him, obliged to clear with his hand a space in the foul scum on the water, before he plunges in to obtain ceremonial purity.[1067]
Other Asian regions display more compact and distinct religious practices related to purification. The Brahman leads a life filled with repeated ceremonial cleansings, starting from the moment he enters the world, which brings uncleanness to the household. This requires washing and clean clothes to remove it. Throughout his life, from youth to old age, bathing becomes a central part of the lengthy daily worship rituals, and additional washings and sprinklings are part of more serious religious ceremonies. Eventually, when the day arrives for his funeral, his relatives cleanse themselves with a final bath to rid themselves of any contamination from his remains. For some of his numerous purifications, a Hindu uses the sacred cow, but he more commonly relies on water, the divine waters to which he prays, "Take away, O Waters, whatever is wicked in me, what I have done through violence or curses, and untruth!" The Parsi religion has a system of purifications that clearly shows its shared origins with Hinduism due to its similar use of cow's urine and water. Bathing or sprinkling with water, or using 'nirang' washed off with water, are part of daily religious practices, as well as special ceremonies like naming a newborn, wearing the sacred thread, purifying the mother after childbirth, and cleansing anyone who has touched a corpse. In this last case, the unclean spirit, driven away by sprinkling pure water from head to toe, departs like a fly to the evil northern region. It may be the influence of this ancestral religion, even more than the actual Islamic laws, that makes the modern Persian a striking example of how ceremony can overshadow reality. His cleanliness is seen more in form than in fact. He takes the principle of removing legal uncleanness through washing to the extent that a holy man will wash his eyes after seeing an infidel. He carries a water pot with a long spout for his purifications, yet he neglects basic sanitary practices, leading to land depopulation. You might see him beside a small tank where many people have bathed before him, having to clear a spot in the dirty scum on the water with his hand before he submerges himself to achieve ceremonial purity.
439Over against the Aryan rites of lustration in the religions of Asia, may be set the well-known types in the religions of classic Europe. At the Greek amphidromia, when the child was about a week old, the women who had assisted at the birth washed their hands, and afterwards the child was carried round the fire by the nurse, and received its name; the Roman child received its prænomen with a lustration at about the same age, and the custom is recorded of the nurse touching its lips and forehead with spittle. To wash before an act of worship was a ceremony handed down by Greek and Roman ritual through the classic ages: καθαραῖς δὲ δρόσοις, ἀφυδρανάμενοι στχείετε ναούς—eo lavatum, ut sacrificem. The holy-water mingled with salt, the holy-water vessel at the temple entrance, the brush to sprinkle the worshippers, all belong to classic antiquity. Romans, their flocks and herds and their fields, were purified from disease and other ill by lustrations which show perfectly the equivalent nature of water and fire as means of purification; the passing of flocks and shepherds through fires, the sprinkling water with laurel branches, the fumigating with fragrant boughs and herbs and sulphur, formed part of the rustic rites of the Palilia. Bloodshed demanded the lustral ceremony. Hektor fears to pour with unwashen hands the libation of dark wine, nor may he pray bespattered with gore to cloud-wrapped Zeus; Æneas may not touch the household gods till cleansed from slaughter by the living stream. It was with far changed thought that Ovid wrote his famous reproof of his too-easy countrymen, who fancied that water could indeed wash off the crime of blood:—
439In contrast to the Aryan purification rituals in Asian religions, we can look at the familiar practices in the religions of classical Europe. At the Greek amphidromia, when a baby was about a week old, the women who helped with the birth would wash their hands, and then the nurse would carry the child around the fire and give it a name. Similarly, a Roman child received its first name around the same age during a purification ceremony, where the nurse would touch the baby's lips and forehead with her spit. Washing before worship was a tradition passed down from Greek and Roman rituals through the classical ages: In clear dews, you may step into the temples, refreshed.—to be cleaned, so I can sacrifice. The use of holy water mixed with salt, holy water containers at temple entrances, and brushes for sprinkling worshippers all date back to classical antiquity. Romans would purify their animals and fields from sickness and other ailments with lustrations, showcasing the equivalent roles of water and fire in the purification process. This included passing flocks and shepherds through flames, sprinkling water with laurel branches, and fumigating with aromatic branches, herbs, and sulfur as part of the rustic Palilia rites. Bloodshed required a lustration ceremony. Hektor is afraid to pour a dark wine libation with unclean hands, and he cannot pray, stained with blood, to cloud-covered Zeus; Æneas cannot touch the household gods until he is cleansed from slaughter by running water. Ovid sharply criticized his complacent fellow countrymen who believed that water could truly wash away the sin of blood:—
Thus, too, the mourner must be cleansed by lustration from the contaminating presence of death. At the door of the Greek house of mourning was set the water-vessel, that those who had been within might sprinkle themselves and be clean; while the mourners returning from a Roman 440funeral, aspersed with water and stepping over fire, were by this double process made pure.[1068]
Thus, the mourner must also be purified through a ritual cleansing from the taint of death. At the entrance of a Greek mourning house, there was a water container so that those who had entered could sprinkle themselves and become clean; meanwhile, mourners coming back from a Roman funeral would cleanse themselves by being sprinkled with water and stepping over fire, thus becoming pure through this two-step process.440[1068]
The ordinances of purification in the Levitical law relate especially to the removal of legal uncleanness connected with childbirth, death, and other pollutions. Washing was prescribed for such purposes, and also sprinkling with water of separation, water mingled with the ashes of the red heifer. Ablution formed part of the consecration of priests, and without it they might not serve at the altar nor enter the tabernacle. In the later times of Jewish national history, perhaps through intercourse with nations whose lustrations entered more into the daily routine of life, ceremonial washings were multiplied. It seems also that in this period must be dated the ceremony which in after ages has held so great a place in the religion of the world, their rite of baptism of proselytes.[1069] The Moslem lustrations are ablutions with water, or in default with dust or sand, performed partially before prayer, and totally on special days or to remove special uncleanness. They are strictly religious acts, belonging in principle to prevalent usage of Oriental religion; and their details, whether invented or adopted as they stand in Islam, are not carried down from Judaism or Christianity.[1070] The rites of lustration which have held and hold their places within the pale of Christianity are in well-marked historical connexion with Jewish and Gentile ritual. Purification by fire has only appeared as an actual ceremony 441among some little-known Christian sects, and in the European folklore custom of passing children through or over fire, if indeed we can be sure that this rite is lustral and not sacrificial.[1071] The usual medium of purification is water. Holy-water is in full use through the Greek and Roman churches. It blesses the worshipper as he enters the temple, it cures disease, it averts sorcery from man and beast, it drives demons from the possessed, it stops the spirit-writer’s pen, it drives the spirit-moved table it is sprinkled upon to dash itself frantically against the wall; at least these are among the powers attributed to it, and some of the most striking of them have been lately vouched for by papal sanction. This lustration with holy-water so exactly continues the ancient classic rite, that its apologists are apt to explain the correspondence by arguing that Satan stole it for his own wicked ends.[1072] Catholic ritual follows ancient sacrificial usage in the priest’s ceremonial washing of hands before mass. The priest’s touching with his spittle the ears and nostrils of the infant or catechumen, saying, ‘Ephphatha,’ is obviously connected with passages in the Gospels; its adoption as a baptismal ceremony has been compared, perhaps justly, with the classical lustration by spittle.[1073] Finally, it has but to be said that ceremonial purification as a Christian act centres in baptism by water, that symbol of initiation of the convert which history traces from the Jewish rite to that of John the Baptist, and thence to the Christian ordinance. Through later ages adult baptism carries on the Jewish ceremony of the admission of the proselyte, while infant baptism combines this with the lustration of the new-born infant. Passing through a range of meaning such as separates the sacrament of the Roman 442centurion from the sacrament of the Roman cardinal, becoming to some a solemn symbol of new life and faith, to some an act in itself of supernatural efficacy, the rite of baptism has remained almost throughout the Christian world the outward sign of the Christian profession.
The rules for purification in Levitical law primarily deal with cleansing related to childbirth, death, and other forms of pollution. Washing was required for these purposes, along with sprinkling with the water of separation, which was mixed with the ashes of the red heifer. Washing was a part of the consecration of priests; without it, they were not allowed to serve at the altar or enter the tabernacle. In later times of Jewish history, possibly influenced by interactions with nations that incorporated more rituals into daily life, ceremonial washings increased. This period likely marks the beginning of the ceremony that would later become significant in global religion—the rite of baptism for new converts.[1069] Muslim purification rituals involve washing with water or, if that's not available, with dust or sand, done partially before prayers and fully on special days or to cleanse specific impurities. These acts are strictly religious and are a common practice in Oriental religions; their details, whether original or adapted, do not come directly from Judaism or Christianity.[1070] The cleansing rituals found in Christianity have clear historical links to both Jewish and Gentile practices. Purification by fire has only been seen as a real ceremony among some lesser-known Christian groups and in European folklore where children are passed through or over fire, although it's unclear if this is a purification act or a sacrificial one.[1071] Water is the most common medium for purification. Holy water is widely used in both the Greek and Roman churches. It blesses worshippers as they enter the church, heals diseases, protects against witchcraft, drives out demons, stops the writing of spirit mediums, and prevents possessed tables from violently crashing into walls; these are among the powers attributed to it, some of which have recently received endorsement from the Pope. This use of holy water closely mirrors ancient rituals, leading some defenders to argue that Satan appropriated it for his nefarious purposes.[1072] Catholic rituals follow ancient sacrificial customs, including the priest washing his hands before mass. The priest’s act of spitting on the ears and nostrils of an infant or catechumen while saying, "Ephphatha," is clearly linked to biblical passages, and its use in baptism has been compared to the ancient practice of purification by spit.[1073] Ultimately, ceremonial purification in Christianity centers on water baptism, the symbol of initiation for converts, traced from the Jewish rite through John the Baptist to the Christian sacrament. Over time, adult baptism continues the Jewish tradition of welcoming converts, while infant baptism combines this with the purification of newborns. The meaning of baptism varies widely, ranging from a solemn sign of new life and faith to an act seen as having supernatural power; nevertheless, the rite of baptism has largely remained the outward expression of Christian faith across the Christian world.
In considering the present group of religious ceremonies, their manifestations in the religions of the higher nations have been but scantily outlined in comparison with their rudimentary forms in the lower culture. Yet this reversal of the proportions due to practical importance in no way invalidates, but rather aids, the ethnographic lessons to be drawn by tracing their course in history. Through their varied phases of survival, modification, and succession, they have each in its own way brought to view the threads of continuity which connect the faiths of the lower with the faiths of the higher world; they have shown how hardly the civilized man can understand the religious rites even of his own land without knowledge of the meaning, often the widely unlike meaning, which they bore to men of distant ages and countries, representatives of grades of culture far different from his.
In looking at the current group of religious ceremonies, their expressions in the religions of advanced societies have been only briefly mentioned compared to their basic forms in simpler cultures. However, this shift in emphasis doesn’t undermine but actually supports the ethnographic insights gained by tracing their historical development. Through their various stages of survival, change, and evolution, each has revealed the connections that link the beliefs of simpler societies with those of more advanced ones. They demonstrate how difficult it is for a modern person to fully grasp the religious rituals of their own country without understanding the meanings—often vastly different—that these rituals held for people from ancient times and different cultures.
CHAPTER XIX.
CONCLUSION.
Practical results of the study of Primitive Culture—Its bearing least upon Positive Science, greatest upon Intellectual, Moral, Social, and Political Philosophy—Language—Mythology—Ethics and Law—Religion—Action of the Science of Culture, as a means of furthering progress and removing hindrance, effective in the course of Civilization.
Practical results of the study of Primitive Culture—Its impact is least on Positive Science and greatest on Intellectual, Moral, Social, and Political Philosophy—Language—Mythology—Ethics and Law—Religion—The influence of the Science of Culture as a way to promote progress and eliminate obstacles, effective in the advancement of Civilization.
It now remains, in bringing to a close these investigations on the relation of primitive to modern civilization, to urge the practical import of the considerations raised in their course. Granted that archæology, leading the student’s mind back to remotest known conditions of human life, shows such life to have been of unequivocally savage type; granted that the rough-hewn flint hatchet, dug out from amidst the bones of mammoths in a drift gravel-bed to lie on an ethnologist’s writing-table, is to him a very type of primitive culture, simple yet crafty, clumsy yet purposeful, low in artistic level yet fairly started on the ascent toward highest development—what then? Of course the history and præ-history of man take their proper places in the general scheme of knowledge. Of course the doctrine of the world-long evolution of civilization is one which philosophic minds will take up with eager interest, as a theme of abstract science. But beyond this, such research has its practical side, as a source of power destined to influence the course of modern ideas and actions. To establish a connexion between what uncultured ancient men thought and did, and what cultured modern men think and do, is not a matter of inapplicable theoretic knowledge, for it raises the issue, how far are modern opinion and conduct 444based on the strong ground of soundest modern knowledge, or how far only on such knowledge as was available in the earlier and ruder stages of culture where their types were shaped. It has to be maintained that the early history of man has its bearing, almost ignored as that bearing has been by those whom it ought most stringently to affect, on some of the deepest and most vital points of our intellectual, industrial, and social state.
It now remains, as we conclude these investigations into the relationship between primitive and modern civilization, to emphasize the practical significance of the points raised throughout this discussion. It's clear that archaeology, which takes us back to the earliest known conditions of human life, demonstrates that such life was distinctly savage in nature. It's also true that the rough flint hatchet, excavated alongside mammoth bones and now resting on an ethnologist’s desk, serves as a prime example of primitive culture—simple yet clever, clumsy yet intentional, low in artistic achievement yet beginning its journey towards greater development. So, what does this mean? Of course, the history and prehistory of humanity fit into the broader framework of knowledge. Of course, the concept of the long evolution of civilization is one that thoughtful minds will eagerly explore as a theme of abstract study. But beyond that, this research has practical implications—it holds the potential to shape modern ideas and actions. Establishing a connection between what uncultured ancient peoples thought and did, and what cultured modern individuals think and do, is not just irrelevant theoretical knowledge; it raises the question of how much modern beliefs and behaviors are grounded in sound contemporary understanding, or how much they are based solely on the knowledge available in earlier, more primitive stages of culture where those ideas were formed. It must be argued that the early history of humanity has significant relevance, even though it's often overlooked by those it should affect most profoundly, on some of the deepest and most vital aspects of our intellectual, industrial, and social condition.
Even in advanced sciences, such as relate to measure and force and structure in the inorganic and organic world, it is at once a common and a serious error to adopt the principle of letting bygones be bygones. Were scientific systems the oracular revelations they sometimes all but pretend to be, it might be justifiable to take no note of the condition of mere opinion or fancy that preceded them. But the investigator who turns from his modern text-books to the antiquated dissertations of the great thinkers of the past, gains from the history of his own craft a truer view of the relation of theory to fact, learns from the course of growth in each current hypothesis to appreciate its raison d’être and full significance, and even finds that a return to older starting-points may enable him to find new paths, where the modern track seems stopped by impassable barriers. It is true that rudimentary conditions of arts and sciences are often rather curious than practically instructive, especially because the modern practitioner has kept up, as mere elementary processes, the results of the ancient or savage man’s most strenuous efforts. Perhaps our tool-makers may not gain more than a few suggestive hints from a museum of savage implements, our physicians may only be interested in savage recipes so far as they involve the use of local drugs, our mathematicians may leave to the infant-school the highest flights of savage arithmetic, our astronomers may only find in the star-craft of the lower races an uninstructive combination of myth and commonplace. But there are departments of knowledge, of not less consequence than mechanics and medicine, arithmetic and 445astronomy, in which the study of the lowest stages, as influencing the practical acceptance of the higher, cannot be thus carelessly set aside.
Even in advanced sciences related to measurement, force, and structure in both the inorganic and organic worlds, it's both common and a serious mistake to adopt the principle of letting bygones be bygones. If scientific systems were the definitive revelations they sometimes claim to be, it might be acceptable to ignore the opinions or ideas that came before them. However, an investigator who shifts from modern textbooks to the outdated writings of history's great thinkers gains a more accurate perspective on the relationship between theory and fact. They learn from the evolution of current hypotheses to appreciate their reasons for existence and significance, and they might even discover that returning to older starting points can lead them to new paths when the modern approach appears blocked by insurmountable obstacles. It's true that the foundational aspects of arts and sciences are often more curious than practically useful, especially because modern practitioners have maintained the most basic processes as the results of ancient or primitive efforts. Our toolmakers may only find a few helpful hints in a collection of primitive tools, our doctors might only show interest in primitive remedies as far as they involve local drugs, our mathematicians might leave the complex calculations of primitive arithmetic to elementary school, and our astronomers may only see in the astronomy of lower cultures a mix of myths and the ordinary. However, there are areas of knowledge—no less important than mechanics, medicine, arithmetic, and astronomy—where studying the most basic stages, as they impact the acceptance of the higher stages, cannot be casually dismissed.
If we survey the state of educated opinion, not within the limits of some special school, but in the civilized world at large, on such subjects especially as relate to Man, his intellectual and moral nature, his place and function among his fellow-men and in the universe at large, we see existing side by side, as if of equal right, opinions most diverse in real authority. Some, vouched for by direct and positive evidence, hold their ground as solid truths. Others, though founded on crudest theories of the lower culture, have been so modified under the influence of advancing knowledge, as to afford a satisfactory framework for recognized facts; and positive science, mindful of the origin of its own philosophic schemes, must admit the validity of such a title. Others, lastly, are opinions belonging properly to lower intellectual levels, which have held their place into the higher by mere force of ancestral tradition; these are survivals. Now it is the practical office of ethnography to make known to all whom it may concern the tenure of opinions in the public mind, to show what is received on its own direct evidence, what is ruder ancient doctrine reshaped to answer modern ends, and what is but time-honoured superstition in the garb of modern knowledge.
If we look at the state of educated opinion, not just within specific schools but in the civilized world as a whole, especially regarding topics related to humanity—his intellectual and moral nature, his role among others and in the universe—we find a wide range of opinions coexisting, each seemingly equally valid. Some opinions are backed by direct and clear evidence and stand firm as solid truths. Others, despite being based on outdated theories from lower cultural levels, have been reshaped by advancing knowledge to create a coherent framework for accepted facts. Positive science, aware of the origins of its own philosophical ideas, must recognize the legitimacy of these views. Lastly, some opinions originate from lower intellectual tiers but persist in higher domains merely due to tradition; these are remnants of the past. The practical role of ethnography is to shed light on the nature of public opinions, revealing what is supported by direct evidence, what is merely an ancient doctrine modified for modern purposes, and what is just age-old superstition disguised as contemporary knowledge.
Topic after topic shows at a glimpse the way in which ethnography bears on modern intellectual conditions. Language, appearing as an art in full vigour among rude tribes, already displays the adaptation of childlike devices in self-expressive sound and pictorial metaphor, to utter thoughts as complex and abstruse as savage minds demand speech for. When it is considered how far the development of knowledge depends on full and exact means of expressing thought, is it not a pregnant consideration that the language of civilized men is but the language of savages, more or less improved in structure, a good deal extended in vocabulary, made more precise in the dictionary definition of words? 446The development of language between its savage and cultured stages has been made in its details, scarcely in its principle. It is not too much to say that half the vast defect of language as a method of utterance, and half the vast defect of thought as determined by the influence of language, are due to the fact that speech is a scheme worked out by the rough and ready application of material metaphor and imperfect analogy, in ways fitting rather the barbaric education of those who formed it, than our own. Language is one of those intellectual departments in which we have gone too little beyond the savage stage, but are still as it were hacking with stone celts and twirling laborious friction-fire. Metaphysical speculation, again, has been one of the potent influences on human conduct, and although its rise, and one may almost say also its decline and fall, belong to comparatively civilized ages, yet its connexion with lower stages of intellectual history may to some extent be discerned. For example, attention may be recalled to a special point brought forward in this work, that one of the greatest metaphysical doctrines is a transfer to the field of philosophy from the field of religion, made when philosophers familiar with the conception of object-phantoms used this to provide a doctrine of thought, thus giving rise to the theory of ideas. Far more fully and distinctly, the study of the savage and barbaric intellect opens to us the study of Mythology. The evidence here brought together as to the relation of the savage to the cultured mind in the matter of mythology has, I think, at any rate justified this claim. With a consistency of action so general as to amount to mental law, it is proved that among the lower races all over the world the operation of outward events on the inward mind leads not only to statement of fact, but to formation of myth. It gives no unimportant clues to the student of mental history, to see by what regular processes myths are generated, and how, growing by wear and increasing in value at secondhand, they pass into pseudo-historic legend. Poetry is full of myth, and he who will 447understand it analytically will do well to study it ethnographically. In so far as myth, seriously or sportively meant, is the subject of poetry, and in so far as it is couched in language whose characteristic is that wild and rambling metaphor which represents the habitual expression of savage thought, the mental condition of the lower races is the key to poetry—nor is it a small portion of the poetic realm which these definitions cover. History, again, is an agent powerful, and becoming more powerful, in shaping men’s minds, and through their minds their actions in the world; now one of the most prominent faults of historians is that, through want of familiarity with the principles of myth-development, they cannot apply systematically to ancient legend the appropriate test for separating chronicle from myth, but with few exceptions are apt to treat the mingled mass of tradition partly with undiscriminating credulity and partly with undiscriminating scepticism. Even more injurious is the effect of such want of testing on that part of traditional or documentary record which, among any section of mankind, stands as sacred history. It is not merely that in turning to the index of some book on savage tribes, one comes on such a suggestive heading as this, ‘Religion—see Mythology.’ It is that within the upper half of the scale of civilization, among the great historic religions of the world, we all know that between religion and religion, and even to no small extent between sect and sect, the narratives which to one side are sacred history, may seem to the other mythic legend. Among the reasons which retard the progress of religious history in the modern world, one of the most conspicuous is this, that so many of its approved historians demand from the study of mythology always weapons to destroy their adversaries’ structures, but never tools to clear and trim their own. It is an indispensable qualification of the true historian that he shall be able to look dispassionately on myth as a natural and regular product of the human mind, acting on appropriate facts in a manner suited to the intellectual state of the people producing it, 448and that he shall treat it as an accretion to be deducted from professed history, whenever it is recognized by the tests of being decidedly against evidence as fact, and at the same time clearly explicable as myth. It is from the ethnographic study of savage and barbaric races that the knowledge of the general laws of myth-development, required for the carrying out of this critical process, may be best or must necessarily be gained.
Topic after topic reveals how ethnography relates to modern intellectual conditions. Language, which functions as a lively art among primitive tribes, already shows how childlike methods in expressive sounds and visual metaphors convey thoughts as complex and obscure as the savage mind requires. When we consider how much the advancement of knowledge relies on precise ways to express thoughts, isn’t it significant that the language of civilized people is essentially just the language of savages, improved in structure, expanded in vocabulary, and made more precise in definitions? The evolution of language from its savage to cultured stages has been detailed but not fundamentally changed. It’s fair to say that a major part of the deficiencies in language as a mode of expression, and the limitations in thought influenced by language, stem from the fact that speech has been crafted through a rough application of physical metaphors and imperfect analogies suited more for the barbaric education of its creators than for our own. Language is one of those intellectual fields where we haven’t progressed much beyond the savage stage; we’re still, in a way, working with stone tools and struggling with primitive fire. Metaphysical speculation, too, has played a significant role in shaping human behavior, and while its emergence—and arguably its decline—occurs in more civilized times, its links to earlier stages of intellectual history can still be discerned. For instance, one of the most significant metaphysical concepts is a transfer from the realm of religion to philosophy, made possible when philosophers familiar with the idea of object-phantoms adapted this to construct a theory of thought, leading to the development of the theory of ideas. The study of savage and barbaric intellects greatly enriches our understanding of mythology. The evidence gathered here concerning how the savage mind relates to the cultured mind in terms of mythology supports this assertion. It has been demonstrated, consistently enough to ascribe it to a mental law, that in lower races worldwide, external events impact the internal mind not only resulting in factual statements but also in the creation of myths. This offers valuable insights for those studying mental history, illuminating the regular processes through which myths arise and how, through wear and gaining value over time, they evolve into pseudo-historic legends. Poetry is rich in myth, and anyone seeking to analyze it would benefit from studying it ethnographically. To the extent that myth, whether serious or playful, is central to poetry, and given that it is presented in language characterized by wild and meandering metaphors reflecting the typical expression of savage thought, understanding the mental state of lower races is crucial for interpreting poetry—covering a significant part of what constitutes the poetic landscape. History, on the other hand, is a powerful agent—and is growing more so—in shaping human minds and, through their minds, their actions in the world. However, a significant flaw among historians is that, due to a lack of familiarity with the principles of myth-development, they often fail to apply a systematic approach to ancient legends to distinguish fact from myth, tending instead to treat the mixed traditions with either uncritical belief or skepticism. The negative impact of this lack of discernment is even more apparent when it comes to the sacred histories within any group of people. It’s not just that when you look at the index of a book on savage tribes, you find a heading like ‘Religion—see Mythology.’ It’s also that among the upper echelons of civilization, across the great historic religions of the world, we all recognize that what is sacred history to one group may appear as mythical legend to another. One of the most apparent reasons that hinder the advancement of religious history in the modern world is that many of its established historians seek mythological studies merely as tools to demolish their opponents’ frameworks, but never to refine their own. A true historian must be able to view myth dispassionately as a natural and regular product of the human mind, responding to suitable facts in a way that reflects the intellectual state of the people who create it, and should treat it as something to subtract from professed history whenever it is shown to clearly contradict evidence and is comprehensively understandable as myth. The ethnographic study of savage and barbaric societies is where we can best acquire the knowledge of the general laws of myth-development required for carrying out this necessary critical process.
The two vast united provinces of Morals and Law have been as yet too imperfectly treated on a general ethnographic scheme, to warrant distinct statement of results. Yet thus much may be confidently said, that where the ground has been even superficially explored, every glimpse reveals treasures of knowledge. It is already evident that enquirers who systematically trace each department of moral and legal institutions from the savage through the barbaric and into the civilized condition of mankind, thereby introduce into the scientific investigations of these subjects an indispensable element which merely theoretical writers are apt unscrupulously to dispense with. The law or maxim which a people at some particular stage of its history might have made fresh, according to the information and circumstances of the period, is one thing. The law or maxim which did in fact become current among them by inheritance from an earlier stage, only more or less modified to make it compatible with the new conditions, is another and far different thing. Ethnography is required to bridge over the gap between the two, a very chasm where the arguments of moralists and legists are continually falling in, to crawl out maimed and helpless. Within modern grades of civilization this historical method is now becoming more and more accepted. It will not be denied that English law has acquired, by modified inheritance from past ages, a theory of primogeniture and a theory of real estate which are so far from being products of our own times that we must go back to the middle ages for anything like a satisfactory explanation of them; and as for more absolute 449survival, did not Jewish disabilities stand practically, and the wager of battle nominally, in our law of not many years back? But the point to be pressed here is, that the development and survival of law are processes that did not first come into action within the range of written codes of comparatively cultured nations. Admitted that civilized law requires its key from barbaric law; it must be borne in mind that the barbarian lawgiver too was guided in judgment not so much by first principles, as by a reverent and often stupidly reverent adherence to the tradition of earlier and yet ruder ages.
The two large united provinces of Morals and Law have not yet been thoroughly examined through a general ethnographic framework, so we can't make distinct statements about the results. However, it can be confidently said that wherever the ground has been even slightly explored, each insight reveals valuable knowledge. It’s clear that researchers who systematically track each area of moral and legal institutions from primitive societies through barbaric states to modern civilizations introduce a crucial element into the scientific study of these topics that purely theoretical writers often overlook. The law or principle that a society may have developed at a specific time based on the knowledge and circumstances of that era is one thing. The law or principle that became common among them through inheritance from an earlier stage, only slightly modified to fit new conditions, is another and significantly different matter. Ethnography is needed to bridge the gap between these two, which is a vast chasm where debates among moralists and legal scholars often falter and emerge wounded and ineffective. Within modern levels of civilization, this historical approach is becoming increasingly accepted. It cannot be denied that English law has adopted, through modified inheritance from earlier times, a theory of primogeniture and a theory of real estate that are so distant from our current era that we must look back to the Middle Ages for a satisfactory explanation of them. And as for more direct survival, didn’t Jewish disabilities and the wager of battle exist in our law only a few years ago? The important point to emphasize here is that the development and survival of law are processes that did not first occur within the scope of written codes of relatively advanced nations. While it's true that civilized law is rooted in barbaric law, it must be recognized that the barbarian lawmaker was also influenced not primarily by foundational principles, but by a respectful and often blindly reverent loyalty to the traditions of earlier, more primitive times.
Nor can these principles be set aside in the scientific study of moral sentiment and usage. When the ethical systems of mankind, from the lowest savagery upward, have been analyzed and arranged in their stages of evolution, then ethical science, no longer vitiated by too exclusive application to particular phases of morality taken unreasonably as representing morality in general, will put its methods to fair trial on the long and intricate world-history of right and wrong.
Nor can these principles be ignored in the scientific study of moral feelings and behavior. Once the ethical systems of humanity, from the most primitive to more advanced stages, have been examined and organized according to their evolution, then ethical science, no longer tainted by an overemphasis on specific aspects of morality taken unfairly as representative of morality as a whole, will fairly test its methods against the complex and lengthy history of right and wrong in the world.
In concluding a work of which full half is occupied by evidence bearing on the philosophy of religion, it may well be asked, how does all this array of facts stand toward the theologian’s special province? That the world sorely needs new evidence and method in theology, the state of religion in our own land bears witness. Take English Protestantism as a central district of opinion, draw an ideal line through its centre, and English thought is seen to be divided as by a polarizing force extending to the utmost limits of repulsion. On one side of the dividing line stand such as keep firm hold on the results of the 16th century reformation, or seek yet more original canons from the first Christian ages; on the other side stand those who, refusing to be bound by the doctrinal judgments of past centuries, but introducing modern science and modern criticism as new factors in theological opinion, are eagerly pressing toward a new reformation. Outside these narrower limits, extremer 450partizans occupy more distant ground on either side. On the one hand the Anglican blends gradually into the Roman scheme, a system so interesting to the ethnologist for its maintenance of rites more naturally belonging to barbaric culture; a system so hateful to the man of science for its suppression of knowledge, and for that usurpation of intellectual authority by a sacerdotal caste which has at last reached its climax, now that an aged bishop can judge, by infallible inspiration, the results of researches whose evidence and methods are alike beyond his knowledge and his mental grasp. On the other hand, intellect, here trampled under foot of dogma, takes full revenge elsewhere, even within the domain of religion, in those theological districts where reason takes more and more the command over hereditary belief, like a mayor of the palace superseding a nominal king. In yet farther ranges of opinion, religious authority is simply deposed and banished, and the throne of absolute reason is set up without a rival even in name; in secularism the feeling and imagination which in the religious world are bound to theological belief, have to attach themselves to a positive natural philosophy, and to a positive morality which shall of its own force control the acts of men. Such, then, is the boundless divergence of opinion among educated citizens of an enlightened country, in an age scarcely approached by any former age in the possession of actual knowledge and the strenuous pursuit of truth as the guiding principle of life. Of the causes which have brought to pass so perplexed a condition of public thought, in so momentous a matter as theology, there is one, and that a weighty one, which demands mention here. It is the partial and one-sided application of the historical method of enquiry into theological doctrines, and the utter neglect of the ethnographical method which carries back the historical into remoter and more primitive regions of thought. Looking at each doctrine by itself and for itself, as in the abstract true or untrue, theologians close their eyes to the instances which history is ever holding up before them, that one phase 451of a religious belief is the outcome of another, that in all times religion has included within its limits a system of philosophy, expressing its more or less transcendental conceptions in doctrines which form in any age their fittest representatives, but which doctrines are liable to modification in the general course of intellectual change, whether the ancient formulas still hold their authority with altered meaning, or are themselves reformed or replaced. Christendom furnishes evidence to establish this principle, if for example we will but candidly compare the educated opinion of Rome in the 5th with that of London in the 19th century, on such subjects as the nature and functions of soul, spirit, deity, and judge by the comparison in what important respects the philosophy of religion has come to differ even among men who represent in different ages the same great principles of faith. The general study of the ethnography of religion, through all its immensity of range, seems to countenance the theory of evolution in its highest and widest sense. In the treatment of some of its topics here, I have propounded special hypotheses as to the order in which various stages of doctrine and rite have succeeded one another in the history of religion. Yet how far these particular theories may hold good, seems even to myself a minor matter. The essential part of the ethnographic method in theology lies in admitting as relevant the compared evidence of religion in all stages of culture. The action of such evidence on theology proper is in this wise, that a vast proportion of doctrines and rites known among mankind are not to be judged as direct products of the particular religious systems which give them sanction, for they are in fact more or less modified results adopted from previous systems. The theologian, as he comes to deal with each element of belief and worship, ought to ascertain its place in the general scheme of religion. Should the doctrine or rite in question appear to have been transmitted from an earlier to a later stage of religious thought, then it should be tested, like any other point of culture, as to its place in development. 452The question has to be raised, to which of these three categories it belongs:—is it a product of the earlier theology, yet sound enough to maintain a rightful place in the later?—is it derived from a cruder original, yet so modified as to become a proper representative of more advanced views?—is it a survival from a lower stage of thought, imposing on the credit of the higher by virtue not of inherent truth but of ancestral belief? These are queries the very asking of which starts trains of thought which candid minds should be encouraged to pursue, leading as they do toward the attainment of such measure of truth as the intellectual condition of our age fits us to assimilate. In the scientific study of religion, which now shows signs of becoming for many a year an engrossing subject of the world’s thought, the decision must not rest with a council in which the theologian, the metaphysician, the biologist, the physicist, exclusively take part. The historian and the ethnographer must be called upon to show the hereditary standing of each opinion and practice, and their enquiry must go back as far as antiquity or savagery can show a vestige, for there seems no human thought so primitive as to have lost its bearing on our own thought, nor so ancient as to have broken its connection with our own life.
In wrapping up a work where half of it is focused on the philosophy of religion, one might wonder how all these facts relate to the theologian's specific area. The need for new evidence and methods in theology is evident, as reflected in the state of religion in our own country. If we take English Protestantism as a key perspective and draw an imaginary line through its center, we can see English thought is sharply divided as if by a polarizing force pushing people to the extremes. On one side of the line are those who firmly cling to the findings of the 16th century Reformation or look for even more original principles from the early Christian eras. On the other side are individuals who refuse to be constrained by the doctrinal beliefs of previous centuries, instead incorporating modern science and criticism into their theological views and actively pushing towards a new form of reformation. Beyond this narrower divide, more extreme factions occupy further ground on both sides. On one side, Anglicanism gradually merges into Roman Catholicism, a system of great interest to ethnologists for its preservation of rites more commonly associated with primitive cultures; a system disdainful to scientists for its suppression of knowledge and the intellectual authority claimed by a priestly class that has reached its peak, as evidenced by an elderly bishop who can supposedly judge research results based on infallible inspiration, despite those findings being beyond his understanding. On the other side, where intellect suffers under dogma, it finds a resurgence elsewhere, even within religious fields, where reason increasingly takes charge over inherited beliefs, resembling a mayor of the palace replacing a figurative king. In even broader fields of thought, religious authority is simply deposed and eliminated, with the throne of absolute reason rising without any challengers. In secularism, the feelings and imaginations that in the religious sphere are tied to theological beliefs now connect with a solid natural philosophy and a definite morality that directly influences human behavior. Such is the immense divergence of opinions among educated individuals in an enlightened society, in an era unmatched by any previous time in terms of existing knowledge and the vigorous pursuit of truth as a guiding principle of life. Among the many factors contributing to this complex state of public thought on such a crucial topic as theology, one significant cause requires mention here. It is the selective and biased use of the historical method in investigating theological doctrines, alongside a complete disregard for the ethnographic method, which delves deeper into the history of thought. By evaluating each doctrine independently as either true or false, theologians ignore the instances that history continually presents, reminding us that one aspect of a religious belief evolves from another. Throughout time, religion has encompassed a philosophy that articulates its varying abstract ideas in doctrines that represent those ideas most appropriately at any given time, yet these doctrines are subject to change as intellectual trends progress, whether the old formulas maintain their authority with altered meanings or are entirely reformed or replaced. Christianity provides proof of this principle; for instance, if we candidly compare the educated opinions of Rome in the 5th century with those of London in the 19th century on topics like the nature and functions of the soul, spirit, and deity, we can see significant differences in how religious philosophy has evolved among people who exemplify the same core principles of faith in different eras. The broad study of the ethnography of religion, with its vast scope, seems to support the theory of evolution in its most comprehensive sense. In discussing some topics here, I've proposed specific hypotheses regarding the order of various stages in the evolution of doctrine and ritual in religious history. However, how valid these particular theories are seems to me a minor issue. The crucial aspect of the ethnographic approach in theology is to accept as relevant the comparative evidence of religion across all cultural stages. This evidence significantly impacts theology, showing that a large portion of known doctrines and rites should not be seen as direct outputs of the particular religious systems that endorse them; rather, they are modified adaptations borrowed from earlier systems. When theologians examine each belief and practice, they should identify its role within the broader religious framework. If a doctrine or rite seems to have transitioned from an earlier to a later stage of religious thought, it should be evaluated, like any cultural point, in terms of its developmental position. The inquiry should consider which of three categories it fits: is it a product of earlier theology that still holds a rightful place later on? Is it derived from a simpler original yet modified enough to represent more advanced perspectives? Is it a remnant from a lower stage of thought, gaining credibility not through inherent truth but through ancestral belief? These questions initiate thought processes deserving of encouragement from open minds, leading us toward whatever level of truth our current intellectual climate allows us to understand. In the now increasingly relevant scientific study of religion, which appears poised to engage many for years, decisions must not be determined solely by a body consisting of theologians, metaphysicians, biologists, and physicists. Historians and ethnographers must contribute insights into the historical context of each belief and practice, digging as far back as history or primitive societies allows, as there seems to be no human idea so ancient that it has lost its relevance to our current thought or so old that it has severed ties with our present lives.
It is our happiness to live in one of those eventful periods of intellectual and moral history, when the oft-closed gates of discovery and reform stand open at their widest. How long these good days may last, we cannot tell. It may be that the increasing power and range of the scientific method, with its stringency of argument and constant check of fact, may start the world on a more steady and continuous course of progress than it has moved on heretofore. But if history is to repeat itself according to precedent, we must look forward to stiffer duller ages of traditionalists and commentators, when the great thinkers of our time will be appealed to as authorities by men who slavishly accept their tenets, yet cannot or dare not follow their methods through better evidence to higher ends. In either case, it is for those 453among us whose minds are set on the advancement of civilization, to make the most of present opportunities, that even when in future years progress is arrested, it may be arrested at the higher level. To the promoters of what is sound and reformers of what is faulty in modern culture, ethnography has double help to give. To impress men’s minds with a doctrine of development, will lead them in all honour to their ancestors to continue the progressive work of past ages, to continue it the more vigorously because light has increased in the world, and where barbaric hordes groped blindly, cultured men can often move onward with clear view. It is a harsher, and at times even painful, office of ethnography to expose the remains of crude old culture which have passed into harmful superstition, and to mark these out for destruction. Yet this work, if less genial, is not less urgently needful for the good of mankind. Thus, active at once in aiding progress and in removing hindrance, the science of culture is essentially a reformer’s science.
We’re fortunate to be living in one of those exciting times in our intellectual and moral history when the often-closed doors of discovery and reform are wide open. We can’t say how long these good times will last. It might be that the growing power and scope of the scientific method, with its strict reasoning and constant fact-checking, will lead the world onto a more stable and continuous path of progress than it has followed before. However, if history repeats itself, we should expect more rigid, duller ages filled with traditionalists and commentators, where the great thinkers of our time will be referenced as authorities by those who blindly accept their ideas but cannot or won't follow their methods for better evidence and greater purposes. In either scenario, it’s up to those among us who are focused on advancing civilization to seize the current opportunities so that even when future progress stalls, it may do so at a higher level. For those promoting what is sound and reforming what is flawed in modern culture, ethnography offers double assistance. Instilling a doctrine of development in people's minds will honor their ancestors by continuing the progressive work of the past more vigorously, especially as knowledge has grown in the world, allowing cultured people to advance with clarity where once barbaric groups moved blindly. Ethnography also has the tougher, sometimes painful task of highlighting the remnants of primitive old cultures that have turned into harmful superstitions and advocating for their removal. Yet this work, while less pleasant, is crucial for the betterment of humanity. Thus, by actively supporting progress and removing obstacles, the science of culture is inherently a reformer's science.
INDEX.
- Abacus, i. 270.
- Accent, i. 173.
- Acephali, i. 390.
- Achilles:—vulnerable spot, i. 358; dream, i. 444;
- in Hades, ii. 81.
- Acosta, on American archetypal deities, ii. 244.
- Adam, ii. 312, 315.
- Ælian, i. 372, ii. 423;
- on Kynokephali, i. 389.
- Æolus, i. 361, ii. 269.
- Æsculapius:—incubation in temple, ii. 121;
- serpents of, ii. 241.
- Affirmative and negative particles, i. 192.
- Afghans, race-genealogy of, i. 403.
- Agni, ii. 281, 386.
- Agreement in custom and opinion no proof of soundness, i. 13.
- Agriculture, god of, ii. 305.
- Ahriman, ii. 328.
- Ahura-Mazda, ii. 283, 328, 355.
- Alexander the Great, i. 395, ii. 138.
- Alfonso di Liguori, St., bilocation of, i. 447.
- Alger, W. R., i. 471, 484, ii. 83.
- Algonquin languages, animate and inanimate genders, i. 302.
- Ali as Thunder-god, ii. 264.
- All Souls’, feast of dead, ii. 37.
- Allegory, i. 277, 408.
- Aloysius Gonzaga, St., letters to, ii. 122.
- Alphabet, i. 171;
- by raps, i. 145;
- as numeral series, i. 258.
- Amatongo, i. 443, ii. 115, 131, 313, 367, 387.
- Amenti, Egyptian dead-land, ii. 67, 81, 96, 295, 311.
- Amphidromia, ii. 439.
- Analogy, myth product of, i. 297.
- Ancestors, eponymic myths of, i. 398, ii. 234;
- worship of divine, ii. 113, 311;
- see Manes-worship, Totem-worship.
- Ancestral names indicate re-birth of souls, ii. 5.
- Ancestral tablet, Chinese, ii. 118, 152.
- Andaman Islanders, mythic origin of, i. 369, 389.
- Angang, omen from meeting animal, i., 120.
- Angel, see Spirit;
- Angelo, St., legend of, i. 295.
- Anima, animus, i. 433, 470.
- Animals:—omens from, i. 120;
- calls to and cries of, 177;
- imitative names from cries, &c., 206;
- treated as human, i. 467, ii. 230;
- souls of, i. 469;
- future life and funeral sacrifice of, i. 469, ii. 75, &c.;
- entry and transmigration of souls into and possession by spirits, ii. 7, 152, 161, 175, 231, 241, 378, &c.;
- diseases transferred to, ii. 147;
- see spirits invisible to men, ii. 196.
- Animals, sacred, incarnations or representatives of deities, ii. 231;
- receive and consume sacrifices, 378.
- Animal-worship, i. 467, ii. 229, 378.
- Animism:—defined, i. 23, 425;
- Anra-Mainyu, ii. 328.
- Antar, tumulus of, ii. 29.
- Anthropomorphic conceptions of spirit and deity, ii. 110, 184, 247, 335.
- Antipodes, i. 392.
- Ape-men, i. 379;
- apes degenerate men, 376;
- can but will not talk, 379.
- Apollo, ii. 294.
- Apophis-serpent, ii. 241.
- Apotheosis, ii. 120.
- Apparitional soul, i. 428;
- its likeness to body, 450.
- Apparitions, i. 143, 440, 445, 478, ii. 24, 187, 410, &c.
- Archetypal deities and ideas, ii. 243.
- Ares, ii. 308.
- Argos Panoptes, i. 320.
- Argyll, Duke of, on primæval man, i. 60.
- Arithmetic, see Counting.
- Arriero, i. 191.
- Arrows, magic, i. 345.
- Artemidorus, on dream-omens, i. 122.
- Artemis, ii. 302.
- Aryan race:—no savage tribe among, i. 49;
- antiquity of culture, i. 54.
- Ascendant in horoscope, i. 129.
- Ashera, worship of, ii. 166, 226.
- Ashes strewn for spirit-footprints, i. 455. ii. 197.
- Asmodeus, ii. 254.
- Association of ideas, foundation of magic, i. 116.
- Astrology, i. 128, 291.
- Atahentsic, ii. 299, 309, 323.
- Atahocan, ii. 323, 340.
- Atavism, explained by transmigration, ii. 3.
- Atheist, use of word, i. 420.
- Augury, &c., i. 119. See ii. 179, 232.
- Augustine, St., i. 199, 441, ii. 54, 427;
- on dreams, i. 441;
- on incubi, ii. 190.
- Augustus, genius of, ii. 202.
- Avatars, ii. 239.
- Avernus, Lake, ii. 45.
- Ayenbite of Inwyt, i. 456.
- Baal-Shemesh, ii. 295.
- Bacon, Lord, on allegory, i. 277.
- Bætyls, animated stones, ii. 166.
- Baku, burning wells of, ii. 281.
- Baldr, i. 464.
- Bale, Bishop, i. 384;
- on witchcraft, i. 142.
- Bands, clerical, i. 18.
- Baptism, ii. 440;
- orientation in, 427.
- Baring-Gould, S., on werewolves, i. 314.
- Bastian, Adolf, Mensch in der Geschichte, i. vi.; ii. 209, 222, 242, 280, &c.
- Baudet, etymology of, i. 413.
- Beal, ii. 252, 408.
- Bear, Great, i. 359.
- Beast-fables, i. 381, 409.
- Bees, telling, i. 287.
- Bel, ii. 293, 380, 384.
- Berkeley, Bishop, on ideas, i. 499;
- on force and matter, ii. 160.
- Bewitching by objects, i. 116.
- Bible and key, ordeal by, i. 128.
- Bilocation, i. 447.
- Bird, of thunder, i. 362;
- Blackstone’s Commentaries, i. 20.
- Blemmyæ, headless men, i. 390.
- Blood:—related to soul, i. 431;
- Blood-red stain, myths to account for, i. 406.
- Bloodsuckers, ii. 191.
- Blow-tube, i. 67.
- Bo tree, ii. 218.
- Boar’s head, ii. 408.
- Boats without iron, myth on, i. 374.
- Bochica, i. 353, ii. 290.
- Boehme, Jacob, on man’s primitive knowledge, ii. 185.
- Bolotu, ii. 22, 62, 310.
- Boni Homines, i. 77.
- Book of Dead, Egyptian, ii. 13, 96.
- Boomerang, i. 67.
- Boreas, i. 362, ii. 268.
- Bosjesman, etymology of word, i. 381.
- Bow and Arrow, i. 7, 15, 64, 73.
- Brahma, ii. 354, 425.
- Brahmanism:—funeral rites, i. 465, &c.;
- Breath, its relation to soul, i. 432.
- Bride-capture, game of, i. 72.
- Bridge, first crossing, i. 106;
- Brinton, D. G., i. 53, 361, ii. 90, 340;
- on dualistic myths, ii. 320.
- Britain, eponymic kings of, i. 400;
- voyage of souls to, ii. 64.
- Brosses, C. de, on degeneration and development, i. 36;
- Browne, Sir Thos., on magnetic mountain, i. 375.
- Brutus, evil genius of, ii. 203.
- Brynhild, i. 465.
- Buck, buck, game of, i. 74.
- Buddha, transmigrations of, i. 414, ii. 11.
- Buddhism:—culture-tradition, i. 41;
- Buildings, victim immured in foundation, i. 104, &c.;
- mythic founders of, i. 394.
- Bull, Bishop, on guardian angels, ii. 203.
- Bura Pennu, ii. 327, 350, 368, 404.
- Burial, ghost wanders till, ii. 27;
- corpse laid east and west, 423.
- Burning oats from straw, i. 44.
- Burton, R. F., continuance-theory of future life, ii. 75;
- disease-spirits, 150.
- Burton, Anatomy of Melancholy, incubi, &c., ii. 191.
- Buschmann, on nature-sound, i. 223.
- Butler, Bishop, on natural religion, ii. 356.
- Cacodæmon, ii. 138, 202.
- Cæsar, on German deities, ii. 294.
- Cagots, i. 115, 384.
- Calls to animals, i. 177.
- Calmet, on souls, i. 457;
- on spirits, ii. 188, &c.
- Calumet, i. 210.
- Candles against demons, ii. 194.
- Cant, myth on word, i. 397.
- Cardinal numbers, i. 257.
- Cards, Playing, i. 82, 126.
- Cassava, i. 63.
- Castrén, ii. 80, 155, 177, 245, 351, &c.
- Cave-men, condition of, i. 59.
- Ceremonies, religious, ii. 362, &c.
- Ceres, ii. 306.
- Chances, games of, their relation to arts of divination, i. 78.
- Chanticleer, i. 413.
- Charivari at eclipse, i. 329.
- Charms:—objects, i. 118, ii. 148;
- formulas, their relation to prayers, ii. 373.
- Charon, i. 490, ii. 93.
- Chesterfield, Lord, on customs, i. 95;
- on omens, i. 118.
- Chic, myth on word, i. 397.
- Child-birth-goddess, ii. 305.
- Children, numerical series of names for, i. 254;
- Children’s language, i. 223.
- China, religion of:—funeral rites, i. 464, 493;
- Chinese culture-tradition, i. 40;
- remains in Borneo, i. 57.
- Chiromancy or palmistry, i. 125.
- Chirp or twitter of ghosts, &c., i. 453.
- Christmas, origin of, ii. 297.
- Chronology, limits of ancient, i. 54.
- Cicero, on dreams, i. 444;
- sun-gods, ii. 294.
- Civilization, see Culture.
- Civilization-myths, i. 39, 353.
- Civilized men adopt savage life, i. 45.
- Clairvoyance, by objects, i. 116.
- Clashing rocks, myth of, i. 347.
- Clicks, i. 171, 192.
- Cocoa-nut, divination by, i. 80.
- Coin placed with dead, i. 490, 494.
- Columba, St., legend of, i. 104.
- Columbus, his quest of Earthly Paradise, ii. 61.
- Common, right of, i. 20.
- Comparative theology, ii. 251.
- Comte, Auguste, i. 19;
- Confucius, i. 157;
- Consonants, i. 169.
- Constellations, myths of, i. 290, 356.
- Continuance-theory of future life, ii. 75.
- Convulsions:—by demoniacal possession, ii. 130;
- artificially produced, 416.
- Convulsionnaires, ii. 420.
- Copal incense, ii. 384.
- Cord, magical connexion by, i. 117.
- Corpse taken out by special opening in house, ii. 26;
- Cortes, i. 319.
- Costume, i. 18.
- Counting, art of i. 22, 240, &c.;
- on fingers and toes, 244;
- by letters of alphabet, &c., 258;
- derivation of numeral words, 247;
- evidence of independent development of low tribes, 271.
- Counting games, i. 75, 87.
- Couvade, in South India, i. 84.
- Cow, name of, i. 208;
- purification by nirang, &c., ii. 438.
- Cox, G. W., i. 341, 346, 362.
- Creator, doctrine of, ii. 249, 312, 321, &c.
- Credibility of tradition, i. 275, 370.
- Crete, earth of, fatal to serpents, i. 372.
- Cromlechs and menhirs objects of worship, ii. 164.
- Culture:—
- definition of, i. 1;
- scale of, i. 26;
- primitive, represented by modern savages, i. 21, 68, ii. 443, &c.;
- development of, i. 21, &c., 62, &c., 237, 270, 417, &c., ii. 356, 445;
- evidence of independent progress from low stages, i. 56, &c.;
- survival in culture, 70, &c.;
- evidence of early culture from language, 236;
- art of counting, 270;
- myth, 284;
- religion, i. 500, ii. 102, 184, 356, &c.;
- practical import of study of culture, 443.
- Curtius, Marcus, leap of, ii. 378.
- Curupa, cohoba, narcotic used in W. Ind. and S. Amer., ii. 416.
- Customs, permanence of, i. 70, 156;
- rational origin of, 94.
- Customs of Dahome, i. 462.
- Cyclops, i. 391.
- Cyrus, i. 281, 286.
- Dancing for religious excitement, ii. 133, 420.
- Danse Macabre, myth on name, i. 397.
- Dante, Divina Commedia, ii. 55, 220.
- Daphne, ii. 220.
- Dark, evil spirits in, ii. 194.
- Darwin, Charles, i. vii., ii. 152, 223.
- Dasent, G. W., i. 19.
- Davenport Brothers, i. 152, 311.
- Dawn, i. 338, &c.
- Day, sun as eye of, i. 350.
- Day and Night, myths of, i. 322, 337, &c., ii. 48, 323.
- Dead, use objects sacrificed for them, i. 485;
- Deaf and Dumb, counting, i. 244, 262;
- their mythic ideas, i. 298, 413.
- Death:—
- Death-watch, i. 146.
- Decimal notation, i. 261.
- Degeneration in culture, i. 35, &c.;
- is a secondary action, i. 38, 69;
- examples of, in Africa, North America, &c., i. 47.
- Delphi, oracle of, i. 94, ii. 138.
- Demeter, i. 328, ii. 273, 306.
- Democritus, theory of ideas, i. 497.
- Demons:—souls become, ii. 27, 111, &c.;
- iron, charm against, i. 140;
- pervade world, ii. 111, 137, 185, &c.;
- disease-demons, 126, &c., 177, 192, 215;
- water-demons, i. 109, ii. 209;
- tree and forest demons, ii. 215, 222;
- possession and obsession by demons, i. 98, 152, 309, ii. 111, 123, &c., 179, 404;
- expulsion of, i. 103, ii. 125, 199, 438;
- answer in own name through patient or medium, ii. 124, &c., 182, 404.
- Dendid, creation-poem of, ii. 21.
- Deodand, origin of, i. 20, 287.
- Destruction of objects sacrificed to dead, i. 483;
- to deities, ii. 376, &c.
- Development of culture, see Culture.
- Development myths, men from apes, &c., i. 376.
- Devil:—as satyr, i. 307;
- Dice, for divination and gambling, i. 82.
- Dies Natalis, ii. 202, 297.
- Differential words, phonetic expression of distance and sex, i. 220.
- Dirge, Lyke-wake, i. 495; of Ho, ii. 32.
- Disease:—personification and myths of, i. 295;
- Distance expressed by phonetic modification, i. 220.
- Divination:—lots, i. 78;
- symbolic processes, 81, 117;
- augury, &c., 119;
- dreams, 121;
- haruspication, 124;
- swinging ring, &c., 126;
- astrology, 128;
- possessed objects, i. 125, ii. 155.
- Divining rod and pendulum, i. 127.
- Doctrines borrowed by low from high races:—on future life, ii. 91;
- Dodona, oak of, ii. 219.
- Dog-headed men, i. 389.
- Dolmens, &c., myths suggested by, i. 387.
- Lady Abundance, ii. 389.
- Dook, ghost, i. 433.
- D’Orbigny, on religion of low tribes, i. 419;
- on sun-worship, ii. 286.
- Dravidian languages, high and low gender, i. 302.
- Dreams:—
- Drift, stone implements from, i. 58.
- Drivers’ and Drovers’ words, i. 180.
- Drowning, superstition against rescuing from, i. 107;
- caused by spirits, 109, ii. 209.
- Drugs used to produce morbid excitement, dreams, visions, &c., ii. 416.
- Dual and plural numbers in primitive culture, i. 265.
- Dualism:—good and evil spirits, ii. 186;
- Dusii, ii. 190.
- Dwarfs, myths of, i. 385.
- Dyu, ii. 258.
- Earth, myths of, i. 322, &c., 364, ii. 270, 320.
- Earth-bearer, i. 364.
- Earth-goddess and earth-worship, i. 322, &c., ii. 270, 306, 345.
- Earth-mother, i. 326, &c., 365.
- Earthquake, myths of, i. 364.
- Earthly Paradise, ii. 57, &c.
- Earthly resurrection, ii. 5.
- East and West, burial of dead, turning to in worship, adjusting temples toward, ii. 383, 422.
- Easter fires and festivals, ii. 297.
- Eclipse, myths of, i. 288, 329, 356;
- driving off eclipse monster, i. 328.
- Ecstasy, swoon, &c.:—
- Edda, i. 84, ii. 77, &c.
- Egypt, antiquity of culture, i. 54;
- El, ii. 355.
- Elagabal, Elagabalus, Heliogabalus, ii. 295, 398.
- Elements, worship of the four, ii. 303.
- Elf-furrows, myth of, i. 393.
- Elijah as thunder-god, ii. 264.
- Elysium, ii. 97.
- Embodiment of souls and spirits, ii. 3, 123, &c.
- Emotional tone, i. 166, &c.
- Emphasis, i. 173.
- Endor, witch of, i. 446.
- Energumens or demoniacs, ii. 139.
- Englishman, Peruvian myth of, i. 354.
- Enigmas, Greek, i. 93.
- Enoch, Book of, i. 408.
- Enthusiasm, changed signification of, ii. 183.
- Epicurean theory of development of culture, i. 37, 60;
- of soul, 456;
- of ideas, 497.
- Epileptic fits by demoniacal possession, ii. 130, 137;
- induced, 419.
- Eponymic ancestors, &c., myths of, i. 387, 398, &c., ii. 235.
- Essence of food consumed by souls, ii. 39;
- by deities, 381.
- Ethereal substance of soul, i. 454;
- of spirit, ii. 198.
- Ethnological evidence from myths of monstrous tribes, i. 379, &c.;
- from eponymic race-genealogies, 401.
- Etiquette, significance of, i. 95.
- Etymological myths:—
- names of places, i. 395;
- of persons, 396;
- nations, cities, &c., traced to eponymic ancestors or founders, 398, &c.
- Euhemerism, i. 279.
- Evans, Sir John, on stone implements, i. 65;
- Sebastian, i. 106, 453.
- Evil deity, ii. 316, &c.;
- worshipped only, 320.
- Excitement of convulsions, &c., for religious purposes, ii. 133, 419.
- Exeter, myth on name of, i. 396.
- Exorcism and expulsion of souls and spirits, i. 102, 454, ii. 26, 40, 125, &c., 146, 179, 199, 438.
- Expression of feature causes corresponding tone, i. 165, 183.
- Expressive sound modifies words, i. 215.
- Ex-voto offering, ii. 406, 409.
- Eye of day, of Odin, of Graiæ, i. 350.
- Fables of animals, i. 381, 409.
- Familiar spirits, ii. 199.
- Fancy, in mythology, i. 315, 405.
- Fasting for dreams and visions, i. 306, 445, ii. 410.
- Fauns and satyrs, ii. 227.
- Feasts of the dead, ii. 30;
- sacrificial banquets, 395.
- Feralia, ii. 42.
- Fergusson, Jas., on tree-worship, ii. 218;
- serpent-worship, 240.
- Fetch or wraith, i. 448, 452.
- Fetish, etymology of, ii. 143.
- Fetishism:—defined, ii. 143;
- Fiji and S. Africa, moon-myth common to, i. 355.
- Finger-joints cut off as sacrifice, ii. 400.
- Fingers and toes, counting on, i. 242.
- Finns, as sorcerers, i. 84, 115.
- Fire, passing through or over, i. 85, ii. 281, 429, &c.;
- Fire-drill, i. 15, 50;
- ceremonial and sportive survival of, 75, ii. 281.
- Fire-god and fire-worship, ii. 277, 376, &c., 403.
- Firmament, belief in existence of, i. 299, ii. 70.
- First Cause, doctrine of, ii. 335.
- Food offered to dead, i. 485, ii. 30, &c.;
- Footprints of souls and spirits, ii. 197.
- Forest-spirits, ii. 215, &c.
- Formalism, ii. 363, 371.
- Formulas:—prayers, ii. 371;
- charms, 373.
- Fortunate Isles, ii. 63.
- Four winds, cardinal points, i. 361.
- Frances, St., her guardian angels, ii. 203.
- French numeral series in English, i. 268.
- Fumigation, see Lustration.
- Funeral procession:—
- horse led in, i. 463, 474;
- kill persons meeting, 464.
- Funeral sacrifice:—
- attendants and wives killed for service of dead, i. 458;
- animals, 472;
- objects deposited or destroyed, 481;
- motives of, 458, 472, 483;
- survival of, 463, 474, 492;
- see Feast of Dead.
- Future Life, i. 419, 469, 480, ii. 1, &c., 100;
- transmigration of soul, ii. 2;
- remaining on earth or departure to spirit-world, ii. 22;
- whether races without belief in, 20;
- connexion with evidence of senses in dreams and visions, 24, 49;
- locality of region of departed souls, 44, 74;
- visionary visits to, 46;
- connexion of solar ideas with, 48, 74, 311, 422;
- character of future life, 74;
- continuance-theory, 75;
- retribution-theory, 83;
- introduction of moral element, 10, 83;
- stages or doctrine of future life, 100;
- its practical effect on mankind, 104;
- god of the dead, 308.
- Gambling numerals, i. 268.
- Games:—
- children’s games related to serious occupations, i. 72;
- counting-games, 74;
- games of chance related to arts of divination, 78.
- Gataker, on lots, i. 79.
- Gates of Hades, Night, Death, i. 347.
- Gayatri, daily sun-prayer of Brahmans, ii. 292.
- Genders, distinguished as male and female, animate and inanimate, &c., i. 301.
- Genghis-Khan, worshipped, ii. 117.
- Genius, patron or natal, ii. 199, 216;
- German and Scandinavian mythology and religion:—
- Gesture-language, and gesture accompanying language, i. 163;
- effect of gesture on vocal tone, 165;
- gesture-counting original method, i. 246.
- Ghebers or Gours, fire-worshippers, ii. 282.
- Gheel, treatment of lunatics at, ii. 143.
- Ghost:—ghost-soul, i. 142, 428, 433, 445, 488;
- seen in dreams and visions, 440, &c.;
- voice of, 452;
- substance and weight of, 453;
- of men, animals, and objects, 429, 469, 479;
- popular theory inconsistent and broken down from primitive, 479;
- ghost as harmful and vengeful demons, ii. 27;
- ghosts of unburied wander, ii. 28;
- ghosts remain near corpse or dwelling, ii. 29, &c.;
- laying ghosts, ii. 153, 194.
- Giants, myths of, i. 386.
- Gibbon, on development of culture, i. 33.
- Glanvil, Saducismus Triumphatus, ii. 140.
- Glass-mountain, Anafielas, i. 492.
- Godless month, ii. 350.
- Gods:—seen in vision, i. 306;
- Gog and Magog, i. 386, &c.
- Goguet, on degeneration and development, i. 32.
- Gold, worshipped, ii. 154.
- Good and evil, rudimentary distinction of, ii. 89, 318;
- good and evil spirits and dualistic deities, 317.
- Goodman’s croft, ii. 408.
- Graiæ, eye of, i. 352.
- Great Spirit, ii. 256, 324, 339, 343, 354, 365, 395.
- Great-eared tribes, i. 388.
- Greek mythology and religion:—nature-myths, i. 320, 328, 349;
- Grey, Sir George, i. 322.
- Grote, George, on mythology, i. 276, 400.
- Grove-spirits, ii. 215.
- Guarani, name of, i. 401.
- Guardian spirits and angels, ii. 199.
- Gulf of dead, ii. 62.
- Gunthram, dream of i. 442.
- Gypsies, i. 49, 115.
- Hades, under-world of departed souls, i. 335, 340, ii. 65, &c., 81, 97, 309;
- Haetsh, Kamchadal, ii. 46, 313.
- Hagiology, ii. 120, 261;
- rising in air, i. 151;
- miracles, i. 157, 371;
- second-sight, i. 449;
- hagiolatry, ii. 120.
- Hair, lock of, as offering, ii. 401.
- Half-men, tribes of, i. 391.
- Haliburton, on sneezing-rite, i. 103.
- Hamadryad, ii. 215.
- Hand-numerals, from counting on fingers, &c., i. 246.
- Hanuman, monkey-god, i. 378.
- Harakari, i. 463.
- Harmosios and Aristogeiton, ii. 63.
- Harpies, ii. 269.
- Harpocrates, ii. 295.
- Haruspication, i. 123, ii. 179.
- Harvest-deity, ii. 305, 364, 368.
- Hashish, ii. 379.
- Head-hunting, Dayak, i. 459.
- Headless tribes, myths of, i. 390.
- Healths, drinking, i. 96.
- Heart, related to soul, i. 431, ii. 152.
- Heaven, region of departed souls, ii. 70.
- Heaven and earth, universal father and mother, i. 322, ii. 272, 345.
- Heaven-god, and heaven-worship, i. 306, 322, ii. 255, &c., 337, &c., 367, 395.
- Hebrides, low culture in, i. 45.
- Hekate, i. 150, ii. 302, 418.
- Hel, death-goddess, i. 301, 347, ii. 88, 311.
- Hell, ii. 56, 68, 97;
- Hellenic race-genealogy, i. 402.
- Hellshoon, i. 491.
- Hephaistos, ii. 212, 280.
- Hera, ii. 305.
- Herakles, ii. 294;
- and Hesione, i. 339.
- Hermes Trismegistus, ii. 178.
- Hermotimos, i. 439, ii. 13.
- Hero-children suckled by beasts, i. 281.
- Hesiod, Isles of Blest, ii. 63.
- Hestia, ii. 284.
- Hiawatha, poem of, i. 345, 361.
- Hide-boiling, i. 44.
- Hierarchy, polytheistic, ii. 248, 337, 349, &c.
- Hissing, for silence, contempt, respect, i. 197.
- History, relation of myth to, i. 278, 416, ii. 447;
- criticism of, i. 280;
- similarity of nature-myth to, 320.
- Hole to let out soul, i. 453.
- Holocaust, ii. 385, 396.
- Holyoake, Holywood, &c., ii. 229.
- Holy Sepulchre, Easter fire at, ii. 297.
- Holy water, ii. 188, 439.
- Holy wells, ii. 214.
- Horne Tooke on interjections, i. 175.
- Horse, sacrificed or led at funeral, i. 463, 473.
- Horseshoes, against witches and demons, i. 140.
- House abandoned to ghost, ii. 25.
- Hucklesbones, i. 82.
- Huitzilopochtli, ii. 254, 307.
- Human sacrifice:—funerals, i. 458;
- Humbolt, W. v., on continuity, i. 19;
- on language, 236;
- on numerals, 253.
- Hume, Natural History of religion, i. 477.
- Huns, as giants, i. 386.
- Hunting-calls, i. 181.
- Hurricane, i. 363.
- Hyades, i. 358.
- Hysteria, &c., by possession, ii. 131, &c.;
- induced, 419.
- Iamblichus, i. 150, ii. 187.
- Ideas:—Epicurean related to object-souls, i. 497;
- Platonic related to species-deities, ii. 244.
- Idiots, inspired, ii. 128.
- Idol, see Image.
- Idolatry as related to fetishism, ii. 168.
- Images:—fallen from heaven, i. 157;
- Imagination, based on experience, i. 273, 298, 304.
- Imitative words, i. 200;
- verbs, &c., of blowing, swelling, mumbling, spitting, sneezing, eating, &c., 203, &c.;
- names of animals, 206;
- names of musical instruments, 208;
- verbs, &c., of striking, cracking, clapping, falling, &c., 211;
- prevalence of imitative words in savage language, 212;
- imitative adaptation of words, 214.
- Immateriality of soul, not conception of lower culture, i. 456, ii. 198.
- Immortality of soul, not conception of lower culture, ii. 22.
- Implements, inventions of, i. 64, &c.
- Incas, myth of ancestry and civilization, i. 288, 354, ii. 290, 301.
- Incense, ii. 383.
- Incubi and succubi, ii. 189.
- Indigenes of low culture, i. 50, &c.;
- considered as sorcerers, 113;
- myths of, as monsters, 376, &c.
- Indo-Chinese languages, musical pitch of vowels, i. 169.
- Indra, i. 320, ii. 265.
- Infant, lustration of, ii. 430, &c.
- Infernus, ii. 81.
- Innocent VIII., bull against witchcraft, i. 139, ii. 190.
- Inspiration, ii. 124, &c.
- Inspired idiot, ii. 128.
- Interjectional words:—verbs, &c. of wailing, laughing, insulting, complaining, fearing, driving, &c., i. 187;
- hushing, hissing, loathing, hating, &c., 197.
- Interjections, i. 175;
- sense-words used as, 176;
- directly expressive sounds, 183.
- Intoxicating liquor, absence of, i. 63.
- Intoxication as a rite, ii. 417.
- Inventions, development of, i. 14, 62;
- myths of, 39, 392.
- Iosco, Ioskeha and Tawiscara, myth of, i. 288, 348, ii. 323.
- Ireland, low culture in, i. 44.
- Iron, charm against witches, elves, &c., i. 140.
- Islands, earth of, fatal to serpents, i. 372;
- of Blest, ii. 57.
- Italian numeral series in English, i. 268.
- Jameson, Mrs., on parables, i. 414.
- Januarius, St., blood of, i. 157.
- Jerome, St., ii. 428.
- Jew’s harp, vowels sounded with, i. 168.
- John, St., Midsummer festival of, ii. 298.
- Johnson, Dr., i. 6, ii. 24.
- Jonah, i. 329.
- Jones, Sir W., on nature deities, ii. 253, 286.
- Joss-sticks, ii. 384.
- Journey to spirit-world, region of dead, i. 481, ii. 44, &c.
- Judge of dead, ii. 92, 314.
- Julius Cæsar, i. 320.
- Jupiter, i. 350, ii. 258, &c.
- Kaaba, black stone of, ii. 166.
- Kalewala, Finnish epic, ii. 46, 80, 93, 261.
- Kali, ii. 425.
- Kami-religion of Japan, ii. 117, 301, 350.
- Kang-hi on magnetic needle, i. 375.
- Kathenotheism, ii. 354.
- Keltic counting by scores continued in French and English, i. 263.
- Kepler on world-soul, ii. 354.
- Kimmerian darkness, ii. 48.
- Kissing, i. 63.
- Kitchi Manitu and Matchi Manitu, Great and Evil Spirit, ii. 324.
- Klemm, Gustav, on development of implements, i. 64.
- Kobong, ii. 235.
- Koran, i. 407, ii. 77, 296.
- Kottabos, game of, i. 82.
- Kronos swallowing children, i. 341.
- Kynokephali, i. 389.
- Lake-dwellers, i. 61.
- Language:—i. 17, 236, ii. 445;
- directly expressive element in, i. 160;
- correspondence of this in different languages, 163;
- interjectional forms, 175;
- imitative forms, 200;
- differential forms, 220;
- children’s language, 223;
- origin and development of language, 229;
- relation of language to mythology, 299;
- gender, 301;
- language attributed to birds, &c., 19, 469;
- place of language in development of culture, ii. 445.
- Langue d’oc, &c., i. 193.
- Last breath, inhaling, i. 433.
- Laying ghosts, ii. 25, 153.
- Legge, J., on Confucius, ii. 352.
- Leibnitz, i. 2.
- Lewes, G. H., i. 497.
- Liebrecht, Felix, i. vii., 108, 177, 348-9, ii. 24, 164, 195, &c.
- Life caused by soul, i. 436.
- Light and darkness, analogy of good and evil, ii. 324.
- Likeness of relatives accounted for by re-birth of soul, ii. 3.
- Fathers' Limbo, ii. 83.
- Linnæus, name of, ii. 229.
- Little Red Riding-hood, i. 341.
- Loki, 83, 365.
- Lots, divination and gambling by, i. 78.
- Lubbock, Sir J.:—
- Lucian, i. 149, ii. 13, 52, 67, 302, 426.
- Lucina, ii. 302.
- Lucretius, i. 40, 60, 498.
- Lunatics, demoniacal possession of, ii. 124, &c.
- Lustration, by water and fire, ii. 429, &c.;
- Luther, on witches, i. 137;
- on guardian angels, ii. 203.
- Lyell, Sir C., on degeneration-theory, i. 57.
- Lying in state, of King of France, ii. 35.
- Lyke-wake dirge, i. 495.
- McLennan, J. F., theory of totemism, ii. 236.
- Macrocosm, i. 350, ii. 354.
- Madness and idiocy by possession, ii. 128, &c., 179.
- Magic:—
- origin and development, i. 112, 132;
- belongs to low level of culture, 112;
- attributed to low tribes, 113;
- based on association of ideas, 116;
- processes of divination, 78, 118;
- relation to Stone Age, 127;
- see Fetishism.
- Magnetic Mountain, philosophical myth of, i. 374.
- Maistre, Count de, on degeneration in culture, i. 35;
- astrology, 128;
- animation of stars, 291.
- Makrokephali, i. 391.
- Malleus Maleficarum, ii. 140, 191.
- Man, primitive condition of, i. 21, ii. 443;
- see Savage.
- Man of the woods, bushman, orang-utan, i. 381.
- Man swallowed by monster, nature-myth of, i. 335, &c.
- Manco Capac, i. 354.
- Manes and manes-worship, i. 98, 143, 434, ii. 8, 111, &c., 129, 162, 307, 364;
- Manichæism, ii. 14, 330.
- Manitu, ii. 249, 324, 339.
- Manoa, golden city of, ii. 249.
- Manu, laws of:—ordeal by water, i. 141;
- pitris, ii. 119.
- Marcus Curtius, leap of, ii. 378.
- Margaret, St., i. 340.
- Markham, C. R., i. vii., ii. 337, 366, 392, &c.
- Marriages in May, i. 70.
- Mars, ii. 308.
- Martius, Dr. V., on dualism, ii. 325.
- Maruts, Vedic, i. 362, ii. 268.
- Mass, ii. 410.
- Master of life or breath, ii. 339, 343, 365.
- Materiality of soul, i. 453;
- of spirit, ii. 198.
- Maui, i. 335, 343, 360, ii. 253, 267, 279.
- Maundevile, Sir John, i. 375, ii. 45.
- Medicine, of N. A. Indians, ii. 154, 200, 233, 372, &c., 411.
- Meiners, History of Religions, ii. 27, 48, &c.
- Melissa, i. 491.
- Men descended from apes, myths of, i. 376;
- men with tails, 383.
- Menander, guardian genius, ii. 201.
- Merit and demerit, Buddhist, ii. 12, 98.
- Messalians, i. 103.
- Metaphor, i. 234, 297;
- myths from, 405.
- Metaphysics, relation of animism to, i. 497, ii. 242, 311.
- Metempsychosis, i. 379, 409, 469, 476, ii. 2;
- origin of, ii. 16.
- Micare digitis, i. 75.
- Middleton, Conyers, i. 157, ii. 121.
- Midgard-snake, ii. 241.
- Midsummer festival, ii. 298.
- Milk and blood, sacrifices of, ii. 48;
- see Blood.
- Milky Way, myths of, i. 359, ii. 72.
- Mill, J. S., on ideas of number, i. 240.
- Milton, on eponymic kings of Britain, i. 400.
- Minne, drinking, i. 96.
- Minucius Felix, on spirits, &c., ii. 179.
- Miracles, i. 276, 371, ii. 121.
- Mithra, i. 351, ii. 293, 297.
- Moa, legend of, ii. 50.
- Mohammed, legend of, i. 407.
- Moloch, ii. 403.
- Money borrowed to be repaid in next life, i. 491.
- Monkeys, preserved as dwarfs, i. 388;
- see Apes.
- Monotheism, ii. 331.
- Monster, driven off at eclipse, i. 328;
- hero or maiden devoured by, 335.
- Monstrous mythic human tribes, ape-like, tailed, gigantic and dwarfish, noseless, great-eared, dog-headed, &c., i. 376, &c.;
- their ethnological significance, 379, &c.
- Month’s mind, i. 83.
- Moon:—
- Moon-god and moon-worship, i. 289, ii. 299, &c., 323.
- Moral and social condition of low tribes, i. 29, &c.
- Moral element in culture, i. 28;
- Morals and law, ii. 448.
- Morbid imagination related to myth, i. 305.
- Morbid excitement for religious purposes, ii. 416, &c.
- Morning and evening stars, myths of, i. 344, 350.
- Morra, game of, in Europe and China, i. 75.
- Morzine, demoniacal possessions at, i. 152, ii. 141.
- Mound-builders, i. 56.
- Mountain, abode of departed souls on, ii. 60;
- ascending for rain, 260.
- Mouth of Night and Death, myths of, i. 347.
- Müller, J. G., on future life, ii. 90, &c.
- Müller, Max:—on language and myth, i. 299;
- Mummies, ii. 19, 34, 151.
- Musical instruments named from sound, i. 208.
- Musical tone used in language, i. 168, 174.
- Mutilation of soul with body, i. 451.
- Mythology:—i. 23, 273, &c.;
- formation and laws of, 273, &c.;
- allegorical interpretation, 277;
- mixture with history, 278;
- rationalization, euhemerism, &c., 278;
- classification and interpretation, 281, 317, &c.;
- nature-myths, 284, 316, &c.;
- personification and animation of nature, 285;
- grammatical gender as related to, 301;
- personal names of objects as related to, 303;
- morbid delusion, 305;
- similarity of nature-myths to real history, 319;
- historical import of mythology, i. 416, ii. 446;
- its place in culture, ii. 446;
- philosophical myths, i. 366;
- explanatory legends, 392;
- etymological myths, 395;
- eponymic myths, 399;
- legends from fancy and metaphor, 405;
- realized or pragmatic legends, 407;
- allegory and parables, 408.
- Myths:—myth-riddles, i. 93;
- origin of sneezing-rite, 101;
- foundation-sacrifice, 104;
- heroes suckled by beasts, 281;
- sun, moon, and stars, 288, &c.;
- eclipse, 288;
- waterspout, 292;
- sand-pillar, 293;
- rainbow, 293, 297;
- waterfalls, rocks, &c., 295;
- disease, death, pestilence, 295;
- phenomena of nature, 297, 320;
- heaven and earth, i. 322, ii. 345;
- sunrise and sunset, day and night, death and life, i. 335, ii. 48, 62, 322;
- moon, inconstant, typical of death, i. 353;
- civilization-legends, 39, 353;
- winds, i. 361, ii. 266;
- thunder, i. 362, ii. 264;
- men and apes, development and degeneration, i. 378;
- ape-men, 379;
- men with tails, 382;
- giants and dwarfs, 385;
- monstrous men, 389;
- personal names introduced, 394;
- race-genealogies of nations, 402;
- beast-fables, 409;
- visits to spirit-world, ii. 46, &c.;
- giant with soul in egg, 153;
- transformation into trees, 219;
- dualistic myth of two brothers, 320.
- Nagas, serpent-worshippers, ii. 218, 240.
- Names:—
- Natural religion, i. 427, ii. 103, 356.
- Nature, conceived of as personal and animated, i. 285, 478, ii. 184.
- Nature-deities, polytheistic, ii. 255, 376.
- Nature-myths, i. 284, 316, &c., 326.
- Nature-spirits, elves, nymphs, &c., ii. 184, 204, &c.
- Necromancy, i. 143, 312, 446;
- see Manes.
- Negative and affirmative particles, i. 192.
- Negroes re-born as whites, ii. 5.
- Neo or Hawaneu, ii. 333.
- Neptune, ii. 276.
- Nereus, ii. 274, 277.
- Neuri, i. 313.
- New birth of soul, ii. 3.
- Newton, Sir Isaac, on sensible species, i. 498.
- Nicene Council, spirit-writing at, i. 148.
- Nicodemus, Gospel of, ii. 54.
- Niebuhr, on origin of culture, i. 41.
- Night, myths of, i. 334, ii. 48, 61.
- Nightmare-demon, ii. 189, 193.
- Nilsson, Sven, on development of culture, i. 61, 64.
- Nirvana, ii. 12, 79.
- Nix, water-demon, i. 110, ii. 213.
- Norns or Fates, i. 352.
- Noseless tribes, i. 388.
- Notation, arithmetical, quinary, decimal, vigesimal, i. 261.
- Numerals:—low tribes only to 3 or 5, i. 242;
- derivation of numerals from counting fingers and toes, 246;
- from other significant objects, 251;
- series of number-names of children, 254;
- new formation of numerals, 255;
- etymology of, 259, 270;
- numerals borrowed from foreign languages, 266;
- initials of numerals, used as figures, 269;
- see Notation.
- Nympholepsy, ii. 137.
- Nymphs:—water-nymphs, ii. 212;
- Objectivity of dreams and visions, i. 442, 479;
- abandoned, 500.
- Objects treated as personal, i. 286, 477, ii. 205;
- souls or phantoms of objects, i. 478, 497, ii. 9;
- dispatched to dead by funeral sacrifice, i. 481.
- Occult sciences, see Magic.
- Odin, or Woden, as heaven-god, i. 351, 362, ii. 269;
- one-eyed, i. 351.
- Odysseus, unbinding of, i. 153;
- Ohio, Ontario, i. 190.
- Ojibwa, myth of, i. 345, ii. 46.
- Oki, demon, ii. 208, 255, 342.
- Old man of sea, ii. 277.
- Omens, i. 97, 118, &c., 145, 449.
- Omophore, Manichæan, i. 365.
- One-eyed tribes, i. 391.
- Oneiromancy, i. 121.
- Opening to let out soul, i. 453.
- Ophiolatry, see Serpent-worship.
- Ophites, ii. 242.
- Oracles, i. 94, ii. 411;
- Orang-utan, i. 381.
- Orcus, ii. 67, 80.
- Ordeal by fire, i. 85;
- by sieve and shears, 128;
- by water, 140;
- by bear’s head, ii. 231.
- Ordinal numbers, i. 257.
- Oregon, Orejones, i. 389.
- Orientation, solar rite or symbolism, ii. 422.
- Origin of language, i. 231;
- numerals, 247.
- Orion, i. 358, ii. 81.
- Ormuzd, ii. 283, 328.
- Orpheus and Eurydike, i. 346, ii. 48.
- Osiris, ii. 67, 295;
- and Isis, i. 289.
- Otiose supreme deity, ii. 320, 336, &c.
- Outcasts, distinct from savages, i. 43, 49.
- Owain, Sir, visit to Purgatory, ii. 56.
- Pachacamac, ii. 337, 366.
- Pandora, myth of, i. 408.
- Panotii, i. 389.
- Pantheism, ii. 332, 341, 354.
- Papa, mamma, &c., i. 223.
- Paper figures substitutes in sacrifice, i. 464, 493, ii. 405.
- Parables, i. 411.
- Pars pro toto in sacrifice, ii. 399.
- Parthenogenesis, ii. 190, 307.
- Particles, affirmative and negative, i. 192;
- of distance, 220.
- Passage from Hell, ii. 65.
- Patrick, St., i. 372;
- his Purgatory, i. 45, 55.
- Patroklos, i. 444, 464.
- Patron saints, ii. 120;
- patron spirits, 199.
- Pattern and matter, ii. 246.
- Pennycomequick, i. 396.
- Periander, i. 491.
- Perkun, Perun, ii. 266.
- Persephone, myth of, i. 321.
- Perseus and Andromeda, i. 339.
- Persian race-genealogy, i. 403.
- Personal names, in mythology, i. 303, 394, 396.
- Personification:—natural phenomena, i. 28, &c., 320, 477, ii. 205, 254;
- disease, death, &c., i. 295;
- ideas, 300;
- tribes, cities, countries, &c., 339;
- Hades, i. 339, ii. 55.
- Pestilence, personification and myths of, i. 295.
- Peter and Paul, Acts of, i. 372.
- Petit bonhomme, game of, i. 77.
- Petronius Arbiter, i. 75, ii. 261.
- Philology, Generative, i. 198, 230.
- Philosophical myths, i. 368.
- Phrase-melody, i. 174.
- Pillars of Hercules, i. 395.
- Pipe, i. 208.
- Pithecusæ, i. 377.
- Places, myths from names of, i. 395.
- Planchette, i. 147.
- Plants, souls of, i. 474.
- Plath, on Chinese religion, ii. 352, &c.
- Plato, on transmigration, ii. 13;
- Platonic ideas, 244.
- Pleiades, i. 291, 358.
- Pliny on magic, i. 133;
- on eclipses, 334.
- Plurality of souls, i. 433.
- Plutarch, visits to spirit-world, ii. 53.
- Pneuma, psyche, i. 433, &c.
- Pointer-facts, i. 62.
- Polytheism, ii. 247, &c.;
- based on analogy of human society, ii. 248, 337, 349, 352;
- classification of deities by attributes, 255;
- heaven-god, 255, 334, &c.;
- rain-god, 259;
- thunder-god, 262;
- wind-god, 266;
- earth-god, 270;
- water-god, 274;
- sea-god, 275;
- fire-god, 277;
- sun-god, 286, 335, &c.;
- moon-god, 299;
- gods of childbirth, agriculture, war, &c., 304;
- god and judge of dead, 308;
- first man, divine ancestor, 311;
- evil deity, 316;
- supreme deity, 332;
- relation of polytheism to monotheism, 331.
- Popular rhymes, &c., i. 86;
- Poseidon, i. 365, ii. 277, 378.
- Possession and obsession, see Demons, Embodiment.
- Pott, A. F., on reduplication, i. 219;
- on numerals, 261.
- Pottery, evidence from remains, i. 56;
- absence of potter’s wheel, 45, 63.
- Pozzuoli, myth of subsidence of, i. 372.
- Pragmatic or realized myths, i. 407.
- Prayer:—
- Prehistoric archæology, i. 55, &c.; ii. 443.
- Priests consume sacrifices, ii. 379.
- Prithivi, i. 327, ii. 258, 272.
- Procopius, voyage of souls to Britain, ii. 64.
- Progression in culture, i. 14, 32;
- inventions, 62, &c.;
- language, 236;
- arithmetic, 270;
- philosophy of religion, see Animism.
- Prometheus, i. 365, ii. 400.
- Proverbs, i. 84, &c.;
- see Popular Sayings.
- Psychology, i. 428.
- Pupil of eye, related to soul, i. 431.
- Purgatory, ii. 68, 92;
- St. Patrick’s, 55.
- Purification, see Lustration.
- Puss, i. 178.
- Pygmies, myths of, i. 385;
- connected with dolmens, 387;
- monkeys as, 388.
- Pythagoras, metempsychosis, ii. 13.
- Quaternary period, i. 58.
- Quetelet, on social laws, i. 11.
- Quinary numeration and notation, i. 261;
- in Roman numeral letters, 263.
- Races:—
- distribution of culture among, i. 49;
- culture of mixed races, Gauchos, &c., 46, 52;
- ethnology in eponymic genealogies, 401;
- moral condition of low races, 26;
- considered as magicians, 113;
- as monsters, 380.
- Rahu and Ketu, eclipse-monsters, i. 379.
- Rain-god, ii. 254, 259.
- Rainbow, myths of, i. vii. 293, ii. 239.
- Ralston, W. R., i. 342, ii. 245, &c.
- Rangi and Papa, i. 322, ii. 345.
- Rapping, omens and communications by, i. 144, ii. 221.
- Rationalization of myths, i. 278.
- Red Swan, myth of, i. 345.
- Reduplication, i. 219.
- Reid, Dr., on ideas, i. 499.
- Relics, ii. 150.
- Religion, i. 22, ii. 357, 449;
- Resurrection, ii. 5, 18.
- Retribution-theory of future life, ii. 83;
- not conception of lower culture, 83.
- Return and restoration of soul, i. 436.
- Revival, in culture, i. 136, 141.
- Revivals, morbid symptoms in religious, ii. 421.
- Reynard the Fox, i. 412.
- Riddles, i. 90.
- Ring, divination by swinging, i. 126.
- Rising in air, supernatural, i. 149, ii. 415.
- Rites, religious, ii. 362, &c.
- River of death, i. 473, 480, ii. 23, 29, 51, 94.
- River-gods and river-worship, ii. 209.
- River-spirits, i. 109, ii. 209, 407.
- Rock, spirit of, ii. 207.
- Roman mythology and religion:—funeral rites, ii. 42;
- Roman numeral letters, i. 263.
- Romulus, patron deity of children, ii. 121;
- and Remus, i. 281.
- Rosary, ii. 372.
- Sabæism, ii. 296.
- Sacred springs, streams, &c., ii. 209;
- Sacrifice:—origin and theory of, ii. 375, &c., 207, 269;
- Saint-Foix, i. 474, ii. 35.
- Saints, worship of, ii. 120.
- Samson’s riddle, i. 93.
- Sanchoniathon, ii. 221.
- Sand-pillar, myths of, i. 293.
- Sanskrit roots, i. 197, 224.
- Savage, man of woods, i. 382.
- Savage culture as representative of primitive culture:—i. 21, ii. 443;
- magic, witchcraft, and spiritualism, i. 112, &c.;
- language, i. 236, ii. 445;
- numerals, i. 242;
- myth, 284, 324;
- doctrine of souls, 499;
- future life, ii. 102;
- animistic theory of nature, i. 285, ii. 180, 356;
- polytheism, 248;
- dualism, 317;
- supremacy, 334;
- rites and ceremonies, 363, 375, 411, 421, 429.
- Savitar, ii. 292.
- Scalp, i. 460.
- Scores, counting by, i. 263.
- Sea, myths of, ii. 275.
- Sea-god and sea-worship, ii. 275, 377.
- Second death, ii. 22.
- Second sight, i. 143, 447.
- Semitic race, no savage tribe among, i. 49;
- antiquity of culture, 54;
- race-genealogy, 404.
- Sennaar, i. 395.
- Serpent emblem of immortality and eternity, ii. 241.
- Serpent-worship, ii. 8, 239, 310, 347.
- Sex distinguished by phonetic modification, i. 222.
- Shadow related to soul, i. 430, 435;
- shadowless men, 85, 430.
- Shell-mounds, i. 61.
- Sheol, ii. 68, 81;
- gates of, i. 347.
- Shingles, disease, i. 307.
- Shoulder-blade, divination by, i. 124.
- Sieve and shears, oracle by, i. 128.
- Silver at new moon, ii. 302.
- Sing-bonga, ii. 291, 350.
- Skylla and Charybdis, ii. 208.
- Slaves sacrificed to serve dead, i. 458.
- Sling, i. 73.
- Snakes, destroyed in Ireland, &c., i. 372.
- Sneezing, salutation on, i. 97;
- connected with spiritual influence, 97.
- Social rank retained in future life, ii. 22, 84.
- Sokrates, ii. 137, 294;
- Soma, Haoma, ii. 418.
- Soul, doctrine of, definition and general course in history, i. 428, 499;
- cause of life, 428;
- qualities as conceived by lower races, 428;
- conception of, related to dreams and visions, i. 429, ii. 24, 410;
- related to shadow, heart, blood, pupil of eye, breath, i. 430;
- plurality or division of, 434;
- exit of, i. 309, 438, &c., 448, ii. 50;
- restoration of, i. 436, 475;
- trance, ecstasy, 439;
- dreams, 440;
- visions, 445;
- soul not visible to all, 446;
- likeness to body, i. 450;
- mutilated with body, 451;
- voice, a whisper, chirp, &c., 452;
- material substance of soul, i. 453, ii. 198;
- ethereality not immateriality of, in lower culture, i. 456;
- human souls transmitted by funeral sacrifice to future life, i. 458, ii. 31;
- souls of animals, i. 467, ii. 41;
- their future life and transmission by funeral sacrifice, i. 469;
- souls of plants, trees, &c., i. 474, ii. 10;
- souls of objects, i. 476, ii. 9, 75, 153, &c.;
- transmission by funeral sacrifice, i. 481;
- conveyed or consumed in sacrifice to deities, ii. 216, 389;
- object-souls related to ideas, i. 497;
- existence of soul after death of body, i. 428, &c., ii. 1, &c.;
- transmigration or metempsychosis, ii. 2;
- new birth in human body, 3;
- in animal body, plant, inert object, 9, &c.;
- souls remain on earth among survivors, near dwelling, corpse, or tomb, i. 148, 447, ii. 25, &c., 150;
- souls called up by necromancer or medium, i. 143, 312, 446, ii. 136, &c.;
- food set out for, ii. 30, &c.;
- region of departed souls, ii. 59, &c., 73, 244;
- future life of, i. 458, &c., ii. 74, &c.;
- relation of soul to spirit in general, ii. 109;
- souls pass into demons, patron-spirits, deities, 111, 124, 192, 200, 364, 375;
- manes-worship, 112, &c.;
- souls embodied in men, animals, plants, objects, 147, 153, 192, 232;
- mystic meaning of word soul, 359.
- Soul of world, ii. 335, &c., 354.
- Soul-mass cake, ii. 43.
- Sound-words, i. 231.
- Speaking machine, i. 170.
- Spear-thrower, i. 66.
- Species-deities, ii. 242.
- Spencer and Gillen, ii. 236.
- Sphinx, i. 90.
- Spirit:—course of meaning of word, i. 433, ii. 181, 206, 359;
- animism, doctrine of spirits, i. 424, ii. 108, 356;
- doctrine of spirit founded on that of soul, ii. 109;
- spirits connected and confounded with souls, ii. 109, 363;
- spirits seen in dreams and visions, i. 306, 440, ii. 154, 189, 194, 411;
- action of spirits, i. 125, ii. 111, &c.;
- embodiment of spirits, ii. 123;
- disease by attack of, 126;
- oracular inspiration by, 130;
- whistling, &c., voice of, i. 453, ii. 135;
- act through fetishes, ii. 143, &c.;
- through idols, 167;
- spirits causes of nature, 185, 204, &c., 250;
- good and evil spirits, 186, 319;
- spirits swarm in dark, fire drives off, 194;
- seen by animals, 196;
- footprints of, i. 455, ii. 197;
- ethereal-material substance of, ii. 198;
- exclusion, expulsion, exorcism of, 125, 199;
- patron, guardian, and familiar spirits, 199;
- nature-spirits of volcanoes, whirlpools, rocks, &c., 207;
- water-spirits and deities, 209, 407;
- tree-spirits and deities, 215;
- spirits subordinate to great polytheistic deities, 248, &c.;
- spirits receive prayer, 363;
- sacrifice, 75;
- see Animism, &c.
- Spirit, Great, ii. 256, 324, 339, &c., 354, 365, 395.
- Spirit-footprints, i. 455, ii. 197.
- Spiritualism, modern:—
- Spirit-world, journey or visit to, by soul, i. 439, 481, ii. 44, &c.
- Spitting, i. 103;
- Standing-stones, objects of worship, ii. 164.
- Stanley, A. P., ii. 387.
- Stars, myths of, i. 288, 356;
- souls of, i. 291.
- Staunton, William, his visit to Purgatory, ii. 58.
- Stock-and-stone-worship, ii. 161, &c., 254, 388.
- Stone, myths of men turned to, i. 353;
- Stone Age, i. 56, &c.;
- magic as belonging to, 140;
- myths of giants and dwarfs as belonging to, 385.
- Storm, myths of, i. 322;
- storm-god, i. 323, ii. 266.
- Strut, i. 62.
- Substitutes in sacrifice, i. 106, 463, ii. 399, &c.
- Succubi, see Incubi.
- Sucking cure, ii. 146.
- Suicide, body of, staked down, ii. 29, 193.
- Sun, myths of, i. 288, 319, 335, &c., ii. 48, 66, 323;
- Sun-god and sun-worship, i. 99, 288, 353, ii. 263, 285, 323, &c., 376, &c., 408, 422, &c.;
- sun and moon as good and evil deity, ii. 324, &c.
- Superlative, triple, i. 265.
- Superstition, case of survival, i. 16, 72, &c.
- Supreme deity, ii. 332, 367;
- Survival in culture, i. 16, &c., 70, &c., ii. 403;
- children’s games, i. 72;
- games of chance, &c., 78;
- proverbs, 89;
- riddles, 91;
- sneezing-salutation, 98;
- foundation-sacrifice, 104;
- not save drowning, 108;
- magic, witchcraft, &c., 112;
- spiritualism, 141;
- numeration, 262, 271;
- deodand, 287;
- were-wolves, 313;
- eclipse-monster, 330;
- animism, i. 500, ii. 356;
- funeral sacrifice, i. 463, 474, 492;
- feasts of dead, ii. 35, 41;
- possession, 140;
- fetishism, 159;
- stone-worship, 168;
- water-worship, 213;
- fire-worship, 285;
- sun-worship, 297;
- moon-worship, 302;
- heaven-worship, 353;
- sacrifice, 406, &c.
- Susurrus necromanticus, i. 453, ii. 135.
- Suttee, i. 465.
- Swedenborg, spiritualism of, i. 144, 450, ii. 18, 204.
- Symbolic connexion in magic, &c., i. 116, &c., ii. 144;
- symbolism in religious ceremony, ii. 362, &c.
- Symplegades, i. 350.
- Tabor, i. 209.
- Tacitus, i. 333, ii. 228, 273.
- Tailed men, i. 383.
- Tangaroa, Taaroa, ii. 345.
- Tari Pennu, ii. 271, 349, 368, 404.
- Taronhiawagon, ii. 256, 309.
- Tarots, i. 82.
- Tartarus, ii. 97.
- Tatar race, culture of, i. 51;
- race-genealogy of, 404.
- Tattooing, mythic origin of, i. 393.
- Taylor, Jeremy, on lots, i. 79.
- Teeth-defacing, mythic origin of, i. 393.
- Temple, Jewish, ii. 426.
- Tertullian, i. 456, ii. 188, 427.
- Tezcatlipoca, ii. 197, 344, 391.
- Theodorus, St., church of, ii. 121.
- Theophrastus, ii. 165.
- Theresa, St., her visions, ii. 415.
- Thor, ii. 266.
- Thought, conveyance of, by vocal tone, i. 166;
- Epicurean theory of, 497;
- savage conception of, ii. 311.
- Thousand and One Nights:
- —water-spout and sand-pillar, i. 292;
- Magnetic Mountain, 374;
- Abdallah of Sea and Abdallah of Land, ii. 106.
- Thunder-bird, myths of, i. 363, ii. 262;
- thunder-bolt, ii. 262.
- Thunder-god, ii. 262, 305, 312, 337, &c.
- Tien and Tu, ii. 257, 272, 352.
- Tlaloc, Tlalocan, ii. 61, 274, 309.
- Tobacco smoked as sacrifice or incense, ii. 287, 343, 383;
- to cause morbid vision, &c., 417.
- Torngarsuk, ii. 340.
- Tortoise, World, i. 364.
- Totem-ancestors, i. 402, ii. 235;
- totemism, ii. 235.
- Traditions, credibility of, i. 275, 280, 370;
- of early culture, i. 39, 52.
- Transformation-myths, i. 308, 377, ii. 10, 220.
- Transmigration of souls, i. 379, 409, 469, 476, ii. 2, &c.;
- theory of, ii. 16.
- Trapezus, i. 396.
- Trees, objects suspended to, ii. 150, 223.
- Tree-souls, i. 475, ii. 10, 215;
- Tribe-names, mythic ancestors, i. 398;
- tribe-deities, ii. 234.
- Tribes without religion, i. 417.
- Tuckett, F. F., i. 373.
- Tumuli, remains of funeral sacrifice in, i. 486.
- Tupan, ii. 263, 305, 333.
- Turks, race-genealogy of, i. 403.
- Turnskins, i. 308, &c.
- Twin brethren, N. A. dualistic myth, ii. 320, &c.
- Two paths, allegory of, i. 409.
- Uiracocha, ii. 338, 366.
- Ukko, ii. 257, 261, 265.
- Ulster, mythic etymology of, ii. 65.
- Unbinding, supernatural, i. 153.
- Under-world, sun and souls of dead descend to, ii. 66;
- see Hades.
- Unkulunkulu, ii. 116, 313, 347.
- Vampires, ii. 191.
- Vapour-bath, narcotic, of Scyths and N. A. Indians, ii. 417.
- Vasilissa the Beautiful, i. 342.
- Vatnsdæla Saga, i. 439.
- Veda, i. 54, 351, 362, 465, ii. 72, 265, 281, 354, 371, 386.
- Vegetal, sensitive, and rational souls, i. 435.
- Ventriloquism, i. 453, ii. 132, 182.
- Vergil, Polydore, ii. 409.
- Versipelles, i. 308, &c.
- Vesta, ii. 285.
- Vigesimal notation, i. 261;
- survival in French and English, 263.
- Visions:—
- Visits to spirit-world, i. 436, 481, ii. 46, &c.
- Vitruvius, on orientation, ii. 427.
- Vocal tone, i. 166, &c.
- Voice of ghosts and other spirits, whisper, twitter, murmur, i. 452, ii. 134.
- Volcano, mouth of underworld, i. 344, 364, ii. 69;
- caused by spirits, 207.
- Vowels, i. 168.
- Vulcan, ii. 280, 284.
- Wainamoinen, ii. 46, 93.
- Waitz, Theodor, Anthropologie der Naturvölker, i. vi.;
- Walhalla, i. 491, ii. 77, 88.
- War-god, ii. 306.
- Warriors, fate of souls of, ii. 87.
- Wassail, i. 97, 101.
- Water, spirits not cross, i. 442.
- Waterfalls and waterspouts, myths, of, i. 292, 294.
- Water-gods and water-worship, ii. 209, 274, 376, 407.
- Water-spirits and water-monsters, i. 109, ii. 208, &c.
- Watling Street, Milky Way, i. 360.
- Weapons, i. 64, &c.;
- personal names given to, 303.
- Wedgwood, Hensleigh, on imitative language, i. 161.
- Weight of soul, i. 455;
- of spirit, ii. 198.
- Well-worship, ii. 209, &c.
- Werewolves, &c., doctrine of, i. 113, 308, &c., 435, ii. 193.
- West, mythic conceptions of, as region of night and death, i. 337, 343, ii. 48, 61, 66, 311, &c., 422, &c.;
- see East and West.
- Whately, Archbishop, on origin of culture, i. 38, 41.
- Wheatstone, Sir C., i. 170.
- Wheel-lock, i. 15.
- Whirlpool, spirit of, ii. 207.
- Widow-sacrifice, i. 458.
- Wild Hunt, i. 362, ii. 269.
- Wilson, Daniel, on dual and plural, i. 265.
- Wind gods, ii. 266.
- Winds, myths of, i. 360.
- Witchcraft, i. 116, &c.;
- Woden, see Odin.
- Wolf of Night, i. 341.
- Wong, ii. 176, 205, 348.
- World pervaded by spirits, ii. 137, 180, 185, 205, 250.
- Worship as related to belief, i. 427, ii. 362.
- Wraith or fetch, i. 448, 451.
- Wright, Thomas, ii. 56, 65.
- Wuttke, Adolf, i. 456, &c.
- Xerxes, i. 286, ii. 378.
- Yama, ii. 54, 314.
- Yawning, possession, i. 102.
- Yezidism, ii. 329.
- Zend-Avesta, i. 116, 351, ii. 98, 293, 328, 438.
- Zeus, i. 328, 350, ii. 258, &c., 353.
- Zingani, myth of name, i. 400.
- Zoroastrism, ii. 20, 98, 282, 319, 328, 354, 374, 400, 438.
THE END.
THE END.
1. Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés. dans la Nouvelle France,’ 1636, p. 130; Charlevoix, ‘Nouvelle France,’ vol. vi. p. 75. See Brinton, p. 253.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Brebeuf in ‘Report of the Jesuits in New France,’ 1636, p. 130; Charlevoix, 'New France,' vol. vi. p. 75. See Brinton, p. 253.
2. Waitz, vol. iii. p. 195, see p. 213. Morse, ‘Report on Indian Affairs,’ p. 345.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Waitz, vol. iii. p. 195, see p. 213. Morse, ‘Report on Indian Affairs,’ p. 345.
3. Mayne, ‘British Columbia,’ p. 181.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Mayne, ‘British Columbia,’ p. 181.
4. Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ pp. 248, 258, see p. 212. See also Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 353; Meiners, vol. ii. p. 793.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Cranz, ‘Greenland,’ pp. 248, 258, see p. 212. See also Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 353; Meiners, vol. ii. p. 793.
5. Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 28.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 28.
6. Bastian, ‘Zur vergl. Psychologie,’ in Lazarus and Steinthal’s ‘Zeitschrift,’ vol. v. p. 160, &c., also Papuas and other races.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, 'For comparative psychology,' in Lazarus and Steinthal’s 'Journal,' vol. v. p. 160, &c., also Papuans and other races.
7. Burton, ‘W. & W. fr. W. Afr.’ p. 376.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Burton, ‘W. & W. from W. Afr.’ p. 376.
8. Krapf, ‘E. Afr.’ p. 201.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Krapf, ‘E. Afr.’ p. 201.
9. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ p. 210; see also R. Clarke, ‘Sierra Leone,’ p. 159.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ p. 210; see also R. Clarke, ‘Sierra Leone,’ p. 159.
10. Bastian, l. c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, l. c.
11. Macpherson, p. 72; also Tickell in ‘Journ. As. Soc. Bengal,’ vol. ix. pp. 793, &c.; Dalton in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vi. p. 22 (similar rite of Mundas and Oraons).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Macpherson, p. 72; also Tickell in ‘Journ. As. Soc. Bengal,’ vol. ix. pp. 793, & etc.; Dalton in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vi. p. 22 (similar rituals of Mundas and Oraons).
12. Klemm, ‘C. G.’ vol. iii. p. 77; K. Leems, ‘Lapper,’ c. xiv.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Klemm, ‘C. G.’ vol. iii. p. 77; K. Leems, ‘Lapper,’ c. xiv.
13. R. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 284; see Shortland, ‘Traditions,’ p. 145; Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 353; Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 279; see also p. 276 (Samoyeds). Compare Charlevoix, ‘Nouvelle France,’ vol. v. p. 426; Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 353; Kracheninnikow, ii. 117. See Plath, ‘Rel. der alten Chinesen,’ ii. p. 98.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.R. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 284; see Shortland, ‘Traditions,’ p. 145; Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 353; Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 279; see also p. 276 (Samoyeds). Compare Charlevoix, ‘New France,’ vol. v. p. 426; Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 353; Kracheninnikow, ii. 117. See Plath, ‘Religion of the Ancient Chinese’ ii. p. 98.
14. Grey, ‘Australia,’ vol. i. p. 301, vol. ii. p. 363 (native’s accusation against some foreign sailors who had assaulted him, ‘djanga Taal-wurt kyle-gut bomb-gur,’—‘one of the dead struck Taal-wurt under the ear,’ &c. The word djanga = the dead, the spirits of deceased persons (see Grey, ‘Vocab. of S. W. Australia’), had come to be the usual term for a European). Lang, ‘Queensland,’ pp. 34, 336; Bonwick, ‘Tasmanians,’ p. 183; Scherzer, ‘Voy. of Novara,’ vol. iii. p. 34; Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 222, ‘Mensch,’ vol. iii. pp. 362-3, and in Lazarus and Steinthal’s ‘Zeitschrift,’ l. c.; Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 424.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grey, ‘Australia,’ vol. i. p. 301, vol. ii. p. 363 (a native's claim against some foreign sailors who attacked him, ‘djanga Taal-wurt kyle-gut bomb-gur,’—‘one of the dead hit Taal-wurt under the ear,’ etc. The term djanga = the dead, the spirits of those who have passed away (see Grey, ‘Vocab. of S. W. Australia’), had become the standard term for a European). Lang, ‘Queensland,’ pp. 34, 336; Bonwick, ‘Tasmanians,’ p. 183; Scherzer, ‘Voy. of Novara,’ vol. iii. p. 34; Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 222, ‘Mensch,’ vol. iii. pp. 362-3, and in Lazarus and Steinthal’s ‘Magazine,’ l. c.; Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 424.
15. Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 85; Brun-Rollet, ‘Nil Blanc,’ &c. p. 234.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 85; Brun-Rollet, ‘Nil Blanc,’ &c. p. 234.
16. Sproat, ‘Savage Life,’ ch. xviii., xix., xxi. Souls of the dead appear in dreams, either in human or animal forms, p. 174. See also Brinton, p. 145.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Sproat, ‘Savage Life,’ ch. xviii., xix., xxi. The souls of the dead show up in dreams, either as humans or animals, p. 174. See also Brinton, p. 145.
17. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part iii. p. 113.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Schoolcraft, 'Indian Tribes,' part III, p. 113.
18. Hayes, ‘Arctic Boat Journey,’ p. 198.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hayes, ‘Arctic Boat Journey,’ p. 198.
19. Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 102.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Brinton, 'Myths of New World,' p. 102.
20. Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1636, p. 104.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1636, p. 104.
21. Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 174.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 174.
22. Clavigero, ‘Messico,’ vol. ii. p. 5.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Clavigero, ‘Mexico,’ vol. ii. p. 5.
23. Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 602; Markham in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 195.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 602; Markham in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 195.
24. Dobrizhoffer, ‘Abipones,’ vol. ii. pp. 74, 270.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Dobrizhoffer, 'Abipones,' vol. 2, pp. 74, 270.
25. Coreal in Brinton, l. c. See also J. G. Müller, pp. 139 (Natchez), 223 (Caribs), 402 (Peru).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Coreal in Brinton, l. c. See also J. G. Müller, pp. 139 (Natchez), 223 (Caribs), 402 (Peru).
26. Chomé in ‘Lettres Edif.’ vol. viii.; see also Martius, vol. i. p. 446.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Chomé in ‘Lettres Edif.’ vol. viii.; see also Martius, vol. i. p. 446.
27. Waitz, vol. ii. p. 419 (Maravi).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Waitz, vol. ii. p. 419 (Maravi).
28. Callaway, ‘Rel. of Amazulu,’ p. 196, &c.; Arbousset and Daumas, p. 237.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Callaway, ‘Rel. of Amazulu,’ p. 196, etc.; Arbousset and Daumas, p. 237.
29. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ pp. 210, 218. See also Brun-Rollet, pp. 200, 234; Meiners, vol. i. p. 211.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ pp. 210, 218. See also Brun-Rollet, pp. 200, 234; Meiners, vol. i. p. 211.
30. Steinhauser in ‘Mag. der Evang. Miss.’ Basel, 1856, No. 2, p. 135.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Steinhauser in ‘Mag. der Evang. Miss.’ Basel, 1856, No. 2, p. 135.
31. Manu, xi. xii. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. i. p. 164, vol. ii. pp. 215, 347-52.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Manu, xi. xii. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. i. p. 164, vol. ii. pp. 215, 347-52.
32. St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. i. p. 181; Perelaer, ‘Ethnog. Beschr. der Dajaks,’ p. 17.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. 1. p. 181; Perelaer, ‘Ethnog. Description of the Dajaks,’ p. 17.
33. Hunter, ‘Rural Bengal,’ p. 210. See also Shaw in ‘As. Res.’ vol. iv. p. 46 (Rajmahal tribes).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hunter, ‘Rural Bengal,’ p. 210. See also Shaw in ‘As. Res.’ vol. iv. p. 46 (Rajmahal tribes).
34. Abraham Roger, ‘La Porte Ouverte,’ Amst. 1670, p. 107.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Abraham Roger, ‘The Open Door,’ Amsterdam 1670, p. 107.
35. Manu, xii. 9: ‘çarîrajaih karmmadoshaih yâti sthâvaratâm narah’—‘for crimes done in the body, the man goes to the inert (motionless) state;’ xii. 42, ‘sthâvarâh krimakîtâçcha matsyâh sarpâh sakachhapâh paçavaçcha mrigaschaiva jaghanyâ tâmasî gatih’—‘inert (motionless) things, worms and insects, fish, serpents, tortoises and beasts and deer also are the last dark form.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Manu, xii. 9: ‘People become stable through actions.’—‘for crimes committed in the body, a person goes to a state of inertness;’ xii. 42, 'sthâvarâh krimakîtâçcha matsyâh sarpâh sakachhapâh paçavaçcha mrigaschaiva jaghanyâ tâmasî gatih'—‘inert things, worms and insects, fish, snakes, turtles, and animals, as well as deer, represent the lowest dark form.’
36. Köppen, ‘Religion des Buddha,’ vol. i. pp. 35, 289, &c., 318; Barthélemy Saint-Hilaire, ‘Le Bouddha et sa Religion,’ p. 122; Hardy, ‘Manual of Budhism,’ pp. 98, &c., 180, 318, 445, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Köppen, ‘Religion of Buddha,’ vol. i. pp. 35, 289, &c., 318; Barthélemy Saint-Hilaire, ‘The Buddha and His Faith,’ p. 122; Hardy, ‘Manual of Buddhism,’ pp. 98, &c., 180, 318, 445, &c.
37. Herod. ii. 123, see Rawlinson’s Tr.; Plutarch. De Iside 31, 72; Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Eg.’ vol. ii. ch. xvi.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Herod. ii. 123, see Rawlinson’s Tr.; Plutarch. De Iside 31, 72; Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Eg.’ vol. ii. ch. xvi.
38. Plat. Phædo, Timæus, Phædrus, Repub.; Diog. Laert. Empedokles xii.; Pindar. Olymp. ii. antistr. 4; Ovid. Metam. xv. 160; Lucian. Somn. 17, &c. Philostr. Vit. Apollon. Tyan. See also Meyer’s Conversations-Lexicon, art. ‘Seelenwanderung.’ For re-birth in old Scandinavia, see Helgakvidha, iii., in ‘Edda.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Plat. Phaedo, Timaeus, Phaedrus, Republic; Diog. Laert. Empedocles xii.; Pindar. Olymp. ii. antistr. 4; Ovid. Metam. xv. 160; Lucian. Somn. 17, &c. Philostr. Vit. Apollon. Tyan. Also see Meyer’s Conversations-Lexicon, article ‘Seelenwanderung.’ For re-birth in old Scandinavia, see Helgakvidha, iii., in ‘Edda.’
39. Eisenmenger, part ii. p. 23, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Eisenmenger, part 2, p. 23, etc.
40. Beausobre, ‘Hist. de Manichée,’ &c., vol. i. pp. 245-6, vol. ii. pp. 496-9; G. Flügel, ‘Mani.’ See Augustin. Contra Faust.; De Hæres.; De Quantitate Animæ.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Beausobre, ‘History of Manichaeism,’ etc., vol. i. pp. 245-6, vol. ii. pp. 496-9; G. Flügel, ‘Mani.’ See Augustine. Against Faustus.; On Heresies.; On the Quantity of the Soul.
41. Gul. de Rubruquis in ‘Rec. des Voy. Soc. de Géographie de Paris,’ vol. iv. p. 356. Benjamin of Tudela, ed. and tr. by Asher, Hebrew 22, Eng. p. 62. Niebuhr, ‘Reisebeschr. nach Arabien,’ &c., vol. ii. pp. 438-443; Meiners, vol. ii. p. 796.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Gul. de Rubruquis in 'Rec. des Voy. Soc. de Géographie de Paris,' vol. iv. p. 356. Benjamin of Tudela, ed. and tr. by Asher, Hebrew 22, Eng. p. 62. Niebuhr, 'Reisebeschr. nach Arabien,' &c., vol. ii. pp. 438-443; Meiners, vol. ii. p. 796.
42. St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 57. Compare the tenets of the Russian sect of Dukhobortzi, in Haxthausen, ‘Russian Empire,’ vol. i. p. 288, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 57. Compare the beliefs of the Russian sect of Dukhobortzi, in Haxthausen, ‘Russian Empire,’ vol. i. p. 288, &c.
43. Since the first publication of the above remark, M. Louis Figuier has supplied a perfect modern instance by his book, entitled ‘Le Lendemain de la Mort,’ translated into English as ‘The Day after Death: Our Future Life according to Science.’ His attempt to revive the ancient belief, and to connect it with the evolution-theory of modern naturalists, is carried out with more than Buddhist elaborateness. Body is the habitat of soul, which goes out when a man dies, as one forsakes a burning house. In the course of development, a soul may migrate through bodies stage after stage, zoophyte and oyster, grasshopper and eagle, crocodile and dog, till it arrives at man, thence ascending to become one of the superhuman beings or angels who dwell in the planetary ether, and thence to a still higher state, the secret of whose nature M. Figuier does not endeavour to penetrate, ‘because our means of investigation fail at this point.’ The ultimate destiny of the more glorified being is the Sun; the pure spirits who form its mass of burning gases, pour out germs and life to start the course of planetary existence. (Note to 2nd edition.)
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Since the first publication of the above remark, M. Louis Figuier has provided a perfect modern example with his book, titled ‘The Day After Death,’ translated into English as ‘The Day after Death: Our Future Life according to Science.’ His effort to revive the ancient belief and connect it with the evolution theory of modern naturalists is carried out with more than Buddhist detail. The body is the home of the soul, which leaves when a person dies, just as one would leave a burning house. As the soul develops, it may move through different bodies stage by stage, from zoophyte and oyster to grasshopper and eagle, crocodile and dog, until it reaches humanity, then ascends to become one of the superhuman beings or angels that inhabit the planetary ether, and then to an even higher state, the nature of which M. Figuier does not attempt to explore, ‘because our means of investigation fall short at this point.’ The ultimate fate of the more exalted being is the Sun; the pure spirits that make up its mass of burning gases emit germs and life to initiate the cycle of planetary existence. (Note to 2nd edition.)
44. Swedenborg, ‘The True Christian Religion,’ 13. Compare the notion attributed to the followers of Basilides the Gnostic, of men whose souls are affected by spirits or dispositions as of wolf, ape, lion, or bear, wherefore their souls bear the properties of these, and imitate their deeds (Clem. Alex. Stromat. ii. c. 20).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Swedenborg, ‘The True Christian Religion,’ 13. Compare the idea that followers of Basilides the Gnostic believed in men whose souls are influenced by spirits or traits resembling those of a wolf, ape, lion, or bear, which is why their souls exhibit these qualities and mimic their actions (Clem. Alex. Stromat. ii. c. 20).
45. See J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ p. 208 (Caribs); but compare Rochefort, p. 429. Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 269, Castrén, ‘Finnische Mythologie,’ p. 119.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ p. 208 (Caribs); but compare Rochefort, p. 429. Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 269, Castrén, ‘Finnische Mythologie,’ p. 119.
46. For Egyptian evidence see the funeral papyri and translations of the ‘Book of the Dead.’ Compare Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 254, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.For Egyptian evidence, check out the funeral papyri and translations of the ‘Book of the Dead.’ See Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 254, & c.
47. Aryan evidence in ‘Rig-Veda,’ x. 14, 8; xi. 1, 8; Manu, xii. 16-22; Max Müller, ‘Todtenbestattung,’ pp. xii. xiv.; ‘Chips,’ vol. i. p. 47; Muir in ‘Journ. As. Soc. Bengal,’ vol. i. 1865, p. 306; Spiegel, ‘Avesta’; Haug, ‘Essays on the Parsis.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Aryan evidence in ‘Rig-Veda,’ 10:14, 8; 11:1, 8; Manu, 12:16-22; Max Müller, ‘Funeral Rites,’ pp. 12-14; ‘Chips,’ vol. 1, p. 47; Muir in ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. 1, 1865, p. 306; Spiegel, ‘Avesta’; Haug, ‘Essays on the Parsis.’
48. Origen, De Princip. ii. 3, 2: ‘materiæ corporalis, cujus materiæ anima usum semper habet, in qualibet qualitate positæ, nunc quidem carnali, postmodum vero subtiliori et puriori, quæ spiritalis appellatur.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Origen, De Princip. ii. 3, 2: "The physical matter that the soul always uses comes in different qualities, existing now in a physical form but later in a more subtle and purer form, known as spiritual."
49. Burton, ‘Central Africa,’ vol. ii. p. 345.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Burton, ‘Central Africa,’ vol. 2, p. 345.
50. Callaway, ‘Rel. of Amazulu,’ p. 84.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Callaway, 'Rel. of Amazulu,' p. 84.
51. Kaufmann, ‘Schilderungen aus Centralafrika,’ p. 124; G. Lejean in ‘Rev. des Deux Mondes,’ Apr. 1, 1860, p. 760; see Brun-Rollet, ‘Nil Blanc,’ pp. 100, 234. A dialogue by the missionary Beltrame (1859-60), in Mitterutzner, ‘Dinka-Sprache,’ p. 57, ascribes to the Dinkas ideas of heaven and hell, which, however, show Christian influence.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Kaufmann, 'Stories from Central Africa,' p. 124; G. Lejean in 'Rev. of the Two Worlds,' Apr. 1, 1860, p. 760; see Brun-Rollet, ‘Nil Blanc,’ pp. 100, 234. A dialogue by the missionary Beltrame (1859-60), in Mitterutzner, 'Dinka language,' p. 57, attributes to the Dinkas concepts of heaven and hell, which, however, reflect Christian influence.
52. Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 136; John Smith, ‘Descr. of Virginia,’ 33; Oviedo, ‘Nicaragua,’ p. 50. The reference to the Laos in Meiners, vol. ii. p. 760, is worthless.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 136; John Smith, ‘Descr. of Virginia,’ 33; Oviedo, ‘Nicaragua,’ p. 50. The mention of the Laos in Meiners, vol. ii. p. 760, is pointless.
53. Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ p. 259.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Cranz, ‘Greenland,’ p. 259.
54. Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 244. See ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iii. p. 113 (Dayaks). Compare wasting and death of souls in depths of Hades, Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 232.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 244. See ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iii. p. 113 (Dayaks). Compare the wasting and death of souls in the depths of Hades, Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 232.
55. Bosman, ‘Guinea’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 401. See also Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. ii. p. 191 (W. Afr.); Callaway, ‘Rel. of Amazulu,’ p. 355.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bosman, ‘Guinea’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 401. See also Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. ii. p. 191 (W. Afr.); Callaway, ‘Rel. of Amazulu,’ p. 355.
56. Cavazzi, ‘Congo, Matamba, et Angola,’ lib. i. p. 270. See also Liebrecht in ‘Zeitschr. für Ethnologie,’ vol. v. p. 96 (Tartary, Scandinavia, Greece).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Cavazzi, ‘Congo, Matamba, and Angola,’ lib. i. p. 270. See also Liebrecht in ‘Journal of Ethnology,’ vol. v. p. 96 (Tartary, Scandinavia, Greece).
57. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. p. 310; Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ pp. 111, 193; Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. p. 235.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part 1, p. 310; Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ pp. 111, 193; Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. 1, p. 235.
58. Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 323.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘Human,’ vol. ii. p. 323.
59. Kolben, p. 579.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Kolben, p. 579.
60. Billings, p. 125.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Billings, p. 125.
61. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien.’ vol. i. p. 145; Cross, l.c., p. 311. For other cases of desertion of dwellings after a death, possibly for the same motive, see Bourien, ‘Tribes of Malay Pen.’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 82; Polack, ‘M. of New Zealanders,’ vol. i. pp. 204, 216; Steiler, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 271. But the Todas say that the buffaloes slaughtered and the hut burnt at the funeral are transferred to the spirit of the deceased in the next world; Shortt in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vii. p. 247. See Waitz, vol. iii. p. 199.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien.’ vol. i. p. 145; Cross, l.c., p. 311. For other instances of leaving homes after a death, possibly for the same reason, see Bourien, ‘Tribes of Malay Pen.’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 82; Polack, ‘M. of New Zealanders,’ vol. i. pp. 204, 216; Steiler, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 271. But the Todas believe that the buffaloes killed and the hut burned during the funeral are given to the spirit of the deceased in the afterlife; Shortt in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vii. p. 247. See Waitz, vol. iii. p. 199.
62. Egede, ‘Greenland,’ p. 152; Cranz, p. 300.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Egede, ‘Greenland,’ p. 152; Cranz, p. 300.
63. Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 323; see pp. 329, 363.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘Human,’ vol. ii. p. 323; see pp. 329, 363.
64. Bowring, ‘Siam,’ vol. i. p. 122; Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien.’ vol. iii. p. 258.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bowring, ‘Siam,’ vol. I, p. 122; Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien.’ vol. III, p. 258.
65. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 120.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 120.
66. Wuttke, ‘Volksaberglaube,’ pp. 213-17. Other cases of taking out the dead by a gap made on purpose: Arbousset and Daumas, p. 502 (Bushmen); Magyar, p. 351 (Kimbunda); Moffat, p. 307 (Bechuanas); Waitz, vol. iii. p. 199 (Ojibwas);—their motive is probably that the ghost may not find its way back by the door.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Wuttke, 'Public superstition,' pp. 213-17. Other examples of removing the dead through a gap created intentionally: Arbousset and Daumas, p. 502 (Bushmen); Magyar, p. 351 (Kimbunda); Moffat, p. 307 (Bechuanas); Waitz, vol. iii. p. 199 (Ojibwas);—their reason is likely that the ghost won't be able to find its way back through the door.
67. Oldfield in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. pp. 228, 236, 245.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Oldfield in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. pp. 228, 236, 245.
68. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 221; Schirren, p. 91; see Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 233.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 221; Schirren, p. 91; see Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 233.
69. Morgan, ‘League of Iroquois,’ p. 174.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Morgan, ‘League of Iroquois,’ p. 174.
70. J. G. Müller, p. 286.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. J. G. Müller, p. 286.
71. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 126.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 126.
72. Cross in ‘Journ. Amer. Or. Soc.’ vol. iv. p. 309; Mason in ‘Journ. As. Soc. Bengal,’ 1865, part ii. p. 203. See also J. Anderson, ‘Exp. to W. Yunnan,’ pp. 126, 131 (Shans).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Cross in ‘Journ. Amer. Or. Soc.’ vol. iv. p. 309; Mason in ‘Journ. As. Soc. Bengal,’ 1865, part ii. p. 203. See also J. Anderson, ‘Exp. to W. Yunnan,’ pp. 126, 131 (Shans).
73. Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ pp. 51, 99-101.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘Psychology,’ pp. 51, 99-101.
74. Lucian. De Luctu. See Pauly, ‘Real. Encyclop.’ and Smith, ‘Dic. of Gr. and Rom. Ant.’ s.v. ‘inferi.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Lucian. On Weeping. See Pauly, ‘Real. Encyclop.’ and Smith, ‘Dic. of Gr. and Rom. Ant.’ s.v. ‘underworld.’
75. Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 277.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 277.
76. Calmet, vol. ii. ch. xxxvi.; Brand, vol. iii. p. 67.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Calmet, vol. 2, ch. 36; Brand, vol. 3, p. 67.
77. Charlevoix, ‘Nouvelle France,’ vol. vi. p. 75; Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. pp. 39, 83; part iv. p. 65; Tanner’s ‘Narr.’ p. 293.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Charlevoix, 'New France,' vol. vi. p. 75; Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. pp. 39, 83; part iv. p. 65; Tanner’s ‘Narr.’ p. 293.
78. Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1636, p. 104.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1636, p. 104.
79. Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i. pp. 253, 364. See Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 220.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. 1. pp. 253, 364. See Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 220.
80. Krapf, ‘E. Afr.’ p. 150.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Krapf, ‘E. Afr.’ p. 150.
81. T. J. Hutchinson, p. 206.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. T. J. Hutchinson, p. 206.
82. Cavazzi, ‘Congo, &c.’ lib. i. p. 264. So in ancient Greece, Lucian. Charon, 22.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Cavazzi, ‘Congo, &c.’ lib. i. p. 264. So in ancient Greece, Lucian. Charon, 22.
83. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ p. 180.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ p. 180.
84. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. ii. p. 235.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. ii. p. 235.
85. Tickell in ‘Journ. As. Soc. Bengal,’ vol. ix. p. 795; Dalton, ibid. 1866, part ii. p. 153, &c.; and in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vi. p. 1, &c.; Latham, ‘Descr. Eth.’ vol. ii. p. 415, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Tickell in ‘Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vol. ix. p. 795; Dalton, ibid. 1866, part ii. p. 153, etc.; and in ‘Transactions of the Ethnological Society,’ vol. vi. p. 1, etc.; Latham, ‘Description of Ethnology,’ vol. ii. p. 415, etc.
86. Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 62; Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 121.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘Psychology,’ p. 62; Castrén, ‘Finnish Mythology’ p. 121.
87. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. p. 173, &c.; vol. ii. p. 91, &c.; Meiners, vol. i. p. 306.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. p. 173, &c. vol. ii. p. 91, &c. Meiners, vol. i. p. 306.
88. Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Eg.’ vol. ii. p. 362; Lucian. De Luctu, 21.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Eg.’ vol. ii. p. 362; Lucian. De Luctu, 21.
89. Manu, iii.; Colebrooke, ‘Essays,’ vol. i. p. 161, &c.; Pictet, ‘Origines Indo-Europ.’ part ii. p. 600; Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. p. 332.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Manu, iii.; Colebrooke, ‘Essays,’ vol. i. p. 161, etc.; Pictet, ‘Origines Indo-Europ.’ part ii. p. 600; Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. p. 332.
90. Pauly, ‘Real-Encyclop.’ s.v. ‘funus.’; Smith’s ‘Dic.’ s.v. ‘funus.’ See Meiners, vol. i. pp. 305-19.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Pauly, ‘Real-Encyclopedia.’ s.v. ‘funus.’; Smith’s ‘Dictionary’ s.v. ‘funus.’ See Meiners, vol. i. pp. 305-19.
91. Augustin. contra Faustum, xx. 4; De Civ. Dei, viii. 27; conf. vi. 2. See Beausobre, vol. ii. pp. 633, 685; Bingham, xx. c. 7.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Augustine. Against Faustus, xx. 4; The City of God, viii. 27; also see vi. 2. Refer to Beausobre, vol. ii. pp. 633, 685; Bingham, xx. c. 7.
92. Saint-Foix, ‘Essais Historiques sur Paris,’ in ‘Œuvres,’ vol. iv. p. 147, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Saint-Foix, ‘Essais Historiques sur Paris,’ in ‘Œuvres,’ vol. 4, p. 147, &c.
93. Lady Herbert, ‘Impressions of Spain,’ p. 8.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Lady Herbert, ‘Impressions of Spain,’ p. 8.
94. H. C. Romanoff, ‘Rites and Customs of Greco-Russian Church,’ p. 249; Ralston, ‘Songs of the Russian People,’ pp. 135, 320; St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 77; Brand, ‘Pop. Ant.’ vol. i. p. 115.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.H. C. Romanoff, ‘Rites and Customs of the Greco-Russian Church,’ p. 249; Ralston, ‘Songs of the Russian People,’ pp. 135, 320; St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 77; Brand, ‘Popular Antiquities,’ vol. i. p. 115.
95. Beside the accounts of annual festivals of the dead cited here, see the following:—Santos, ‘Ethiopia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 685 (Sept.); Brasseur, ‘Mexique,’ vol. iii. pp. 23, 522, 528 (Aug., Oct., Nov.); Rivero and Tschudi, ‘Peru,’ p. 134 (Peruvian feast dated as Nov. 2 in coincidence with All Souls’, but this reckoning is vitiated by confusion of seasons of N. and S. hemisphere, see J. G. Müller, p. 389; moreover, the Peruvian feast may have been originally held at a different date, and transferred, as happened elsewhere, to the ‘Spanish All Souls’); Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. ii. pp. 44, 62 (esp. Apr.); Caron, ‘Japan,’ in Pinkerton, vol. vii. p. 629 (Aug.).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.In addition to the accounts of annual festivals honoring the dead mentioned here, check out the following:—Santos, ‘Ethiopia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 685 (Sept.); Brasseur, ‘Mexique,’ vol. iii. pp. 23, 522, 528 (Aug., Oct., Nov.); Rivero and Tschudi, ‘Peru,’ p. 134 (the Peruvian feast is noted as Nov. 2, coinciding with All Souls’, but this is complicated by the seasonal differences between the N. and S. hemispheres, see J. G. Müller, p. 389; furthermore, the Peruvian feast may have originally taken place on a different date and was moved, like in other regions, to the ‘Spanish All Souls’); Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. ii. pp. 44, 62 (especially Apr.); Caron, ‘Japan,’ in Pinkerton, vol. vii. p. 629 (Aug.).
96. Mason, ‘Karens,’ l. c. p. 238.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Mason, ‘Karens,’ p. 238.
97. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ p. 147.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ p. 147.
98. Munzinger, ‘Ostafr. Stud.’ p. 473.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Munzinger, ‘East African Studies’ p. 473.
99. Waitz, vol. ii. p. 194.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Waitz, vol. 2, p. 194.
100. G. D’Alaux in ‘Rev. des Deux Mondes,’ May 15, 1852, p. 76.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.G. D’Alaux in 'Rev. of the Two Worlds,' May 15, 1852, p. 76.
101. Ovid. Fast. ii. 533; v. 420.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ovid. The Metamorphoses. Book 2, line 533; Book 5, line 420.
102. Spiegel, ‘Avesta,’ vol. ii. p. ci.; Alger, p. 137.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Spiegel, ‘Avesta,’ vol. ii, p. ci; Alger, p. 137.
103. Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ pp. 374, 408; St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 77; Romanoff, ‘Greco-Roman Church,’ p. 255.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ pp. 374, 408; St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 77; Romanoff, ‘Greco-Roman Church,’ p. 255.
104. Petrus Damianus, ‘Vita S. Odilonis,’ in the Bollandist ‘Acta Sanctorum,’ Jan. 1, has the quaint legend attached to the new ordinance. An island hermit dwelt near a volcano, where souls of the wicked were tormented in the flames. The holy man heard the officiating demons lament that their daily task of new torture was interfered with by the prayers and alms of devout persons leagued against them to save souls, and especially they complained of the Monks of Cluny. Thereupon the hermit sent a message to Abbot Odilo, who carried out the work to the efficacy of which he had received such perfect spiritual testimony, by decreeing that November 2, the day after All Saints’, should be set apart for services for the departed.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Petrus Damianus, ‘Life of St. Odilon’ in the Bollandist ‘Acta Sanctorum,’ Jan. 1, has an interesting legend related to the new ordinance. A hermit lived on an island near a volcano, where the souls of the wicked were tormented in flames. The holy man overheard the demons in charge lamenting that their daily task of torturing souls was being disrupted by the prayers and donations of devoted people who opposed them to save souls, and they particularly complained about the Monks of Cluny. In response, the hermit sent a message to Abbot Odilo, who enacted a decree based on the strong spiritual confirmation he had received, establishing November 2, the day after All Saints’, as a day dedicated to services for the departed.
105. Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 336. Meiners, vol. i. p. 316; vol. ii. p. 290. Wuttke, ‘Deutsche Volksaberglaube,’ p. 216. Cortet, ‘Fêtes Religieuses,’ p. 233; ‘Westminster Rev.’ Jan. 1860; Hersart de la Villemarqué, ‘Chants de la Bretagne,’ vol. ii. p. 307.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, ‘Human,’ vol. ii. p. 336. Meiners, vol. i. p. 316; vol. ii. p. 290. Wuttke, ‘German Folk Beliefs,’ p. 216. Cortet, ‘Religious Festivals,’ p. 233; ‘Westminster Rev.’ Jan. 1860; Hersart de la Villemarqué, ‘Songs of Brittany’ vol. ii. p. 307.
106. Le Jeune in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1634, p. 16; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 195.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Le Jeune in ‘Jesuit Relations’ 1634, p. 16; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 195.
107. Cavazzi, ‘Congo,’ &c., book i. 265.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Cavazzi, ‘Congo,’ etc., book i. 265.
108. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 865, but not so in the account of the Feast of the Dead in Boecler, ‘Ehsten Abergl. Gebr.’ (ed. Kreutzwald), p. 89. Compare Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 345 (Gês). The following passage from a spiritualist journal, ‘The Medium,’ Feb. 9, 1872, shows this primitive notion curiously surviving in modern England. ‘Every time we sat at dinner, we had not only spirit-voices calling to us, but spirit-hands touching us; and last evening, as it was his farewell, they gave us a special manifestation, unasked for and unlooked for. He sitting at the right hand of me, a vacant chair opposite to him began moving, and, in answer to whether it would have some dinner, said “Yes.” I then asked it to select what it would take, when it chose croquets des pommes de terre (a French way of dressing potatoes, about three inches long and two wide. I will send you one that you may see it). I was desired to put this on the chair, either in a tablespoon or on a plate. I placed it in a tablespoon, thinking that probably the plate might be broken. In a few seconds I was told that it was eaten, and looking, found the half of it gone, with the marks showing the teeth.’ (Note to 2nd ed.)
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 865, but not so in the account of the Feast of the Dead in Boecler, ‘Ehsten Abergl. Bros.’ (ed. Kreutzwald), p. 89. Compare Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 345 (Gês). The following excerpt from a spiritualist journal, ‘The Medium,’ Feb. 9, 1872, illustrates this primitive idea surprisingly persisting in modern England. ‘Every time we sat down for dinner, we had not only spirit-voices calling to us, but spirit-hands touching us; and last evening, as it was his farewell, they gave us a special manifestation, unasked for and unexpected. He was sitting at my right side, and a vacant chair across from him started moving. When I asked if it wanted some dinner, it said “Yes.” I then asked it to choose what it would like, and it picked potato croquettes (a French way of preparing potatoes, about three inches long and two wide. I will send you one so you can see it). I was instructed to place this on the chair, either in a tablespoon or on a plate. I put it in a tablespoon, thinking the plate might break. A few seconds later, I was told that it had been eaten, and when I looked, I found half of it gone, with bite marks visible.’ (Note to 2nd ed.)
109. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 220, see 104.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 220, see 104.
110. Brasseur, ‘Mexique,’ vol. iii. p. 24.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Brasseur, ‘Mexico,’ vol. iii. p. 24.
111. Colebrooke, ‘Essays,’ vol. i. p. 163, &c.; Manu. iii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Colebrooke, ‘Essays,’ vol. I, p. 163, &c. Manu. III.
112. Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 408; Hartknoch, ‘Preussen,’ part i. p. 187.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 408; Hartknoch, ‘Preussen,’ part i. p. 187.
113. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. ii. pp. 33, 48; Meiners, vol. i. p. 318.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. ii. pp. 33, 48; Meiners, vol. i. p. 318.
114. Borri, ‘Relatione della Nuova Missione della Comp. di Giesu,’ Rome, 1631, p. 208; and in Pinkerton, vol. ix. p. 822, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Borri, ‘Report on the New Mission of the Society of Jesus,’ Rome, 1631, p. 208; and in Pinkerton, vol. ix. p. 822, &c.
115. Grout, ‘Zulu Land,’ p. 140; see Callaway, ‘Rel. of Amazulu,’ p. 11.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grout, 'Zulu Land,' p. 140; see Callaway, 'Rel. of Amazulu,' p. 11.
116. Caron, ‘Japan,’ vol. vii. p. 629; see Turpin, ‘Siam,’ ibid. vol. ix. p. 590.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Caron, ‘Japan,’ vol. vii. p. 629; see Turpin, ‘Siam,’ ibid. vol. ix. p. 590.
117. Ovid. Fast. ii. 533.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ovid. Fast. II. 533.
118. Legge, ‘Confucius,’ pp. 101-2, 130; Bunsen, ‘God in History,’ p. 271.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Legge, ‘Confucius,’ pp. 101-2, 130; Bunsen, ‘God in History,’ p. 271.
119. Brand, ‘Pop. Ant.’ vol. i. p. 392, vol. ii. p. 289.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Brand, ‘Pop. Ant.’ vol. i. p. 392, vol. ii. p. 289.
120. Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 239; Seemann, ‘Viti,’ p. 398.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. I, p. 239; Seemann, ‘Viti,’ p. 398.
121. Arbousset and Daumas, p. 347; Casalis, p. 247.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Arbousset and Daumas, p. 347; Casalis, p. 247.
122. Brasseur, ‘Mexique,’ vol. iii. p. 20, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Brasseur, ‘Mexico,’ vol. iii. p. 20, &c.
123. See ‘The Buke of John Mandeuill,’ 31, edited by Geo. F. Warner, published by the Roxburghe Club, 1889; Yule, ‘Cathay,’ Hakluyt Soc. (Note to 3rd ed.)
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See ‘The Book of John Mandeville,’ 31, edited by Geo. F. Warner, published by the Roxburghe Club, 1889; Yule, ‘Cathay,’ Hakluyt Soc. (Note to 3rd ed.)
124. Wuttke, ‘Volksaberglaube,’ p. 215. Other cases in Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. pp. 58, 369, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Wuttke, 'Volksbelief' p. 215. Other examples in Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. pp. 58, 369, &c.
125. Schoolcraft, ‘Algic Res.’ vol. ii. pp. 32, 64, and see ante, vol. i. p. 312.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Schoolcraft, ‘Algic Researches.’ vol. ii. pp. 32, 64, and see earlier, vol. i. p. 312.
126. Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 271; Klemm, ‘C. G.’ vol. ii. p. 312.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 271; Klemm, ‘C. G.’ vol. ii. p. 312.
127. Kalewala, Rune xvi.; see Schiefner’s German Translation, and Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ pp. 128, 134. A Slavonic myth in Hanusch, p. 412.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Kalewala, Rune 16; see Schiefner’s German Translation, and Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ pp. 128, 134. A Slavic myth in Hanusch, p. 412.
128. Homer. Odyss. xi. On the vivification of ghosts by sacrifice of blood, and on libations of milk and blood, see Meiners, vol. i. p. 315, vol. ii. p. 89; J. G. Müller, p. 85; Rochholz, ‘Deutscher Glaube und Brauch,’ vol. i. p. 1, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Homer. Odyss. xi. For information on how ghosts are revived through blood sacrifice and offerings of milk and blood, see Meiners, vol. i. p. 315, vol. ii. p. 89; J. G. Müller, p. 85; Rochholz, ‘German Faith and Customs,’ vol. i. p. 1, &c.
129. See for example, various details in Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. pp. 369-75, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See for example, various details in Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. pp. 369-75, & etc.
130. See vol. i. p. 481; also below, p. 52, note. Tanner’s ‘Narr.’ p. 290; Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part iii. p. 233; Keating, vol. ii. p. 154; Loskiel, part i. p. 35; Smith, ‘Virginia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xiii. p. 14. See Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ p. 269.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See vol. i. p. 481; also below, p. 52, note. Tanner’s ‘Narr.’ p. 290; Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part iii. p. 233; Keating, vol. ii. p. 154; Loskiel, part i. p. 35; Smith, ‘Virginia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xiii. p. 14. See Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ p. 269.
131. Callaway, ‘Zulu Tales,’ vol. i. pp. 316-20.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Callaway, ‘Zulu Tales,’ vol. 1, pp. 316-20.
132. Shortland, ‘Traditions of New Zealand,’ p. 150; R. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 423. The idea, of which the classic representative belongs to the myth of Persephone, that the living who tastes the food of the dead may not return, and which is so clearly stated in this Maori story, appears again among the Sioux of North America. Ahak-tah (‘Male Elk’) seems to die, but after two days comes down from the funeral-scaffold where his body had been laid, and tells his tale. His soul had travelled by the path of braves through the beautiful land of great trees and gay loud-singing birds, till he reached the river, and saw the homes of the spirits of his forefathers on the shore beyond. Swimming across, he entered the nearest house, where he found his uncle sitting in a corner. Very hungry, he noticed some wild rice in a bark dish. ‘I asked my uncle for some rice to eat, but he did not give it to me. Had I eaten of the food for spirits, I never should have returned to earth.’ Eastman, ‘Dacotah,’ p. 177.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Shortland, ‘Traditions of New Zealand,’ p. 150; R. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 423. The idea, represented classically by the myth of Persephone, that anyone who eats the food of the dead cannot return to the living, which is clearly illustrated in this Maori story, appears again among the Sioux of North America. Ahak-tah (‘Male Elk’) seems to die, but after two days, he comes down from the funeral scaffold where his body had been placed and shares his story. His soul traveled along the brave’s path through the beautiful land of tall trees and joyful singing birds until he reached the river and saw the homes of the spirits of his ancestors on the other side. After swimming across, he entered the nearest house, where he found his uncle sitting in a corner. Feeling very hungry, he spotted some wild rice in a bark dish. ‘I asked my uncle for some rice to eat, but he didn’t give it to me. If I had eaten the food meant for spirits, I would never have returned to earth.’ Eastman, ‘Dacotah,’ p. 177.
133. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 139, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 139, etc.
134. Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ Letter 19, in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 501; Burton, ‘Dahome,’ vol. ii. p. 158. For modern visits to hell and heaven by Christianized negro visionaries in America, see Macrae, ‘Americans at Home,’ vol. ii. p. 91.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ Letter 19, in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 501; Burton, ‘Dahome,’ vol. ii. p. 158. For contemporary accounts of visits to hell and heaven by Christianized African American visionaries, see Macrae, ‘Americans at Home,’ vol. ii. p. 91.
135. Lucian. Philopseudes, c. 17-28.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Lucian. Philopseudes, ch. 17-28.
136. Plutarch. De Sera Numinis Vindicta, xxii.; and in Euseb. Præp. Evang. xi. 36.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Plutarch. On the Deity's Prolonged Revenge, xxii.; and in Euseb. Preparing for the Gospel xi. 36.
137. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. p. 63.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ward, ‘Hindus,’ vol. ii. p. 63.
138. Gregor. Dial. iv. 36. See Calmet, vol. ii. ch. 49.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Gregor. Dial. IV. 36. See Calmet, Vol. II. Ch. 49.
139. Augustin. Epist. clxiv. 2.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Augustin. Letter clxiv. 2.
140. See Pearson, ‘Exposition of the Creed;’ Bingham, ‘Ant. Ch. Ch.’ book x. ch. iii. Art. iii. of the Church of England was reduced to its present state by Archbp. Parker’s revision.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See Pearson, ‘Explanation of the Creed;’ Bingham, ‘Antique Church of Christ’ book x. ch. iii. Article iii. of the Church of England was updated to its current form by Archbp. Parker’s revision.
141. Codex Apocr. N. T. Evang. Nicod. ed. Giles. ‘Apocryphal Gospels,’ &c. tr. by A. Walker; ‘Gospel of Nicodemus.’ The Greek and Latin texts differ much.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Codex Apocr. N. T. Evang. Nicod. ed. Giles. 'Apocryphal Gospels,’ etc. tr. by A. Walker; 'Gospel of Nicodemus.' The Greek and Latin texts differ significantly.
142. The following details mostly from T. Wright, ‘St. Patrick’s Purgatory’ (an elaborate critical dissertation on the mediæval legends of visits to the other world).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The following details are mainly from T. Wright, ‘St. Patrick’s Purgatory’ (a detailed critical analysis of the medieval legends about visits to the afterlife).
143. St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. i. p. 278. Rigg. in ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iv. p. 119. See also Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 397; Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. i. p. 83; Irving, ‘Astoria,’ p. 142.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. 1 p. 278. Rigg, in ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. 4 p. 119. See also Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. 1 p. 397; Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. 1 p. 83; Irving, ‘Astoria,’ p. 142.
144. Molina, ‘Chili,’ vol. ii. p. 89.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Molina, ‘Chili,’ vol. 2, p. 89.
145. Brasseur, ‘Mexique,’ vol. iii. p. 496; Sahagun, iii. App. c. 2, x. c. 29; Clavigero, vol. ii. p. 5.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Brasseur, 'Mexico,' vol. iii. p. 496; Sahagun, iii. App. c. 2, x. c. 29; Clavigero, vol. ii. p. 5.
146. See Wright, l.c. &c.; Alger, p. 391; &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. See Wright, l.c. & etc.; Alger, p. 391; & etc.
147. ‘History of Colon,’ ch. 61; Pet. Martyr. Dec. i. lib. ix.; Irving, ‘Life of Columbus,’ vol. ii. p. 121.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘History of Colon,’ ch. 61; Pet. Martyr. Dec. i. lib. ix.; Irving, ‘Life of Columbus,’ vol. ii. p. 121.
148. Stanbridge in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. i. p. 299; G. F. Moore, ‘Vocab. W. Austr.’ p. 83; Bonwick, ‘Tasmanians,’ p. 181.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Stanbridge in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. i. p. 299; G. F. Moore, ‘Vocab. W. Austr.’ p. 83; Bonwick, ‘Tasmanians,’ p. 181.
149. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. p. 321; see part iii. p. 229.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. p. 321; see part iii. p. 229.
150. Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 107. See also Burton, ‘W. and W. fr. W. Africa,’ p. 154 (Gold Coast).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 107. See also Burton, ‘W. and W. fr. W. Africa,’ p. 154 (Gold Coast).
151. Hesiod. Opera et Dies, Pindar, Olymp. ii. antistr. 4. Callistrat. Hymn. in Ilgen, Scolia Græca, 10. Strabo, iii. 2, 13; Plin. iv. 36.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hesiod. Works and Days, Pindar, Olymp. ii. antistr. 4. Callistrat. Hymn. in Ilgen, Greek Scolia, 10. Strabo, iii. 2, 13; Plin. iv. 36.
152. Loc. cit.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Same source.
153. Procop. De Bello Goth. iv. 20; Plut. Fragm. Comm. in Hesiod. 2; Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 793; Hersart de Villemarqué, vol. i. p. 136; Souvestre, ‘Derniers Bretons,’ p. 37; Jas. Macpherson, ‘Introd. to Hist. of Great Britain and Ireland,’ 2nd ed. London, 1772, p. 180; Wright, ‘St. Patrick’s Purgatory,’ pp. 64, 129.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Procop. De Bello Goth. iv. 20; Plut. Fragm. Comm. in Hesiod. 2; Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 793; Hersart de Villemarqué, vol. i. p. 136; Souvestre, ‘Derniers Bretons,’ p. 37; Jas. Macpherson, ‘Introd. to Hist. of Great Britain and Ireland,’ 2nd ed. London, 1772, p. 180; Wright, ‘St. Patrick’s Purgatory,’ pp. 64, 129.
154. Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 269.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Steller, ‘Kamchatka,’ p. 269.
155. Harmon, ‘Journal,’ p. 299; see Lewis and Clarke, p. 139 (Mandans).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Harmon, ‘Journal,’ p. 299; see Lewis and Clarke, p. 139 (Mandans).
156. J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrelig.’ pp. 140, 287; see Humboldt and Bonpland, ‘Voy.’ vol. iii. p. 132; Falkner, ‘Patagonia,’ p. 114.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrelig.’ pp. 140, 287; see Humboldt and Bonpland, ‘Voy.’ vol. iii. p. 132; Falkner, ‘Patagonia,’ p. 114.
157. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 232; Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 235.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 232; Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 235.
158. Callaway, ‘Zulu Tales,’ vol. i. p. 317, &c.; Arbousset and Daumas, p. 474. See also Burton, ‘Dahome,’ vol. ii. p. 157.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Callaway, ‘Zulu Tales,’ vol. i. p. 317, etc.; Arbousset and Daumas, p. 474. See also Burton, ‘Dahome,’ vol. ii. p. 157.
159. Mason, ‘Karens,’ l.c. p. 195; Cross, l.c. p. 313. Turanian examples in Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 119.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Mason, 'Karens,' l.c. p. 195; Cross, l.c. p. 313. Turanian examples in Castrén, 'Finn. Myth.' p. 119.
161. Festus, s.v. ‘manalis,’ &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Festus, s.v. ‘manalis,’ etc.
162. Sophocl. Œdip. Tyrann. 178; Lucian. De Luctu, 2. See classic details in Pauly, ‘Real-Encyclop.’ art. ‘inferi.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Sophocles, Oedipus the King, 178; Lucian, On Grief, 2. See classic details in Pauly, 'Real-Encyclop.' art. 'inferi.'
163. Birch in Bunsen’s ‘Egypt,’ vol. v.; Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Eg.’ vol. ii. p. 368; Alger, p. 101.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Birch in Bunsen’s ‘Egypt,’ vol. 5; Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Eg.’ vol. 2, p. 368; Alger, p. 101.
165. Thorpe, ‘Analecta Anglo-Saxonica,’ p. 115.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Thorpe, ‘Analecta Anglo-Saxon,’ p. 115.
166. Schirren, p. 151. See Taylor, ‘N. Z.’ p. 525.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Schirren, p. 151. See Taylor, ‘N.Z.’ p. 525.
167. Meiners, vol. ii. p. 781; Maury, ‘Magie,’ &c. p. 170.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Meiners, vol. ii. p. 781; Maury, ‘Magie,’ &c. p. 170.
168. Oviedo, ‘Nicaragua,’ p. 160; Brinton, p. 288.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Oviedo, ‘Nicaragua,’ p. 160; Brinton, p. 288.
169. J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ p. 138, see also 220 (Caribs), 402 (Peru), 505, 660 (Mexico); Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 233; Taylor, ‘Physical Theory,’ ch. xvi.; Alger, ‘Future Life,’ p. 590; see also above, p. 16, note.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ p. 138, see also 220 (Caribs), 402 (Peru), 505, 660 (Mexico); Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 233; Taylor, ‘Physical Theory,’ ch. xvi.; Alger, ‘Future Life,’ p. 590; see also above, p. 16, note.
170. Humboldt and Bonpland, ‘Voy.’ vol. v. p. 90; Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 233; Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 531; Plutarch. De Facie in Orbe Lunæ; Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ pp. 80, 89 (souls in stars).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Humboldt and Bonpland, ‘Voy.’ vol. 5 p. 90; Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. 1 p. 233; Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 531; Plutarch. De Facie in Orbe Lunæ; Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ pp. 80, 89 (souls in stars).
171. See Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. pp. 269, 311; Smith, ‘Virginia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xiii. p. 54; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 223; Squier, ‘Abor. Mon. of N. Y.’ p. 156; Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. i. p. 180.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. pp. 269, 311; Smith, ‘Virginia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xiii. p. 54; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 223; Squier, ‘Abor. Mon. of N. Y.’ p. 156; Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. i. p. 180.
172. Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 134; Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 103; Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ pp. 101, 114, 256.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 134; Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 103; Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ pp. 101, 114, 256.
173. Callaway, ‘Rel. of Amazulu,’ p. 393; Burton, ‘W. and W. fr. W. Afr.’ p. 454; Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 295.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Callaway, ‘Rel. of Amazulu,’ p. 393; Burton, ‘W. and W. fr. W. Afr.’ p. 454; Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 295.
174. Herodot. iv. 158, see 185, and Rawlinson’s note. See Smith’s ‘Dic. of the Bible,’ s.v. ‘firmament.’ Eisenmenger, part i. p. 408.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Herodotus. iv. 158, see 185, and Rawlinson’s note. See Smith’s ‘Dic. of the Bible,’ s.v. ‘firmament.’ Eisenmenger, part i. p. 408.
175. Eyre, ‘Australia,’ vol. ii. p. 367.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Eyre, ‘Australia,’ vol. ii, p. 367.
176. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part iv. p. 240 (but compare part v. p. 403); Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 176; Sproat, ‘Savage Life,’ p. 209.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part iv. p. 240 (but see part v. p. 403); Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 176; Sproat, ‘Savage Life,’ p. 209.
177. D’Orbigny, ‘L’Homme Américain,’ vol. ii. pp. 319, 328; see Martius, vol. i. p. 485 (Jumanas).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.D’Orbigny, ‘The American Man,’ vol. ii. pp. 319, 328; see Martius, vol. i. p. 485 (Jumanas).
178. J. G. Müller, p. 403; Brasseur, ‘Mexique,’ vol. iii. p. 496; Kingsborough, ‘Mexico,’ Cod. Letellier, fol. 20.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. G. Müller, p. 403; Brasseur, ‘Mexico,’ vol. iii. p. 496; Kingsborough, ‘Mexico,’ Cod. Letellier, fol. 20.
179. Max Müller, ‘Chips,’ vol. i. p. 46; Roth in ‘Zeitschr. d. Deutsch. Morgenl. Ges.’ vol. iv. p. 427.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Max Müller, ‘Chips,’ vol. i. p. 46; Roth in 'Journal of German and Eastern Studies' vol. iv. p. 427.
180. Cross, ‘Karens,’ l.c. pp. 309, 313; Le Jeune in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1634, p. 16; Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 272; Callaway, ‘Zulu Tales,’ vol. i. p. 316; Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. ii. pp. 310, 315; J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 139, 286.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Cross, ‘Karens,’ l.c. pp. 309, 313; Le Jeune in ‘Jesuit Relations’ 1634, p. 16; Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 272; Callaway, ‘Zulu Tales,’ vol. i. p. 316; Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. ii. pp. 310, 315; J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 139, 286.
181. Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 224; Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part ii. p. 135.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, ‘Psychology,’ p. 224; Schoolcraft, ‘Native American Tribes,’ part ii. p. 135.
182. D’Orbigny, ‘L’Homme Américain,’ vol. i. p. 364; Spix and Martius, ‘Brasilien,’ vol. i. p. 383; De Laet, Novus Orbis, xv. 2.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.D’Orbigny, 'The American Man,' vol. i. p. 364; Spix and Martius, ‘Brasilien,’ vol. i. p. 383; De Laet, Novus Orbis, xv. 2.
183. Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ p. 258.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Cranz, ‘Greenland,’ p. 258.
184. Magyar, ‘Süd-Afrika,’ p. 336.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hungarian, ‘South Africa,’ p. 336.
185. Edda: ‘Gylfaginning.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Edda: ‘The Deluding of Gylfi.’
186. ‘Koran,’ ch. lv. lvi.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Quran,’ ch. 55 lvi.
187. Eisenmenger, ‘Entdecktes Judenthum,’ part i. p. 7.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Eisenmenger, ‘Discovered Judaism,’ part i. p. 7.
188. Hardy, ‘Manual of Budhism,’ pp. 5, 24; Köppen, ‘Rel. des Buddha,’ vol. i. p. 235, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hardy, ‘Manual of Buddhism,’ pp. 5, 24; Köppen, ‘Religion of Buddha,’ vol. i. p. 235, &c.
189. Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1636, p. 105.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1636, p. 105.
190. Sahagun, ‘Hist. de Nueva España,’ book iii. appendix ch. i., in Kingsborough, vol. vii.; Brasseur, vol. iii. p. 571.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Sahagun, ‘History of New Spain,’ book iii. appendix ch. i., in Kingsborough, vol. vii.; Brasseur, vol. iii. p. 571.
191. Casalis, ‘Basutos,’ pp. 247, 254.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Casalis, ‘Basutos,’ pp. 247, 254.
192. Burton, ‘Dahome,’ vol. ii. p. 156; ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 403; ‘Wit and Wisdom from W. Afr.’ pp. 280, 449; see J. G. Müller, p. 140.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Burton, ‘Dahome,’ vol. ii. p. 156; ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 403; ‘Wit and Wisdom from W. Afr.’ pp. 280, 449; see J. G. Müller, p. 140.
193. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 126, &c.; Kalewala, Rune xv. xvi. xlv. &c.; Meiners, vol. ii. p. 780.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 126, &c.; Kalewala, Rune xv. xvi. xlv. &c.; Meiners, vol. ii. p. 780.
194. Homer. Il. ix. 405; Odyss. xi. 218, 475; Virg. Æn. vi. 243, &c., &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Homer. Iliad IX 405; Odyssey XI 218, 475; Virgil Aeneid VI 243, etc.
195. Gen. xxxv. 29; xxv. 8; xxxvii. 35; Job xi. 8; Amos ix. 2; Psalm lxxxix. 48; Ezek. xxxi., xxxii.; Isaiah xiv. 9, xxxviii. 10-18; 1 Sam., xxviii. 15; Eccles. ix. 10. ‘Records of the Past,’ vol. i. pp. 141-9; Sayce ‘Lectures on Hist. of Rel.’ part ii.; Alger, ‘Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life,’ ch. viii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Gen. 35: 29; 25: 8; 37: 35; Job 11: 8; Amos 9: 2; Psalm 89: 48; Ezek. 31, 32; Isaiah 14: 9, 38: 10-18; 1 Sam. 28: 15; Eccles. 9: 10. ‘Records of the Past,’ Vol. I pp. 141-9; Sayce ‘Lectures on Hist. of Rel.’ part II; Alger, ‘Critical History of the Doctrine of a Future Life,’ Ch. VIII
196. The doctrine of reversal, as in Kamchatka, where rich and poor will change places in the other world (Steller, pp. 269-72), is too exceptional in the lower culture to be generalized. See Steinhauser, ‘Rel. des Negers,’ l. c., p. 135. A Wolof proverb is ‘The more powerful one is in this world, the more servile one will be in the next.’ (Burton, ‘Wit and Wisdom,’ p. 28.)
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The idea of reversal, like in Kamchatka, where the rich and the poor will swap roles in the afterlife (Steller, pp. 269-72), is too rare in lower cultures to be applied broadly. See Steinhauser, ‘Rel. des Negers,’ l. c., p. 135. A Wolof saying is ‘The more powerful you are in this world, the more submissive you will be in the next.’ (Burton, ‘Wit and Wisdom,’ p. 28.)
197. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. pp. 245, 397; see also Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 237 (Samoans); Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 105.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. pp. 245, 397; see also Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 237 (Samoans); Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 105.
198. Sproat, ‘Savage Life,’ p. 209.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Sproat, ‘Savage Life,’ p. 209.
199. ‘Rec. des Voy. au Nord,’ vol. v. p. 23 (Natchez); Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Commentarios Reales,’ lib. i. c. 23, tr. by C. R. Markham; Prescott, ‘Peru,’ vol. i. pp. 29, 83; J. G. Müller, p. 402, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Rec. des Voy. au Nord,’ vol. v. p. 23 (Natchez); Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Royal Comments,’ lib. i. c. 23, tr. by C. R. Markham; Prescott, ‘Peru,’ vol. i. pp. 29, 83; J. G. Müller, p. 402, &c.
200. Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ p. 259.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Cranz, ‘Greenland,’ p. 259.
201. Charlevoix, ‘Nouvelle France,’ vol. vi. p. 77; Lescarbot, ‘Hist. de la Nouvelle France,’ Paris, 1619, p. 679.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Charlevoix, 'New France,' vol. 6. p. 77; Lescarbot, 'History of New France' Paris, 1619, p. 679.
202. Lery, ‘Hist. d’un Voy. en Brésil,’ p. 234; Coreal, ‘Voi. aux Indes Occ.’ i. p. 224.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Lery, ‘History of a Voyage to Brazil’ p. 234; Coreal, 'Voi. in the Indies' i. p. 224.
203. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 430.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Rochefort, 'Caribbean Islands,' p. 430.
204. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. i. p. 325.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. i. p. 325.
205. Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1636, p. 104; see also Meiners, vol. ii. p. 769; J. G. Müller, pp. 89, 139.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1636, p. 104; see also Meiners, vol. ii. p. 769; J. G. Müller, pp. 89, 139.
206. Chateaubriand, ‘Voy. en Amérique’ (Religion).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Chateaubriand, ‘Voyage in America’ (Religion).
207. Oviedo, ‘Nicaragua,’ p. 22; Torquemada, ‘Monarquia Indiana,’ book xiii. c. 48; Sahagun, book iii. app. ch. i.-iii. in Kingsborough, vol. vii. Compare Anderson, ‘Exp. to W. Yunnan,’ p. 125. (Shans, good men and mothers dying in child-birth to heaven, bad men and those killed by the sword to hell.)
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Oviedo, ‘Nicaragua,’ p. 22; Torquemada, ‘Monarquia Indiana,’ book xiii. c. 48; Sahagun, book iii. app. ch. i.-iii. in Kingsborough, vol. vii. Compare Anderson, ‘Exp. to W. Yunnan,’ p. 125. (Shans, good people and mothers dying during childbirth go to heaven, bad people and those killed by the sword go to hell.)
208. Alger, ‘Future Life,’ p. 93.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Alger, ‘Future Life,’ p. 93.
209. Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 300.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 300.
210. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 397; see also Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 243.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 397; see also Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 243.
211. Brinton, p. 242, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Brinton, p. 242, etc.
212. J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 87, 224. See also the opinions of Meiners, ‘Gesch. der Religion,’ vol. ii. p. 768; Wuttke. ‘Gesch. des Heidenthums,’ vol. i. p. 115.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 87, 224. Check out the views of Meiners, 'History of Religion,' vol. ii. p. 768; Wuttke. ‘History of Paganism,’ vol. i. p. 115.
213. Ellis, l. c.; Moerenhout, ‘Voyage,’ vol. i. p. 433.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ellis, l.c.; Moerenhout, 'Voyage,' vol. 1, p. 433.
214. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 378.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Rochefort, ‘Caribbean Islands,’ p. 378.
215. Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ letter x.; in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 401.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ letter x; in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 401.
216. St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. i. p. 181; see Mundy, ‘Narrative,’ vol. i. p. 332.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. 1. p. 181; see Mundy, ‘Narrative,’ vol. 1. p. 332.
217. Macpherson, p. 92. Compare Moerenhout, l. c. (Tahiti).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Macpherson, p. 92. Compare Moerenhout, l. c. (Tahiti).
218. Mason, l. c. p. 195. See also De Brosses, ‘Nav. aux Terres Australes,’ vol. ii. p. 482 (Caroline Is.).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Mason, l. c. p. 195. See also De Brosses, ‘Nav. aux Terres Australes,’ vol. ii. p. 482 (Caroline Is.).
219. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ pp. 136, 144. See Georgi, ‘Reise im Russ. Reich,’ vol. i. p. 278. Compare accounts of Purgatory among the North American Indians, apparently derived from missionaries, in Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 169; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 345.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ pp. 136, 144. See Georgi, 'Travel in the Russian Empire,' vol. i. p. 278. Compare accounts of Purgatory among North American Indians, apparently derived from missionaries, in Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 169; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 345.
220. See T. Wright, ‘St. Patrick’s Purgatory.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. See T. Wright, ‘St. Patrick’s Purgatory.’
221. Waitz, vol. ii. pp. 171, 191; Bowen, ‘Yoruba Lang.’ p. xvi. See J. L. Wilson, p. 210.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Waitz, vol. ii, pp. 171, 191; Bowen, ‘Yoruba Lang.’ p. xvi. See J. L. Wilson, p. 210.
222. Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1635, p. 35; 1636, p. 105. Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. ii. p. 127; Long’s ‘Exp.’ vol. i. p. 180. See Brinton, p. 247; Waitz, vol. ii. p. 191, vol. iii. p. 197; and the collection of myths of the Heaven-Bridge and Heaven-Gulf in ‘Early History of Mankind,’ chap. xii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1635, p. 35; 1636, p. 105. Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. ii. p. 127; Long’s ‘Exp.’ vol. i. p. 180. See Brinton, p. 247; Waitz, vol. ii. p. 191, vol. iii. p. 197; and the collection of myths of the Heaven-Bridge and Heaven-Gulf in ‘Early History of Mankind,’ chap. xii.
223. Smith, ‘New England,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xiii. p. 244.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Smith, ‘New England,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xiii. p. 244.
224. Wilson in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 303.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Wilson in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 303.
225. Birch, Introduction to and translation of the ‘Book of the Dead,’ in Bunsen, vol. v.; Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Eg.’ vol. v.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Birch, Introduction to and translation of the ‘Book of the Dead,’ in Bunsen, vol. 5; Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Eg.’ vol. 5
226. For references to Rig Veda see Muir, ‘Sanskrit Texts,’ sec. xviii.; Max Müller, Lecture on Vedas in ‘Essays,’ vol. ii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.For references to the Rig Veda, see Muir, ‘Sanskrit Texts,’ sec. xviii; Max Müller, Lecture on Vedas in ‘Essays,’ vol. ii.
227. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ new ser. vol. ii. p. 210. See Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. iii. p. 387.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ new ser. vol. ii. p. 210. See Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. iii. p. 387.
228. Spiegel, ‘Avesta,’ ed. Bleek, vol. iii. pp. 136, 163; see vol. i. pp. xviii. 90, 141; vol. ii. p. 68.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Spiegel, ‘Avesta,’ ed. Bleek, vol. iii. pp. 136, 163; see vol. i. pp. xviii. 90, 141; vol. ii. p. 68.
229. See Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 134; J. G. Müller, ‘Amerikanische Urreligionen,’ p. 171.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 134; J. G. Müller, ‘American Indigenous Religions,’ p. 171.
230. Philo Jud. de Gigantibus, iv.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Philo Jud. on Giants, iv.
231. Rituale Romanum: De Exorcizandis Obsessis a Dæmonio.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Rituale Romanum: On Exorcising People Possessed by Demons.
232. Oldfield, ‘Abor. of Australia’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 236. See Bonwick, ‘Tasmanians,’ p. 181.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Oldfield, ‘Aboriginals of Australia’ in ‘Transactions of the Ethnological Society’ vol. iii. p. 236. See Bonwick, ‘Tasmanians,’ p. 181.
233. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 104.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 104.
234. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 429.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Rochefort, ‘Antilles,’ p. 429.
235. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part ii. p. 195; M. Eastman, ‘Dahcotah,’ p. 72.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part II, p. 195; M. Eastman, ‘Dahcotah,’ p. 72.
236. Burton, ‘Central Afr.’ vol. ii. p. 344; Schlegel, ‘Ewe-Sprache,’ p. xxv.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Burton, ‘Central Africa’ vol. ii. p. 344; Schlegel, ‘Ewe-Sprache,’ p. xxv.
237. Falkner, ‘Patagonia,’ p. 116; but cf. Musters, p. 180.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Falkner, 'Patagonia,' p. 116; but cf. Musters, p. 180.
238. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 122.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 122.
239. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. p. 206.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. I, p. 206.
240. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. ii. pp. 129, 416; vol. iii. pp. 29, 257, 278; ‘Psychologie,’ pp. 77, 99; Cross, ‘Karens,’ l. c. p. 316; Elliot in ‘Journ. Eth. Soc.’ vol. i. p. 115; Buchanan, ‘Mysore, &c.,’ in Pinkerton, vol. viii. p. 677.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, ‘Eastern Asia,’ vol. ii. pp. 129, 416; vol. iii. pp. 29, 257, 278; ‘Psychology,’ pp. 77, 99; Cross, ‘Karens,’ l. c. p. 316; Elliot in ‘Journal of the Ethnological Society,’ vol. i. p. 115; Buchanan, ‘Mysore, etc.,’ in Pinkerton, vol. viii. p. 677.
241. Shortt, ‘Tribes of India,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vii. p. 192; Tinling, ‘Tour round India,’ p. 19.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Shortt, ‘Tribes of India,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. 7. p. 192; Tinling, ‘Tour around India,’ p. 19.
242. Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 101.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘Psychology,’ p. 101.
243. Sir J. Shore in ‘Asiatic Res.’ vol. iv. p. 331.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Sir J. Shore in ‘Asiatic Res.’ vol. iv. p. 331.
244. For some collections of details of manes-worship, see Meiners, ‘Geschichte der Religionen,’ vol. i. book 3; Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. pp. 402-11; ‘Psychologie,’ pp. 72-114.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.For some collections of details about manes-worship, see Meiners, ‘History of Religions’ vol. i. book 3; Bastian, ‘Human,’ vol. ii. pp. 402-11; ‘Psychology,’ pp. 72-114.
245. J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 73, 173, 209, 261; Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. p. 39, part iii. p. 237; Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. iii. pp. 191, 204.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 73, 173, 209, 261; Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. p. 39, part iii. p. 237; Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. iii. pp. 191, 204.
246. Backhouse, ‘Australia,’ p. 105; Bonwick, ‘Tasmanians,’ p. 182.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Backhouse, ‘Australia,’ p. 105; Bonwick, ‘Tasmanians,’ p. 182.
247. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 88.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Turner, 'Polynesia,' p. 88.
248. Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 104; S. S. Farmer, p. 126; Shortland, ‘Trads. of N. Z.’ p. 81; Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 108.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 104; S. S. Farmer, p. 126; Shortland, ‘Trads. of N. Z.’ p. 81; Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 108.
249. J. R. Forster, ‘Observations,’ p. 604; Marsden, ‘Sumatra,’ p. 258; ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. ii. p. 234.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. R. Forster, ‘Observations,’ p. 604; Marsden, ‘Sumatra,’ p. 258; ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. ii. p. 234.
250. Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i. pp. 123, 423. As to the connexion of the Vazimbas with the Mazimba of East Africa, see Waitz, vol. ii. pp. 360, 426.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i. pp. 123, 423. For information about the connection between the Vazimbas and the Mazimba of East Africa, refer to Waitz, vol. ii. pp. 360, 426.
251. Callaway, ‘Religious System of Amazulu,’ part ii.; see also Arbousset and Daumas, p. 469; Casalis, ‘Basutos,’ pp. 248-54; Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. ii. pp. 411, 419; Magyar, ‘Reisen in Süd-Afrika,’ pp. 21, 335 (Congo); Cavazzi, ‘Congo,’ lib. i.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Callaway, 'Religious System of Amazulu,' part ii.; see also Arbousset and Daumas, p. 469; Casalis, 'Basutos,' pp. 248-54; Waitz, 'Anthropologie,' vol. ii. pp. 411, 419; Magyar, 'Reisen in Süd-Afrika,' pp. 21, 335 (Congo); Cavazzi, 'Congo,' lib. i.
252. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ pp. 217, 388-93. See Waitz, vol. ii. pp. 181, 194.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ pp. 217, 388-93. See Waitz, vol. ii. pp. 181, 194.
253. Bailey in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. ii. p. 301. Compare Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 153.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bailey in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. ii. p. 301. Compare Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 153.
254. Buchanan, ‘Mysore,’ in Pinkerton, vol. viii. pp. 674-7. See Macpherson, ‘India,’ p. 95 (Khonds); Hunter, ‘Rural Bengal,’ p. 183 (Santals).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Buchanan, ‘Mysore,’ in Pinkerton, vol. viii. pp. 674-7. See Macpherson, ‘India,’ p. 95 (Khonds); Hunter, ‘Rural Bengal,’ p. 183 (Santals).
255. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 122; Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 90. See Palgrave, ‘Arabia,’ vol. i. p. 373.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 122; Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 90. See Palgrave, ‘Arabia,’ vol. i. p. 373.
256. Siebold, ‘Nippon,’ vol. i. p. 3, vol. ii. p. 51; Kempfer, ‘Japan,’ in Pinkerton, vol. vii. pp. 672, 680, 723, 755.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Siebold, ‘Nippon,’ vol. i. p. 3, vol. ii. p. 51; Kempfer, ‘Japan,’ in Pinkerton, vol. vii. pp. 672, 680, 723, 755.
257. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. iii. p. 250.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘Southeast Asia,’ vol. iii. p. 250.
258. Plath, ‘Religion der alten Chinesen,’ part i. p. 65, part ii. p. 89; Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. pp. vi. viii.; vol. ii. p. 373; ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ New Ser. vol. ii. p. 363; Legge, ‘Confucius,’ p. 92.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Plath, ‘Religion of the ancient Chinese,’ part i. p. 65, part ii. p. 89; Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. pp. vi. viii.; vol. ii. p. 373; ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ New Ser. vol. ii. p. 363; Legge, ‘Confucius,’ p. 92.
259. Manu, book iii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Manu, book 3.
260. Details in Pauly, ‘Real-Encyclop.’ s.v. ‘inferi’; Smith’s ‘Dic. of Gr. and Rom. Biog. and Myth.’; Meiners, Hartung, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Details in Pauly, ‘Real-Encyclop.’ s.v. ‘inferi’; Smith’s ‘Dic. of Gr. and Rom. Biog. and Myth.’; Meiners, Hartung, & others.
261. Middleton, ‘Letter from Rome’; Murray’s ‘Handbook of Rome.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Middleton, ‘Letter from Rome’; Murray’s ‘Guide to Rome.’
262. L. F. Alfred Maury, ‘Magie, &c.,’ p. 249; ‘Acta Sanctorum,’ 27 Sep.; Gregor. Turon. De Gloria Martyr, i. 98.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.L. F. Alfred Maury, ‘Magic, etc.,’ p. 249; 'Saints' Lives,' September 27; Gregor. Turon. On the Glory of Martyrs, i. 98.
263. J. R. Beste, ‘Nowadays at Home and Abroad,’ London, 1870, vol. ii. p. 44; ‘A New Miracle at Rome; being an Account of a Miraculous Cure, &c., &c.,’ London (Washbourne), 1870.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. R. Beste, ‘These Days at Home and Abroad,’ London, 1870, vol. ii. p. 44; ‘A New Miracle in Rome; A Report of a Miraculous Healing, &c., &c.,’ London (Washbourne), 1870.
264. Oldfield in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 235; see Grey, ‘Australia,’ vol. ii. p. 337. Bonwick, ‘Tasmanians,’ pp. 183, 195.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Oldfield in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 235; see Grey, ‘Australia,’ vol. ii. p. 337. Bonwick, ‘Tasmanians,’ pp. 183, 195.
265. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. i. p. 307.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. I p. 307.
266. Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 204; ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 73, see p. 125 (Battas); Macpherson, ‘India,’ p. 370. See also Mason, ‘Karens,’ l. c. p. 201.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, ‘Psychology,’ p. 204; ‘Humanity,’ vol. ii. p. 73, see p. 125 (Battas); Macpherson, ‘India,’ p. 370. See also Mason, ‘Karens,’ l. c. p. 201.
267. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iii. p. 110, vol. iv. p. 194; St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. i. pp. 71, 87; Beeckman in Pinkerton, vol. ix. p. 133; Meiners, vol. i. p. 278. See also Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. p. 159.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iii. p. 110, vol. iv. p. 194; St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. i. pp. 71, 87; Beeckman in Pinkerton, vol. ix. p. 133; Meiners, vol. i. p. 278. See also Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. p. 159.
268. Shortland, ‘Trads. of N. Z.’ pp. 97, 114, 125; Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ pp. 48, 137.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Shortland, ‘Traditions of N. Z.’ pp. 97, 114, 125; Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ pp. 48, 137.
269. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 236.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 236.
270. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. pp. 363, 395, &c., vol. ii. pp. 193, 274; Cook, ‘3rd Voy.’ vol. iii. p. 131. Details of the superhuman character ascribed to weak or deranged persons among other races, in Schoolcraft, part iv. p. 49; Martius, vol. i. p. 633; Meiners, vol. i. p. 323; Waitz, vol. ii. p. 181.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ellis, 'Polyn. Res.' vol. i. pp. 363, 395, &c., vol. ii. pp. 193, 274; Cook, '3rd Voy.' vol. iii. p. 131. Information about the superhuman traits associated with weak or mentally disturbed individuals from different cultures can be found in Schoolcraft, part iv. p. 49; Martius, vol. i. p. 633; Meiners, vol. i. p. 323; Waitz, vol. ii. p. 181.
271. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. p. 250, part ii. pp. 179, 199, part iii. p. 498; M. Eastman, ‘Dahcotah,’ pp. xxiii. 34, 41, 72. See also Gregg, ‘Commerce of Prairies,’ vol. ii. p. 297 (Comanches); Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 163; Sproat, p. 174 (Ahts); Egede, ‘Greenland,’ p. 186; Cranz, p. 269.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. p. 250, part ii. pp. 179, 199, part iii. p. 498; M. Eastman, ‘Dahcotah,’ pp. xxiii. 34, 41, 72. See also Gregg, ‘Commerce of Prairies,’ vol. ii. p. 297 (Comanches); Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 163; Sproat, p. 174 (Ahts); Egede, ‘Greenland,’ p. 186; Cranz, p. 269.
272. Roman Pane, xix. in ‘Life of Colon’; in Pinkerton, vol. xii. p. 87.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Roman Pane, 19 in ‘Life of Colon’; in Pinkerton, vol. 12 p. 87.
273. D’Orbigny, ‘L’Homme Américain,’ vol. ii. pp. 73, 168; Musters, ‘Patagonians,’ p. 180. See also J. G. Müller, pp. 207, 231 (Caribs); Spix and Martius, ‘Brasilien,’ vol. i. p. 70; Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 646 (Marcusis).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.D’Orbigny, 'The American Man,' vol. ii. pp. 73, 168; Musters, ‘Patagonians,’ p. 180. See also J. G. Müller, pp. 207, 231 (Caribs); Spix and Martius, ‘Brasilien,’ vol. i. p. 70; Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 646 (Marcusis).
274. Casalis, ‘Basutos,’ p. 247; Callaway, ‘Rel. of Amazulu,’ p. 147, &c.; Magyar, ‘Süd-Afrika,’ p. 21, &c.; Burton, ‘Central Afr.’ vol. ii. pp. 320, 354; Steere in ‘Journ. Anthrop. Inst.’ vol. i. 1871, p. cxlvii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Casalis, ‘Basutos,’ p. 247; Callaway, ‘Rel. of Amazulu,’ p. 147, etc.; Magyar, ‘Süd-Afrika,’ p. 21, etc.; Burton, ‘Central Afr.’ vol. ii. pp. 320, 354; Steere in ‘Journ. Anthrop. Inst.’ vol. i. 1871, p. cxlvii.
275. Steinhauser, ‘Religion des Negers,’ in ‘Magaz. der Evang. Missions und Bibel-Gesellschaften,’ Basel, 1856, No. 2, p. 139.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Steinhauser, ‘Religion of Black people,’ in "Magazine of Evangelical Missions and Bible Societies," Basel, 1856, No. 2, p. 139.
276. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ pp. 217, 388.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ pp. 217, 388.
277. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ pp. 163, 170.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ pp. 163, 170.
278. Backhouse, ‘Australia,’ p. 103.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Backhouse, ‘Australia,’ p. 103.
279. Mason, ‘Burmah,’ p. 107, &c. Cross, l.c. p. 305.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Mason, ‘Burmah,’ p. 107, etc. Cross, l.c. p. 305.
280. Callaway, ‘Religion of Amazulu,’ pp. 183, &c., 259, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Callaway, ‘Religion of Amazulu,’ pp. 183, etc., 259, etc.
281. Falkner, ‘Patagonia,’ p. 116. See also Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 418 (Caribs).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Falkner, ‘Patagonia,’ p. 116. See also Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 418 (Caribs).
282. Georgi, ‘Reise im Russ. Reich,’ vol. i. p. 280; Meiners, vol. ii. p. 488.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Georgi, ‘Journey in the Russian Empire,’ vol. i. p. 280; Meiners, vol. ii. p. 488.
283. Falkner, l.c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Falkner, l.c.
284. Caldwell, ‘Dravidian Languages,’ App.; Latham, vol. ii. p. 469.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Caldwell, ‘Dravidian Languages,’ App.; Latham, vol. ii, p. 469.
285. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ p. 172.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ p. 172.
286. Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 278.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Steller, 'Kamchatka,' p. 278.
287. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. ii. p. 328, see vol. iii. p. 201, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 139. See also Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 59.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, 'Eastern Asia,' vol. ii. p. 328, see vol. iii. p. 201, 'Psychology,' p. 139. See also Römer, 'Guinea,' p. 59.
288. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. pp. 352, 373; Moerenhout, ‘Voyage,’ vol. i. p. 479; Mariner, ‘Tonga Islands,’ vol. i. p. 105; Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 373.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. 1. pp. 352, 373; Moerenhout, ‘Voyage,’ vol. 1. p. 479; Mariner, ‘Tonga Islands,’ vol. 1. p. 105; Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. 1. p. 373.
289. Dos Santos, ‘Ethiopia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 686.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Dos Santos, ‘Ethiopia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. XVI, p. 686.
290. Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 57. See also Steinhauser, l.c. pp. 132, 139; J. B. Schlegel, ‘Ewe-Sprache,’ p. xvi.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 57. See also Steinhauser, l.c. pp. 132, 139; J. B. Schlegel, ‘Ewe language,’ p. xvi.
291. Details from Tatar races in Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ pp. 164, 173, &c.; Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 90; from Abyssinia in Parkyns, ‘Life in A.,’ ch. xxxiii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Details from Tatar races in Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ pp. 164, 173, etc.; Bastian, ‘Psychology,’ p. 90; from Abyssinia in Parkyns, ‘Life in A.,’ ch. 33.
292. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. p. 143, vol. ii. pp. 110, 320.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. p. 143, vol. ii. pp. 110, 320.
293. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. ii. pp. 103, 152, 381, 418, vol. iii. p. 247, &c. See also Bowring, ‘Siam,’ vol. i. p. 139; ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iv. p. 507, vol. vi. p. 614; Turpin, in Pinkerton, vol. ix. p. 761; Kempfer, ‘Japan,’ ibid. vol. vii. pp. 701, 730, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, ‘Eastern Asia,’ vol. ii. pp. 103, 152, 381, 418, vol. iii. p. 247, &c. See also Bowring, ‘Siam,’ vol. i. p. 139; ‘Journal of the Indian Archipelago’ vol. iv. p. 507, vol. vi. p. 614; Turpin, in Pinkerton, vol. ix. p. 761; Kempfer, ‘Japan,’ same source vol. vii. pp. 701, 730, &c.
294. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. i. p. 155, vol. ii. p. 183; Roberts, ‘Oriental Illustrations of the Scriptures,’ p. 529; Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ pp. 164, 184-7. Sanskrit paiçâcha-graha = demon-seizure, possession. Ancient evidence in Pictet, ‘Origines Indo-Europ.’ part ii. ch. v.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. i. p. 155, vol. ii. p. 183; Roberts, ‘Oriental Illustrations of the Scriptures,’ p. 529; Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ pp. 164, 184-7. Sanskrit paiçâcha-graha = demon-seizure, possession. Ancient evidence in Pictet, ‘Origines Indo-Europ.’ part ii. ch. v.
295. Homer. Odyss. v. 396, x. 64; Plat. Phædr. Tim. &c.; Pausan. iv. 27, 2; Xen. Mem. I. i. 9; Plutarch. Vit. Alex.; De Orac. Def.; Lucian. Philopseudes; Petron. Arbiter, Sat.; &c., &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Homer. Odyss. v. 396, x. 64; Plat. Phædr. Tim. &c.; Pausan. iv. 27, 2; Xen. Mem. I. i. 9; Plutarch. Vit. Alex.; De Orac. Def.; Lucian. Philopseudes; Petron. Arbiter, Sat.; & c., & c.
296. Joseph. Ant. Jud. viii. 2, 5. Eisenmenger, ‘Entdecktes Judenthum,’ part ii. p. 454. See Maury, p. 290.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Joseph. Ant. Jud. viii. 2, 5. Eisenmenger, 'Discovered Judaism,' part ii. p. 454. See Maury, p. 290.
297. Matth. ix. 32, xi. 18, xii. 22, xvii. 15; Mark, i. 23, ix. 17; Luke, iv. 33, 39, vii. 33, viii. 27, ix. 39, xiii. 11; John, x. 20; Acts, xvi. 16, xix. 13; &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Matt. 9:32, 11:18, 12:22, 17:15; Mark 1:23, 9:17; Luke 4:33, 39, 7:33, 8:27, 9:39, 13:11; John 10:20; Acts 16:16, 19:13; etc.
298. For general evidence see Bingham, ‘Antiquities of Christian Church,’ book iii. ch. iv.; Calmet, ‘Dissertation sur les Esprits’; Maury, ‘Magie,’ &c.; Lecky, ‘Hist. of Rationalism.’ Among particular passages are Tertull. Apolog. 23; De Spectaculis, 26; Chrysostom. Homil. xxviii. in Matth. iv.; Cyril. Hierosol. Catech. xvi. 16; Minuc. Fel. Octavius. xxi.; Concil. Carthag. iv.; &c., &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.For general evidence, see Bingham, ‘Antiquities of the Christian Church,’ book iii. ch. iv.; Calmet, 'Essay on the Minds'; Maury, ‘Magic,’ &c.; Lecky, ‘Hist. of Rationalism.’ Among specific passages are Tertullian, Apolog. 23; De Spectaculis, 26; Chrysostom, Homil. xxviii. in Matth. iv.; Cyril of Jerusalem, Catech. xvi. 16; Minucius Felix, Octavius. xxi.; Council of Carthage, iv.; &c., &c.
299. Details in Cockayne, ‘Leechdoms, &c., of Early England,’ vol. i. p. 365, vol. ii. p. 137, 355; Sprenger, ‘Malleus Maleficarum,’ part ii.; Calmet, ‘Dissertation,’ vol. i. ch. xxiv.; Horst, ‘Zauber-Bibliothek’; Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 557, &c.; ‘Psychologie,’ p. 115, &c.; Voltaire, ‘Questions sur l’Encyclopédie,’ art., ‘Superstition’; ‘Encyclopædia Britannica,’ 5th ed. art. ‘Possession.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Details in Cockayne, ‘Leechdoms, &c., of Early England,’ vol. i. p. 365, vol. ii. p. 137, 355; Sprenger, ‘Malleus Maleficarum,’ part ii.; Calmet, ‘Dissertation,’ vol. i. ch. xxiv.; Horst, ‘Zauber-Bibliothek’; Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 557, &c.; ‘Psychologie,’ p. 115, &c.; Voltaire, 'Questions about the Encyclopedia' art. ‘Superstition’; ‘Encyclopædia Britannica,’ 5th ed. art. ‘Possession.’
300. See Maury, ‘Magie,’ &c., part ii. ch. ii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. See Maury, ‘Magie,’ etc., part ii. ch. ii.
301. A. Constans, ‘Rel. sur une Epidémie d’Hystéro-Démonopathie, en 1861.’ 2nd ed. Paris, 1863. For descriptions of such outbreaks, among the North American Indians, see Le Jeune in ‘Rel. des Jés. dans la Nouvelle France,’ 1639; Brinton, p. 275; and in Guinea, see J. L. Wilson, ‘Western Africa,’ p. 217.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.A. Constans, "Report on an Epidemic of Hystero-Demonopathy, in 1861." 2nd ed. Paris, 1863. For descriptions of such outbreaks among Native Americans, see Le Jeune in "Reports of the Jesuits in New France," 1639; Brinton, p. 275; and in Guinea, see J. L. Wilson, ‘Western Africa,’ p. 217.
302. Gaume, ‘L’Eau Bénite au Dix-Neuvième Siècle,’ 3rd ed. Paris, 1866, p. 353.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Gaume, 'Blessed Water in the 19th Century,' 3rd ed. Paris, 1866, p. 353.
303. West, in ‘Spiritual Telegraph,’ cited by Bastian.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.West, in ‘Spiritual Telegraph,’ referenced by Bastian.
304. (C. de Brosses.) ‘Du culte des dieux fétiches ou Parallèle de l’ancienne Religion de l’Egypte avec la religion actuelle de Nigritie.’ 1760. (De Brosses supposed the word fétiche connected with chose fée, fatum.)
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.(C. de Brosses.) "On the Worship of Fetish Gods or a Comparison of the Ancient Religion of Egypt with the Current Religion of Nigeria." 1760. (De Brosses thought the word fetish was related to chose fée, fatum.)
305. Grey, ‘Australia,’ vol. ii. p. 337; Eyre, ‘Australia,’ vol. ii. p. 362; Oldfield in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 235, &c.; G. F. Moore, ‘Vocab. of S. W. Austr.’ pp. 18, 98, 103. See Bonwick, ‘Tasmanians,’ p. 195.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grey, ‘Australia,’ vol. ii. p. 337; Eyre, ‘Australia,’ vol. ii. p. 362; Oldfield in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 235, &c. G. F. Moore, ‘Vocab. of S. W. Austr.’ pp. 18, 98, 103. See Bonwick, ‘Tasmanians,’ p. 195.
306. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ pp. 419, 508; J. G. Müller, pp. 173, 207, 217.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Rochefort, ‘Antilles Islands,’ pp. 419, 508; J. G. Müller, pp. 173, 207, 217.
307. Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i. pp. 221, 232, 422.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. I, pp. 221, 232, 422.
308. St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. i. p. 211, see 72.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. i. p. 211, see 72.
309. Callaway, ‘Religion of Amazulu,’ p. 314.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Callaway, ‘Religion of Amazulu,’ p. 314.
310. Steinhauser, l.c. p. 141. See also Steere, ‘East Afr. Tribes,’ in ‘Journ. Anthrop. Soc.’ vol. i. p. cxlviii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Steinhauser, l.c. p. 141. See also Steere, ‘East Afr. Tribes,’ in ‘Journ. Anthrop. Soc.’ vol. i. p. cxlviii.
311. Burton, ‘Central Africa,’ vol. ii. p. 352. See ‘Sindh,’ p. 177.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Burton, ‘Central Africa,’ vol. 2, p. 352. See ‘Sindh,’ p. 177.
312. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. iii. p. 275.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘East Asia,’ vol. iii. p. 275.
313. ‘Early Hist. of Mankind,’ ch. x. See Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 116, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Early History of Mankind,’ ch. x. See Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 116, & c.
314. Plin. xxx. 14, 20. Cardan, ‘De Var. Rerum,’ cap. xliii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Plin. xxx. 14, 20. Cardan, ‘De Var. Rerum,’ cap. xliii.
315. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. i. p. 134, vol. ii. p. 247.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ward, ‘Hindus,’ vol. i, p. 134, vol. ii, p. 247.
316. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. p. 122.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. I, p. 122.
317. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ pp. 1118-23; Wuttke, ‘Volksaberglaube,’ pp. 155-70; Brand, ‘Pop. Ant.’ vol. ii. p. 375, vol. iii. p. 286; Halliwell, ‘Pop. Rhymes,’ p. 208; R. Hunt, ‘Pop. Romances,’ 2nd Series, p. 211; Hylten-Cavallius, ‘Wärend och Wirdarne,’ vol. i. p. 173. It is said, however, that rags fastened on trees by Gypsies, which passers-by avoid with horror as having diseases thus banned into them, are only signs left for the information of fellow vagrants; Liebich, ‘Die Zigeuner,’ p. 96.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grimm, ‘D. M.’ pp. 1118-23; Wuttke, 'Folk belief,' pp. 155-70; Brand, ‘Pop. Ant.’ vol. ii. p. 375, vol. iii. p. 286; Halliwell, ‘Pop. Rhymes,’ p. 208; R. Hunt, ‘Pop. Romances,’ 2nd Series, p. 211; Hylten-Cavallius, ‘Wärend and Wirdarne,’ vol. i. p. 173. It is said, however, that rags tied on trees by Gypsies, which people avoid with fear as if they carry diseases, are just markers left for the information of other travelers; Liebich, ‘The Gypsies,’ p. 96.
318. Catlin, ‘N. A. Indians,’ vol. i. p. 90.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Catlin, ‘N. A. Indians,’ vol. 1, p. 90.
319. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Africa,’ p. 394.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Africa,’ p. 394.
320. Meiners, ‘Gesch. der Rel.’ vol. i. p. 305; J. G. Müller, p. 209.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Meiners, ‘Gesch. der Rel.’ vol. i. p. 305; J. G. Müller, p. 209.
321. Mason, Karens, l.c. p. 231.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Mason, Karens, l.c. p. 231.
322. Meiners, vol. ii. pp. 721-3.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Meiners, vol. II, pp. 721-3.
323. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 418. See Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 485 (Yumanas swallow ashes of deceased with liquor, that he may live again in them).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 418. See Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 485 (Yumanas swallow the ashes of the deceased with liquor so that they can live on in them).
324. Hunter, ‘Rural Bengal,’ p. 210. See Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 73; J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 209, 262, 289, 401, 419.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hunter, ‘Rural Bengal,’ p. 210. See Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 73; J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 209, 262, 289, 401, 419.
325. Darwin, ‘Journal,’ p. 458.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Darwin, ‘Journal,’ p. 458.
326. Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 320.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘Human,’ vol. ii. p. 320.
327. ‘Report of Jubbulpore Ethnological Committee,’ Nagpore, 1868, part i. p. 5.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Report of Jubbulpore Ethnological Committee,’ Nagpur, 1868, part i. p. 5.
328. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. pp. 151, 207, 214, vol. ii. p. 401; see Plath, ‘Religion der alten Chinesen,’ part i. p. 59, part ii. p. 101.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. pp. 151, 207, 214, vol. ii. p. 401; see Plath, ‘Religion of the ancient Chinese,’ part i. p. 59, part ii. p. 101.
329. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 187; Dasent, ‘Norse Tales,’ p. 69; Lane, ‘Thousand and One Nights,’ vol. iii. p. 316; Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 1033. See also Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 213. Eisenmenger, ‘Judenthum,’ part ii. p. 39.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 187; Dasent, ‘Norse Tales,’ p. 69; Lane, ‘Thousand and One Nights,’ vol. iii. p. 316; Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 1033. See also Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 213. Eisenmenger, ‘Judenthum,’ part ii. p. 39.
330. Brand, ‘Pop. Ant.’ vol. iii. p. 72.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Brand, ‘Pop. Ant.’ vol. 3 p. 72.
331. Herrera, ‘Hist. de las Indias Occidentales,’ Dec. i. ix. 3.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Herrera, ‘History of the West Indies,’ Dec. i. ix. 3.
332. Lery, Brésil, p. 249; J. G. Müller, pp. 210, 262.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Lery, Brazil, p. 249; J. G. Müller, pp. 210, 262.
333. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes’; Waitz, vol. iii.; Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. i. p. 36; Keating, ‘Narrative,’ vol. i. p. 421; J. G. Müller, p. 74, &c. See Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ p. 274.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes’; Waitz, vol. iii.; Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. i. p. 36; Keating, ‘Narrative,’ vol. i. p. 421; J. G. Müller, p. 74, &c. See Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ p. 274.
334. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ pp. 162, 221, 230; Meiners, vol. i. p. 170.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ pp. 162, 221, 230; Meiners, vol. i. p. 170.
335. Bell, in Pinkerton, vol. vii. p. 357.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bell, in Pinkerton, vol. 7, p. 357.
336. H. Rowley, ‘Universities’ Mission to Central Africa,’ p. 217.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.H. Rowley, ‘Universities’ Mission to Central Africa,’ p. 217.
337. Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. ii. p. 174; Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 56, &c.; J. L. Wilson, ‘West Africa,’ pp. 135, 211-6, 275, 338; Burton, ‘Wit and Wisdom from W. Afr.’ pp. 174, 455; Steinhauser, l.c. p. 134; Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 397; Meiners, ‘Gesch. der Relig.’ vol. i. p. 173. See also Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i. p. 396; Flacourt, ‘Madag.’ p. 191.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. ii. p. 174; Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 56, &c.; J. L. Wilson, ‘West Africa,’ pp. 135, 211-6, 275, 338; Burton, ‘Wit and Wisdom from W. Afr.’ pp. 174, 455; Steinhauser, l.c. p. 134; Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 397; Meiners, ‘Gesch. der Relig.’ vol. i. p. 173. See also Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i. p. 396; Flacourt, ‘Madag.’ p. 191.
338. Brand, ‘Popular Antiquities,’ vol. iii. p. 255, &c. Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 171. Wuttke, ‘Deutsche Volksaberglaube,’ pp. 75-95, 225, &c. St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 46.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Brand, ‘Popular Antiquities,’ vol. iii. p. 255, etc. Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 171. Wuttke, ‘German Folk Beliefs,’ pp. 75-95, 225, etc. St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 46.
339. Berkeley, ‘Concerning Motion,’ in ‘Works,’ vol. ii. p. 86.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Berkeley, ‘On Motion,’ in ‘Works,’ vol. 2, p. 86.
340. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part ii. p. 196, part iii. p. 229.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ vol. II, p. 196, vol. III, p. 229.
341. Herrera, ‘Indias Occidentales,’ dec. i. iii. 3.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Herrera, ‘Indies,’ dec. i. iii. 3.
342. De Laet, Novus Orbis, xv. 2.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. De Laet, New World, xv. 2.
344. Hahn, ‘Gramm. des Hereró,’ s.v. ‘omu-makisina.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hahn, ‘Grammar of Herero,’ s.v. ‘omu-makisina.’
345. Kaufmann, ‘Central-Afrika,’ (White Nile), p. 131.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Kaufmann, ‘Central Africa,’ (White Nile), p. 131.
346. Waitz, vol. ii. pp. 518, 523.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Waitz, vol. ii, pp. 518, 523.
347. Zollinger in ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. ii. p. 692.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Zollinger in ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. ii. p. 692.
348. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 337. See also Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i. p. 399.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 337. See also Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i. p. 399.
349. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ pp. 347, 526.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ pp. 347, 526.
350. Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 220; Seemann, ‘Viti,’ pp. 66, 89.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. I, p. 220; Seemann, ‘Viti,’ pp. 66, 89.
351. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 193, &c., 204, &c.; ‘Voyages au Nord,’ vol. viii. pp. 103, 410; Klemm, ‘C. G.’ vol. iii. p. 120. See also Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ pp. 265, 276.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 193, &c., 204, &c.; ‘Voyages au Nord,’ vol. viii. pp. 103, 410; Klemm, ‘C. G.’ vol. iii. p. 120. See also Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ pp. 265, 276.
352. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ p. 174. See also Macrae in ‘As. Res.’ vol. vii. p. 196; Dalton, ‘Kols,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vi. p. 33.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ p. 174. Also see Macrae in ‘As. Res.’ vol. vii. p. 196; Dalton, ‘Kols,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vi. p. 33.
353. Macpherson, ‘India,’ pp. 103, 358.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Macpherson, ‘India,’ pp. 103, 358.
354. Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 177. See also Shortt, ‘Tribes of Neilgherries,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vii. p. 281.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 177. See also Shortt, ‘Tribes of Neilgherries,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vii. p. 281.
355. Elliot in ‘Journ. Eth. Soc.’ vol. i. 1869, p. 115.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Elliot in 'Journ. Eth. Soc.' vol. 1 1869, p. 115.
356. Buchanan, ‘Mysore,’ in Pinkerton, vol. vii. p. 739.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Buchanan, ‘Mysore,’ in Pinkerton, vol. 7, p. 739.
357. Elliot in ‘Journ. Eth. Soc.’ vol. i. pp. 96, 115, 125. Lubbock, ‘Origin of Civilization,’ p. 222. Forbes Leslie, ‘Early Races of Scotland,’ vol. ii. p. 462, &c. Prof. Liebrecht, in ‘Ztschr. für Ethnologie,’ vol. v. p. 100, compares the field-protecting Priapos-hermes of ancient Italy, daubed with minium.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Elliot in ‘Journ. Eth. Soc.’ vol. i. pp. 96, 115, 125. Lubbock, ‘Origin of Civilization,’ p. 222. Forbes Leslie, ‘Early Races of Scotland,’ vol. ii. p. 462, &c. Prof. Liebrecht, in ‘Ztschr. für Ethnologie,’ vol. v. p. 100, compares the field-protecting Priapos-hermes of ancient Italy, covered in red lead.
358. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. pp. 142, 182, &c., see 221. See also Latham, ‘Descr. Eth.’ vol. ii. p. 239. (Siah-push, stone offered to the representative of deity.)
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. pp. 142, 182, etc., see 221. See also Latham, ‘Descr. Eth.’ vol. ii. p. 239. (Siah-push, stone offered to the representative of the deity.)
359. Grote, ‘Hist. of Greece,’ vol. iv. p. 132; Welcker, ‘Griechische Götterlehre,’ vol. i. p. 220. Meiners, vol. i. p. 150, &c. Details esp. in Pausanias; Theophrast. Charact. xvi.; Tacit. Hist. ii. 3; Arnobius, Adv. Gent.; Tertullianus; Clemens Alexandr.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grote, ‘Hist. of Greece,’ vol. iv. p. 132; Welcker, 'Greek mythology' vol. i. p. 220. Meiners, vol. i. p. 150, & c. Details esp. in Pausanias; Theophrast. Charact. xvi.; Tacit. Hist. ii. 3; Arnobius, Adv. Gent.; Tertullianus; Clemens Alexandr.
360. Is. lvii. 6. The first line, ‘behhalkey-nahhal hhêlkech,’ turns on the pun on hhlk = smooth (stone), and also lot or portion; a double sense probably connected with the use of smooth pebbles for casting lots.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Is. lvii. 6. The first line, ‘behhalkey-nahhal hhêlkech,’ plays on the word hhlk, which means smooth (stone), and also lot or portion; this double meaning is likely related to using smooth pebbles for casting lots.
361. Sprenger, ‘Mohammad,’ vol. ii. p. 7, &c. Burton, ‘El Medinah,’ &c., vol. ii. p. 157.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Sprenger, ‘Muhammad,’ vol. ii. p. 7, &c. Burton, ‘El Medinah,’ &c., vol. ii. p. 157.
362. Euseb. Præp. Evang. i. 10. Deut. xii. 3; Micah v. 13, &c. Movers, ‘Phönizier,’ vol. i. pp. 105, 569, and see index, ‘Säule,’ &c. See De Brosses, ‘Dieux Fétiches,’ p. 135 (considers bætyl = beth-el, &c.).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Euseb. Præp. Evang. i. 10. Deut. xii. 3; Micah v. 13, &c. Movers, ‘Phönizier,’ vol. i. pp. 105, 569, and see index, ‘Säule,’ &c. See De Brosses, ‘Dieux Fétiches,’ p. 135 (considers bætyl = beth-el, &c.).
363. For references see Ducange s.v. ‘petra’; Leslie, ‘Early Races of Scotland,’ vol. i. p. 256.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.For references, see Ducange s.v. ‘petra’; Leslie, ‘Early Races of Scotland,’ vol. i. p. 256.
364. Nilsson, ‘Primitive Inhabitants of Scandinavia,’ p. 241. See also Meiners, vol. ii. p. 671 (speaking stones in Norway, &c.).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Nilsson, ‘Primitive Inhabitants of Scandinavia,’ p. 241. See also Meiners, vol. ii. p. 671 (talking stones in Norway, etc.).
365. Earl of Roden, ‘Progress of Reformation in Ireland,’ London, 1851, p. 51. Sir J. E. Tennent in ‘Notes and Queries,’ Feb. 7, 1852. See Borlase, ‘Antiquities of Cornwall,’ Oxford, 1754, book iii. ch. 2.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Earl of Roden, ‘Progress of Reformation in Ireland,’ London, 1851, p. 51. Sir J. E. Tennent in ‘Notes and Queries,’ Feb. 7, 1852. See Borlase, ‘Antiquities of Cornwall,’ Oxford, 1754, book iii. ch. 2.
366. ‘Early Hist. of Mankind,’ chap. vi.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Early History of Mankind,’ chap. vi.
367. For general collections of evidence, see especially Meiners, ‘Geschichte der Religionen,’ vol. i. books i. and v.; Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii.; Waitz, ‘Anthropologie;’ De Brosses, ‘Dieux Fétiches,’ &c. Particular details in J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ p. 393; Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i. p. 395; Castrén, ‘Finnische Mythologie,’ p. 193, &c.; Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii.; Köppen, ‘Rel. des Buddha,’ vol. i. p. 493, &c.; Grote, ‘Hist, of Greece.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.For general collections of evidence, see especially Meiners, 'History of Religions,' vol. i. books i. and v.; Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii.; Waitz, ‘Anthropologie;’ De Brosses, ‘Dieux Fétiches,’ etc. Specific details in J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ p. 393; Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i. p. 395; Castrén, ‘Finnische Mythologie,’ p. 193, etc.; Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii.; Köppen, ‘Rel. des Buddha,’ vol. i. p. 493, etc.; Grote, ‘Hist, of Greece.’
368. J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrelig.’ p. 263; Meiners, vol. i. p. 163.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrelig.’ p. 263; Meiners, vol. 1. p. 163.
369. Loskiel, ‘Ind. of N. A.’ vol. i. p. 39; Smith, ‘Virginia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xiii. p. 14; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 203; J. G. Müller, pp. 95-8, 128.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Loskiel, ‘Ind. of N. A.’ vol. i. p. 39; Smith, ‘Virginia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xiii. p. 14; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 203; J. G. Müller, pp. 95-8, 128.
370. Fernando Colombo, ‘Vita del Amm. Cristoforo Colombo,’ Venice, 1571, p. 127, &c.; and ‘Life of Colon,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xii. p. 84. Herrera, dec. i. iii. 3. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ pp. 421-4. Waitz, vol. iii. p. 384; J. G. Müller, pp. 171-6, 182, 210, 232.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Fernando Colombo, ‘The Life of Admiral Christopher Columbus,’ Venice, 1571, p. 127, &c.; and ‘Life of Columbus,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xii. p. 84. Herrera, dec. i. iii. 3. Rochefort, ‘The Antilles Islands,’ pp. 421-4. Waitz, vol. iii. p. 384; J. G. Müller, pp. 171-6, 182, 210, 232.
371. Prescott, ‘Peru,’ vol. i. pp. 71, 89; Waitz, vol. iv. p. 458; J. G. Müller, pp. 322, 371.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Prescott, ‘Peru,’ vol. i. pp. 71, 89; Waitz, vol. iv. p. 458; J. G. Müller, pp. 322, 371.
372. Brasseur, ‘Mexique,’ vol. iii. p. 486; Waitz, vol. iv. p. 148; J. G. Müller, p. 642.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Brasseur, 'Mexico,' vol. iii. p. 486; Waitz, vol. iv. p. 148; J. G. Müller, p. 642.
373. Shortland, ‘Trads. of N. Z.’ &c., p. 83; Taylor, pp. 171, 183, 212.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Shortland, ‘Traditions of N. Z.’ &c., p. 83; Taylor, pp. 171, 183, 212.
374. J. R. Forster, ‘Obs. during Voyage,’ London, 1778, p. 534, &c.; Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 281, &c., 323, &c. See also Earl, ‘Papuans,’ p. 84; Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 78 (Nias).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. R. Forster, ‘Observations during Voyage,’ London, 1778, p. 534, etc.; Ellis, ‘Polynesian Research,’ vol. i. p. 281, etc., 323, etc. See also Earl, ‘Papuans,’ p. 84; Bastian, ‘Psychology,’ p. 78 (Nias).
375. St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. i. p. 198.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. 1, p. 198.
376. Hutchinson in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. i. p. 336; see Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 172.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hutchinson in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. i. p. 336; see Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 172.
377. Steinhauser, in ‘Magaz. der Evang. Missionen,’ Basel, 1856, No. 2, p. 131.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Steinhauser, in ‘Magazine of Evangelical Missions,’ Basel, 1856, No. 2, p. 131.
378. Schlegel, ‘Ewe-Sprache,’ p. xvi.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Schlegel, ‘Ewe Language,’ p. xvi.
379. Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. ii. p. 183; Denham, ‘Travels,’ vol. i. p. 113; Römer, ‘Guinea’; Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. See also Livingstone, ‘S. Afr.’ p. 282 (Balonda).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Waitz, ‘Anthropology,’ vol. ii, p. 183; Denham, ‘Travels,’ vol. i, p. 113; Römer, ‘Guinea’; Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. See also Livingstone, ‘S. Afr.’ p. 282 (Balonda).
380. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 193, &c.; Bastian, ‘Psych.’ p. 34, 208, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. iii. pp. 293, 486. See ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. ii. p. 350 (Chinese).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 193, etc.; Bastian, ‘Psych.’ p. 34, 208, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. iii. pp. 293, 486. See ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. ii. p. 350 (Chinese).
381. Max Müller, ‘Chips,’ vol. i. p. xvii.; Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. i. p. 198, vol. ii. pp. xxxv, 164, 234, 292, 485.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Max Müller, ‘Chips,’ vol. i. p. xvii; Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. i. p. 198, vol. ii. pp. xxxv, 164, 234, 292, 485.
382. Arnobius, Adversus Gentes, vi. 17-19.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Arnobius, Against the Nations, vi. 17-19.
383. Augustinus ‘De Civ. Dei,’ viii. 23: ‘at ille visibilia et contrectabilia simulacra, velut corpora deorum esse asserit; inesse autem his quosdam spiritus invitatos, &c.... Hos ergo spiritus invisibiles per artem quandam visibilibus rebus corporalis materiæ copulare, ut sint quasi animata corpora, illis spiritibus dicata et subdita simulacra, &c.’ See also Tertullianus De Spectaculis, xii.: ‘In mortuorum autem idolis dæmonia consistunt, &c.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Augustine 'City of God' viii. 23: "He argues that visible and tangible representations are similar to the bodies of gods, and that there are specific invited spirits within these figures, etc. Therefore, these invisible spirits somehow connect with visible material objects, making them appear as if they are animated bodies, with those representations dedicated to and subordinate to those spirits, etc." See also Tertullian 'About the Glasses,' xii.: "The demons live in the idols of the dead, etc."
384. Marcus Minucius Felix, Octavius, cap. xxvii.: ‘Isti igitur impuri spiritus, dæmones, ut ostensum a magis, a philosophis, et a Platone sub statuis et imaginibus consecrati delitescunt, &c.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Marcus Minucius Felix, Octavius, cap. xxvii.: "These unclean spirits, demons, as demonstrated by magicians, philosophers, and Plato, hide under statues and images that are consecrated, etc."
385. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. ii. p. 455. See Spiegel, ‘Avesta,’ vol. ii. p. 54.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, ‘Eastern Asia,’ vol. ii. p. 455. See Spiegel, ‘Avesta,’ vol. ii. p. 54.
386. Porphyr. de Vita Pythagoræ. Oken, ‘Lehrbuch der Naturphilosophie,’ 2753.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Porphyr. on the Life of Pythagoras. Oken, ‘Textbook of Natural Philosophy,’ 2753.
387. Suidas, s.v. ἐγγαστρίμυθος; Isidor. Gloss. s.v. ‘præcantatores’; Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 578. Maury, ‘Magie,’ &c. p. 269. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. ii. p. 115.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Suidas, s.v. ἐγγαστρίμυθος; Isidor. Gloss. s.v. ‘præcantatores’; Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 578. Maury, ‘Magie,’ &c. p. 269. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. ii. p. 115.
388. F. R. Nixon, ‘Cruise of the Beacon’; Bonwick, p. 182.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.F. R. Nixon, ‘Cruise of the Beacon’; Bonwick, p. 182.
389. Oldfield in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 228.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Oldfield in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 228.
390. Schoolcraft, ‘Algic Res.’ vol. i. p. 41. ‘Indian Tribes,’ vol. iii. p. 327. Waitz, vol. iii. p. 191. See also J. G. Müller, p. 175. (Antilles Islanders); Brasseur, ‘Mexique,’ vol. iii. p. 482.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Schoolcraft, ‘Algic Res.’ vol. i. p. 41. ‘Indian Tribes,’ vol. iii. p. 327. Waitz, vol. iii. p. 191. See also J. G. Müller, p. 175. (Antilles Islanders); Brasseur, ‘Mexique,’ vol. iii. p. 482.
391. Macpherson, ‘India,’ p. 90. See also Cross, ‘Karens,’ in ‘Journ. Amer. Or. Soc.’ vol. iv. p. 315; Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 239.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Macpherson, ‘India,’ p. 90. See also Cross, ‘Karens,’ in ‘Journ. Amer. Or. Soc.’ vol. iv. p. 315; Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 239.
392. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 114, 182, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 114, 182, etc.
393. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ p. 218, 388; Waitz, vol. ii. p. 171.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ p. 218, 388; Waitz, vol. ii. p. 171.
394. Philo, De Gigant. I. iv.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Philo, On Giants. I. iv.
395. Iamblichus, ii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Iamblichus, ii.
396. Collected passages in Calmet, ‘Diss. sur les Esprits’; Horst, ‘Zauber-Bibliothek,’ vol. ii. p. 263, &c.; vol. vi. p. 49, &c.; see Migne’s Dictionaries.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Collected excerpts in Calmet, ‘Dissertation on Spirits’; Horst, ‘Library of Magic’ vol. ii. p. 263, etc.; vol. vi. p. 49, etc.; see Migne’s Dictionaries.
397. Calmet, ‘Dissertation sur les Esprits,’ vol. i. ch. xlviii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Calmet, ‘Dissertation on Spirits,’ vol. i. ch. xlviii.
398. Gaume, ‘L’Eau Bénite au XIXme Siècle,’ pp. 295, 341.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Gaume, ‘Holy Water in the 19th Century,’ pp. 295, 341.
399. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 331.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 331.
400. Backhouse, ‘Australia,’ p. 555; Grey, ‘Australia,’ vol. ii. p. 337.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Backhouse, ‘Australia,’ p. 555; Grey, ‘Australia,’ vol. ii. p. 337.
401. Mason, ‘Karens,’ l.c. p. 211.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Mason, ‘Karens,’ p. 211.
402. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part iii. p. 226.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part III, p. 226.
403. Rochefort, ‘Antilles,’ p. 419.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Rochefort, ‘Antilles,’ p. 419.
404. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 1193; Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 332; St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 59; Wuttke, ‘Volksaberglaube,’ p. 122; Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 103; Brand, vol. iii. p. 279. The mare in nightmare means spirit, elf, or nymph; compare Anglo-Sax. wudumære (wood-mare) = echo.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 1193; Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 332; St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 59; Wuttke, 'Folk Beliefs,' p. 122; Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 103; Brand, vol. iii. p. 279. The mare in nightmare refers to a spirit, elf, or nymph; compare Anglo-Sax. wudumære (wood-mare) = echo.
405. ‘Vita del Amm. Christoforo Colombo,’ ch. xiii.; and ‘Life of Colon,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xii. p. 84.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Life of Admiral Christopher Columbus,’ ch. xiii.; and ‘Life of Columbus,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xii. p. 84.
406. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ pp. 149, 389. Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 119.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ pp. 149, 389. Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 119.
407. Högström, ‘Lapmark,’ ch. xi.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Högström, ‘Lapmark,’ ch. 11
408. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. p. 151. See also Borri, ‘Cochin-China,’ in Pinkerton, vol. ix. p. 823.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ward, ‘Hindus,’ vol. ii. p. 151. See also Borri, ‘Cochin-China,’ in Pinkerton, vol. ix. p. 823.
409. Augustin. ‘De Civ. Dei,’ xv. 23: ‘Et quoniam creberrima fama est, multique se expertos, vel ab eis qui experti essent, de quorum fide dubitandum non esset, audisse confirmant, Silvanos et Faunos, quos vulgo incubos vocant, improbos sæpe extitisse mulieribus, et earum appetisse ac peregisse concubitum; et quosdam dæmones, quos Dusios Galli nuncupant, hanc assidue immunditiam et tentare et efficere; plures talesque asseverant, ut hoc negare impudentiæ videatur; non hinc aliquid audeo definire, utrum aliqui spiritus ... possint etiam hanc pati libidinem; ut ... sentientibus feminibus misceantur.’ See also Grimm, ‘D. M.’ pp. 449, 479; Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 332; Cockayne, ‘Leechdoms of Early England,’ vol. i. p. xxxviii., vol. ii. p. 345.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Augustin. 'The City of God,' xv. 23: "There is a widely held belief, and many people confirm they have heard from credible sources—individuals whose trustworthiness is unquestionable—that Silvanus and Faunus, commonly known as incubus, have often taken advantage of women and sought to engage in sexual relations with them. Additionally, certain demons, called Dusios by the Gauls, frequently attempt to instigate and pursue this impurity. Many make similar claims to such a degree that denying it would seem shameless. Therefore, I hesitate to conclude anything about whether any spirits ... can also experience this lust, leading them to ... mix with women who are aware of it." See also Grimm, ‘D. M.’ pp. 449, 479; Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 332; Cockayne, ‘Leechdoms of Early England,’ vol. i. p. xxxviii., vol. ii. p. 345.
410. The ‘Malleus Maleficarum’ was published about 1489. See on the general subject, Horst, ‘Zauber-Bibliothek,’ vol. vi.; Ennemoser, ‘Magic,’ vol. ii.; Maury, ‘Magie,’ &c. p. 256; Lecky, ‘Hist, of Rationalism,’ vol. i.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.The ‘Malleus Maleficarum’ was published around 1489. For more on the topic, see Horst’s ‘Zauber-Bibliothek,’ vol. vi.; Ennemoser’s ‘Magic,’ vol. ii.; Maury’s ‘Magie,’ etc., p. 256; Lecky’s ‘History of Rationalism,’ vol. i.
411. Burton, ‘Anatomy of Melancholy,’ iii. 2. ‘Unum dixero, non opinari me ullo retro ævo tantam copiam Satyrorum, et salacium istorum Geniorum se ostendisse, quantum nunc quotidianæ narrationes, et judiciales sententiæ proferunt.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Burton, ‘Anatomy of Melancholy,’ iii. 2. “I can say this: I don’t think in any previous era there were so many Satyrs and mischievous spirits revealed as there are in today’s news and court decisions.”
412. J. R. Forster, ‘Observations during Voyage round World,’ p. 543.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. R. Forster, ‘Observations during Voyage around the World,’ p. 543.
413. Cross, ‘Karens,’ l.c. p. 312.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Cross, "Karens," l.c. p. 312.
414. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. i. p. 307.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. i. p. 307.
415. J. V. Grohmann, ‘Aberglauben aus Böhmen,’ &c., p. 24; Calmet, ‘Diss. sur les Esprits,’ vol. ii.; Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 1048, &c.; St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 49; see Ralston, ‘Songs of Russian People,’ p. 409.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. V. Grohmann, ‘Bohemian Superstitions’ &c., p. 24; Calmet, ‘Dissertation on Spirits’ vol. ii.; Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 1048, &c.; St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 49; see Ralston, ‘Songs of Russian People,’ p. 409.
416. Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ p. 268. Callaway, ‘Rel. of Amazulu,’ p. 246, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Cranz, ‘Greenland,’ p. 268. Callaway, ‘Report of Amazulu,’ p. 246, &c.
417. Grey, ‘Australia,’ vol. ii. p. 302. See also Bonwick, ‘Tasmanians,’ p. 180.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grey, ‘Australia,’ vol. ii. p. 302. See also Bonwick, ‘Tasmanians,’ p. 180.
418. Southey, ‘Brazil,’ part i. p. 238. See also Rochefort, p. 418; J. G. Müller, p. 273 (Caribs); Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ p. 301; Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part iii. p. 140.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Southey, ‘Brazil,’ part i. p. 238. See also Rochefort, p. 418; J. G. Müller, p. 273 (Caribs); Cranz, ‘Greenland,’ p. 301; Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part iii. p. 140.
419. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. i. pp. 270, 298; vol. ii. ‘N. S.’ p. 117.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. i. pp. 270, 298; vol. ii. ‘N. S.’ p. 117.
420. Roberts, ‘Oriental Illustrations,’ p. 531; Colebrook in ‘As. Res.’ vol. vii. p. 274.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Roberts, ‘Oriental Illustrations,’ p. 531; Colebrook in ‘As. Res.’ vol. vii. p. 274.
421. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. p. 77.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Doolittle, 'Chinese,' vol. 1, p. 77.
422. Hylten-Cavallius, ‘Wärend och Wirdarne,’ vol. i. p. 191; Atkinson, ‘Glossary of Cleveland Dial.’ p. 597. (Prof. Liebrecht, in ‘Zeitschrift für Ethnologie,’ vol. v. 1873, p. 99, adds comparison of the still usual German custom of keeping a light burning in the lying-in room till the child is baptized (Wuttke, 2nd ed. No. 583), and the similar ancient Roman practice whence the goddess Candelifera had her name (note to 2nd. ed.).)
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hylten-Cavallius, ‘Wärend och Wirdarne,’ vol. i. p. 191; Atkinson, ‘Glossary of Cleveland Dial.’ p. 597. (Prof. Liebrecht, in ‘Journal of Ethnology,’ vol. v. 1873, p. 99, adds a comparison to the still common German practice of keeping a light on in the delivery room until the child is baptized (Wuttke, 2nd ed. No. 583), and the similar ancient Roman tradition which gave the goddess Candelifera her name (note to 2nd. ed.).)
423. Martin, ‘Western Islands,’ in Pinkerton, vol. iii. p. 612.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Martin, 'Western Islands,' in Pinkerton, vol. iii. p. 612.
424. St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 44.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 44.
425. Rituale Romanum; Benedictio Candelarum. Brand, ‘Popular Antiquities,’ vol. i. p. 46.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Roman Ritual; Blessing of Candles. Brand, ‘Popular Antiquities,’ vol. i. p. 46.
426. Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ p. 267, see 296.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Cranz, ‘Greenland,’ p. 267, see 296.
427. Macpherson, ‘India,’ p. 100.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Macpherson, ‘India,’ p. 100.
428. Homer, Odyss, xvi. 160.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Homer, Odyss, 16. 160.
429. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 632.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 632.
430. Eisenmenger, ‘Judenthum,’ part i. p. 872. Lane, ‘Thousand and One Nights,’ vol. ii. p. 56.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Eisenmenger, ‘Judaism,’ part i. p. 872. Lane, ‘One Thousand and One Nights,’ vol. ii. p. 56.
431. Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 162. Other localities in ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iv. p. 333.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 162. Other locations in ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iv. p. 333.
433. De Brosses, ‘Dieux Fétiches,’ p. 46.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. De Brosses, ‘Dieux Fétiches,’ p. 46.
434. Clavigero, ‘Messico,’ vol. ii. p. 79.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Clavigero, ‘Mexico,’ vol. ii. p. 79.
435. Tractat. Berachoth.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Treatise. Blessings.
436. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ pp. 420, 1117; St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 54. See also Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 325; Tschudi, ‘Peru,’ vol. ii. p. 355.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grimm, ‘D. M.’ pp. 420, 1117; St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 54. See also Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 325; Tschudi, ‘Peru,’ vol. ii. p. 355.
437. Brand, ‘Popular Antiquities,’ vol. i. p. 193. See Boecler, ‘Ehsten Abergl.’ p. 73.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Brand, ‘Popular Antiquities,’ vol. i. p. 193. See Boecler, ‘Ehsten Abergl.’ p. 73.
438. Tertullian, De Carne Christi, vi.; Adv. Marcion, ii.; Origen, De Princip. i. 7. See Horst, l.c. Calmet, ‘Dissertation,’ vol. i. ch. xlvi.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Tertullian, Of the Flesh of Christ, vi.; Adv. Marcion, ii.; Origen, De Princip. i. 7. See Horst, l.c. Calmet, ‘Dissertation,’ vol. i. ch. xlvi.
439. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ p. 217. See Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 402.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ p. 217. See Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 402.
440. Pallas, ‘Reisen,’ vol. i. p. 360.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Pallas, ‘Reisen,’ vol. I, p. 360.
441. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 1212; Wuttke, ‘Volksaberglaube,’ p. 119; see Hyltén-Cavallius, part i. p. 178 (Sweden).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 1212; Wuttke, ‘Volksbelief,’ p. 119; see Hyltén-Cavallius, part i. p. 178 (Sweden).
442. Oldfield, ‘Abor. of Australia,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 240.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Oldfield, ‘Aborigines of Australia,’ in ‘Transactions of the Ethnological Society,’ vol. iii. p. 240.
443. Bonwick, ‘Tasmanians,’ p. 182.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bonwick, 'Tasmanians,' p. 182.
444. Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ p. 268; Egede, p. 187.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Cranz, ‘Greenland,’ p. 268; Egede, p. 187.
445. Molina, ‘Chili,’ vol. ii. p. 86.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Molina, ‘Chili,’ vol. ii. p. 86.
446. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ pp. 416, 429; J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 171, 217.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Rochefort, ‘Caribbean Islands,’ pp. 416, 429; J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 171, 217.
447. Waitz, vol. ii. p. 182; J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ p. 387; Steinhauser, l.c. p. 134. Compare Callaway, p. 327, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Waitz, vol. ii. p. 182; J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ p. 387; Steinhauser, l.c. p. 134. Compare Callaway, p. 327, &c.
448. Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 77.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘Psychology,’ p. 77.
449. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. iii. p. 275.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘Ost. Asien,’ vol. iii. p. 275.
450. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 829; Rochholz, ‘Deutscher Glaube,’ part i. p. 92; Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 247.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 829; Rochholz, 'German Faith,' part i. p. 92; Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 247.
451. Menander, 205, in Clement. Stromat.; Xenophon, Memor. Socr.; Plato, Apol. Socr. &c. See Plotin. Ennead. iii. 4; Porphyr. Plotin.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Menander, 205, in Clement. Stromat.; Xenophon, Memor. Socr.; Plato, Apol. Socr. &c. See Plotin. Ennead. iii. 4; Porphyr. Plotin.
452. Paulus Diaconus: ‘Genium appellant Deum, qui vim obtineret rerum omnium generandarum.’ Censorin. de Die Natali, 3: ‘Eundem esse genium et larem, multi veteres memoriæ prodiderunt.’ Tibull. Eleg. i. 2, 7; Ovid. Trist. iii. 13, 18, v. 5, 10; Horat. Epist. ii. 1, 140, Od. iv. 11, 7. Appian. de Bellis Parth. p. 156. Tertullian, Apol. xxiii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Paulus Diaconus: 'Genium is the name of a god who has power over the creation of all things generandarum.' Censorin. de Die Natali, 3: 'Many ancient sources have pointed out that the genium and the larem are the same.' Tibull. Eleg. i. 2, 7; Ovid. Trist. iii. 13, 18, v. 5, 10; Horat. Epist. ii. 1, 140, Od. iv. 11, 7. Appian. de Bellis Parth. p. 156. Tertullian, Apol. xxiii.
453. Serv. in Virg. Æn. vi. 743: ‘Cum nascimur, duos genios sortimur: unus hortatur ad bona, alter depravat ad mala, quibus assistentibus post mortem aut asserimur in meliorem vitam, aut condemnamur in deteriorem.’ Horat. Epist. ii. 187; Valer. Max. i. 7; Plutarch, Brutus. See Pauly, ‘Real-Encyclop.;’ Smith’s ‘Dic. of Biog. & Myth.’ s.v. ‘genius.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Serv. in Virg. Æn. vi. 743: "When we are born, we are given two spirits: one that guides us toward good and the other that leads us to evil. Their influence determines whether we are elevated to a better life or sentenced to a worse one after death." Horat. Epist. ii. 187; Valer. Max. i. 7; Plutarch, Brutus. See Pauly, ‘Real-Encyclop.;’ Smith’s ‘Dic. of Biog. & Myth.’ s.v. ‘genius.’
454. Acta Sanctorum Bolland.: S. Francisca Romana ix. Mart. Calmet, ‘Dissertation,’ ch. iv. xxx.; Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. pp. 140, 347, vol. iii. p. 10; Wright, ‘St. Patrick’s Purgatory,’ p. 33.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Acta Sanctorum Bolland.: St. Francisca Romana ix. Mart. Calmet, ‘Dissertation,’ ch. iv. xxx.; Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. pp. 140, 347, vol. iii. p. 10; Wright, ‘St. Patrick’s Purgatory,’ p. 33.
455. Rochholz, p. 93.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Rochholz, p. 93.
456. Bull, ‘Sermons,’ 2nd ed. London, 1714, vol. ii. p. 506.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bull, ‘Sermons,’ 2nd ed. London, 1714, vol. ii. p. 506.
457. Swedenborg, ‘True Christian Religion,’ p. 380. See also A. J. Davis, ‘Philosophy of Spiritual Intercourse,’ p. 38.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Swedenborg, ‘True Christian Religion,’ p. 380. See also A. J. Davis, ‘Philosophy of Spiritual Intercourse,’ p. 38.
458. D. Monnier, ‘Traditions Populaires,’ p. 7.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. D. Monnier, ‘Folk Traditions,’ p. 7.
459. L. H. Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 64. Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1636, p. 107. See Schoolcraft, ‘Tribes,’ vol. iii. p. 337.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.L. H. Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 64. Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1636, p. 107. See Schoolcraft, ‘Tribes,’ vol. iii. p. 337.
460. Steinhauser, ‘Religion des Negers,’ in ‘Magazin der Evang. Missionen,’ Basel, 1856; No. 2, p. 127, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Steinhauser, ‘Religion of the Blacks,’ in ‘Magazine of the Evangelical Missions,’ Basel, 1856; No. 2, p. 127, & etc.
461. Plath, ‘Religion der alten Chinesen,’ part i. p. 44.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Plath, ‘Religion of the Ancient Chinese,’ part i. p. 44.
462. Oldfield, ‘Abor. of Austr.’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 232.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Oldfield, ‘Abor. of Austr.’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 232.
463. Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ pp. 47, 265.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Steller, ‘Kamchatka,’ pp. 47, 265.
464. Oviedo, ‘Nicaragua,’ in Ternaux-Compans, part xiv. pp. 132, 160. Compare Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. ii. p. 169.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Oviedo, ‘Nicaragua,’ in Ternaux-Compans, part xiv. pp. 132, 160. Compare Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. ii. p. 169.
465. Creswick, ‘Veys,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vi. p. 359. See Du Chaillu, ‘Ashango-land,’ p. 106.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Creswick, ‘Veys,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vi. p. 359. See Du Chaillu, ‘Ashango-land,’ p. 106.
466. Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1636, p. 108. Long’s Exp. vol. i. p. 46. See Loskiel, ‘Indians of N. A.’ part i. p. 45.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1636, p. 108. Long’s Exp. vol. i. p. 46. See Loskiel, ‘Indians of N. A.’ part i. p. 45.
467. For details of the belief in water-spirits as the cause of drowning, see ante, vol. i. p. 109.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.For details on the belief in water spirits being responsible for drowning, see ante, vol. i. p. 109.
468. Oldfield in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 328; Eyre, vol. ii. p. 362; Grey, vol. ii. p. 339; Bastian, ‘Vorstellungen von Wasser und Feuer,’ in ‘Zeitschrift für Ethnologie,’ vol. i. (contains a general collection of details as to water-worship).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Oldfield in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 328; Eyre, vol. ii. p. 362; Grey, vol. ii. p. 339; Bastian, ‘Vorstellungen von Wasser und Feuer,’ in ‘Zeitschrift für Ethnologie,’ vol. i. (contains a general collection of details about water-worship).
469. Compare John Morgan, ‘Life of William Buckley’; Bonwick, p. 203; Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 48, with Forbes Leslie, Brand, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Compare John Morgan, ‘Life of William Buckley’; Bonwick, p. 203; Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 48, with Forbes Leslie, Brand, & others.
470. Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ p. 267.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Cranz, ‘Greenland,’ p. 267.
471. Tanner, ‘Narr.’ p. 341; Carver, ‘Travels,’ p. 383; Franklin, ‘Journey to Polar Sea,’ vol. ii. p. 245; Lubbock, ‘Origin of Civilization,’ pp. 213-20 (contains details as to water-worship); see Brinton, p. 124.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Tanner, ‘Narr.’ p. 341; Carver, ‘Travels,’ p. 383; Franklin, ‘Journey to Polar Sea,’ vol. ii. p. 245; Lubbock, ‘Origin of Civilization,’ pp. 213-20 (includes details about water worship); see Brinton, p. 124.
472. Rivero and Tschudi, ‘Peruvian Ant.’ p. 161; Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Comm. Real.’ i. 10. See also J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrelig.’ pp. 258, 260, 282.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Rivero and Tschudi, ‘Peruvian Ant.’ p. 161; Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Comm. Real.’ i. 10. See also J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrelig.’ pp. 258, 260, 282.
473. Krapf, ‘E. Afr.’ p. 198; Steinhauser, l.c. p. 131; Villault in Astley, vol. i. p. 668; Backhouse, ‘Afr.’ p. 230; Callaway, ‘Zulu Tales,’ vol. i. p. 90; Bastian, l.c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Krapf, ‘E. Afr.’ p. 198; Steinhauser, l.c. p. 131; Villault in Astley, vol. i. p. 668; Backhouse, ‘Afr.’ p. 230; Callaway, ‘Zulu Tales,’ vol. i. p. 90; Bastian, l.c.
474. Castrén, ‘Vorlesungen über die Altaischen Völker,’ p. 114. ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 70. Atkinson, ‘Siberia,’ p. 444. Boecler, ‘Ehsten Abergläub. Gebräuche,’ ed. Kreutzwald, p. 6.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Castrén, "Lectures on the Altaic Peoples," p. 114. ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 70. Atkinson, ‘Siberia,’ p. 444. Boecler, ‘Estonian Superstitions and Traditions,’ ed. Kreutzwald, p. 6.
475. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ p. 164; Hunter, ‘Rural Bengal.’ p. 184. See also Lubbock, l.c.; Forbes Leslie, ‘Early Races of Scotland,’ vol. i. p. 163, vol. ii. p. 497.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ p. 164; Hunter, ‘Rural Bengal.’ p. 184. See also Lubbock, l.c.; Forbes Leslie, ‘Early Races of Scotland,’ vol. i. p. 163, vol. ii. p. 497.
476. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. p. 206, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ward, ‘Hindus,’ vol. ii. p. 206, &c.
477. Homer, Il. xx. xxi. See Gladstone, ‘Juventus Mundi,’ pp. 190, 345, &c., &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Homer, Il. 20. 21. See Gladstone, ‘Juventus Mundi,’ pp. 190, 345, & etc.
478. Cosmas, book iii. p. 197, ‘superstitiosas institutiones, quas villani adhuc semipagani in Pentecosten tertia sive quarta feria observabant offerentes libamina super fontes mactabant victimas et dæmonibus immolabant.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Cosmas, book iii. p. 197, "Superstitious practices that the peasants, who still held some pagan beliefs, observed on Pentecost during the third or fourth Wednesday, where they offered sacrifices at springs and sacrificed victims to demons."
479. Poenitentiale Ecgberti, ii. 22, ‘gif hwilc man his ælmessan gehâte oththe bringe to hwilcon wylle;’ iv. 19, ‘gif hwâ his wæccan æt ænigum wylle hæbbe.’ Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 549, &c. See Hyltén-Cavallius, ‘Wärend och Wirdarne,’ part i. pp. 131, 171 (Sweden).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Poenitentiale Ecgberti, ii. 22, ‘if any man intends to give his alms or brings them to any one;’ iv. 19, ‘if anyone wishes to have his vigil at any time.’ Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 549, &c. See Hyltén-Cavallius, ‘Wärend och Wirdarne,’ part i. pp. 131, 171 (Sweden).
480. Grohmann, ‘Aberglauben aus Böhmen und Mähren,’ p. 43, &c. Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 291, &c. Ralston, ‘Songs of Russian People,’ p. 139, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grohmann, ‘Superstitions from Bohemia and Moravia,’ p. 43, &c. Hanusch, ‘Slavic Mythology,’ p. 291, &c. Ralston, ‘Songs of the Russian People,’ p. 139, &c.
481. St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 46. Similar ideas in Grohmann, p. 44. Eisenmenger, ‘Entd. Judenthum,’ part i. p. 426.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 46. Similar ideas in Grohmann, p. 44. Eisenmenger, ‘Entd. Judenthum,’ part i. p. 426.
482. Maury, ‘Magie,’ &c., p. 158. Brand, ‘Pop. Ant.’ vol. ii. p. 366, &c. Hunt, ‘Pop. Rom. 2nd Series,’ p. 40, &c. Forbes Leslie, ‘Early Races of Scotland,’ vol. i. p. 156, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Maury, ‘Magie,’ etc., p. 158. Brand, ‘Pop. Ant.’ vol. ii. p. 366, etc. Hunt, ‘Pop. Rom. 2nd Series,’ p. 40, etc. Forbes Leslie, ‘Early Races of Scotland,’ vol. i. p. 156, etc.
483. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. i. p. 307.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. i. p. 307.
484. Beeker, ‘Dyaks,’ in ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iii. p. 111.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Beeker, ‘Dyaks,’ in ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iii. p. 111.
485. Marsden, ‘Sumatra,’ p. 301.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Marsden, ‘Sumatra,’ p. 301.
486. S. S. Farmer, ‘Tonga,’ p. 127.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. S. S. Farmer, ‘Tonga,’ p. 127.
487. Bastian, ‘Der Baum in vergleichender Ethnologie,’ in Lazarus and Steinthal’s ‘Zeitschrift für Völkerpsychologie,’ &c., vol. v. 1868.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, ‘The Tree in Comparative Anthropology,’ in Lazarus and Steinthal’s ‘Folk Psychology Journal,’ &c., vol. v. 1868.
488. Chr. Colombo, ch. xix.; and in Pinkerton, vol. xii. p. 87.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Chr. Colombo, ch. 19; and in Pinkerton, vol. 12 p. 87.
489. Burton, ‘W. & W. fr. W. Afr.’ pp. 205, 243.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Burton, ‘W. & W. from W. Afr.’ pp. 205, 243.
490. Waitz, vol. ii. p. 188.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Waitz, vol. 2, p. 188.
491. Bosman, letter 19, and in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 500.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bosman, letter 19, and in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 500.
492. Krapf, ‘E. Afr.’ p. 77; Prichard, ‘N. H. of Man,’ p. 290; Waitz, vol. ii. p. 518. See also Merolla, ‘Congo,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 236.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Krapf, ‘E. Afr.’ p. 77; Prichard, ‘N. H. of Man,’ p. 290; Waitz, vol. ii. p. 518. See also Merolla, ‘Congo,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 236.
493. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. ii. pp. 457, 461, vol. iii. pp. 187, 251, 289, 497. For details of tree-worship from other Asiatic districts, see Ainsworth, ‘Yezidis,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. i. p. 23; Jno. Wilson, ‘Parsi Religion,’ p. 262.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, 'Eastern Asia,' vol. ii. pp. 457, 461, vol. iii. pp. 187, 251, 289, 497. For more information on tree worship from other Asian regions, see Ainsworth, 'Yezidis,' in 'Transactions of the Ethnological Society,' vol. i. p. 23; Jno. Wilson, 'Parsi Religion,' p. 262.
494. Hardy, ‘Manual of Budhism,’ pp. 100, 443.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hardy, ‘Manual of Buddhism,’ pp. 100, 443.
495. Fergusson, ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ pl. xxiv. xxvi. &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Fergusson, ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ pl. xxiv. xxvi. &c.
496. Tabary in Bastian, l.c. p. 295.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Tabary in Bastian, l.c. p. 295.
497. Hartknoch, ‘Alt. und Neues Preussen,’ part i. ch. v.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hartknoch, ‘Old and New Prussia,’ part i. ch. v.
498. See Pauly, ‘Real-Encyclopedie.’ Homer. Odyss. xiv. 327, xix. 296.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. See Pauly, ‘Real-Encyclopedia.’ Homer. Odyss. xiv. 327, xix. 296.
499. Hymn. Homer. Aphrod. 257.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hymn. Homer. Aphrod. 257.
500. Ausonii Idyll. De Histor. 7.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ausonii Idyll. On History. 7.
501. Apollon. Rhod. Argonautica, ii. 476. See Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. iii. p. 57.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Apollon. Rhod. Argonautica, ii. 476. See Welcker, ‘Greek Deities.’ vol. iii. p. 57.
502. Ovid. Metamm. i. 452, ii. 345, xi. 67.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ovid. Metamorphoses. i. 452, ii. 345, xi. 67.
503. Dante, ‘Divina Commedia,’ ‘Inferno,’ canto xiii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Dante, ‘Divine Comedy,’ ‘Inferno,’ canto 13.
504. Ariosto, ‘Orlando Furioso,’ canto vi.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ariosto, ‘Orlando Furioso,’ canto 6.
505. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 615, &c. Bastian, ‘Der Baum,’ l.c. p. 297; Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 313.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 615, etc. Bastian, 'The tree,' l.c. p. 297; Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 313.
506. Wuttke, ‘Volksaberglaube,’ p. 57, see 183.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Wuttke, ‘Volksaberglaube,’ p. 57, see 183.
507. Euseb. ‘Præp. Evang.’ i. 10.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Euseb. 'Preparation for the Gospel' i. 10.
508. Further details as to tree-worship in Bastian, ‘Der Baum,’ &c., here cited; Lubbock, ‘Origin of Civilization,’ p. 206, &c.; Fergusson, ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.For more information on tree worship in Bastian, 'The Tree,' and so on, see Lubbock, 'Origin of Civilization,' p. 206, and others; Fergusson, 'Tree and Serpent Worship,' etc.
509. Bastian, ‘Der Baum,’ l.c. &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘The Tree,’ l.c. &c.
510. Irving, ‘Astoria,’ vol. ii. ch. viii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Irving, ‘Astoria,’ vol. ii. ch. viii.
511. Darwin, ‘Journal,’ p. 68.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Darwin, ‘Journal,’ p. 68.
512. Polack, ‘New Z.’ vol. ii. p. 6; Taylor, p. 171, see 99.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Polack, ‘New Z.’ vol. ii. p. 6; Taylor, p. 171, see 99.
513. St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. i. p. 89.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. 1, p. 89.
514. Wallace, ‘Eastern Archipelago,’ vol. i. p. 338.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Wallace, ‘Eastern Archipelago,’ vol. I, p. 338.
515. Prichard, ‘Nat. Hist. of Man,’ p. 531.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Prichard, ‘Nat. History of Man,’ p. 531.
516. Merolla in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 236.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Merolla in Pinkerton, vol. 16, p. 236.
517. Lubbock, p. 193; Bastian, l.c.; Park, ‘Travels,’ vol. i. pp. 64, 106.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Lubbock, p. 193; Bastian, l.c.; Park, ‘Travels,’ vol. i. pp. 64, 106.
518. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 86, &c., 191, &c.; Latham, ‘Descr. Eth.’ vol. i. p. 363; Simpson, ‘Journey,’ vol. ii. p. 261.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 86, etc., 191, etc.; Latham, ‘Descr. Eth.’ vol. i. p. 363; Simpson, ‘Journey,’ vol. ii. p. 261.
519. Boecler, ‘Ehsten Abergläubische Gebräuche,’ &c., ed. Kreutzwald, pp. 2, 112, 146.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Boecler, ‘Ehsten Superstitious Customs,’ &c., ed. Kreutzwald, pp. 2, 112, 146.
520. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ pp. 165, 173.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ pp. 165, 173.
521. Macpherson, p. 61.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Macpherson, p. 61.
522. Dalton, ‘Kols,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vi. p. 34. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien.’ vol. i. p. 134, vol. iii. p. 252.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Dalton, ‘Kols,’ in ‘Transactions of the Ethnographic Society’ vol. 6 p. 34. Bastian, ‘Eastern Asia.’ vol. 1 p. 134, vol. 3 p. 252.
523. Deut. xii. 3; xvi. 21. Judges vi. 25. 1 Kings xiv. 23; xv. 13; xviii. 19. 2 Kings xvii. 10; xxiii. 4. Is. lvii. 5. Jerem. xvii. 2. Ezek. vi. 13; xx. 28. Hos. iv. 13, &c., &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Deut. 12 3; 16 21. Judges 6 25. 1 Kings 14 23; 15 13; 18 19. 2 Kings 17 10; xxiii. 4. Is. lvii. 5. Jerem. 17 2. Ezek. 6 13; 20 28. Hos. 4 13, &c., &c.
524. Sil. Ital. Punica, iii. 675, 690. Harduin, Acta Conciliorum, vol. i. For further evidence as to Semitic tree-and-grove worship, see Movers, ‘Phönizier,’ vol. i. p. 560, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Sil. Ital. Punica, iii. 675, 690. Harduin, Acta Conciliorum, vol. i. For more evidence about Semitic tree-and-grove worship, see Movers, ‘Phönizier,’ vol. i. p. 560, &c.
525. Hunter, ‘Rural Bengal,’ pp. 131, 194.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hunter, ‘Rural Bengal,’ pp. 131, 194.
526. Boehtlingk and Roth, s.v. ‘chaityataru.’ Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. p. 204.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Boehtlingk and Roth, s.v. ‘chaityataru.’ Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. p. 204.
527. Ovid. Metamm. viii. 741.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ovid. Metamm. 8. 741.
528. Cato de Re Rustica, 139; Plin. xvii. 47.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Cato on Agriculture, 139; Pliny XVII 47.
529. Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ pp. 98, 229. Hartknoch, part i. ch. v. vii.; Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 67.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ pp. 98, 229. Hartknoch, part i. ch. v. vii.; Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 67.
530. Maxim. Tyr. viii.; Plin. xvi. 95.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Maxim. Tyr. 8; Plin. 16 95.
531. Tacit. Germania, 9, 39, &c.; Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 66.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Tacit. Germania, 9, 39, &c.; Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 66.
532. Hyltén-Cavallius, ‘Wärend och Wirdarne,’ part i. p. 142.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hyltén-Cavallius, ‘Wärend and Wirdarne,’ part i. p. 142.
533. Ralston, ‘Songs of Russian People,’ p. 153, see 238.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ralston, ‘Songs of Russian People,’ p. 153, see 238.
534. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 62, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 62, &c.
535. Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 276.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Steller, ‘Kamchatka,’ p. 276.
536. Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Comentarios Reales,’ i. ch. ix. &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Comentarios Reales,’ vol. I, ch. 9 & etc.
537. Marsden, ‘Sumatra,’ p. 303.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Marsden, ‘Sumatra,’ p. 303.
538. Petron. Arb. Fragm.; Statius, iii. Theb. 661.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Petron. Arb. Fragm.; Statius, iii. Theb. 661.
539. See ante, ch. xi.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. See above, ch. xi.
540. Mouhot, ‘Indo-China,’ vol. i. p. 252.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Mouhot, ‘Indo-China,’ vol. 1, p. 252.
541. Charlevoix, ‘Nouvelle France,’ vol. v. p. 443.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Charlevoix, ‘New France,’ vol. 5, p. 443.
542. W. M. Wood in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iv. p. 36.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.W. M. Wood in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iv. p. 36.
543. Simpson, ‘Journey,’ vol. ii. p. 269; Erman, ‘Siberia,’ vol. i. p. 492; Latham, ‘Descr. Eth.’ vol. i. p. 456; ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iv. p. 590.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Simpson, ‘Journey,’ vol. ii. p. 269; Erman, ‘Siberia,’ vol. i. p. 492; Latham, ‘Descr. Eth.’ vol. i. p. 456; ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iv. p. 590.
544. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 336.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 336.
545. Farmer, ‘Tonga,’ p. 126; Mariner, vol. ii. p. 106.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Farmer, ‘Tonga,’ p. 126; Mariner, vol. II, p. 106.
546. Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 217, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. 1, p. 217, &c.
547. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 238.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 238.
548. Shortland, ‘Trads. of N. Z.’ ch. iv.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Shortland, ‘Traditions of New Zealand’ ch. iv.
549. Marsden, ‘Sumatra,’ p. 292.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Marsden, ‘Sumatra,’ p. 292.
550. Loskiel, ‘Ind. of N. A.’ part i. p. 40; Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. i. p. 36; Schoolcraft, ‘Tribes,’ part i. p. 34, part v. p. 652; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 190.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Loskiel, ‘Ind. of N. A.’ part i. p. 40; Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. i. p. 36; Schoolcraft, ‘Tribes,’ part i. p. 34, part v. p. 652; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 190.
552. Steinhauser, ‘Religion des Negers,’ l.c. p. 133. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ pp. 210, 218. Schlegel, ‘Ewe-Sprache,’ p. xv.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Steinhauser, 'Religion of the Blacks' l.c. p. 133. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ pp. 210, 218. Schlegel, ‘Ewe-Sprache,’ p. xv.
553. Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ letter 19; in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 499. See Burton, ‘Dahome,’ ch. iv., xvii. An account of the Vaudoux serpent-worship still carried on among the negroes of Hayti, in ‘Lippincott’s Magazine,’ Philadelphia, March, 1870.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ letter 19; in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 499. See Burton, ‘Dahome,’ ch. iv., xvii. An account of the Vaudoux serpent-worship still practiced among the Black people of Haiti, in ‘Lippincott’s Magazine,’ Philadelphia, March, 1870.
554. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 196, see 228.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 196, see 228.
555. J. F. McLennan in ‘Fortnightly Review,’ 1869-70; reprinted in ‘Studies in Ancient History,’ 2nd Series, pp. 117, 491.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. F. McLennan in 'Fortnightly Review,' 1869-70; reprinted in 'Studies in Ancient History,' 2nd Series, pp. 117, 491.
557. Grey, ‘Journals of Expeditions in N. W. & W. Australia,’ vol. ii. pp. 225-9; ‘Archæologia Americana,’ vol. ii. p. 109.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grey, ‘Journals of Expeditions in N. W. & W. Australia,’ vol. ii. pp. 225-9; ‘Archæologia Americana,’ vol. ii. p. 109.
558. J. G. Frazer, ‘Totemism,’ p. 53; ‘Golden Bough,’ 2nd ed. vol. iii. pp. 419, 423.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. G. Frazer, ‘Totemism,’ p. 53; ‘Golden Bough,’ 2nd ed. vol. iii. pp. 419, 423.
559. Codrington, ‘Melanesians,’ pp. 32-3, 170.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Codrington, ‘Melanesians,’ pp. 32-3, 170.
560. Spencer and Gillen, ‘Native Tribes of Central Australia,’ 1899, pp. 73, 121.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Spencer and Gillen, ‘Native Tribes of Central Australia,’ 1899, pp. 73, 121.
561. General references in J. F. McLennan, ‘Studies in Ancient History;’ J. G. Frazer, ‘Totemism.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.General references in J. F. McLennan, ‘Studies in Ancient History;’ J. G. Frazer, ‘Totemism.’
562. Herod. ii.; Plutarch, De Iside & Osiride; Strabo, xvii. 1; Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Eg.,’ edited by Birch, vol. iii.; Bunsen, 2nd Edition, with notes by Birch, vol. i.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Herod. ii.; Plutarch, De Iside & Osiride; Strabo, xvii. 1; Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Eg.,’ edited by Birch, vol. iii.; Bunsen, 2nd Edition, with notes by Birch, vol. i.
563. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. p. 195, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ward, ‘Hindus,’ vol. ii. p. 195, & etc.
564. Schoolcraft, part iii. p. 231; Brinton, p. 108, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Schoolcraft, part 3, p. 231; Brinton, p. 108, etc.
565. Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Comentarios Reales,’ i. 9.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Comentarios Reales,’ vol. 9.
566. Herodot. viii. 41.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Herodotus. viii. 41.
567. Servius ad Æn. v. 95.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Servius on Æn. v. 95.
568. Hartknoch, ‘Preussen,’ part i. pp. 143, 162.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hartknoch, ‘Prussia,’ part i. pp. 143, 162.
569. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 648.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 648.
570. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 650. Rochholz, ‘Deutscher Glaube,’ &c., vol. i. p. 146. Monnier, ‘Traditions Populaires,’ p. 644. Grohmann, ‘Aberglauben aus Böhmen,’ &c., p. 78. Ralston, ‘Songs of Russian People,’ p. 175.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 650. Rochholz, 'German Faith,' &c., vol. i. p. 146. Monnier, ‘Traditions Populaires,’ p. 644. Grohmann, 'Superstitions from Bohemia,' &c., p. 78. Ralston, ‘Songs of Russian People,’ p. 175.
571. Fergusson ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ p. 55, &c., pl. xxiv. McLennan l.c. p. 563, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Fergusson ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ p. 55, etc., pl. xxiv. McLennan l.c. p. 563, etc.
572. Strabo, xiii. 1, 14.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Strabo, XIII 1, 14.
573. J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 62, 585.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 62, 585.
574. J. B. Schlegel, ‘Ewe-Sprache,’ p. xiv.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. J. B. Schlegel, ‘Ewe Language,’ p. xiv.
575. Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 217.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 217.
576. Pausan. ii. 28; Ælian, xvi. 39. See Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. ii. p. 734.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Pausan. ii. 28; Ælian, xvi. 39. See Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. ii. p. 734.
577. Macrob. Saturnal. i. 9. Movers, ‘Phönizier,’ vol. i. p. 500.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Macrob. Saturnal. i. 9. Movers, ‘Phoenicians,’ vol. i. p. 500.
578. Details such as in Schoolcraft, ‘Ind. Tribes,’ part i. pp. 38, 414, may be ascribed to Christian intercourse. See Brinton, p. 121.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Details like those in Schoolcraft, ‘Ind. Tribes,’ part i. pp. 38, 414, may be attributed to Christian interactions. See Brinton, p. 121.
579. Lepsius, ‘Todtenbuch,’ and Birch’s transl. in Bunsen’s ‘Egypt,’ vol. v.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Lepsius, ‘Book of the Dead,’ and Birch’s translation in Bunsen’s ‘Egypt,’ vol. v.
580. Spiegel, ‘Avesta,’ vol. i. p. 66, vol. iii. p. lix.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Spiegel, ‘Avesta,’ vol. I, p. 66, vol. III, p. lix.
581. Epiphan. Adv. Hæres. xxxvii. Tertullian. De Præscript. contra Hæreticos, 47.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Epiphan. Adv. Hæres. xxxvii. Tertullian. De Præscript. against Heretics, 47.
582. Further collections of evidence relating to Zoolatry in general may be found in Bastian, ‘Das Thier in seiner mythologischen Bedeutung,’ in Bastian and Hartmann’s ‘Zeitschrift für Ethnologie,’ vol. i., Meiners, ‘Geschichte der Religionen,’ vol. i.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.More evidence related to Zoolatry can be found in Bastian, ‘The animal in its mythological significance,’ in Bastian and Hartmann’s 'Journal of Ethnology,' vol. i., Meiners, ‘History of Religions,’ vol. i.
583. Comte, ‘Philosophie Positive,’ vol. v. p. 101.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Comte, ‘Positive Philosophy,’ vol. 5, p. 101.
584. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 242.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 242.
585. Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 105.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 105.
586. Acosta, ‘Historia de las Indias,’ book v. c. iv.; Rivero & Tschudi, pp. 161, 179; J. G. Müller, p. 365.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Acosta, ‘History of the Indies,’ book v. c. iv.; Rivero & Tschudi, pp. 161, 179; J. G. Müller, p. 365.
587. Le Jeune in ‘Rel. des Jés. dans la Nouvelle France,’ 1634, p. 13. Lafitau, ‘Mœurs des Sauvages,’ vol. i. p. 370. See also Waitz, vol. iii. p. 194; Schoolcraft, part iii. p. 327.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Le Jeune in 'Recollections of the Jesuits in New France,' 1634, p. 13. Lafitau, ‘Customs of the Savages,’ vol. i. p. 370. See also Waitz, vol. iii. p. 194; Schoolcraft, part iii. p. 327.
588. Ralston, ‘Songs of the Russian People,’ p. 375. The Slavonic myth of Buyán with its dripping oak and the snake Garafena lying beneath, is obviously connected with the Scandinavian myth of the dripping ash, Yggdrasill, the snake Nidhögg below, and the two Swans of the Urdharfount, parents of all swans.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ralston, ‘Songs of the Russian People,’ p. 375. The Slavic myth of Buyán, with its dripping oak and the snake Garafena lying underneath, is clearly linked to the Scandinavian myth of the dripping ash tree, Yggdrasill, the snake Nidhögg below it, and the two Swans of the Urdharfount, who are the parents of all swans.
589. Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 162.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 162.
590. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ pp. 106, 160, 189, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ pp. 106, 160, 189, etc.
591. Eisenmenger, ‘Judenthum,’ part ii. p. 376; Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. iii. p. 194.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Eisenmenger, ‘Judaism,’ part ii. p. 376; Bastian, ‘Humanity,’ vol. iii. p. 194.
592. De Brosses, ‘Dieux Fétiches,’ p. 58.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. De Brosses, ‘Dieux Fétiches,’ p. 58.
593. Eyre, ‘Australia,’ vol. ii. p. 362; Oldfield in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 228; Lang, ‘Queensland,’ p. 444.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Eyre, ‘Australia,’ vol. ii. p. 362; Oldfield in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 228; Lang, ‘Queensland,’ p. 444.
594. Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 583.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 583.
595. Loskiel, ‘Ind. of N. America,’ part i. p. 43.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Loskiel, ‘Ind. of N. America,’ vol. 1, p. 43.
596. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 1322.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 1322.
597. St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. i. p. 180.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. 1, p. 180.
598. J. B. Schlegel, ‘Schlüssel zur Ewe Sprache,’ p. xii.; compare Bowen, ‘Yoruba Lang.’ in ‘Smithsonian Contrib.’ vol. i. p. xvi.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. B. Schlegel, 'Key to the Ewe Language,' p. xii.; see Bowen, ‘Yoruba Lang.’ in ‘Smithsonian Contrib.’ vol. i. p. xvi.
599. Samoiedia, in Pinkerton, vol. i. p. 531.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Samoiedia, in Pinkerton, vol. I, p. 531.
600. Macpherson, p. 84, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Macpherson, p. 84, etc.
601. Clavigero, ‘Messico,’ vol. ii. ch. i.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Clavigero, ‘Mexico,’ vol. ii. ch. i.
602. Gladstone, ‘Juventus Mundi,’ ch. vii. &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Gladstone, ‘Juventus Mundi,’ ch. 7 &c.
603. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ward, ‘Hindus,’ vol. ii.
604. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. i. pp. 33, 255, 275, 338, vol. ii. p. 692.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. i. pp. 33, 255, 275, 338, vol. ii. p. 692.
605. Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.,’ 1636, p. 107; Lafitau, ‘Mœurs des Sauvages Amériquains,’ vol. i. p. 132. Schoolcraft, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 36, &c. 237. Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ pp. 48, 172. J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrelig.’ p. 119.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.,’ 1636, p. 107; Lafitau, 'Mores of American Indians,' vol. i. p. 132. Schoolcraft, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 36, &c. 237. Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ pp. 48, 172. J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrelig.’ p. 119.
606. Callaway, ‘Zulu Tales,’ vol. i. p. 203.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Callaway, ‘Zulu Tales,’ vol. 1, p. 203.
607. Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. ii. p. 168, &c.; Burton, ‘W. & W. fr. W. Afr.’ p. 76.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. ii, p. 168, etc.; Burton, ‘W. & W. from W. Afr.’ p. 76.
608. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 7, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 7, &c.
609. Plath, ‘Religion und Cultus der alten Chinesen,’ part i. p. 18, &c.; part ii. p. 32; Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. ii. p. 396. See Max Müller, ‘Lectures,’ 2nd S. p. 437; Legge, ‘Confucius,’ p. 100. For further evidence as to savage and barbaric worship of the Heaven as Supreme Deity, see chap. xvii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Plath, ‘Religion and Cult of Ancient China,’ part i. p. 18, &c.; part ii. p. 32; Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. ii. p. 396. See Max Müller, ‘Lectures,’ 2nd S. p. 437; Legge, ‘Confucius,’ p. 100. For more information on primitive and barbaric worship of Heaven as the Supreme Deity, see chap. xvii.
610. Max Müller, ‘Lectures,’ 2nd Series, p. 425; Grimm, ‘D. M.’ ch. ix.; Cicero, De Natura Deorum, iii. 4. Connexion of the Sanskrit Dyu with the Scandinavian Tyr and the Anglo Saxon Tiw is perhaps rather of etymology than definition.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Max Müller, ‘Lectures,’ 2nd Series, p. 425; Grimm, ‘D. M.’ ch. ix.; Cicero, De Natura Deorum, iii. 4. The connection between the Sanskrit Dyu and the Scandinavian Tyr and the Anglo-Saxon Tiw is probably more about etymology than meaning.
611. Duff Macdonald, ‘Africana,’ vol. i. p. 60 (E. Centr. Afr.). Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. ii. p. 169 (W. Afr.) p. 416 (Damaras).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Duff Macdonald, ‘Africana,’ vol. i. p. 60 (E. Centr. Afr.). Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. ii. p. 169 (W. Afr.) p. 416 (Damaras).
612. Markham, ‘Quichua Gr. and Dic.’ p. 9; J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 318, 368.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Markham, ‘Quichua Grammar and Dictionary’ p. 9; J. G. Müller, ‘American Urrel.’ pp. 318, 368.
613. Ibid. pp. 496-9; Oviedo, ‘Nicaragua,’ pp. 40, 72.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Same source. pp. 496-9; Oviedo, ‘Nicaragua,’ pp. 40, 72.
614. Macpherson, ‘India,’ pp. 89, 355.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Macpherson, ‘India,’ pp. 89, 355.
615. Dalton, ‘Kols,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vi. p. 34. Compare 1 Kings xviii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Dalton, ‘Kols,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vi. p. 34. Compare 1 Kings xviii.
616. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 36; Kalewala, Rune ii. 317.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 36; Kalewala, Rune ii. 317.
617. Marc. Antonin. v. 7. ‘Ἐὐχὴ Ἀθηναίων, ὖσον, ὖσον, ὦ φίλε Ζεῦ, κατὰ τῆς ἀρούρας τῶν Ἀθηναίων καὶ τῶν πεδίων.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Marc. Antonin. v. 7. "Prayer of the Athenians, to you, dear Zeus, over the land of the Athenians and the plains."
618. Petron. Arbiter. Sat. xliv. ‘Antea stolatæ ibant nudis pedibus in clivum, passis capillis, mentibus puris, et Jovem aquam exorabant. Itaque statim urceatim pluebat: aut tunc aut nunquam; et omnes redibant udi tanquam mures.’ See Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 160.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Petron. Arbiter. Sat. xliv. "Before, the women would walk up the hill barefoot, with their hair down and faces clean, praying to Jupiter for water. It would start raining immediately—either then or never; and everyone would come back soaked like rats." See Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 160.
619. Pr. Max v. Wied, ‘N. Amer.’ vol. ii. pp. 152, 223; J. G. Müller, p. 120; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 179.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Pr. Max v. Wied, ‘N. Amer.’ vol. ii. pp. 152, 223; J. G. Müller, p. 120; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 179.
620. Keating, ‘Narr.’ vol. i. p. 407; Eastman, ‘Dahcotah,’ p. 71; Brinton, p. 150, &c.; see M’Coy, ‘Baptist Indian Missions,’ p. 363.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Keating, ‘Narr.’ vol. i. p. 407; Eastman, ‘Dahcotah,’ p. 71; Brinton, p. 150, & etc.; see M’Coy, ‘Baptist Indian Missions,’ p. 363.
621. De la Borde, ‘Caraïbes,’ p. 530; Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 431.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.De la Borde, ‘Caribbean,’ p. 530; Rochefort, ‘Antilles,’ p. 431.
622. De Laet, ‘Novus Orbis,’ xv. 2. Waitz, vol. iii. p. 417; J. G. Müller, p. 270; also 421 (thunderstorms by anger of Sun, in Cumana, &c.).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.De Laet, 'New World,' xv. 2. Waitz, vol. iii. p. 417; J. G. Müller, p. 270; also 421 (thunderstorms caused by the anger of the Sun, in Cumana, etc.).
623. Brinton, p. 153; Herrera, ‘Indias Occidentales,’ Dec., v. 4. J. G. Müller p. 327. ‘Rites and Laws of the Yncas,’ tr. & ed. by C. R. Markham, p. 16, see 81; Prescott, ‘Peru,’ vol. i. p. 86.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Brinton, p. 153; Herrera, ‘Indias Occidentales,’ Dec., v. 4. J. G. Müller p. 327. ‘Rites and Laws of the Yncas,’ tr. & ed. by C. R. Markham, p. 16, see 81; Prescott, ‘Peru,’ vol. i. p. 86.
624. Bowen, ‘Yoruba Lang.’ p. xvi. in ‘Smithsonian Contr.’ vol. i. See Burton, ‘Dahome,’ vol. ii. p. 142. Details as to thunder-axes, &c., in ‘Early Hist. of Mankind,’ ch. viii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bowen, ‘Yoruba Language.’ p. xvi. in ‘Smithsonian Contributions.’ vol. i. See Burton, ‘Dahomey,’ vol. ii. p. 142. Information about thunder-axes, etc., in ‘Early History of Mankind,’ ch. viii.
625. Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 266.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Steller, ‘Kamchatka,’ p. 266.
626. Klemm, ‘C. G.’ vol. iv. p. 85. (Ossetes, &c.) See Welcker, vol. i. p. 170; Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 158. Bastian, ‘Mensch.’ vol. ii. p. 423 (Ali-sect.).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Klemm, ‘C. G.’ vol. iv. p. 85. (Ossetes, etc.) See Welcker, vol. i. p. 170; Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 158. Bastian, ‘Mensch.’ vol. ii. p. 423 (Ali-sect.).
627. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 39, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 39, etc.
628. ‘Rig-Veda,’ i. 32. 1, 55. 5, 130. 8, 165; iii. 34. 9; vi. 20; x. 44. 9, 89. 9. Max Müller, ‘Lectures,’ 2nd S. p. 427; ‘Chips,’ vol. i. p. 42, vol. ii. p. 323. See Muir, ‘Sanskrit Texts.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Rig-Veda,’ i. 32. 1, 55. 5, 130. 8, 165; iii. 34. 9; vi. 20; x. 44. 9, 89. Max Müller, ‘Lectures,’ 2nd S. p. 427; ‘Chips,’ vol. i. p. 42, vol. ii. p. 323. See Muir, ‘Sanskrit Texts.’
629. Homer. Il. viii. 170, xvii. 595. Ovid. Fast. ii. 69. See Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. ii. p. 194.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Homer. Il. viii. 170, xvii. 595. Ovid. Fast. ii. 69. See Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. ii. p. 194.
630. Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 257.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ p. 257.
631. Grimm, ‘Deutsche Myth.’ ch. viii. Edda; Gylfaginning, 21, 44.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grimm, ‘German Mythology.’ ch. viii. Edda; Gylfaginning, 21, 44.
632. Schoolcraft, ‘Algic Res.’ vol. i. p. 139, vol. ii. p. 214; Loskiel, part i. p. 43; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 190. Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 157; J. G. Müller, p. 56. Further American evidence in Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ pp. 50, 74; Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ p. 267 (Sillagiksartok, Weather-spirit); De la Borde, ‘Caraïbes,’ p. 530 (Carib Star Curumon, makes the billows and upsets canoes).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Schoolcraft, ‘Algic Res.’ vol. i. p. 139, vol. ii. p. 214; Loskiel, part i. p. 43; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 190. Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 157; J. G. Müller, p. 56. More American evidence can be found in Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ pp. 50, 74; Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ p. 267 (Sillagiksartok, Weather-spirit); De la Borde, ‘Caraïbes,’ p. 530 (Carib Star Curumon, creates the waves and tips over canoes).
633. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 329 (compare with the Maori Tempest-god Tawhirimatea, Grey, ‘Polyn. Myth.’ p. 5); Schirren, ‘Wandersage der Neuseeländer,’ &c. p. 85; Yate, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 144. See also Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 115.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 329 (compare with the Maori Tempest-god Tawhirimatea, Grey, ‘Polyn. Myth.’ p. 5); Schirren, ‘New Zealand Wander Saga,’ &c. p. 85; Yate, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 144. See also Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 115.
634. Steller, ‘Kamschatka,’ p. 266.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Steller, ‘Kamschatka,’ p. 266.
635. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ pp. 37, 68.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ pp. 37, 68.
636. Boecler, pp. 106, 147.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Boecler, pp. 106, 147.
637. See also Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. iv. p. 85 (Circassian Water-god and Wind-god).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See also Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. iv. p. 85 (Circassian Water-god and Wind-god).
638. Muir, ‘Sanskrit Texts,’ vol. v. p. 150.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Muir, ‘Sanskrit Texts,’ vol. 5, p. 150.
639. Homer. Il. xxiii. 192, Odyss. xx. 66, 77; Apollon. Rhod. Argonautica; Apollodor. i. 9. 21; Virg. Æn. i. 56; Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. i. p. 707, vol. iii. p. 67.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Homer. Il. 23. 192, Odyss. 20. 66, 77; Apollon. Rhod. Argonautica; Apollodor. 1. 9. 21; Virg. Æn. 1. 56; Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. 1. p. 707, vol. 3. p. 67.
640. Grimm, ‘Deutsche Myth.’ pp. 121, 871.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Grimm, 'German Myth.' pp. 121, 871.
641. Wuttke, ‘Deutsche Volksabergl.’ p. 86.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Wuttke, ‘German Folk Superstitions.’ p. 86.
642. Tanner’s ‘Narrative,’ p. 193; Loskiel, l.c. See also Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 414; J. G. Müller, p. 178 (Antilles).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Tanner’s ‘Narrative,’ p. 193; Loskiel, l.c. See also Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 414; J. G. Müller, p. 178 (Antilles).
643. Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Commentarios Reales,’ i. 10; Rivero & Tschudi, p. 161; J. G. Müller, p. 369.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Royal Commentaries,’ i. 10; Rivero & Tschudi, p. 161; J. G. Müller, p. 369.
644. Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. ii. p. 170.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. ii. p. 170.
645. ‘Report of Ethnological Committee, Jubbulpore Exhibition,’ 1866-7. Nagpore, 1868, part ii. p. 54.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Report of Ethnological Committee, Jubbulpore Exhibition,’ 1866-7. Nagpur, 1868, part ii. p. 54.
646. Macpherson, ‘India,’ chap. vi.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Macpherson, ‘India,’ ch. vi.
647. Georgi, ‘Reise im Russ. Reich,’ vol. i. pp. 275, 317. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth,’ p. 86, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Georgi, 'Journey in the Russian Empire' vol. 1. pp. 275, 317. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth,’ p. 86, &c.
648. Plath, ‘Religion der alten Chinesen,’ part i. pp. 36, 73, part ii. p. 32. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. pp. 86, 354, 413, vol. ii. pp. 67, 380, 455.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Plath, 'Religion of the Ancient Chinese,' part i. pp. 36, 73, part ii. p. 32. Doolittle, 'Chinese,' vol. i. pp. 86, 354, 413, vol. ii. pp. 67, 380, 455.
649. ‘Rig-Veda,’ i. 89. 4, &c., &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Rig-Veda,’ i. 89. 4, etc.
650. Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. i. p. 385, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Welcker, ‘Greek Gods.’ vol. i. p. 385, & etc.
651. Varro de Ling. Lat. iv.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Varro on Language. 4.
652. Tacit. Germania, 40. Grimm, ‘Deutsche Myth.’ p. 229, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Tacit. Germania, 40. Grimm, ‘Deutsche Myth.’ p. 229, &c.
653. Wuttke, ‘Deutsche Volksabergl.’ p. 87.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Wuttke, ‘Deutsche Volksaberglauben.’ p. 87.
654. Liebich, ‘Die Zigeuner,’ pp. 30, 84.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Liebich, ‘The Gypsies,’ pp. 30, 84.
655. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part iii. p. 485; Eastman, ‘Dahcotah,’ pp. i. 118, 161.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part iii. p. 485; Eastman, ‘Dahcotah,’ pp. i. 118, 161.
656. Clavigero, vol. ii. p. 14.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Clavigero, vol. 2, p. 14.
657. Marsden, ‘Sumatra,’ p. 301; see also 303 (Tagals).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Marsden, ‘Sumatra,’ p. 301; see also 303 (Tagals).
658. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 328.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. I p. 328.
659. Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ letter xix.; in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 494. Burton, ‘Dahome,’ vol. ii. p. 141. See also below, chap. xviii. (sacrifice).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ letter xix.; in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 494. Burton, ‘Dahome,’ vol. ii. p. 141. See also below, chap. xviii. (sacrifice).
660. Schlegel, ‘Ewe Sprache,’ p. xiv.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Schlegel, ‘Ewe Language,’ p. xiv.
661. Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Commentarios Reales,’ i. 10, vi. 17; Rivero & Tschudi, ‘Peru,’ p. 161.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Royal Comments,’ i. 10, vi. 17; Rivero & Tschudi, ‘Peru,’ p. 161.
662. Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 265.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Steller, ‘Kamchatka,’ p. 265.
663. Siebold, ‘Nippon,’ part v. p. 9.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Siebold, ‘Nippon,’ vol. 5, p. 9.
664. Herod. vi. 76.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Herod. vi. 76.
665. Cicero, De Natura Deorum, iii. 20.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Cicero, On the Nature of Gods, iii. 20.
666. Homer, Il. i. 538, xiii. 18, xx. 13. Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. i. p. 616 (Nereus), p. 622 (Poseidon). Cox, ‘Mythology of Aryan Nations,’ vol. ii. ch. vi.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Homer, Il. i. 538, xiii. 18, xx. 13. Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. i. p. 616 (Nereus), p. 622 (Poseidon). Cox, ‘Mythology of Aryan Nations,’ vol. ii. ch. vi.
667. Loskiel, ‘Ind. of N. A.’ part i. pp. 41, 45. See also J. G. Müller, p. 55.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Loskiel, ‘Ind. of N. A.’ part i. pp. 41, 45. See also J. G. Müller, p. 55.
668. Irving, ‘Astoria,’ vol. ii. ch. xxii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Irving, ‘Astoria,’ vol. ii. ch. xxii.
669. Torquemada, ‘Monarquia Indiana,’ vi. c. 28, x. c. 22, 30; Brasseur, ‘Mexique,’ vol. iii. pp. 492, 522, 536.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Torquemada, ‘Monarquia Indiana,’ vol. 6, ch. 28, vol. 10, ch. 22, 30; Brasseur, ‘Mexique,’ vol. 3, pp. 492, 522, 536.
670. Schirren, ‘Wandersage der Neuseeländer,’ &c., p. 32; Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ pp. 252, 527.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Schirren, ‘Wandersage der Neuseeländer,’ &c., p. 32; Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ pp. 252, 527.
671. Burton, ‘Dahome,’ vol. ii. p. 148; Schlegel, ‘Ewe Sprache,’ p. xv.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Burton, ‘Dahome,’ vol. II, p. 148; Schlegel, ‘Ewe Sprache,’ p. xv.
672. Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 276.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Steller, ‘Kamchatka,’ p. 276.
673. Batchelor in ‘Tr. As. Soc. Japan,’ vols. x. xvi.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Batchelor in 'Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan,' vol. 10, vol. 16
674. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 57; Billings, ‘N. Russia,’ p. 123 (Yakuts); Bastian, ‘Vorstellungen von Wasser und Feuer,’ in ‘Zeitschr. für Ethnologie,’ vol. i. p. 383 (Mongols).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 57; Billings, ‘N. Russia,’ p. 123 (Yakuts); Bastian, ‘Ideas about Water and Fire,’ in 'Journal of Ethnology,' vol. i. p. 383 (Mongols).
675. Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. vi. p. 85 (Circassia). Welcker, vol. i. p. 663.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Klemm, ‘Culture History.’ vol. vi. p. 85 (Circassia). Welcker, vol. i. p. 663.
676. See ‘Records of the Past,’ vol. iii. p. 137, vol. ix. p. 143; Sayce, ‘Lectures on Rel. of Ancient Babylonians,’ p. 170. For accounts of Semitic fire-worship, see Movers, ‘Phönizier,’ vol. i. p. 327, &c., 337, &c., 401.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See ‘Records of the Past,’ vol. iii. p. 137, vol. ix. p. 143; Sayce, ‘Lectures on Rel. of Ancient Babylonians,’ p. 170. For accounts of Semitic fire-worship, see Movers, ‘Phönizier,’ vol. i. p. 327, &c., 337, &c., 401.
677. ‘Rig-Veda,’ i. 1. 1, 19. 2, iii. 1. 18, &c.; Max Müller, vol. i. p. 39; Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. p. 53. Haug, ‘Essays on Parsis,’ iv.; ‘Early Hist. of Mankind,’ p. 255.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Rig-Veda,’ i. 1. 1, 19. 2, iii. 1. 18, &c.; Max Müller, vol. i. p. 39; Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. p. 53. Haug, ‘Essays on Parsis,’ iv.; ‘Early Hist. of Mankind,’ p. 255.
678. Hanway, ‘Journal of Travels,’ London, 1753, vol. i. ch. lvii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hanway, ‘Journal of Travels,’ London, 1753, vol. i. ch. lvii.
679. Diog. Lært. Proœm. ii. 6. Sextus Empiricus adv. Physicos, ix.; Strabo, xv. 3, 13.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Diog. Lært. Proœm. ii. 6. Sextus Empiricus against the Physicists, ix.; Strabo, xv. 3, 13.
680. John Wilson, ‘The Parsi Religion,’ ch. iv.; ‘Avesta,’ tr. by Spiegel, Yacna, i. lxi.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.John Wilson, ‘The Parsi Religion,’ ch. iv.; ‘Avesta,’ tr. by Spiegel, Yacna, i. lxi.
681. Max Müller, ‘Chips,’ vol. i. p. 169. Haug, ‘Essays on Parsis,’ p. 281.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Max Müller, ‘Chips,’ vol. 1. p. 169. Haug, ‘Essays on Parsis,’ p. 281.
682. Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ pp. 88, 98.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ pp. 88, 98.
683. Homer. Hymn. Aphrod. 29, Hestia 1. Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. ii. pp. 686, 691.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Homer. Hymn. Aphrod. 29, Hestia 1. Welcker, ‘Greek Gods.’ vol. ii. pp. 686, 691.
684. Ovid. Fast. vi. 295.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ovid. The Fast. vi. 295.
685. Boecler, ‘Ehsten Abergl.’ p. 29, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Boecler, ‘Ehsten Abergl.’ p. 29, etc.
686. Wuttke, ‘Volksabergl.’ p. 86. Grohmann, ‘Aberglauben aus Böhmen,’ p. 41.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Wuttke, ‘Volksabergl.’ p. 86. Grohmann, ‘Aberglauben aus Böhmen,’ p. 41.
687. D’Orbigny, ‘L’Homme Américain,’ vol. i. p. 242.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. D’Orbigny, ‘L'Homme Américain,’ vol. I, p. 242.
688. Herod, i. 216, iv. 184. Baker, ‘Albert Nyanza,’ vol. i. p. 144.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Herod, 1:216, 4:184. Baker, ‘Albert Nyanza,’ vol. 1 p. 144.
689. Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. iii. p. 181 (Hudson’s B., Pottawatomies), 205 (Virginians). J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ p. 117 (Delawares, Sioux, Mingos, &c.). Sproat, ‘Ind. of Vancouver’s I.’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. v. p. 253. Loskiel, ‘Ind. of N. A.’ part i. p. 43 (Delawares). Hennepin, ‘Voyage dans l’Amérique,’ p. 302 (Sioux), &c. Bartram, ‘Creek and Cherokee Ind.’ in ‘Tr. Amer. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. part i. pp. 20, 26; see also Schoolcraft, ‘Ind. Tribes,’ part ii. p. 127 (Comanches, &c.); Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 164; Gregg, vol. ii. p. 238 (Shawnees); but compare the remarks of Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 141.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. iii. p. 181 (Hudson’s B., Pottawatomies), 205 (Virginians). J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ p. 117 (Delawares, Sioux, Mingos, etc.). Sproat, ‘Ind. of Vancouver’s I.’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. v. p. 253. Loskiel, ‘Ind. of N. A.’ part i. p. 43 (Delawares). Hennepin, "Journey through America," p. 302 (Sioux), etc. Bartram, ‘Creek and Cherokee Ind.’ in ‘Tr. Amer. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. part i. pp. 20, 26; see also Schoolcraft, ‘Ind. Tribes,’ part ii. p. 127 (Comanches, etc.); Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 164; Gregg, vol. ii. p. 238 (Shawnees); but compare the remarks of Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 141.
690. Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 327 (Botocudos). Waitz, vol. iii. p. 518 (Araucanians). Dobrizhoffer, vol. ii. p. 89 (Puelches). Charlevoix, ‘Hist. du Paraguay,’ vol. i. p. 331 (Diaguitas). J. G. Müller, p. 255 (Botocudos, Aucas, Diaguitas).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 327 (Botocudos). Waitz, vol. iii. p. 518 (Araucanians). Dobrizhoffer, vol. ii. p. 89 (Puelches). Charlevoix, ‘Hist. du Paraguay,’ vol. i. p. 331 (Diaguitas). J. G. Müller, p. 255 (Botocudos, Aucas, Diaguitas).
691. Charlevoix, ‘Nouvelle France,’ vol. vi. p. 172; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 217.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Charlevoix, "New France," vol. vi, p. 172; Waitz, vol. iii, p. 217.
692. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ book ii. ch. viii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ book 2, ch. 8
693. Torquemada, ‘Monarquia Indiana,’ ix. c. 34; Sahagun, ‘Hist. de Nueva España,’ ii. App. in Kingsborough, ‘Antiquities of Mexico;’ Waitz, vol. iv. p. 138; J. G. Müller, p. 474, &c.; Brasseur, ‘Mexique,’ vol. iii. p. 487; Tylor, ‘Mexico,’ p. 141.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Torquemada, ‘Monarquia Indiana,’ ix. c. 34; Sahagun, ‘Hist. de Nueva España,’ ii. App. in Kingsborough, ‘Antiquities of Mexico;’ Waitz, vol. iv. p. 138; J. G. Müller, p. 474, &c. Brasseur, ‘Mexique,’ vol. iii. p. 487; Tylor, ‘Mexico,’ p. 141.
694. Piedrahita, ‘Hist. Gen. de las Conquistas del Nuevo Reyno de Granada,’ Antwerp, 1688: part i. book i. c. iii. iv.; Humboldt, ‘Vues des Cordillères;’ Waitz, vol. iv. p. 352, &c.; J. G. Müller, p. 432, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Piedrahita, ‘General History of the Conquests of the New Kingdom of Granada,’ Antwerp, 1688: part i. book i. c. iii. iv.; Humboldt, ‘Vues des Cordillères;’ Waitz, vol. iv. p. 352, &c.; J. G. Müller, p. 432, &c.
695. Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Commentarios Reales,’ lib. i. c. 15, &c., iii. c. 20; v. c. 2, 6; ‘Rites and Laws of the Yncas,’ tr. & ed. by C. R. Markham, (Hakluyt Soc., 1873) p. 84; Prescott, ‘Peru,’ book i. ch. iii.; Waitz, vol. iv. p. 447, &c.; J. G. Müller, p. 362, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Royal Commentaries,’ lib. i. c. 15, &c., iii. c. 20; v. c. 2, 6; ‘Rites and Laws of the Yncas,’ tr. & ed. by C. R. Markham, (Hakluyt Soc., 1873) p. 84; Prescott, ‘Peru,’ book i. ch. iii.; Waitz, vol. iv. p. 447, &c.; J. G. Müller, p. 362, &c.
696. Meiners, ‘Gesch. der Rel.’ vol. i. p. 383. Burton, ‘Central Afr.’ vol. ii. p. 346; ‘Dahome,’ vol. ii. p. 147.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Meiners, 'History of Religion' vol. i. p. 383. Burton, ‘Central Afr.’ vol. ii. p. 346; ‘Dahome,’ vol. ii. p. 147.
697. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ pp. 167, 175 (Bodos, &c.).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ pp. 167, 175 (Bodos, etc.).
698. Dalton, ‘Kols,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vi. p. 33 (Oraons, &c.); Hunter, ‘Annals of Rural Bengal,’ p. 184 (Santals).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Dalton, ‘Kols,’ in ‘Transactions of the Ethnological Society,’ vol. vi. p. 33 (Oraons, etc.); Hunter, ‘Annals of Rural Bengal,’ p. 184 (Santals).
699. Macpherson, ‘India,’ p. 84, &c. (Khonds).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Macpherson, ‘India,’ p. 84, etc. (Khonds).
700. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ pp. 16, 51, &c. Meiners, l.c. Georgi, ‘Reise im Russ. Reich.’ vol. i. pp. 275, 317. Klemm, ‘Cultur-Geschichte,’ vol. iii. p. 87. Sun-Worship in Japan, Siebold, ‘Nippon,’ part v. p. 9. For further evidence as to savage and barbaric worship of the Sun as Supreme Deity, see chap. xvii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Castrén, 'Finn. Myth.' pp. 16, 51, &c. Meiners, l.c. Georgi, 'Travel in the Russian Empire.' vol. i. pp. 275, 317. Klemm, 'Cultural History,' vol. iii. p. 87. Sun-Worship in Japan, Siebold, 'Nippon,' part v. p. 9. For more evidence about primitive and barbaric worship of the Sun as the Supreme Deity, see chap. xvii.
701. ‘Rig-Veda,’ i. 35, 50; iii. 62, 10. Max Müller, ‘Lectures,’ 2nd Ser. pp. 378, 411; ‘Chips,’ vol. i. p. 19. Colebrooke, ‘Essays,’ vol. i. pp. 30, 133. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. p. 42.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Rig-Veda,’ i. 35, 50; iii. 62, 10. Max Müller, ‘Lectures,’ 2nd Ser. pp. 378, 411; ‘Chips,’ vol. i. p. 19. Colebrooke, ‘Essays,’ vol. i. pp. 30, 133. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. p. 42.
702. ‘Khordah-Avesta,’ xxvi. in Avesta tr. by Spiegel, vol. iii.; M. Haug, ‘Essays on Parsis.’ Strabo, xv. 3, 13. Nonnus, xl. 400. Movers, ‘Phönizier,’ vol. i. p. 180: ‘Ἡλίῳ Μίθρᾳ ἀνικήτῳ’; ‘Διὸς ἀνικήτον Ἡλίου.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Khordah-Avesta,’ xxvi. in Avesta tr. by Spiegel, vol. iii.; M. Haug, ‘Essays on Parsis.’ Strabo, xv. 3, 13. Nonnus, xl. 400. Movers, ‘Phönizier,’ vol. i. p. 180: ‘To the invincible Mithras of the Sun’; ‘To the invincible Zeus of the Sun.’
703. Plat. Sympos. xxxvi. See Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterlehre,’ vol. i. pp. 400, 412.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Plat. Sympos. 36. See Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterlehre,’ Vol. I pp. 400, 412.
704. Cæsar de Bello Gallico, vi. 21: ‘Deorum numero eos solos ducunt, quos cernunt et quorum aperte opibus juvantur, Solem et Vulcanum et Lunam, reliquos ne fama quidem acceperunt.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Cæsar de Bello Gallico, vi. 21: "They only worship the gods they can see and who obviously help them, like the Sun, Vulcan, and the Moon; they haven't even heard of the others."
705. Cicero de Natura Deorum, iii. 21.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Cicero on the Nature of the Gods, iii. 21.
706. See Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Egyptians’; Renouf, ‘Religion of Ancient Egypt.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Egyptians’; Renouf, ‘Religion of Ancient Egypt.’
707. Deut. iv. 19, xvii. 3; 2 Kings xxiii. 11.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Deut. 4:19, 17:3; 2 Kings 23:11.
708. Movers, ‘Phönizier,’ vol. i. pp. 162, 180, &c. Lamprid. Heliogabal. i.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Movers, ‘Phoenicians,’ vol. i. pp. 162, 180, &c. Lamprid. Heliogabal. i.
709. Euseb. Præparat. Evang. i. 6.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Euseb. Prep. Evang. i. 6.
710. Neander, ‘Church History,’ vol. vi. p. 341. Carsten Niebuhr, ‘Reisebeschr.’ vol. ii. p. 396.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Neander, ‘Church History,’ vol. 6, p. 341. Carsten Niebuhr, ‘Reisebeschr.’ vol. 2, p. 396.
711. Palgrave, ‘Arabia,’ vol. i. p. 9; vol. ii. p. 258. See Koran, xli. 37.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Palgrave, ‘Arabia,’ vol. i. p. 9; vol. ii. p. 258. See Quran, xli. 37.
712. Tertullian. Apolog. adv. Gentes, xvi. See Lucian. de Saltat. xvii.; compare Job. xxxi. 26.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Tertullian. Apolog. against the Gentiles, xvi. See Lucian. on Dancing. xvii.; compare Job. xxxi. 26.
713. Leo. I. Serm. viii. in Natal. Dom.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Leo. I. Serm. VIII. in Natal. Dom.
714. Wuttke, ‘Volksaberglaube,’ p. 150.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Wuttke, ‘Volksaberglaube,’ p. 150.
715. Grimm, ‘Deutsche Myth.’ p. 581, &c. Wuttke, pp. 17, 93. Brand, ‘Pop. Ant.’ vol. i. p. 157, &c. ‘Early Hist. of Mankind,’ p. 260. Murray’s ‘Handbook for Syria and Palestine,’ 1868, p. 162.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grimm, ‘Deutsche Myth.’ p. 581, etc. Wuttke, pp. 17, 93. Brand, ‘Pop. Ant.’ vol. i. p. 157, etc. ‘Early Hist. of Mankind,’ p. 260. Murray’s ‘Handbook for Syria and Palestine,’ 1868, p. 162.
716. See Pauly, ‘Real-Encyclop.’ s.v. ‘Sol;’ Petavius, ‘Juliani Imp. Opera,’ 290-2, 277. Bingham, ‘Antiquities of Christian Church,’ book xx. ch. iv.; Neander, ‘Church Hist.’ vol. iii. p. 437; Beausobre, ‘Hist. de Manichée,’ vol. ii. p. 691; Gibbon, ch. xxii.; Creuzer, ‘Symbolik,’ vol. i. p. 761, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See Pauly, ‘Real-Encyclop.’ s.v. ‘Sol;’ Petavius, ‘Juliani Imp. Opera,’ 290-2, 277. Bingham, ‘Antiquities of Christian Church,’ book xx. ch. iv.; Neander, ‘Church Hist.’ vol. iii. p. 437; Beausobre, ‘Hist. de Manichée,’ vol. ii. p. 691; Gibbon, ch. xxii.; Creuzer, ‘Symbolik,’ vol. i. p. 761, &c.
717. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ pp. 593, 1223. Brand, ‘Popular Antiquities,’ vol. i. p. 467. Monnier, ‘Traditions Populaires,’ p. 188.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grimm, ‘D. M.’ pp. 593, 1223. Brand, ‘Popular Antiquities,’ vol. i. p. 467. Monnier, ‘Traditions Populaires,’ p. 188.
718. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 583; Brand, vol. i. p. 298; Wuttke, pp. 14, 140. Beausobre, l.c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 583; Brand, vol. i. p. 298; Wuttke, pp. 14, 140. Beausobre, l.c.
719. Spix and Martius, ‘Reise in Brasilien,’ vol. i. pp. 377, 381; Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 327; Pr. Max. v. Wied, vol. ii. p. 58; J. G. Müller, pp. 218, 254; also Musters, ‘Patagonians,’ pp. 58, 179.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Spix and Martius, ‘Journey in Brazil,’ vol. i. pp. 377, 381; Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 327; Pr. Max. v. Wied, vol. ii. p. 58; J. G. Müller, pp. 218, 254; also Musters, ‘Patagonians,’ pp. 58, 179.
720. De la Borde, ‘Caraibes,’ p. 525.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. De la Borde, ‘Caribbean,’ p. 525.
721. Sproat, ‘Savage Life,’ p. 206; ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. v. p. 253.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Sproat, ‘Savage Life,’ p. 206; ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. v. p. 253.
722. Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1635, p. 34.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1635, p. 34.
723. Livingstone, ‘S. Afr.’ p. 235; Waitz, vol. ii. pp. 175, 342.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Livingstone, ‘S. Afr.’ p. 235; Waitz, vol. ii. pp. 175, 342.
724. Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 84; Du Chaillu, ‘Ashango-land,’ p. 428; see Purchas, vol. v. p. 766. Müller, ‘Fetu,’ p. 47.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 84; Du Chaillu, ‘Ashango-land,’ p. 428; see Purchas, vol. v. p. 766. Müller, ‘Fetu,’ p. 47.
725. Merolla, ‘Congo,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 273.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Merolla, ‘Congo,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 273.
726. Kolbe, ‘Beschryving van de Kaap de Goede Hoop,’ part i. xxix. See ante, vol. i. p. 355.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Kolbe, ‘Description of the Cape of Good Hope,’ part i. xxix. See above, vol. i. p. 355.
727. Loskiel, ‘Ind. of N. A.’ part i. p. 43.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Loskiel, ‘Ind. of N. A.’ part i. p. 43.
728. Bickmore, ‘Ainos,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vii. p. 20.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bickmore, ‘Ainos,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vii. p. 20.
729. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ p. 167.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ p. 167.
730. Georgi, ‘Reise im Russ. R.’ vol. i. p. 275.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Georgi, ‘Journey in Russ. R.’ vol. i. p. 275.
731. Clavigero, ‘Messico,’ vol. ii. pp. 9, 35; Tylor, ‘Mexico,’ l.c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Clavigero, ‘Mexico,’ vol. ii. pp. 9, 35; Tylor, ‘Mexico,’ l.c.
732. Waitz, vol. iv. p. 362.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Waitz, vol. IV, p. 362.
733. Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Commentarios Reales,’ iii. 21.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Commentarios Reales,’ III. 21.
734. Siebold, ‘Nippon,’ part v. p. 9.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Siebold, ‘Nippon,’ vol. 5, p. 9.
735. Deuteron. xvii. 3; Polyb. vii. 9; see Movers, ‘Phönizier,’ pp. 159, 536, 605.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Deuteron. 17. 3; Polyb. 7. 9; see Movers, ‘Phönizier,’ pp. 159, 536, 605.
736. Lucian. de Syria Dea, iv. 34.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Lucian. of Syria Dea, iv. 34.
737. Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Egyptians,’ ed. by Birch, vol. iii. p. 174. See Plutarch. Is. et Osir.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Egyptians,’ ed. by Birch, vol. iii. p. 174. See Plutarch. Is. et Osir.
738. Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. i. p. 550, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Welcker, ‘Greek Gods’ vol. i. p. 550, &c.
739. Cic. de Nat. Deor. ii. 27.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Cicero on the Nature of the Gods, II. 27.
740. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ ch. xxii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Grimm, 'D. M.' ch. xxii.
741. Akerblad, ‘Lettre à Italinsky.’ Burton, ‘Central Afr.’ vol. ii. p. 346. Mungo Park, ‘Travels,’ in ‘Pinkerton,’ vol. xvi. p. 875.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Akerblad, ‘Letter to Italinsky.’ Burton, ‘Central Africa’ vol. ii. p. 346. Mungo Park, ‘Travels,’ in ‘Pinkerton,’ vol. xvi. p. 875.
742. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ pp. 29, 667; Brand, vol. iii. p. 146; Forbes Leslie, ‘Early Races of Scotland,’ vol. i. p. 136.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grimm, ‘D. M.’ pp. 29, 667; Brand, vol. iii. p. 146; Forbes Leslie, ‘Early Races of Scotland,’ vol. i. p. 136.
743. Herrera, ‘Indias Occidentales,’ Dec. i. 3, 3; J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 175, 221.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Herrera, ‘West Indies,’ Dec. i. 3, 3; J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 175, 221.
744. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 174.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 174.
745. Rivero and Tschudi, ‘Peru,’ p. 160.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Rivero and Tschudi, ‘Peru,’ p. 160.
746. Kingsborough, ‘Mexico,’ vol. v. p. 179.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Kingsborough, ‘Mexico,’ vol. 5, p. 179.
747. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 89.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Castrén, ‘Finnish Myth.’ p. 89.
748. Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. i. p. 371.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. i. p. 371.
749. Ovid. Fast. ii. 449.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ovid. Fast. II. 449.
750. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. p. 264.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. I, p. 264.
751. Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 158.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 158.
752. De Laet, ‘Novus Orbis,’ xv. 2; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 417; Brinson, pp. 152, 185; J. G. Müller, p. 271, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.De Laet, ‘New World,’ xv. 2; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 417; Brinson, pp. 152, 185; J. G. Müller, p. 271, &c.
753. D’Orbigny, ‘L’Homme Américain,’ vol. ii. p. 319.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. D’Orbigny, ‘The American Man,’ vol. ii, p. 319.
754. Clavigero, ‘Messico,’ vol. ii. pp. 16, 68, 75.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Clavigero, ‘Mexico,’ vol. ii. pp. 16, 68, 75.
755. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 333. Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 115.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ellis, ‘Polynesian Research’ vol. 1. p. 333. Mariner, ‘Tonga Islands’ vol. 2. p. 115.
756. Cross, in ‘Journ. Amer. Oriental Soc.’ vol. iv. p. 316; Mason, p. 215.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Cross, in ‘Journ. Amer. Oriental Soc.’ vol. iv. p. 316; Mason, p. 215.
757. Macpherson, ‘India,’ pp. 91, 355.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Macpherson, ‘India,’ pp. 91, 355.
758. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 89.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 89.
759. Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. ii. p. 467. Cox, ‘Mythology of Aryan Nations,’ vol. ii. p. 308.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Welcker, ‘Greek Gods’ vol. 2, p. 467. Cox, ‘Mythology of Aryan Nations,’ vol. 2, p. 308.
760. J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 141, 271, 274, 591, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 141, 271, 274, 591, &c.
761. Dobrizhoffer, ‘Abipones,’ vol. ii. p. 90.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Dobrizhoffer, ‘Abipones,’ vol. 2, p. 90.
762. Clavigero, ‘Messico,’ vol. ii. pp. 17, 81.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Clavigero, ‘Mexico,’ vol. ii, pp. 17, 81.
763. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 326; vol. iv. p. 158. See also Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 112; Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 218.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 326; vol. iv. p. 158. See also Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 112; Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 218.
764. Macpherson, ‘India,’ pp. 90, 360.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Macpherson, ‘India,’ pp. 90, 360.
765. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. p. 267.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. p. 267.
766. Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. i. p. 413. Cox, ‘Myth. of Aryan N.,’ vol. ii. pp. 254, 311.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Welcker, 'Greek Gods.' vol. 1. p. 413. Cox, ‘Myth. of Aryan N.,’ vol. 2. pp. 254, 311.
767. J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 137, &c., 272, 286, &c., 500, &c. See Sproat, p. 213 (Ahts), cited ante, p. 85. Chay-her signifies not only the world below, but Death personified as a boneless greybeard who wanders at night stealing men’s souls away.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 137, &c., 272, 286, &c., 500, &c. See Sproat, p. 213 (Ahts), cited ante, p. 85. Chay-her means not just the underworld, but also represents Death as a boneless old man who roams around at night stealing people's souls.
768. Lery, ‘Bresil,’ p. 234.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Lery, ‘Brazil,’ p. 234.
769. Clavigero, vol. ii. pp. 14, 17; Brasseur, ‘Mexique,’ vol. iii. p. 495.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Clavigero, vol. ii. pp. 14, 17; Brasseur, ‘Mexique,’ vol. iii. p. 495.
770. ‘Rites and Laws of Yncas,’ tr. and ed. by C. R. Markham, pp. 32, 48 (prayer from MS. communication by C. R. M.); Garcilaso de la Vega, lib. ii. c. 2, 7; Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 251.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Rites and Laws of the Incas,’ tr. and ed. by C. R. Markham, pp. 32, 48 (prayer from MS. communication by C. R. M.); Garcilaso de la Vega, lib. ii. c. 2, 7; Brinton, ‘Myths of the New World,’ p. 251.
771. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 237; Farmer, ‘Tonga,’ p. 126. Yate, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 140; J. Williams, ‘Missionary Enterprise,’ p. 145. See Schirren, ‘Wandersagen der Neuseeländer,’ p. 89; Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 246.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 237; Farmer, ‘Tonga,’ p. 126. Yate, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 140; J. Williams, ‘Missionary Enterprise,’ p. 145. See Schirren, ‘Wandersagen der Neuseeländer,’ p. 89; Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 246.
772. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ pp. 128, 147, 155; Waitz, vol. ii. p. 171 (Africa).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ pp. 128, 147, 155; Waitz, vol. ii. p. 171 (Africa).
773. Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterl.’ vol. i. p. 395; Roscher, s.v. ‘Hades.’ Grimm, ‘Deutsch. Myth.’ p. 288.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Welcker, ‘Greek Gods.’ vol. i. p. 395; Roscher, s.v. ‘Hades.’ Grimm, ‘German Mythology.’ p. 288.
774. Brugsch, ‘Religion der alten Aegypter’; ‘Book of Dead.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Brugsch, Ancient Egyptian Religion; ‘Book of the Dead.’
775. Pr. Max. v. Wied, ‘N. Amerika,’ vol. ii. p. 157.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Pr. Max. v. Wied, ‘N. Amerika,’ vol. ii. p. 157.
776. J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 133, &c., 228, 255. Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. i. pp. 159, 177; Pr. Max v. Wied, vol. ii. pp. 149, &c. Compare Sproat, ‘Savage Life,’ p. 179 (Quawteaht the Great Spirit is also First Man).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ pp. 133, &c., 228, 255. Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. i. pp. 159, 177; Pr. Max v. Wied, vol. ii. pp. 149, &c. Compare Sproat, ‘Savage Life,’ p. 179 (Quawteaht the Great Spirit is also First Man).
777. D’Orbigny, ‘L’Homme Américain,’ vol. ii. p. 319.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. D’Orbigny, ‘L’Homme Américain,’ vol. 2, p. 319.
778. Schirren, ‘Wandersagen der Neuseeländer,’ p. 64, &c., 88, &c. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 111, vol. iv. pp. 145, 366.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Schirren, ‘New Zealand Legends’ p. 64, &c., 88, &c. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 111, vol. iv. pp. 145, 366.
779. Steller, ‘Kamtschatka,’ p. 271.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Steller, ‘Kamchatka,’ p. 271.
780. Callaway, ‘Religion of Amazulu,’ pp. 1-104.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Callaway, ‘Amazulu Religion,’ pp. 1-104.
781. ‘Rig-Veda,’ x. ‘Atharva-Veda,’ xviii. Max Müller, ‘Lectures,’ 2nd Ser. p. 514. Muir, ‘Yama,’ &c., in ‘Journ. As. Soc. N. S.’ vol. i. 1865. Roth in ‘Ztschr. Deutsch. Morgenl. G.’ vol. iv. p. 426. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. p. 60. Avesta: ‘Vendidad,’ ii. Pictet, ‘Origines Indo-Europ.’ part ii. p. 621.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Rig-Veda,’ x. ‘Atharva-Veda,’ xviii. Max Müller, ‘Lectures,’ 2nd Ser. p. 514. Muir, ‘Yama,’ &c., in ‘Journ. As. Soc. N. S.’ vol. i. 1865. Roth in ‘Ztschr. Deutsch. Morgenl. G.’ vol. iv. p. 426. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. p. 60. Avesta: ‘Vendidad,’ ii. Pictet, ‘Origines Indo-Europ.’ part ii. p. 621.
782. Eisenmenger, part i. p. 365.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Eisenmenger, vol. I p. 365.
783. Koran, ii. 28, vii. 10, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Quran, 2:28, 7:10, etc.
784. Neander, ‘Hist. of Chr.’ vol. ii. pp. 81, 109, 174.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Neander, ‘History of Christianity’ vol. ii. pp. 81, 109, 174.
785. Oldfield in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 228. See also Eyre, vol. ii. p. 356; Lang, ‘Queensland,’ p. 444.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Oldfield in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 228. See also Eyre, vol. ii. p. 356; Lang, ‘Queensland,’ p. 444.
786. Loskiel, ‘Gesch. der Mission unter den Ind. in Nord-Amer.’ part i. ch. 3.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Loskiel, 'History of the Mission among the Indians in North America' part i. ch. 3.
787. Callaway, ‘Rel. of Amazulu,’ p. 348.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Callaway, ‘Rel. of Amazulu,’ p. 348.
788. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 416. See J. G. Müller, p. 207.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Rochefort, ‘Caribbean Islands,’ p. 416. See J. G. Müller, p. 207.
789. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part v. p. 632; see part i. p. 316, part vi. p. 166; ‘Iroquois,’ p. 36, see 237; Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 63.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part v. p. 632; see part i. p. 316, part vi. p. 166; ‘Iroquois,’ p. 36, see 237; Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 63.
790. Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jésuites dans la Nouvelle France,’ 1635, p. 34, 1636, p. 100. Sagard, ‘Histoire du Canada,’ Paris, 1636, p. 490. L. H. Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 156. See ante, vol. i. pp. 288, 349.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Brebeuf in 'Reports of the Jesuits in New France,' 1635, p. 34, 1636, p. 100. Sagard, 'History of Canada,' Paris, 1636, p. 490. L. H. Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 156. See ante, vol. i. pp. 288, 349.
791. Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. iii. pp. 182, 330, 335, 345; Le Jeune in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1637, p. 49; La Potherie, ‘Hist. de l’Amér. Septentrionale,’ Paris, 1722, vol. i. p. 121; J. G. Müller, p. 149, &c. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. p. 35, &c., 320, 412; Catlin, vol. i. p. 156; Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ p. 263.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Waitz, ‘Anthropology,’ vol. iii. pp. 182, 330, 335, 345; Le Jeune in ‘Jesuit Relations’ 1637, p. 49; La Potherie, ‘History of North America,’ Paris, 1722, vol. i. p. 121; J. G. Müller, p. 149, &c. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. p. 35, &c., 320, 412; Catlin, vol. i. p. 156; Cranz, ‘Greenland,’ p. 263.
792. Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. pp. 327, 485, 583, 645, see 247, 393, 427, 696. See also J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrelig.’ pp. 259, &c., 403, 423; D’Orbigny, ‘L’Homme Américain,’ vol. i. p. 405, vol. ii. p. 257; Falkner, ‘Patagonia,’ p. 114; Musters, ‘Patagonians,’ p. 179; Fitzroy, ‘Voy. of Adventure and Beagle,’ vol. i. pp. 180, 190.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. pp. 327, 485, 583, 645, see 247, 393, 427, 696. See also J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrelig.’ pp. 259, &c., 403, 423; D’Orbigny, 'The American Man' vol. i. p. 405, vol. ii. p. 257; Falkner, ‘Patagonia,’ p. 114; Musters, ‘Patagonians,’ p. 179; Fitzroy, ‘Voy. of Adventure and Beagle,’ vol. i. pp. 180, 190.
793. Piedrahita, ‘Hist. de Neuv. Granada,’ part i. book i. ch. 3.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Piedrahita, ‘History of New Granada,’ part i. book i. ch. 3.
794. Molina, ‘Hist. of Chili,’ vol. ii. p. 84; Febres, ‘Diccionario Chileño,’ s.v.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Molina, ‘History of Chili,’ Vol. II. p. 84; Febres, ‘Chilean Dictionary,’ s.v.
795. Proyart, ‘Loango,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 504. Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 109. See Kolbe, ‘Kaap de Goede Hoop,’ part i. xxix.: Waitz, vol. ii. p. 342 (Hottentots).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Proyart, ‘Loango,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 504. Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 109. See Kolbe, ‘Kaap de Goede Hoop,’ part i. xxix.: Waitz, vol. ii. p. 342 (Hottentots).
796. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ pp. 217, 387. Waitz, vol. ii. p. 173.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ pp. 217, 387. Waitz, vol. 2. p. 173.
797. Birch, in Bunsen, vol. v. p. 136. Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Eg.’ &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Birch, in Bunsen, vol. 5, p. 136. Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Eg.’ &c.
798. Macpherson, ‘India,’ p. 84.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Macpherson, ‘India,’ p. 84.
799. Avesta, tr. by Spiegel. Vendidad, i.; ‘Khorda-Avesta.’ xlv. xlvi. Max Müller, ‘Lectures,’ 1st Ser. p. 208.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Avesta, tr. by Spiegel. Vendidad, i.; ‘Khorda-Avesta.’ 45 46 Max Müller, ‘Lectures,’ 1st Ser. p. 208.
800. Layard, ‘Nineveh,’ vol. i. p. 297; Ainsworth, ‘Izedis,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. i. p. 11.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Layard, ‘Nineveh,’ vol. 1. p. 297; Ainsworth, ‘Izedis,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. 1. p. 11.
801. Beausobre, ‘Hist. de Manichée,’ &c. Neander, ‘Hist. of Christian Religion,’ vol. ii. p. 157, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Beausobre, ‘History of Manichaeism,’ etc. Neander, ‘History of Christian Religion,’ vol. ii. p. 157, etc.
802. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 155.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 155.
803. Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. vi. p. 85.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. 6, p. 85.
804. ‘Études Philologiques sur quelques Langues Sauvages de l’Amérique,’ par N. O. (J. A. Cuoq.) Montreal, 1866, p. 14. Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 53. Schoolcraft, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 33.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__."Philological Studies on Certain Native Languages of America," by N. O. (J. A. Cuoq.) Montreal, 1866, p. 14. Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 53. Schoolcraft, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 33.
805. De la Borde, ‘Caraibes,’ p. 524. J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrel.’ p. 228.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.De la Borde, ‘Caribbean,’ p. 524. J. G. Müller, ‘American Originals,’ p. 228.
806. Dobrizhoffer, ‘Abipones,’ vol. ii. p. 89.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Dobrizhoffer, ‘Abipones,’ vol. 2, p. 89.
807. Hutchinson, ‘Chaco Ind.’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 327.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hutchinson, ‘Chaco Ind.’ in ‘Trans. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 327.
808. D’Orbigny, ‘L’Homme Américain,’ vol. ii. p. 319.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. D’Orbigny, ‘L’Homme Américain,’ vol. II, p. 319.
809. Molina, ‘Hist. of Chili,’ vol. ii. p. 84, &c. Compare Febres, ‘Diccionario Chileño.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Molina, ‘Hist. of Chili,’ vol. ii. p. 84, &c. Compare Febres, ‘Chilean Dictionary.’
810. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 415. Musters, ‘Patagonians,’ p. 179.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Rochefort, ‘Antilles Islands,’ p. 415. Musters, ‘Patagonians,’ p. 179.
811. ‘Narratives of the Rites and Laws of the Yncas,’ trans. from the original Spanish MSS., and ed. by C. R. Markham, Hakluyt Soc. 1873, p. ix. 5, 16, 30, 76, 84, 154, &c. The above remarks are based on the early evidence here printed for the first time, and on private suggestions for which I am also indebted to Mr. Markham. The title Pachacamac has been also considered to mean Animator or Soul of the World, camani = I create, camac = creator, cama = soul (note to 2nd ed.). Garcilaso de la Vega, lib. i., ii. c. 2, iii. c. 20; Herrera, dec. v. 4; Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 177, see 142; Rivero and Tschudi, ‘Peruvian Antiquities,’ ch. vii.; Waitz, vol. iv. p. 447; J. G. Müller, p. 317, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Narratives of the Rites and Laws of the Yncas,’ trans. from the original Spanish MSS., and ed. by C. R. Markham, Hakluyt Soc. 1873, p. ix. 5, 16, 30, 76, 84, 154, &c. The comments above are based on the early evidence printed here for the first time and on private suggestions I'm also grateful to Mr. Markham for. The title Pachacamac is also thought to mean Animator or Soul of the World, where camani = I create, camac = creator, cama = soul (note to 2nd ed.). Garcilaso de la Vega, lib. i., ii. c. 2, iii. c. 20; Herrera, dec. v. 4; Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 177, see 142; Rivero and Tschudi, ‘Peruvian Antiquities,’ ch. vii.; Waitz, vol. iv. p. 447; J. G. Müller, p. 317, &c.
812. Sagard, ‘Hist. du Canada,’ p. 490. Hennepin, ‘Voy. dans l’Amérique,’ p. 302. Gregg, ‘Commerce of Prairies,’ vol. ii. p. 237.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Sagard, ‘History of Canada,’ p. 490. Hennepin, ‘Go. to America,’ p. 302. Gregg, ‘Commerce of Prairies,’ vol. ii. p. 237.
813. Le Jeune, ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1637, p. 49; Brinton, p. 52; Lafitau, ‘Mœurs des Sauvages Amériquains,’ vol. i. pp. 126, 145 (note to 3rd ed.).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Le Jeune, ‘Jesuit Relations’ 1637, p. 49; Brinton, p. 52; Lafitau, 'Customs of American Savages,' vol. i. pp. 126, 145 (note to 3rd ed.).
814. Egede, ‘Descr. of Greenland,’ ch. xviii.; Cranz, ‘Grönland,’ p. 263; Rink, ‘Eskimoiske Eventyr,’ &c., p. 28.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Egede, ‘Description of Greenland,’ ch. xviii.; Cranz, ‘Greenland,’ p. 263; Rink, ‘Eskimo Tales,’ &c., p. 28.
815. Le Jeune, 1633, p. 16; 1634, p. 13.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Le Jeune, 1633, p. 16; 1634, p. 13.
816. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. p. 15.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part I, p. 15.
817. Cartier, ‘Relation;’ Hakluyt, vol. iii. p. 212; Lescarbot, ‘Nouvelle France,’ p. 613. Thevet, ‘Singularitez de la France Antarctique,’ Paris, 1558, ch. 77. See also J. G. Müller, p. 102. Andouagni is perhaps a miscopied form of Cudouagni. Other forms, Cudruagni, &c., occur.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Cartier, 'Relation;' Hakluyt, vol. iii. p. 212; Lescarbot, 'New France,' p. 613. Thevet, ‘Unique features of Antarctic France,’ Paris, 1558, ch. 77. See also J. G. Müller, p. 102. Andouagni might be a miswritten version of Cudouagni. Other variations, including Cudruagni, appear as well.
818. Smith, ‘Hist. of Virginia,’ London, 1632, in Pinkerton, ‘Voyages,’ vol. xiii. pp. 13, 18, 244 (New Eng.); see Arber’s edition. Priority has been claimed for E. Strachey (see Lang, ‘Making of Religion,’ p. 254), but this copyist seems only to have copied Capt. Smith’s ‘Map of Virginia’ (1608). Brinton, p. 58; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 177, &c. J. G. Müller, pp. 99, &c.; Loskiel, part i. pp. 33, 43.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Smith, ‘Hist. of Virginia,’ London, 1632, in Pinkerton, ‘Voyages,’ vol. xiii. pp. 13, 18, 244 (New Eng.); see Arber’s edition. Priority has been claimed for E. Strachey (see Lang, ‘Making of Religion,’ p. 254), but this copyist seems only to have copied Capt. Smith’s ‘Map of Virginia’ (1608). Brinton, p. 58; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 177, &c. J. G. Müller, pp. 99, &c.; Loskiel, part i. pp. 33, 43.
819. Brebeuf in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1636, p. 107; see above, p. 255. Sagard, p. 494; Cuoq, p. 176; J. G. Müller, p. 103. For other mention of a Supreme Deity among North American tribes see Joutel, ‘Journal du Voyage,’ &c., Paris, 1713, p. 224 (Louisiana); Sproat in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. v. p. 253 (Vancouver’s I.).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Brebeuf in ‘Rel. of the Jesuits.’ 1636, p. 107; see above, p. 255. Sagard, p. 494; Cuoq, p. 176; J. G. Müller, p. 103. For more references to a Supreme Deity among North American tribes, see Joutel, ‘Journal du Voyage,’ &c., Paris, 1713, p. 224 (Louisiana); Sproat in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. v. p. 253 (Vancouver’s I.).
820. Lafitau, ‘Mœurs des Sauvages Amériquains,’ 1724, vol. i. pp. 124-6.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Lafitau, ‘Customs of Native Americans,’ 1724, vol. 1. pp. 124-6.
821. Bartram in ‘Tr. Amer. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. pp. 20, 26.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bartram in ‘Tr. Amer. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. pp. 20, 26.
822. Schoolcraft, ‘Ind. Tribes,’ part ii. p. 127.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Schoolcraft, ‘Ind. Tribes,’ vol. ii, p. 127.
823. Prescott, ‘Mexico,’ book i. ch. vi. Sahagun, ‘Hist. de Nueva España,’ lib. vi. in Kingsborough, vol. v.; Torquemada, ‘Monarq. Ind.’ lib. x. c. 14. Waitz, vol. iv. p. 136; J. G. Müller, p. 621, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Prescott, ‘Mexico,’ book i. ch. vi. Sahagun, 'History of New Spain,' lib. vi. in Kingsborough, vol. v.; Torquemada, ‘Monarq. Ind.’ lib. x. c. 14. Waitz, vol. iv. p. 136; J. G. Müller, p. 621, &c.
824. Moerenhout, ‘Voy. aux Iles du Grand Océan,’ vol. i. pp. 419, 437. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 321, &c. J. R. Forster, ‘Voyage round the World,’ pp. 540, 567. Grey, ‘Polyn. Myth.’ p. 6. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 118; see above, vol. i. p. 322. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 244. Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. pp. 116, 121. Schirren, ‘Wandersagen der Neuseeländer,’ pp. 68, 89.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Moerenhout, "Voyage to the Islands of the Great Ocean," vol. i. pp. 419, 437. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 321, &c. J. R. Forster, ‘Voyage round the World,’ pp. 540, 567. Grey, ‘Polyn. Myth.’ p. 6. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 118; see above, vol. i. p. 322. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 244. Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. pp. 116, 121. Schirren, ‘Wandersagen der Neuseeländer,’ pp. 68, 89.
825. Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 217.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. 1, p. 217.
827. See especially Waitz, vol. ii. p. 167, &c.; J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ pp. 209, 387; Bosman, Mungo Park, &c. Comp. Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i. p. 390.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See especially Waitz, vol. ii. p. 167, &c.; J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ pp. 209, 387; Bosman, Mungo Park, &c. Comp. Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i. p. 390.
828. Steinhauser, ‘Religion des Negers,’ in ‘Mag. der Miss.’ Basel, 1856. No. 2, p. 128. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ pp. 92, 209; Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 42. See also Waitz, vol. ii. pp. 171, 419.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Steinhauser, ‘Religion of the African,’ in ‘Magazine of Missions,’ Basel, 1856. No. 2, p. 128. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ pp. 92, 209; Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 42. See also Waitz, vol. ii. pp. 171, 419.
829. Magyar, ‘Reisen in Süd-Afrika,’ pp. 125, 335.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hungarian, ‘Travel in South Africa,’ pp. 125, 335.
830. Bowen, ‘Gr. and Dic. of Yoruba,’ p. xvi. in ‘Smithsonian Contr.’ vol. i.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bowen, 'Gr. and Dic. of Yoruba,' p. xvi in 'Smithsonian Contr.' vol. i.
831. Macpherson, ‘India,’ p. 84, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Macpherson, ‘India,’ p. 84, etc.
832. Dalton, ‘Kols,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vi. p. 32. Hunter, ‘Rural Bengal,’ p. 184.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Dalton, ‘Kols,’ in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vi. p. 32. Hunter, ‘Rural Bengal,’ p. 184.
833. Siebold, ‘Nippon.’ Kaempfer, ‘Hist. of Japan,’ 1727, book I. ch. I, IV. For accurate modern information, see papers of Chamberlain and Satow in ‘Tr. As. Soc. Japan,’ and Murray’s Handbook (note to 3rd ed.).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Siebold, ‘Nippon.’ Kaempfer, ‘Hist. of Japan,’ 1727, book I. ch. I, IV. For accurate modern information, check the works of Chamberlain and Satow in ‘Tr. As. Soc. Japan,’ and Murray’s Handbook (note to 3rd ed.).
834. Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 1, &c. Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. iii. p. 101. ‘Samoiedia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. i. p. 531. ‘Georgi, Reise im Russ. Reich.’ vol. i. p. 275.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 1, etc. Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. iii. p. 101. ‘Samoiedia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. i. p. 531. ‘Georgi, Reise im Russ. Reich.’ vol. i. p. 275.
835. Plath, ‘Rel. der Alten Chinesen,’ part i. p. 18, &c. See Max Müller, ‘Lectures on Science of Religion,’ No. III. in ‘Fraser’s Mag.’ 1870. Legge, ‘Confucius,’ p. 100.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Plath, 'Religion of the Ancient Chinese,' part i. p. 18, etc. See Max Müller, ‘Lectures on Science of Religion,’ No. III. in ‘Fraser’s Mag.’ 1870. Legge, ‘Confucius,’ p. 100.
836. See Colebrooke, ‘Essays,’ vol. ii. Wuttke, ‘Heidenthum,’ part i. p. 254. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. i. p. xxi. vol. ii. p. 1.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See Colebrooke, ‘Essays,’ vol. ii. Wuttke, ‘Heidenthum,’ part i. p. 254. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. i. p. xxi. vol. ii. p. 1.
837. Comte, ‘Philosophie Positive.’ Cf. Bp. Berkeley’s ‘Siris’; and for a modern dissertation on the universal æther as the divine soul of the world, see Phil. Spiller, ‘Gott im Lichte der Naturwissenschaften,’ Berlin, 1873 (note to 2nd ed.).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Comte, ‘Positive Philosophy.’ See Bp. Berkeley’s ‘Siris’; and for a modern dissertation on the universal ether as the divine essence of the world, check out Phil. Spiller, “God in the Context of the Natural Sciences,” Berlin, 1873 (note to 2nd ed.).
838. ‘Rig-Veda,’ i. 164, 46. Max Müller, ‘Chips,’ vol. i. pp. 27, 241.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Rig-Veda,’ i. 164, 46. Max Müller, ‘Chips,’ vol. i. pp. 27, 241.
839. See Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterlehre,’ pp. 143, 175.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. See Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterlehre,’ pp. 143, 175.
840. Avesta; trans. by Spiegel, ‘Ormazd-Yasht.’ 12.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Avesta; trans. by Spiegel, ‘Ormazd-Yasht.’ 12.
841. Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Eg.’ vol. iv. ch. xii.; Bunsen, ‘Egypt,’ vol. iv. p. 325.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Egypt’ vol. iv ch. xii; Bunsen, ‘Egypt,’ vol. iv p. 325.
842. Movers, ‘Phönizier,’ vol. i. p. 169, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Movers, ‘Phoenicians,’ vol. I p. 169, &c.
843. ‘Of the Principles and Duties of Natural Religion,’ London, 1678, book i. ch. vi. Johnson’s Dictionary, s.v. The term ‘natural religion’ is used in various and even incompatible senses. Thus Butler in his ‘Analogy of Religion, Natural and Revealed, to the Constitution and Course of Nature,’ signifies by ‘natural religion’ a primæval system which he expressly argues to have been not reasoned out, but taught first by revelation. This system, of which the main tenets are the belief in one God, the Creator and Moral Governor of the World, and in a future state of moral retribution, differs in the extreme from the actual religions of the lower races.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Of the Principles and Duties of Natural Religion,’ London, 1678, book i. ch. vi. Johnson’s Dictionary, s.v. The term ‘natural religion’ is used in various and often conflicting ways. For example, Butler in his ‘Analogy of Religion, Natural and Revealed, to the Constitution and Course of Nature,’ refers to ‘natural religion’ as an original system that he argues was not developed through reasoning but was initially taught by revelation. This system, which centers on the belief in one God, the Creator and Moral Governor of the World, and in a future state of moral retribution, is very different from the actual religions of less developed societies.
844. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 88; see p. 427.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 88; see p. 427.
845. Ibid. p. 200; see p. 174. See also Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 343. Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 235.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ibid. p. 200; see p. 174. Also, check out Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 343. Mariner, ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. ii. p. 235.
846. Schoolcraft, ‘Ind. Tribes,’ part iii. p. 237.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Schoolcraft, ‘Ind. Tribes,’ part iii, p. 237.
847. M’Coy, ‘Baptist Indian Missions,’ p. 359.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. M’Coy, ‘Baptist Indian Missions,’ p. 359.
848. Tanner, ‘Narrative,’ p. 46.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Tanner, ‘Narrative,’ p. 46.
849. Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 297.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Brinton, 'Myths of the New World,' p. 297.
850. Heckewelder, ‘Ind. Völkerschaften,’ p. 354.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Heckewelder, ‘Ind. Völkerschaften,’ p. 354.
851. ‘Narratives of Rites and Laws of Yncas,’ tr. and ed. by C. R. Markham, pp. 31, 33. See also Brinton, p. 298.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Stories of Rites and Laws of the Incas,’ tr. and ed. by C. R. Markham, pp. 31, 33. See also Brinton, p. 298.
852. Callaway, ‘Religion of Amazulu,’ pp. 141, 174, 182. ‘Remarks on Zulu Lang.’ Pietermaritzburg, 1870, p. 22.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Callaway, ‘Religion of Amazulu,’ pp. 141, 174, 182. ‘Comments on Zulu Language.’ Pietermaritzburg, 1870, p. 22.
853. Waitz, vol. ii. p. 169. Steinhauser, l.c. p. 129.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Waitz, vol. ii. p. 169. Steinhauser, l.c. p. 129.
854. Rowley, ‘Universities’ Mission to Central Africa,’ p. 226.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Rowley, ‘Universities’ Mission to Central Africa,’ p. 226.
855. Mason, ‘Karens,’ l.c. p. 215.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Mason, ‘Karens,’ p. 215.
856. Macpherson, ‘India,’ pp. 110, 128. See also Hunter, ‘Rural Bengal,’ p. 182 (Santals).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Macpherson, ‘India,’ pp. 110, 128. See also Hunter, ‘Rural Bengal,’ p. 182 (Santals).
857. Plath, ‘Religion der Chinesen,’ part ii. p. 2; Doolittle, vol. ii. p. 116.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Plath, ‘Religion of the Chinese,’ part ii. p. 2; Doolittle, vol. ii. p. 116.
858. ‘Sama-Veda,’ i. 4, 2. Wuttke, ‘Gesch. des Heidenthums,’ part ii. p. 342.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Sama-Veda,’ i. 4, 2. Wuttke, ‘Gesch. des Heidenthums,’ part ii. p. 342.
859. Lane, ‘Modern Egyptians,’ vol. i. p. 128.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Lane, ‘Modern Egyptians,’ vol. 1, p. 128.
860. ‘Rig-Veda,’ i. 51, 8, x. 105, 8. Muir, ‘Sanskrit Texts,’ part ii. ch. iii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Rig-Veda,’ i. 51, 8, x. 105, 8. Muir, ‘Sanskrit Texts,’ part ii. ch. iii.
861. Lane, ‘Modern Egyptians,’ vol. ii. p. 383.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Lane, ‘Modern Egyptians,’ vol. ii, p. 383.
862. See Köppen, ‘Religion des Buddha,’ vol. i. pp. 345, 556; vol. ii. pp. 303, 319. Compare Fergusson, ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ pl. xlii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.See Köppen, ‘Religion of Buddha,’ vol. i. pp. 345, 556; vol. ii. pp. 303, 319. Compare Fergusson, ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ pl. xlii.
863. Xenoph. Memorabilia Socrat. i. 3, 2.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Xenophon. Socratic Memorabilia. i. 3, 2.
864. Sahagun, ‘Retorica, &c., de la Gente Mexicana,’ lib. vi. c. 4, in Kingsborough, ‘Antiquities of Mexico,’ vol. v.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Sahagun, ‘Rhetoric, etc., of the Mexican People,’ lib. vi. c. 4, in Kingsborough, ‘Antiquities of Mexico,’ vol. v.
865. ‘Rig-Veda,’ vii. 89, 3. Max Müller, ‘Chips,’ vol. i. p. 39.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Rig-Veda,’ vii. 89, 3. Max Müller, ‘Chips,’ vol. i. p. 39.
866. ‘Avesta,’ tr. by Spiegel; ‘Khorda-Avesta,’ Patet Qod.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Avesta,’ tr. by Spiegel; ‘Khorda-Avesta,’ Patet Qod.
867. Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Commentarios Reales,’ v. 19. Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i., p. 421.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Royal Comments,’ v. 19. Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i., p. 421.
868. Charlevoix, ‘Nouv. Fr.’ vol. i. p. 394. See also Smith, ‘Virginia,’ in ‘Pinkerton,’ vol. xiii. p. 41.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Charlevoix, ‘Nouv. Fr.’ vol. i. p. 394. See also Smith, ‘Virginia,’ in ‘Pinkerton,’ vol. xiii. p. 41.
869. Phillips in Astley’s ‘Voyages,’ vol. ii. p. 411; Lubbock, ‘Origin of Civilization,’ p. 216. Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 500. Bastian in ‘Ztschr. für Ethnologie,’ 1869, p. 315.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Phillips in Astley’s ‘Voyages,’ vol. ii. p. 411; Lubbock, ‘Origin of Civilization,’ p. 216. Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 500. Bastian in ‘Ztschr. für Ethnologie,’ 1869, p. 315.
871. Macpherson, ‘India,’ p. 129.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Macpherson, ‘India,’ p. 129.
872. Billings, ‘Exp. to Northern Russia,’ p. 125. Chinese sacrifices buried for earth spirits, see ante, vol. i. p. 107; Plath, part ii. p. 50.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Billings, ‘Exp. to Northern Russia,’ p. 125. Chinese offerings buried for earth spirits, see earlier, vol. i. p. 107; Plath, part ii. p. 50.
873. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 182.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 182.
874. Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 67.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 67.
875. Herod. vii. 35, 54. Liv. vii. 6. Grote, ‘Hist. of Greece,’ vol. x. p. 589, see p. 715.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Herod. vii. 35, 54. Liv. vii. 6. Grote, ‘Hist. of Greece,’ vol. x. p. 589, see p. 715.
876. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 367.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Rochefort, ‘Caribbean Islands,’ p. 367.
877. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. pp. 336, 358. Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 220.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. pp. 336, 358. Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 220.
878. Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 494; J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ p. 218; Burton, ‘W. & W. fr. W. Afr.’ p. 331.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 494; J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ p. 218; Burton, ‘W. & W. fr. W. Afr.’ p. 331.
879. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. p. 195, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ward, ‘Hindus,’ vol. ii. p. 195, & etc.
880. Clavigero, ‘Messico,’ vol. ii. p. 69. J. G. Müller, p. 631.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Clavigero, ‘Mexico,’ vol. ii. p. 69. J. G. Müller, p. 631.
881. Ward, vol. ii. p. 194; ‘Mem. Anthrop. Soc.’ vol. i. p. 332.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ward, vol. ii. p. 194; ‘Mem. Anthrop. Soc.’ vol. i. p. 332.
882. Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 226.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. I, p. 226.
883. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ p. 218.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ p. 218.
884. Manu, iii. 212. See also ‘Avesta,’ tr. by Spiegel, vol. ii. p. lxxvii. (sacrificial cakes eaten by priest).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Manu, III. 212. See also ‘Avesta,’ translated by Spiegel, vol. II, p. LXXVII (sacrificial cakes eaten by priest).
885. Ysbrants Ides, ‘Reize naar China,’ p. 38. Meiners, vol. i. p. 162.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ysbrants Ides, ‘Journey to China,’ p. 38. Meiners, vol. i. p. 162.
886. Clavigero, vol. ii. p. 46. J. G. Müller, p. 631.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Clavigero, vol. ii. p. 46. J. G. Müller, p. 631.
887. Bel and the Dragon.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bel and the Dragon.
888. Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 47.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 47.
889. Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ part ii. p. 210.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, 'Human,' part ii. p. 210.
890. Homer, Odyss. xi. xii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Homer, Odyssey xi. xii.
891. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. i. p. 270.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. 1, p. 270.
892. Smith, ‘Virginia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xiii. p. 41; see J. G. Müller, p. 143; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 207. Comp. Meiners, vol. ii. p. 89. See also Bollaert in ‘Mem. Anthrop. Soc.’ vol. ii. p. 96.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Smith, ‘Virginia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xiii. p. 41; see J. G. Müller, p. 143; Waitz, vol. iii. p. 207. Comp. Meiners, vol. ii. p. 89. See also Bollaert in ‘Mem. Anthrop. Soc.’ vol. ii. p. 96.
893. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iii. p. 145. See also St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. i. p. 160.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iii. p. 145. See also St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. i. p. 160.
894. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ p. 147; Hunter, ‘Rural Bengal,’ p. 181; Forbes Leslie, ‘Early Races of Scotland,’ vol. ii. p. 458.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hodgson, ‘Aborigines of India,’ p. 147; Hunter, ‘Rural Bengal,’ p. 181; Forbes Leslie, ‘Early Races of Scotland,’ vol. ii. p. 458.
895. Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ letter xxi. in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 531. See also Waitz, vol. ii. p. 192.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ letter xxi. in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 531. See also Waitz, vol. ii. p. 192.
896. Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 96.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘Psychology,’ p. 96.
897. Levit. i. &c.; Deuteron. xii. 23; Psalm xvi. 4.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Lev. 1. &c.; Deut. 12. 23; Psalm 16. 4.
898. Waitz, vol. iii. p. 181. Hennepin, ‘Voyage,’ p. 302. Charlevoix, ‘Nouvelle France,’ vol. v. p. 311, vi. p. 178. Schoolcraft, ‘Ind. Tribes,’ part i. p. 49, part ii. p. 127. Catlin, vol. i. pp. 181, 229. Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 164. J. G. Müller, p. 58.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Waitz, vol. iii. p. 181. Hennepin, ‘Voyage,’ p. 302. Charlevoix, 'New France,' vol. v. p. 311, vi. p. 178. Schoolcraft, ‘Ind. Tribes,’ part i. p. 49, part ii. p. 127. Catlin, vol. i. pp. 181, 229. Morgan, ‘Iroquois,’ p. 164. J. G. Müller, p. 58.
899. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ pp. 418, 507. Lery, ‘Voy. en Brésil,’ p. 268. See also Musters in ‘Journ. Anthrop. Inst.’ vol. i. p. 202 (Patagonians).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ pp. 418, 507. Lery, ‘Voy. en Brésil,’ p. 268. See also Musters in ‘Journ. Anthrop. Inst.’ vol. i. p. 202 (Patagonians).
900. Callaway, ‘Religion of Amazulu,’ pp. 11, 141, 177. See also Casalis, ‘Basutos,’ p. 258.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Callaway, ‘Religion of Amazulu,’ pp. 11, 141, 177. See also Casalis, ‘Basutos,’ p. 258.
901. Clavigero, ‘Messico,’ vol. ii. p. 39. See also Piedrahita, part i. lib. i. c. 3 (Muyscas).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Clavigero, ‘Mexico,’ vol. ii. p. 39. See also Piedrahita, part i. lib. i. c. 3 (Muyscas).
902. Plath, ‘Religion der alten Chinesen,’ part ii. p. 31. Doolittle, ‘Chinese.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Plath, ‘Ancient Chinese Religion,’ part ii. p. 31. Doolittle, ‘Chinese.’
903. Porphyr. de Abstinentia, ii. 5. Arnob. contra Gentes. vii. 26. Meiners, vol. ii. p. 14.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Porphyr. on Abstinence, ii. 5. Arnob. Against the Gentiles. vii. 26. Meiners, vol. ii. p. 14.
904. Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Egyptians,’ vol. v. pp. 315, 338. Plutarch, de Is. et Osir.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Egyptians,’ vol. v. pp. 315, 338. Plutarch, de Is. et Osir.
905. Herodot. i. 183.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Herodotus. i. 183.
906. Exod. xxx., xxxvii. Lev. x. 1, xvi. 12, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Exodus 30, 37, Leviticus 10:1, 16:12, etc.
907. Smith, ‘Virginia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xiii. p. 41. Le Jeune in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1634, p. 16. Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. i. p. 189.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Smith, ‘Virginia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xiii. p. 41. Le Jeune in ‘Rel. des Jés.’ 1634, p. 16. Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. i. p. 189.
908. ‘Rites and Laws of Incas,’ p. 16, &c., 79; see ‘Ollanta, an ancient Ynca Drama,’ tr. by C. R. Markham, p. 81. Garcilaso de la Vega, lib. i. ii. vi.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Rites and Laws of Incas,’ p. 16, &c., 79; see ‘Ollanta, an ancient Inca Drama,’ tr. by C. R. Markham, p. 81. Garcilaso de la Vega, lib. i. ii. vi.
909. Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. iii. pp. 106, 114.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. iii. pp. 106, 114.
910. Plath, part ii. p. 65.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Plath, part 2, p. 65.
911. Latham, ‘Descr. Eth.’ vol. i. p. 191.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Latham, ‘Descr. Eth.’ vol. i. p. 191.
912. ‘Rig-Veda,’ i. 1, 4.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Rig-Veda,’ 1. 4.
913. Homer, Il. i. 317.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Homer, Iliad 1.317.
914. Porphyr. De Abstinentia, ii. 42; see 58.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Porphyr. On Abstinence, ii. 42; see 58.
915. Stanley, ‘Jewish Church,’ 2d Ser. pp. 410, 424. See Kalisch on Leviticus; Barry in Smith’s ‘Dictionary of the Bible,’ art. ‘sacrifice.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Stanley, ‘Jewish Church,’ 2nd Ser. pp. 410, 424. See Kalisch on Leviticus; Barry in Smith’s ‘Dictionary of the Bible,’ art. ‘sacrifice.’
916. Callaway, ‘Religion of Amazulu,’ p. 11 (amadhlozi or amatongo = ancestral spirits).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Callaway, ‘Religion of Amazulu,’ p. 11 (amadhlozi or amatongo = ancestors' spirits).
917. Roman Pane, ch. xvi. in ‘Life of Colon,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xii. p. 86. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 418; see Meiners, vol. ii., p. 516; J. G. Müller, p. 212.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Roman Pane, ch. xvi. in ‘Life of Colon,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xii. p. 86. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 418; see Meiners, vol. ii., p. 516; J. G. Müller, p. 212.
918. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iv. p. 194.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. 4 p. 194.
919. Eliot in ‘As. Res.’ vol. iii. p. 30.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Eliot in ‘As. Res.’ vol. iii. p. 30.
920. Macpherson, ‘India,’ pp. 88, 100.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Macpherson, ‘India,’ pp. 88, 100.
921. Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. iii. p. 114.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. iii. p. 114.
922. Grimm, ‘Deutsche Myth.’ p. 264.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Grimm, ‘German Myth.’ p. 264.
923. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. i. p. 27.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. i. p. 27.
924. Mason, ‘Karens,’ l.c. p. 208.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Mason, ‘Karens,’ p. 208.
925. Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 407. Ellis, ‘Polyn. Res.’ vol. i. p. 358. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ pp. 104, 220.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, ‘Human,’ vol. ii. p. 407. Ellis, ‘Polynesian Research,’ vol. i. p. 358. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ pp. 104, 220.
926. Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. i. p. 231.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Williams, ‘Fiji,’ vol. I, p. 231.
927. Schoolcraft, ‘Algic Researches,’ vol. ii. p. 140; see p. 190.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Schoolcraft, ‘Algic Researches,’ vol. 2, p. 140; see p. 190.
928. Tanner’s ‘Narrative,’ pp. 286, 318. See also Waitz, vol. iii. p. 207.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Tanner’s ‘Narrative,’ pp. 286, 318. See also Waitz, vol. iii. p. 207.
929. J. G. Müller, p. 142; see p. 282.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. J. G. Müller, p. 142; see p. 282.
930. Sahagun, lib. vi. in Kingsborough, vol. v.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Sahagun, lib. vi. in Kingsborough, vol. v.
931. ‘Rites and Laws of Yncas,’ tr. and ed. by C. R. Markham, pp. 55, 58, 166. See ante, p. 385 (possible connexion of smoke with soul).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Rites and Laws of the Incas,’ trans. and ed. by C. R. Markham, pp. 55, 58, 166. See earlier, p. 385 (possible connection of smoke with the soul).
932. Waitz, vol. ii. pp. 188, 196. Steinhauser, l.c. p. 136. See also Schlegel, ‘Ewe-Sprache,’ p. xv.; Magyar, ‘Süd-Afrika,’ p. 273.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Waitz, vol. ii. pp. 188, 196. Steinhauser, l.c. p. 136. See also Schlegel, ‘Ewe-Sprache,’ p. xv.; Magyar, ‘Süd-Afrika,’ p. 273.
933. A. Campbell in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vii. p. 153.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. A. Campbell in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vii. p. 153.
934. O’Riley, in ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iv. p. 592. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. ii. p. 12.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.O’Riley, in ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iv. p. 592. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. ii. p. 12.
935. R. Clarke, ‘Sierra Leone,’ p. 43.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. R. Clarke, ‘Sierra Leone,’ p. 43.
936. Smith, ‘Virginia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xiii. p. 41. Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterlehre,’ vol. ii. p. 693. Legge, ‘Confucius,’ p. 179. Grohmann, ‘Aberglauben aus Böhmen,’ p. 41, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Smith, ‘Virginia,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xiii. p. 41. Welcker, 'Greek mythology,' vol. ii. p. 693. Legge, ‘Confucius,’ p. 179. Grohmann, ‘Superstitions from Bohemia,’ p. 41, &c.
937. J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ p. 218; Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 400.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. L. Wilson, ‘W. Afr.’ p. 218; Bosman, ‘Guinea,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 400.
938. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. ii. p. 387.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘Eastern Asia,’ vol. ii. p. 387.
939. Roberts, ‘Oriental Illustrations,’ p. 545.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Roberts, ‘Oriental Illustrations,’ p. 545.
940. M’Coy, ‘Baptist Indian Missions,’ p. 305.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. M’Coy, ‘Baptist Indian Missions,’ p. 305.
941. Callaway, ‘Religion of Amazulu,’ p. 59. See Casalis, p. 252.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Callaway, ‘Religion of Amazulu,’ p. 59. See Casalis, p. 252.
942. Earl in ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iv. p. 174.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Earl in ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. iv. p. 174.
943. Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ p. 170, see p. 146; Hooker, ‘Himalayan Journals,’ vol. ii. p. 276.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hodgson, ‘Abor. of India,’ p. 170, see p. 146; Hooker, ‘Himalayan Journals,’ vol. ii. p. 276.
944. Prescott, ‘Mexico,’ book i. ch. iii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Prescott, ‘Mexico,’ book I, ch. III
945. ‘Rites and Laws of Yncas,’ p. 33, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Rites and Laws of Yncas,’ p. 33, & etc.
946. Welcker, ‘Griech. Götterlehre,’ vol. ii. p. 50; Pauly, ‘Real-Encyclopedie,’ s.v. ‘Sacrificia.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Welcker, ‘Greek Mythology,’ vol. ii. p. 50; Pauly, ‘Real Encyclopedia,’ s.v. ‘Sacrifices.’
947. Tanner’s ‘Nar.’ p. 154; see also Waitz, vol. iii. p. 167.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Tanner’s ‘Nar.’ p. 154; see also Waitz, vol. iii. p. 167.
948. Symes, ‘Ava,’ in Pinkerton, vol. ix. p. 440; Caron, ‘Japan,’ ib. vol. vii. p. 629.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Symes, ‘Ava,’ in Pinkerton, vol. ix. p. 440; Caron, ‘Japan,’ ib. vol. vii. p. 629.
949. Burton, ‘Medinah,’ &c., vol. iii. p. 302; Lane, ‘Mod. Eg.’ vol. i. p. 132.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Burton, ‘Medinah,’ etc., vol. 3, p. 302; Lane, ‘Mod. Eg.’ vol. 1, p. 132.
950. Hardy, ‘Manual of Budhism,’ p. 59.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hardy, ‘Manual of Buddhism,’ p. 59.
951. 2 Kings iii. 27. Euseb. Præp. Evang. i. 10, iv. 156; Laud. Constant. xiii. Porphyr. De Abstin. ii. 56, &c. Lamprid. Heliogabal. vii. Movers, ‘Phönizier,’ vol. i. p. 300, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.2 Kings 3:27. Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel 1:10, 4:156; Laodicean Constant. 13. Porphyry, On Abstinence 2:56, etc. Lampridius, Heliogabalus 7. Movers, ‘Phoenicians,’ vol. 1, p. 300, etc.
952. Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i. p. 419.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. 1, p. 419.
953. Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 59. Bosman in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 399.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Römer, ‘Guinea,’ p. 59. Bosman in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. p. 399.
954. Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. iii. p. 106; Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 232.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. iii. p. 106; Castrén, ‘Finn. Myth.’ p. 232.
955. Hesiod. Theog. 537. Welcker, vol. i. p. 764; vol. ii. p. 51.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hesiod. Theog. 537. Welcker, vol. i. p. 764; vol. ii. p. 51.
956. Haug, ‘Parsis,’ Bombay, 1862, p. 238.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Haug, ‘Parsis,’ Mumbai, 1862, p. 238.
957. Hamilton in ‘As. Res.’ vol. ii. p. 342.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Hamilton in ‘As. Res.’ vol. 2 p. 342.
958. Mariner’s ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. i. p. 454; vol. ii. p. 222. Cook’s ‘3rd Voy.’ vol. i. p. 403. Details from S. Africa in Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. iii. pp. 4, 24; Scherzer, ‘Voy. of Novara,’ vol. i. p. 212.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Mariner’s ‘Tonga Is.’ vol. 1. p. 454; vol. 2. p. 222. Cook’s ‘3rd Voy.’ vol. 1. p. 403. Details from S. Africa in Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. 3. pp. 4, 24; Scherzer, ‘Voy. of Novara,’ vol. 1. p. 212.
959. Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. i. p. 172; Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. ii. p. 170. See also Venegas, ‘Noticia de la California,’ vol. i. p. 117; Garcilaso de la Vega, lib. ii. c. 8 (Peru).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. i. p. 172; Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. ii. p. 170. See also Venegas, ‘California News’ vol. i. p. 117; Garcilaso de la Vega, lib. ii. c. 8 (Peru).
960. Buchanan, ‘Mysore,’ &c., in Pinkerton, vol. viii. p. 661; Meiners, vol. ii. p. 472; Bastian, l.c. See also Dubois, ‘India,’ vol. i. p. 5.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Buchanan, ‘Mysore,’ etc., in Pinkerton, vol. viii. p. 661; Meiners, vol. ii. p. 472; Bastian, l.c. See also Dubois, ‘India,’ vol. i. p. 5.
961. Polack, ‘New Zealand,’ vol. i. p. 264.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Polack, ‘New Zealand,’ vol. 1, p. 264.
962. Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 184.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘Psychology,’ p. 184.
963. Theodoret. in Levit. xix.; Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ Details in Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 229, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Theodoret. in Levit. xix.; Hanusch, ‘Slaw. Myth.’ Details in Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 229, &c.
964. Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. iii. p. 113 (see other details).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘Human,’ vol. iii. p. 113 (see other details).
965. Pausan. viii. 23; ix. 8.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Pausan. 8. 23; 9. 8.
966. ‘Encyc. Brit.’ art. ‘Brahma.’ See ‘Asiat. Res.’ vol. ix. p. 387.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Encyc. Brit.’ art. ‘Brahma.’ See ‘Asiat. Res.’ vol. 9 p. 387.
967. Boecler, ‘Ehsten Aberglaübische Gebraüche,’ &c., p. 4.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Boecler, ‘Ehsten Aberglaübische Gebraüche,’ &c., p. 4.
968. Rivero and Tschudi, p. 196. See ‘Rites of Yncas,’ p. 79.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Rivero and Tschudi, p. 196. See ‘Rites of Incas,’ p. 79.
969. Bastian, p. 112, &c.; Smith’s ‘Dic. of Gr. and Rom. Ant.’ art. ‘Sacrificium.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, p. 112, etc.; Smith’s ‘Dic. of Gr. and Rom. Ant.’ art. ‘Sacrificium.’
970. Grimm, ‘Deutsche Myth.’ p. 40.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Grimm, ‘German Mythology.’ p. 40.
971. Diodor. Sic. xx. 14.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Diodorus Siculus. xx. 14.
972. Callaway, ‘Zulu Tales,’ vol. i. p. 88; Magyar, ‘Süd-Afrika,’ p. 256.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Callaway, 'Zulu Tales,' vol. I, p. 88; Magyar, 'Süd-Afrika,' p. 256.
973. Macpherson, ‘India,’ pp. 108, 187.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Macpherson, ‘India,’ pp. 108, 187.
974. De Silva in Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ p. 181.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. De Silva in Bastian, ‘Psychology,’ p. 181.
975. Details in Pauly, ‘Real-Encyclop.’ s.v. ‘Sacrificia’; Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. iii. p. 114; Movers, ‘Phönizier,’ vol. i. p. 300.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Details in Pauly, ‘Real-Encyclopedia.’ s.v. ‘Sacrificia’; Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. iii. p. 114; Movers, ‘Phönizier,’ vol. i. p. 300.
976. Clavigero, ‘Messico,’ vol. ii. p. 82; Torquemada, ‘Monarquia Indiana,’ x. c. 29; J. G. Müller, pp. 502, 640. See also ibid. p. 379 (Peru); ‘Rites and Laws of Yncas,’ pp. 46, 54.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Clavigero, ‘Mexico,’ vol. ii. p. 82; Torquemada, ‘Indian Monarchy,’ x. c. 29; J. G. Müller, pp. 502, 640. See also ibid. p. 379 (Peru); ‘Rites and Laws of Incas,’ pp. 46, 54.
977. Grote, vol. v. p. 366. Schmidt in Smith’s ‘Dic. of Gr. and Rom. Ant.’ art. ‘Sacrificium.’ Bastian, l.c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grote, vol. 5 p. 366. Schmidt in Smith’s ‘Dic. of Gr. and Rom. Ant.’ art. ‘Sacrificium.’ Bastian, l.c.
978. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. iii. p. 501.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, ‘Eastern Asia,’ vol. iii, p. 501.
979. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. p. 152.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. I, p. 152.
980. Lane, ‘Modern Eg.’ vol. ii. p. 262. Meiners, vol. ii. p. 85.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Lane, ‘Modern Eg.’ vol. ii. p. 262. Meiners, vol. ii. p. 85.
981. Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Eg.’ vol. iii. p. 395; and in Rawlinson’s Herodotus, vol. ii. p. 137. See 1 Sam. vi. 4.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Wilkinson, ‘Ancient Eg.’ vol. iii. p. 395; and in Rawlinson’s Herodotus, vol. ii. p. 137. See 1 Sam. vi. 4.
982. Grimm, ‘Deutsche Myth.’ p. 1131.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Grimm, ‘Deutsche Myth.’ p. 1131.
983. Ibid.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Same source.
984. Bastian, vol. iii. p. 116.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bastian, vol. iii. p. 116.
985. St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 43. Compare modern Circassian sacrifice of animal before cross, as substitute for child, in Bell, ‘Circassia,’ vol. ii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.St. Clair and Brophy, ‘Bulgaria,’ p. 43. Compare the modern Circassian practice of sacrificing an animal before the cross as a substitute for a child, in Bell, ‘Circassia,’ vol. ii.
986. Ralston, ‘Songs of Russian People,’ pp. 123, 153, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ralston, ‘Songs of Russian People,’ pp. 123, 153, etc.
987. Wuttke, ‘Deutsche Volksaberglaube,’ p. 86. See also Grimm, ‘Deutsche Myth.’ pp. 417, 602.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Wuttke, ‘German Folk Beliefs’ p. 86. See also Grimm, 'German Mythology.' pp. 417, 602.
988. Hyltén-Cavallius, ‘Wärend och Wirdarne,’ part i. pp. 131, 146, 157, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hyltén-Cavallius, ‘Wärend and Wirdarne,’ part i. pp. 131, 146, 157, &c.
989. Monnier, ‘Traditions Populaires,’ pp. 187, 666.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Monnier, ‘Traditions Populaires,’ pp. 187, 666.
990. R. Hunt, ‘Pop. Rom. of W. of England,’ 1st Ser. p. 237. Pennant, ‘Tour in Scotland,’ in Pinkerton, vol. iii. p. 49. J. Y. Simpson, Address to Soc. Antiq. Scotland, 1861, p. 33; Brand, ‘Pop. Ant.’ vol. iii. pp. 74, 317.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.R. Hunt, ‘Population Romanticism of W. of England,’ 1st Series, p. 237. Pennant, ‘Tour in Scotland,’ in Pinkerton, vol. iii. p. 49. J. Y. Simpson, Address to Soc. Antiq. Scotland, 1861, p. 33; Brand, ‘Popular Antiquities’ vol. iii. pp. 74, 317.
991. Brand, vol. i. p. 484. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ pp. 45, 194, 1188, see p. 250; ‘Deutsche Rechtsalterthümer,’ p. 900; Hyltén-Cavallius, part i. p. 175.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Brand, vol. i. p. 484. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ pp. 45, 194, 1188, see p. 250; ‘German Legal Antiquities,’ p. 900; Hyltén-Cavallius, part i. p. 175.
992. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 962.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Grimm, ‘D. M.’ p. 962.
993. Beausobre, vol. ii. p. 667. Polydorus Vergilius, De Inventoribus Rerum (Basel, 1521), lib. v. 1.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Beausobre, vol. ii. p. 667. Polydorus Vergilius, On the Origins of Things (Basel, 1521), lib. v. 1.
994. Tanner’s ‘Narrative,’ p. 288. Loskiel, ‘N. A. Ind.’ part i. p. 76. Schoolcraft, ‘Ind. Tribes,’ part i. pp. 34, 113, 360, 391; part iii. p. 227. Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. i. p. 36. Charlevoix, ‘Nouv. Fr.’ vol. ii. p. 170; vol. vi. p. 67. Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. ii. p. 170. Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. iii. pp. 206, 217.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Tanner’s ‘Narrative,’ p. 288. Loskiel, ‘N. A. Ind.’ part i. p. 76. Schoolcraft, ‘Ind. Tribes,’ part i. pp. 34, 113, 360, 391; part iii. p. 227. Catlin, ‘N. A. Ind.’ vol. i. p. 36. Charlevoix, ‘Nouv. Fr.’ vol. ii. p. 170; vol. vi. p. 67. Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. ii. p. 170. Waitz, ‘Anthropologie,’ vol. iii. pp. 206, 217.
995. Colombo, ‘Vita,’ ch. xxv. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 501. See also Meiners, vol. ii. p. 143 (Guyana).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Colombo, ‘Vita,’ ch. xxv. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 501. See also Meiners, vol. ii. p. 143 (Guyana).
996. Dobrizhoffer, ‘Abipones,’ vol. ii. p. 68.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Dobrizhoffer, ‘Abipones,’ vol. 2, p. 68.
997. St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. i. p. 144.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. St. John, ‘Far East,’ vol. 1, p. 144.
998. Döhne, ‘Zulu Dic.’ s.v. ‘nyanga;’ Grout, ‘Zulu-land,’ p. 158; Callaway, ‘Religion of Amazulu,’ p. 387.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Döhne, ‘Zulu Dic.’ s.v. ‘nyanga;’ Grout, ‘Zulu-land,’ p. 158; Callaway, ‘Religion of Amazulu,’ p. 387.
999. Somadeva Bhatta, tr. Brockhaus, vol. ii. p. 81. Meiners, vol. ii. p. 147.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Somadeva Bhatta, tr. Brockhaus, vol. 2, p. 81. Meiners, vol. 2, p. 147.
1000. Maury, ‘Magic,’ &c., p. 237; Pausan. i. 34; Philostrat. Apollon. Tyan. i.; Galen. Comment. in Hippocrat. i.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Maury, ‘Magic,’ etc., p. 237; Pausan. i. 34; Philostrat. Apollon. Tyan. i.; Galen. Comment. in Hippocrat. i.
1001. Baptist. Mantuan. Fast. ix. 350.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Baptist. Mantuan. Quick. ix. 350.
1002. ‘Acta Sanctorum Bolland.’ S. Theresa.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Acta Sanctorum Bolland.’ St. Theresa.
1003. Colombo, ‘Vita,’ ch. lxii.; Roman Pane, ibid. ch. xv.; and in Pinkerton, vol. xii. Condamine, ‘Travels,’ in Pinkerton, vol. xiv. p. 226; Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. pp. 441, 631 (details of snuff-powders among Omaguas, Otomacs, &c.; native names curupá, paricá, niopo, nupa; made from seeds of Mimosa acacioides, Acacia niopo).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Colombo, ‘Vita,’ ch. 62; Roman Pane, ibid. ch. 15; and in Pinkerton, vol. 12 Condamine, ‘Travels,’ in Pinkerton, vol. 14 p. 226; Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. 1 pp. 441, 631 (details of snuff powders among Omaguas, Otomacs, etc.; native names curupá, paricá, niopo, nupa; made from seeds of Mimosa acacioides, Acacia niopo).
1004. Maury, ‘Magie,’ &c., p. 425.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Maury, ‘Magic,’ &c., p. 425.
1005. Seemann, ‘Voy. of Herald,’ vol. i. p. 256. Rivero and Tschudi, ‘Peruvian Antiquities,’ p. 184. J. G. Müller, p. 397.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Seemann, ‘Voy. of Herald,’ vol. i. p. 256. Rivero and Tschudi, ‘Peruvian Antiquities,’ p. 184. J. G. Müller, p. 397.
1006. Brasseur, ‘Mexique,’ vol. iii. p. 558; Clavigero, vol. ii. p. 40; J. G. Müller, p. 656.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Brasseur, ‘Mexico,’ vol. iii. p. 558; Clavigero, vol. ii. p. 40; J. G. Müller, p. 656.
1007. J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrelig.’ p. 277; Hernandez, ‘Historia Mexicana,’ lib. v. c. 51; Purchas, vol. iv. p. 1292.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrelig.’ p. 277; Hernandez, ‘Historia Mexicana,’ lib. v. c. 51; Purchas, vol. iv. p. 1292.
1008. D. Wilson, ‘Prehistoric Man,’ vol. i. p. 487.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. D. Wilson, ‘Prehistoric Man,’ vol. 1. p. 487.
1009. Loskiel, ‘Ind. of N. A.’ part i. p. 42.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Loskiel, ‘Ind. of N. A.’ part i. p. 42.
1010. Herodot. iv. 73-5.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Herodotus. iv. 73-5.
1011. Maury, ‘Magie,’ &c., l.c.; Plin. xxiv. 102; Hesych. s.v. ‘ὠπήτειρα.’ See also Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 152, &c.; Baring-Gould, ‘Were-wolves,’ p. 149.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Maury, ‘Magie,’ etc., l.c.; Plin. xxiv. 102; Hesych. s.v. ‘ὠπήτειρα.’ See also Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 152, etc.; Baring-Gould, ‘Were-wolves,’ p. 149.
1012. Polak, ‘Persien,’ vol. ii. p. 245; Vambéry in ‘Mem. Anthrop. Soc.’ vol. ii. p. 20; Meiners, vol. ii. p. 216.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Polak, ‘Persian,’ vol. ii. p. 245; Vambéry in ‘Mem. Anthrop. Soc.’ vol. ii. p. 20; Meiners, vol. ii. p. 216.
1013. Meiners, vol. ii. p. 162.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Meiners, vol. ii, p. 162.
1014. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part iii. p. 286.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part iii, p. 286.
1015. Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 145. Compare ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. ii. p. 247 (Aracan).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, ‘Human,’ vol. ii. p. 145. Compare ‘Eastern Asia,’ vol. ii. p. 247 (Aracan).
1016. D. H. Tuke in ‘Journal of Mental Science,’ Oct. 1870, p. 368.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.D. H. Tuke in ‘Journal of Mental Science,’ Oct. 1870, p. 368.
1017. Grey, ‘Australia,’ vol. ii. p. 327.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Grey, ‘Australia,’ vol. ii. p. 327.
1018. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 230. Seemann, ‘Viti,’ p. 151.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Turner, ‘Polynesia,’ p. 230. Seemann, ‘Viti,’ p. 151.
1019. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part iv. p. 54.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part 4, p. 54.
1020. Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 485.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 485.
1021. D’Orbigny, ‘L’Homme Américain,’ vol. ii. pp. 319, 330.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. D’Orbigny, ‘The American Man,’ vol. ii. pp. 319, 330.
1022. Rivero and Tschudi, ‘Peruvian Antiquities,’ p. 202. See also Arbousset and Daumas, ‘Voyage,’ p. 277 (Kafirs).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Rivero and Tschudi, ‘Peruvian Antiquities,’ p. 202. Also check out Arbousset and Daumas, ‘Voyage,’ p. 277 (Kafirs).
1023. Bickmore, in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vii. p. 20. Georgi, ‘Reise,’ vol. i. p. 266. Gul. de Rubruquis in Hakluyt vol. i. p. 78. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. iii. p. 228.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bickmore, in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. VII. p. 20. Georgi, ‘Reise,’ vol. I. p. 266. Gul. de Rubruquis in Hakluyt vol. I. p. 78. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. III. p. 228.
1024. Ælian. Var. Hist. v. 14, vii. 19; Plutarch. Solon, x.; Diog. Laert. Solon; Welcker, vol. i. p. 404.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ælian. Var. Hist. v. 14, vii. 19; Plutarch. Solon, x.; Diog. Laert. Solon; Welcker, vol. i. p. 404.
1025. Beda in Die S. Paschæ. Durand, Rationale Divinorum Officiorum, lib. vii. c. 35-9. Brand, ‘Popular Antiquities,’ vol. ii. pp. 295, 318.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Beda in The S. Paschæ. Durand, Rationale of Divine Offices, lib. vii. c. 35-9. Brand, ‘Popular Antiquities,’ vol. ii. pp. 295, 318.
1026. Gregg, ‘Commerce of Prairies,’ vol. i. pp. 270, 273; vol. ii. p. 318.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Gregg, ‘Commerce of Prairies,’ vol. I, pp. 270, 273; vol. II, p. 318.
1027. Charlevoix, ‘Nouvelle France,’ vol. vi. p. 178.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Charlevoix, ‘New France,’ vol. vi. p. 178.
1028. Rochefort, ‘Iles Antilles,’ p. 365.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Rochefort, ‘Caribbean Islands,’ p. 365.
1029. Clavigero, ‘Messico,’ vol. ii. p. 24; J. G. Müller, p. 641. See Oviedo, ‘Nicaragua,’ p. 29.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Clavigero, ‘Mexico,’ vol. ii. p. 24; J. G. Müller, p. 641. See Oviedo, ‘Nicaragua,’ p. 29.
1030. J. G. Müller, p. 363; Prescott, ‘Peru,’ book i. ch. 3. Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Commentarios Reales,’ lib. iii. c. 20, says it was at the east end; cf. lib. vi. c. 21 (llama sacrificed with head to east).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. G. Müller, p. 363; Prescott, ‘Peru,’ book i. ch. 3. Garcilaso de la Vega, ‘Royal Commentaries,’ lib. iii. c. 20, states it was at the east end; cf. lib. vi. c. 21 (llama sacrificed with its head facing east).
1031. Colebrooke, ‘Essays,’ vol. i., iv. and v.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Colebrooke, ‘Essays,’ vol. I, IV, and V
1032. ‘Illustrations of the History and Practices of the Thugs,’ London, 1837, p. 46.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.‘Illustrations of the History and Practices of the Thugs,’ London, 1837, p. 46.
1033. Ezek. viii. 16; Mishna, ‘Sukkoth,’ v. See Fergusson in Smith’s ‘Dictionary of the Bible,’ s.v. ‘Temple.’
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ezek. viii. 16; Mishna, ‘Sukkoth,’ v. See Fergusson in Smith’s ‘Dictionary of the Bible,’ s.v. ‘Temple.’
1034. Hyde, ‘Veterum Persarum Religionis Historia,’ ch. iv. Niebuhr, ‘Reisebeschreibung nach Arabien,’ vol. i. p. 396. Layard, ‘Nineveh,’ vol. i. ch. ix.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Hyde, "History of the Religion of the Ancient Persians," ch. iv. Niebuhr, "Description of a Journey to Arabia," vol. i. p. 396. Layard, ‘Nineveh,’ vol. i. ch. ix.
1035. Lucian. De Domo, vi. Vitruv. de Architectura, iv. 5. See Welcker, vol. i. p. 403.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Lucian. De Domo, vi. Vitruv. de Architectura, iv. 5. See Welcker, vol. i. p. 403.
1036. Augustin. de Serm. Dom. in Monte, ii. 5. Tertullian. Contra Valentin. iii.; Apolog. xvi. Constitutiones Apostolicæ, ii. 57. Cyril. Catech. Mystag. i. 2. Hieronym. in Amos. vi. 14; Bingham, ‘Antiquities of Chr. Church,’ book viii. ch. 3, book xi. ch. 7, book xiii. ch. 8. J. M. Neale, ‘Eastern Church,’ part i. p. 956; Romanoff, ‘Greco-Russian Church,’ p. 67.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Augustin. on the Sermon of the Lord on the Mount, ii. 5. Tertullian. Against Valentin. iii.; Apology xvi. Apostolic Constitutions, ii. 57. Cyril. Catechesis Mystagogica. i. 2. Jerome. in Amos. vi. 14; Bingham, ‘Antiquities of the Christian Church,’ book viii. ch. 3, book xi. ch. 7, book xiii. ch. 8. J. M. Neale, ‘Eastern Church,’ part i. p. 956; Romanoff, ‘Greco-Russian Church,’ p. 67.
1037. Billings, ‘N. Russia,’ p. 175.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Billings, ‘N. Russia,’ p. 175.
1038. Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 485.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Martius, ‘Ethnog. Amer.’ vol. i. p. 485.
1039. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. ii. p. 264.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. ‘Journ. Ind. Archip.’ vol. 2, p. 264.
1040. Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 184; Yate, p. 82; Polack, vol. i. p. 51; A. S. Thomson, vol. i. p. 118; Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. iv. p. 304. See Schirren, ‘Wandersagen der Neuseeländer,’ pp. 58, 183; Shortland, p. 145.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Taylor, ‘New Zealand,’ p. 184; Yate, p. 82; Polack, vol. i. p. 51; A. S. Thomson, vol. i. p. 118; Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. iv. p. 304. See Schirren, ‘New Zealand Myths and Legends,’ pp. 58, 183; Shortland, p. 145.
1041. Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i. p. 152.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. 1, p. 152.
1042. Munzinger, ‘Ost-Afrika,’ p. 387.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Munzinger, ‘East Africa,’ p. 387.
1043. Park, ‘Travels,’ ch. vi.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Park, ‘Travels,’ ch. 6
1044. J. L. Wilson, ‘Western Africa,’ p. 399. See also Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 279 (Watje); ‘Anthropological Review,’ Nov. 1864, p. 243 (Mpongwe); Barker-Webb and Berthelot, vol. ii. p. 163 (Tenerife).
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.J. L. Wilson, ‘Western Africa,’ p. 399. See also Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 279 (Watje); ‘Anthropological Review,’ Nov. 1864, p. 243 (Mpongwe); Barker-Webb and Berthelot, vol. ii. p. 163 (Tenerife).
1045. See pp. 5, 437.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. See pp. 5, 437.
1046. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. p. 261; part iii. p. 243, &c. Charlevoix, ‘Nouvelle France,’ vol. v. p. 425. Wilson in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iv. p. 294.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. p. 261; part iii. p. 243, & etc. Charlevoix, 'New France,' vol. v. p. 425. Wilson in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iv. p. 294.
1047. Casalis, ‘Basutos,’ p. 267.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Casalis, ‘Basutos,’ p. 267.
1048. Kolben, vol. i. pp. 273, 283.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Kolben, vol. I, pp. 273, 283.
1049. Bosman, in Pinkerton, vol. xvi. pp. 423, 527; Meiners, vol. ii. pp. 107, 463.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bosman, in Pinkerton, vol. 16, pp. 423, 527; Meiners, vol. 2, pp. 107, 463.
1050. Pallas, ‘Mongolische Völkerschaften,’ vol. i. p. 166, &c.; Strahlenberg, ‘Siberia,’ p. 97.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Pallas, ‘Mongolian Peoples,’ vol. i. p. 166, &c.; Strahlenberg, ‘Siberia,’ p. 97.
1051. Bourien in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 81.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Bourien in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. iii. p. 81.
1052. Dalton in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vi. p. 22; Shortt, ibid. vol. iii. p. 375.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Dalton in ‘Tr. Eth. Soc.’ vol. vi. p. 22; Shortt, same source vol. iii. p. 375.
1053. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part i. p. 255.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Schoolcraft, ‘Indian Tribes,’ part 1, p. 255.
1054. Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 127.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Brinton, ‘Myths of New World,’ p. 127.
1055. Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. i. p. 241; see pp. 407, 419.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Ellis, ‘Madagascar,’ vol. 1, p. 241; see pp. 407, 419.
1056. Casalis, ‘Basutos,’ p. 258.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Casalis, ‘Basutos,’ p. 258.
1057. Grout, ‘Zulu-land,’ p. 147; Backhouse, ‘Mauritius and S. Africa,’ pp. 213, 225.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Grout, ‘Zulu-land,’ p. 147; Backhouse, ‘Mauritius and S. Africa,’ pp. 213, 225.
1058. Bastian, ‘Mensch,’ vol. iii. p. 75; Rubruquis, in Pinkerton, vol. vii. p. 82; Plano Carpini in Hakluyt, vol. i. p. 37.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, ‘Man,’ vol. iii. p. 75; Rubruquis, in Pinkerton, vol. vii. p. 82; Plano Carpini in Hakluyt, vol. i. p. 37.
1059. Rivero and Tschudi, ‘Peruvian Antiquities,’ p. 180; J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrelig.’ p. 389; Acosta, ‘Ind. Occ.’ v. c. 25; Brinton, p. 126. See account of the rite of driving out sicknesses and evils into the rivers, ‘Rites and Laws of Incas,’ tr. and ed. by C. R. Markham, p. 22.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Rivero and Tschudi, ‘Peruvian Antiquities,’ p. 180; J. G. Müller, ‘Amer. Urrelig.’ p. 389; Acosta, ‘Ind. Occ.’ v. c. 25; Brinton, p. 126. See the account of the ritual for driving out sickness and evil into the rivers, ‘Rites and Laws of Incas,’ tr. and ed. by C. R. Markham, p. 22.
1060. Sahagun, ‘Nueva España,’ lib. vi.; Torquemada, ‘Monarquia Indiana,’ lib. xii.; Clavigero, vol. ii. pp. 39, 86, &c.; Humboldt, ‘Vues des Cordillères,’ Mendoza Cod.; J. G. Müller, p. 652.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Sahagun, 'New Spain,' book vi.; Torquemada, ‘Monarquia Indiana,’ book xii.; Clavigero, vol. ii. pp. 39, 86, &c.; Humboldt, ‘Vues des Cordillères,’ Mendoza Cod.; J. G. Müller, p. 652.
1061. Siebold, ‘Nippon,’ v. p. 22; Kempfer, ‘Japan,’ ch. xiii. in Pinkerton, vol. vii.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Siebold, ‘Nippon,’ p. 22; Kempfer, ‘Japan,’ ch. xiii in Pinkerton, vol. vii
1062. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. i. p. 120, vol. ii. p. 273. Davis, vol. i. p. 269.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. Doolittle, ‘Chinese,’ vol. I p. 120, vol. II p. 273. Davis, vol. I p. 269.
1063. Bastian, ‘Oestl. Asien,’ vol. ii. p. 247; Meiners, vol. ii. p. 106; Symes in Pinkerton, vol. ix. p. 435.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bastian, ‘Eastern Asia,’ vol. ii. p. 247; Meiners, vol. ii. p. 106; Symes in Pinkerton, vol. ix. p. 435.
1064. Köppen, ‘Religion des Buddha,’ vol. ii. p. 320; Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ pp. 151, 211; ‘Mensch,’ vol. ii. p. 499.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Köppen, 'Buddhism' vol. II. p. 320; Bastian, ‘Psychologie,’ pp. 151, 211; ‘Mensch,’ vol. II. p. 499.
1065. Leems, ‘Finnmarkens Lapper.’ Copenhagen, c. xiv., xxii., and Jessen, c. xiv.; Pinkerton, vol. i. p. 483; Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. iii. p. 77.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Leems, ‘Finnmarkens Lapper.’ Copenhagen, c. xiv., xxii., and Jessen, c. xiv.; Pinkerton, vol. i. p. 483; Klemm, ‘Cultur-Gesch.’ vol. iii. p. 77.
1066. Ward, ‘Hindoos,’ vol. ii. pp. 96, 246, 337; Colebrooke, ‘Essays,’ vol. ii. Wuttke, ‘Gesch. des Heidenthums,’ vol. ii. p. 378. ‘Rig-Veda,’ i. 22, 23.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ward, ‘Hindus,’ vol. ii. pp. 96, 246, 337; Colebrooke, ‘Essays,’ vol. ii. Wuttke, ‘History of Paganism,’ vol. ii. p. 378. ‘Rig-Veda,’ i. 22, 23.
1067. Avesta, Vendidad, v.-xii.; Lord, in Pinkerton, vol. viii. p. 570; Naoroji, ‘Parsee Religion’; Polak, ‘Persien,’ vol i. p. 355, &c., vol. ii. p. 271. Meiners, vol. ii. p. 125.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Avesta, Vendidad, v.-xii.; Lord, in Pinkerton, vol. viii. p. 570; Naoroji, ‘Parsee Religion’; Polak, ‘Persien,’ vol i. p. 355, &c., vol. ii. p. 271. Meiners, vol. ii. p. 125.
1068. Details in Smith’s ‘Dic. of Gr. and Rom. Ant.’ and Pauly, ‘Real-Encyclopedie,’ s.v. ‘amphidromia,’ ‘lustratio,’ ‘sacrificium,’ ‘funus’; Meiners, ‘Gesch. der Religionen,’ book vii.; Lomeyer, ‘De Veterum Gentilium Lustrationibus’; Montfaucon, ‘L’Antiquité Expliquée,’ &c. Special passages; Homer, Il. vi. 266; Eurip. Ion. 96; Theocrit. xxiv. 95; Virg. Æn. ii. 719; Plaut. Aulular. iii. 6; Pers. Sat. ii. 31; Ovid. Fast. i. 669, ii. 45, iv. 727; Festus, s.v. ‘aqua et ignis,’ &c. The obscure subject of lustration in the mysteries is here left untouched.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Details in Smith’s ‘Dic. of Gr. and Rom. Ant.’ and Pauly, ‘Real-Encyclopedia,’ s.v. ‘amphidromia,’ ‘lustratio,’ ‘sacrificium,’ ‘funus’; Meiners, 'History of Religions,' book vii.; Lomeyer, ‘On the Purifications of the Ancients’; Montfaucon, 'Antiquity Explained,' &c. Special passages; Homer, Il. vi. 266; Eurip. Ion. 96; Theocrit. xxiv. 95; Virg. Æn. ii. 719; Plaut. Aulular. iii. 6; Pers. Sat. ii. 31; Ovid. Fast. i. 669, ii. 45, iv. 727; Festus, s.v. ‘aqua et ignis,’ &c. The unclear topic of lustration in the mysteries is left untouched here.
1069. Ex. xxix. 4, xxx. 18, xl. 12; Lev. viii. 6, xiv. 8, xv. 5, xxii. 6; Numb. xix. &c.; Lightfoot in ‘Works,’ vol. xi.; Browne in Smith’s ‘Dic. of the Bible,’ s.v. ‘baptism;’ Calmet, ‘Dic.’ &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Ex. 29: 4, 30: 18, 40: 12; Lev. 8: 6, 14: 8, 15: 5, 22: 6; Numb. 19 & etc.; Lightfoot in ‘Works,’ vol. 11; Browne in Smith’s ‘Dic. of the Bible,’ s.v. ‘baptism;’ Calmet, ‘Dic.’ & etc.
1070. Reland, ‘De Religione Mohammedanica;’ Lane, ‘Modern Eg.’ vol. i. p. 98, &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Reland, ‘On the Religion of Muhammad;’ Lane, ‘Modern Egyptians’ vol. i. p. 98, &c.
1071. Bingham, ‘Antiquities of Christian Church,’ book xi. ch. 2. Grimm, ‘Deutsche Mythologie,’ p. 592; Leslie, ‘Early Races of Scotland,’ vol. i. p. 113; Pennant, in Pinkerton, vol. iii. p. 383.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Bingham, ‘Antiquities of Christian Church,’ book xi. ch. 2. Grimm, 'German Mythology,' p. 592; Leslie, ‘Early Races of Scotland,’ vol. i. p. 113; Pennant, in Pinkerton, vol. iii. p. 383.
1072. Rituale Romanum; Gaume, ‘L’Eau Bénite;’ Middleton, ‘Letter from Rome,’ &c.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Roman Ritual; Gaume, 'Holy Water;' Middleton, ‘Letter from Rome,’ &c.
1073. Rituale Romanum. Bingham, book x. ch. 2, book xv. ch. 3. See Mark vii. 34, viii. 23; John ix. 6.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.Roman Ritual. Bingham, book 10. Ch. 2, book 15. Ch. 3. See Mark 7 34, 8 23; John 9 6.
- Transcriber’s Notes:
- Footnotes have been collected at the end of the text, and are linked for ease of reference.
Download ePUB
If you like this ebook, consider a donation!