{"collection":"myth-cosmogony","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_61220/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_61220","id":"gutenberg_61220","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/61220","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Archaeology & Anthropology","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Mythology","Religion","Religions -- History"],"text":"_AMERICAN LECTURES ON THE\n                          HISTORY OF RELIGIONS_\n\n                         SECOND SERIES\u20141896-1897\n\n                         RELIGIONS OF PRIMITIVE\n                                 PEOPLES\n\n                                   BY\n               DANIEL G. BRINTON, A.M., M.D., LL.D., SC.D.\n         Professor of American Arch\u00e6ology and Linguistics in the\n                University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia\n\n                           _FOURTH IMPRESSION_\n\n                           G. P. PUTNAM\u2019S SONS\n                           NEW YORK AND LONDON\n                         The Knickerbocker Press\n\n                             COPYRIGHT, 1897\n                                   BY\n                           G. P. PUTNAM\u2019S SONS\n\n                   Entered at Stationers\u2019 Hall, London\n\n                    The Knickerbocker Press, New York\n\n\n\n\nANNOUNCEMENT.\n\n\nOn the 24th of December, 1891, fifteen persons interested in promoting\nthe historical study of religions united in issuing a circular-letter,\ninviting a conference in the Council Chambers of the Historical Society\nof Philadelphia, on the 30th of the same month, for the purpose of\ninstituting \u201cpopular courses in the History of Religions, somewhat after\nthe style of the Hibbert lectures in England, to be delivered annually\nby the best scholars of Europe and this country, in various cities, such\nas Baltimore, Boston, Brooklyn, Chicago, New York, Philadelphia, and\nothers.\u201d There participated in this conference personally or by letter\nfrom Philadelphia, Rev. Prof. E. T. Bartlett, D.D., Rev. George Dana\nBoardman, D.D., Prof. D. G. Brinton, M.D., Sc.D., Horace Howard Furness,\nLL.D., Prof. E. J. James, Ph.D., Prof. Morris Jastrow, Jr., Ph.D.,\nProvost Wm. Pepper, M.D., LL.D., of the University of Pennsylvania,\nHon. Mayer Sulzberger, Mrs. Cornelius Stevenson, and Talcott Williams,\nLL.D.; from Baltimore, Prest. D. C. Gilman, LL.D., of the Johns Hopkins\nUniversity, and Prof. Paul Haupt, Ph.D.; from Boston and Cambridge, Rev.\nE. E. Hale, D.D., Prof. C. R. Lanman, Ph.D., Prof. D. G. Lyon, Ph.D., and\nProf. C. H. Toy, LL.D.; from Brooklyn, Rev. Edward S. Braislin, D.D.,\nand Prof. Franklin W. Hooper of the Brooklyn Institute; from Chicago,\nPrest. W. R. Harper, Ph.D., of the University of Chicago, and Rev. Prof.\nEmil G. Hirsch, Ph.D.; from New York, Rev. Prof. C. A. Briggs, D.D.,\nLL.D., Rev. Prof. Francis Brown, D.D., Rev. G. Gottheil, D.D., Prof. R.\nJ. H. Gottheil, Ph.D., Rev. John P. Peters, Ph.D., and Rev. W. Hayes\nWard, D.D., LL.D.; from Ithaca, N. Y., Prest. J. G. Schurman of Cornell\nUniversity, and Hon. Andrew D. White, LL.D.\n\nAt this conference Prof. Jastrow submitted a plan for establishing\npopular lecture courses on the historical study of religions by securing\nthe co-operation of existing institutions and lecture associations, such\nas the Lowell, Brooklyn, and Peabody Institutes, the University Lecture\nAssociation of Philadelphia, and some of our colleges and universities.\nEach course, according to this plan, was to consist of from six to eight\nlectures, and the engagement of lecturers, choice of subjects, and so\nforth were to be in the hands of a committee chosen from the different\ncities, and representing the various institutions and associations\nparticipating. This general scheme met with the cordial approval of the\nconference, which voted the project both a timely and useful one, and\nwhich appointed Dean Bartlett, Prof. Jastrow, and Dr. Peters a committee\nto elaborate a plan of organisation and report at an adjourned meeting.\nThat meeting was held at the Union Theological Seminary in New York City,\nFebruary 6, 1892, and, as a result, an association was organised for the\npurpose of encouraging the study of religions. The _terms_ of association\nthen adopted, with slight modifications introduced later, are as follows:\n\n    1.\u2014The object of this Association shall be to provide courses\n    of lectures on the history of religions, to be delivered in\n    various cities.\n\n    2.\u2014The Association shall be composed of delegates from\n    institutions agreeing to co-operate, or from local boards,\n    organised where such co-operation is not possible.\n\n    3.\u2014These Delegates\u2014one from each Institution or Local\n    Board\u2014shall constitute themselves a council under the name\n    of the \u201cAmerican Committee for Lectures on the History of\n    Religions.\u201d\n\n    4.\u2014The Council shall elect out of its number a President, a\n    Secretary, and a Treasurer.\n\n    5.\u2014All matters of local detail shall be left to the\n    Institutions or Local Boards, under whose auspices the lectures\n    are to be delivered.\n\n    6.\u2014A course of lectures on some religion, or phase of religion,\n    from an historical point of view, or on a subject germane to\n    the study of religions, shall be delivered annually, or at such\n    intervals as may be found practicable, in the different cities\n    represented by this Association.\n\n    7.\u2014The Council (_a_) shall be charged with the selection of the\n    lecturers, (_b_) shall have charge of the funds, (_c_) shall\n    assign the time for the lectures in each city, and perform such\n    other functions as may be necessary.\n\n    8.\u2014Polemical subjects, as well as polemics in the treatment of\n    subjects, shall be positively excluded.\n\n    9.\u2014The lecturer shall be chosen by the Council at least ten\n    months before the date fixed for the course of lectures.\n\n    10.\u2014The lectures shall be delivered in the various cities\n    between the months of October and June.\n\n    11.\u2014The copyright of the lectures shall be the property of the\n    Association.\n\n    12.\u2014One half of the lecturer\u2019s compensation shall be paid at\n    the completion of this entire course, and the second half upon\n    the publication of the lectures.\n\n    13.\u2014The compensation offered to the lecturer shall be fixed in\n    each case by the Council.\n\n    14.\u2014The lecturer is not to deliver elsewhere any of the\n    lectures for which he is engaged by the Committee, except with\n    the sanction of the Committee.\n\nThe Committee appointed to carry out this plan as now constituted, is as\nfollows:\n\n    Prof. C. H. Toy, of Harvard University, Chairman.\n\n    Prof. Morris Jastrow, Jr., of the University of Pennsylvania,\n    Secretary.\n\n    Rev. John P. Peters, D. D., of New York, Treasurer.\n\n    Prof. Richard J. H. Gottheil, of Columbia University.\n\n    Prof. Paul Haupt, of the Johns Hopkins University.\n\n    Prof. F. W. Hooper, of the Brooklyn Institute.\n\n    Prof. J. F. Jameson, of Brown University.\n\n    Prof. F. K. Sanders, of Yale University.\n\n    President J. G. Schurman, of Cornell University.\n\nFor its first course the Committee selected as lecturer Prof. T. W.\nRhys Davids, Ph.D. LL.D., of London, England, who delivered a course\nof lectures in the winter of 1894-95 on The History and Literature\nof Buddhism, at the following places, with the co-operation of the\ninstitutions named:\n\n    Baltimore, before the Johns Hopkins University.\n\n    Boston, at the Lowell Institute.\n\n    Brooklyn, at the Brooklyn Institute.\n\n    Ithaca, before the Cornell University.\n\n    New York, before the Columbia University.\n\n    Philadelphia, before the University of Pennsylvania Lecture\n    Association.\n\n    Providence, before the Brown University Lecture Association.\n\nProfessor Davids\u2019 lectures were published in 1896 by arrangement with\nMessrs. G. P. Putnam\u2019s Sons, the publishers to the Committee, as the\nFirst Series of The American Lectures on the History of Religions.\nAs the second lecturer, the Committee chose Prof. Daniel G. Brinton,\nA.M., M.D., LL.D., Sc.D., of Philadelphia; and as the subject, \u201cThe\nReligions of Primitive Peoples.\u201d Dr. Brinton, who holds the chair of\nAmerican Arch\u00e6ology and Linguistics in the University of Pennsylvania,\nis a leading authority on the languages and customs of the American\nIndians, and on Anthropology in general. His studies have led him also\ninto the domain of Prehistoric Arch\u00e6ology and Comparative Mythology. As\nthe product of his investigations in the latter field, he published as\nearly as 1868, _The Myths of The New World_, which at once attracted the\nattention of scholars, and has passed through several editions since.\nIn 1876 he issued an important contribution to the Science of Religion,\nunder the title, _The Religious Sentiment_. In addition to this he has\npublished a large number of works on American Languages on Anthropology,\nand Arch\u00e6ology, the most notable of which is the series Library of\nAboriginal American Literature. His papers, scattered in various\nscientific periodicals of this country and Europe, number several hundred.\n\nThe lectures delivered by him under the auspices of the Committee\nrepresent the ripe fruit of many years of study, and will, we feel\nassured, be welcomed as an important contribution to a subject now\nattracting much attention.\n\nThe lectures were delivered during the winter of 1896-97, at the\nfollowing places:\n\n    Boston, (Lowell Institute).\n\n    Brooklyn, (Brooklyn Institute).\n\n    Ithaca, (Cornell University).\n\n    New Haven, (Yale University).\n\n    New York, (New York University).\n\n    Philadelphia, (University of Pennsylvania).\n\n    Providence, (Brown University Lecture Association).\n\nThe object of this Association is to provide the best opportunities for\nbringing to the knowledge of the public at large the methods and results\nof those distinguished specialists who have devoted their lives to the\nstudy of the religions of other countries and other ages. It is safe to\nsay that there is no other subject of modern research which concerns\nall classes so nearly as the study of religions. It is the hope of the\nCommittee to provide courses at intervals of two years, or oftener, if\nthe encouragement which the undertaking receives warrants it, and the\npractical difficulties involved in securing competent lecturers do not\nmake it impossible.\n\nArrangements have been made for a course of lectures during the winter of\n1897-98, by the Rev. T. K. Cheyne, M.A., D.D., Professor of Old Testament\nInterpretation at Oriel College, Oxford, and Canon of Rochester;\nwhose subject will be Religious Thought and Life among the Hebrews in\nPost-Exilic Days, to be followed in 1898-99 by a complementary course\non Religious Life and Thought among the Hebrews in Pre-Exilic Days, by\nProfessor Karl Budde, of the University of Strasburg, Germany.\n\n                                                      JOHN P. PETERS,\n                                                      C. H. TOY,\n                                                      MORRIS JASTROW, JR.\n\n_Committee on Publication._\n\n_May 10, 1897._\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\n\n                                                                      PAGE\n\n     LECTURE I. THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF PRIMITIVE RELIGIONS\u2014METHODS\n                            AND DEFINITIONS.\n\n  Ethnology Defined\u2014The Scientific Study of Religions\u2014It is not\n  Theology\u2014Its Methods: 1. The Historic Method; 2. The Comparative\n  Method; 3. The Psychologic Method\u2014Strange Coincidences in\n  Human Thought\u2014Conspicuous in Primitive Religions\u2014\u201cPrimitive\u201d\n  Peoples Defined\u2014The Savage Mind\u2014Examples\u2014Means of Study: 1.\n  Arch\u00e6ology; 2. Language: 3. Folk-Lore; 4. Descriptions of\n  Travellers\u2014Examples: The Early Aryans, Etruscans, Semites,\n  Egyptians, American Tribes, Australians, Polynesians,\n  etc.\u2014\u201cReligions\u201d Defined\u2014Compared with \u201cSuperstitions\u201d\u2014No One\n  Belief Essential to Religion\u2014Atheistic Religions\u2014Fundamental\n  Identity of Religions\u2014No Tribe Known Devoid of a Religion\u2014How the\n  Opposite Opinion Arose\u2014Earliest Men probably had No Religion\u2014No\n  Signs of Religion in Lower Animals\u2014Power of Religion in Primitive\n  Society\u2014True Source of Religion                                        1\n\n       LECTURE II. THE ORIGIN AND CONTENTS OF PRIMITIVE RELIGIONS.\n\n  Former Theories of the Origin of Religions\u2014Inadequacy of\n  these\u2014Universal Postulate of Religions that Conscious\n  Volition is the Source of Force\u2014How Mind was Assigned\n  to Nature\u2014Communion between the Human and the Divine\n  Mind\u2014Universality of \u201cInspiration\u201d\u2014Inspiration the Product of\n  the Sub-Conscious Mind\u2014Known to Science as \u201cSuggestion\u201d\u2014This\n  Explained\u2014Examples\u2014Illustrations from Language\u2014No Primitive\n  Monotheism\u2014The Special Stimuli of the Religious Emotions:\n  1. Dreaming and Allied Conditions\u2014Life as a Dream\u20142. The\n  Apprehension of Life and Death and the Notion of the Soul\u20143. The\n  Perception of Light and Darkness; Day and Night\u2014The Sky God as\n  the High God\u20144. The Observation of Extraordinary Exhibitions of\n  Force\u2014The Thunder God\u20145. The Impression of Vastness\u2014Dignity of\n  the Sub-Conscious Intelligence                                        41\n\n        LECTURE III. PRIMITIVE RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION: IN THE WORD.\n\n  An Echo Myth\u2014The Power of Words\u2014Their Magical Potency\u2014The\n  Curse\u2014Power Independent of Meaning\u2014The Name as an Attribute\u2014The\n  Sacred Names\u2014The Ineffable Name\u2014\u201cMyrionomous\u201d Gods\u2014\u201cTheophorous\u201d\n  Names\u2014Suggestion and Repetition as Stimulants\u2014I. The Word\n  _to_ the gods: Prayer\u2014Its Forms, Contents, and Aims\u2014II. The\n  Word _from_ the gods: The Law and the Prophecy\u2014The Ceremonial\n  Law, or _tabu_\u2014Examples\u2014Divination and Prediction\u2014III. The\n  Word _concerning_ the gods: The Myths\u2014Their Sources chiefly\n  Psychic\u2014Some from Language\u2014Examples\u2014Transference\u2014Similarities\u2014The\n  Universal Mythical Cycles: 1. The Cosmical Concepts; 2. The\n  Sacred Numbers; 3. The Drama of the Universe; Creation and Deluge\n  Myths; 4. The Earthly Paradise; 5. The Conflict of Nature; 6. The\n  Returning Saviour; 7. The Journey of the Soul\u2014Conclusion as to\n  these Identities                                                      86\n\n       LECTURE IV. PRIMITIVE RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION: IN THE OBJECT.\n\n  Visual Ideas\u2014Fetishism\u2014Not Object-Worship only\u2014Identical with\n  Idolatry\u2014Modern Fetishism\u2014Animism\u2014Not a Stadium of Religion\u2014The\n  Chief Groups of Religious Objects: 1. The Celestial Bodies\u2014Sun\n  and Moon Worship\u2014Astrolatry; 2. The Four Elements\u2014Fire, Air (the\n  Winds), Water, and the Earth\u2014Symbolism of Colours; 3. Stones\n  and Rocks\u2014Thunderbolts\u2014Memorial Stones\u2014Divining Stones; 4. Trees\n  and Plants\u2014The Tree of Life\u2014The Sacred Pole and the Cross\u2014The\n  Plant-Soul\u2014The Tree of Knowledge; 5. Places and Sites\u2014High Places\n  and Caves; 6. The Lower Animals\u2014The Bird, the Serpent, etc.; 7.\n  Man\u2014Anthropism in Religion\u2014The Worship of Beauty; 8. Life and its\n  Transmission\u2014Examples\u2014Genesiac Cults\u2014The Fatherhood of God\u2014Love\n  as Religion\u2019s Crown                                                  130\n\n         LECTURE V. PRIMITIVE RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION: IN THE RITE.\n\n  The Ritual a Mimicry of the Gods\u2014Magical Rites\u2014Division of Rites\n  into I. Communal, and II. Personal. I. Communal Rites: 1. The\n  Assemblage\u2014The Liturgy\u20142. The Festal Function\u2014Joyous Character of\n  Primitive Rites\u2014Commensality\u2014The \u201cCeremonial Circuit\u201d\u2014Masks and\n  Dramas\u20143. The Sacrifice\u2014Early and Later Forms\u20144. The Communion\n  with God\u2014Pagan Eucharists. II. Personal Rites: 1. Relating\n  to Birth\u2014Vows and Baptism\u20142. Relating to Naming\u2014The Personal\n  Name\u20143. Relating to Puberty\u2014Initiation of Boys and Girls\u20144.\n  Relating to Marriage\u2014Marriage \u201cby Capture\u201d and \u201cby Purchase\u201d\u20145.\n  Relating to Death\u2014Early Cannibalism\u2014Sepulchral Monuments\u2014Funerary\n  Ceremonies\u2014Modes of Burial\u2014Customs of Mourning                       172\n\n      LECTURE VI. THE LINES OF DEVELOPMENT OF PRIMITIVE RELIGIONS.\n\n  Pagan Religions not wholly Bad\u2014Their Lines of Development as\n  Connected with: 1. The Primitive Social Bond\u2014The Totem, the\n  Priesthood, and the Law; 2. The Family and the Position of Woman;\n  3. The Growth of Jurisprudence\u2014The Ordeal, Trial by Battle,\n  Oaths, and the Right of Sanctuary\u2014Religion is Anarchic; 4. The\n  Development of Ethics\u2014Dualism of Primitive Ethics\u2014Opposition of\n  Religion to Ethics; 5. The Advance in Positive Knowledge\u2014Religion\n  _versus_ Science; 6. The Fostering of the Arts\u2014The Aim for\n  Beauty and Perfection\u2014Colour-Symbolism, Sculpture, Metre,\n  Music, Oratory, Graphic Methods\u2014Useful Arts, Architecture;\n  7. The Independent Life of the Individual\u2014His Freedom and\n  Happiness\u2014Inner Stadia of Progress: 1. From the Object to the\n  Symbol; 2. From the Ceremonial Law to the Personal Ideal; 3. From\n  the Tribal to the National Conception of Religion\u2014Conclusion         214\n\n\n\n\nRELIGIONS OF PRIMITIVE PEOPLES\n\n\n\n\nLECTURE I.\n\nThe Scientific Study of Primitive Religions\u2014Methods and Definitions.\n\n    CONTENTS:\u2014Ethnology Defined\u2014The Scientific Study of\n    Religions\u2014It is not Theology\u2014Its Methods: 1. The Historic\n    Method; 2. The Comparative Method; 3. The Psychologic\n    Method\u2014Strange Coincidences in Human Thought\u2014Conspicuous in\n    Primitive Religions\u2014\u201cPrimitive\u201d Peoples Defined\u2014The Savage\n    Mind\u2014Examples\u2014Means of Study: 1. Arch\u00e6ology; 2. Language;\n    3. Folk-Lore; 4. Descriptions of Travellers\u2014Examples: The\n    Early Aryans, Etruscans, Semites, Egyptians, American\n    Tribes, Australians, Polynesians, etc.\u2014\u201cReligions\u201d\n    Defined\u2014Compared with \u201cSuperstitions\u201d\u2014No One Belief Essential\n    to Religion\u2014Atheistic Religions\u2014Fundamental Identity of\n    Religions\u2014No Tribe Known Devoid of a Religion\u2014How the Opposite\n    Opinion Arose\u2014Earliest Men probably had No Religion\u2014No Signs\n    of Religion in Lower Animals\u2014Power of Religion in Primitive\n    Society\u2014True Source of Religion.\n\n\nThe youngest in the sisterhood of the sciences is that which deals with\nMan. In its widest scope it is called Anthropology, and as such includes\nboth the physical and mental life of the species, from the beginning\nuntil now. That branch of it which especially concerns itself with the\ndevelopment of man as indicated by his advance in civilisation, is known\nas Ethnology.\n\nWhen we analyse the directive forces which have brought about this\nadvance, and whose study therefore makes up Ethnology, they can be\nreduced to four, to wit, Language, Laws, Arts, and Religion. Do not\nimagine, however, that these are separable, independent forces. On the\ncontrary, they are inseparable, constituent elements of an organic unity,\neach working through the others, and on the symmetrical adjustment of all\nof them to the needs of a community depend its prosperity and growth. No\none of them can be omitted or exaggerated without stunting or distorting\nthe national expansion. This lesson, taught by all ages and confirmed by\nevery example, warns us to be cautious in giving precedence to one over\nthe others in any general scheme; but we can profitably separate one from\nthe others, and study its origins and influence.\n\nOn this occasion I invite your attention to Religion, and especially as\ndisplayed in its earliest and simplest forms, in the faiths and rites of\nprimitive peoples. I shall present these to you in accordance with the\nprinciples and methods of Ethnology.\n\nThere is what has been called the \u201cscience of religion.\u201d The expression\nseems to me a little presumptuous\u2014or, at least, premature. We do not yet\nspeak of a \u201cscience of jurisprudence,\u201d although we have better materials\nfor it than for a science of religion. I shall content myself, therefore,\nin calling what I have to offer a study of early religions according to\nscientific methods.\n\nI need not remind you that such a method is absolutely without bias or\npartisanship; that it looks upon all religions alike as more or less\nenlightened expressions of mental traits common to all mankind in every\nknown age.[1] It concedes the exclusive possession of truth to none, and\nstill less does it aim to set up any other standard than past experience\nby which to measure the claims of any. It brings no new canons of faith\nor doctrine, and lays no other foundation than that which has been laid\neven from the beginning until now.\n\nBut just there its immediate utility and practical bearings are\nmanifested. It seeks to lay bare those eternal foundations on which the\nsacred edifices of religion have ever been and must ever be erected. It\naims to accomplish this by clearing away the incidental and adventitious\nin religions so as to discover what in them is permanent and universal.\nThose sacred ideas and institutions which we find repeated among all the\nearly peoples of the earth, often developing in after ages along parallel\nlines, will form the special objects of our investigation. The departures\nfrom these universal forms, we shall see, can be traced to local or\ntemporary causes, they turn on questions of environment, and serve merely\nto define the limits of variability of the ubiquitous principles of\nreligion as a psychic phenomenon, wherever we find it.\n\nThis is not \u201ctheology.\u201d That branch of learning aims to measure the\nobjective reality, the concrete truth, of some one or another opinion\nconcerning God and divine things; while the scientific study of religions\nconfines itself exclusively to examining such opinions as phases of human\nmental activity, and ascertaining what influence they have exerted on the\ndevelopment of the species or of some branch of it. Therefore it is never\n\u201cpolemic.\u201d It neither attacks nor defends the beliefs which it studies.\nIt confines itself to examining their character and influence by the\nlights of reason and history.\n\nThe methods which we employ in this process of reduction are three in\nnumber: 1. The Historic Method; 2. The Comparative Method; 3. The\nPsychologic Method. A few words will explain the scope of each of these.\n\nThe Historic Method studies the history of beliefs and the development of\nworship. It seeks to discover what influences have been exerted on them\nby environment, transmission, heredity, and conquest, and to bring into\nfull relief what is peculiar to the tribe or group under consideration,\nand what is exotic. For in one sense it is true that every nation and\ntribe, even every man, has his own religion.\n\nSuch ethnic traits merit the closest scrutiny. They are so marked\nand constant as to modify profoundly the history of even the ripest\nreligions. It is quite true, as has been observed by an historian of\nChristianity, that \u201cthere is in every people an hereditary disposition to\nsome particular heresy,\u201d[2] that is, to altering any religion which they\naccept in accordance with the special constitution of their own minds.\n\nThe Comparative Method notes the similarities and differences between the\nreligions of different tribes or groups, and, gradually extending its\nfield to embrace the whole species, endeavors, by excluding what is local\nor temporal, to define those forms of religious thought and expression\nwhich are common to humanity at large.\n\nThe Psychologic Method takes the results of both the previous methods\nand aims to explain them by referring the local manifestations to the\nspecial mental traits of the tribe or group, and the universal features\nto equally universal characteristics of the human mind.\n\nThe last, the Psychologic Method, is the crown and completion of the\nquest; for every advanced student of religion will subscribe to the\ndeclaration of Professor Granger, that \u201call mythology and all history\nof beliefs must finally turn to psychology for their satisfactory\nelucidation.\u201d[3] In other words, the laws of human thought can alone\nexplain its own products.\n\nAnd here I must mention a startling discovery, the most startling, it\nseems to me, of recent times. It is that these laws of human thought are\nfrightfully rigid, are indeed automatic and inflexible. The human mind\nseems to be a machine; give it the same materials, and it will infallibly\ngrind out the same product. So deeply impressed by this is an eminent\nmodern writer that he lays it down as \u201ca fundamental maxim of ethnology\u201d\nthat, \u201cwe do not think; thinking merely goes on within us.\u201d[4]\n\nThese strange coincidences find their explanation in experimental\npsychology. This science, in its modern developments, establishes the\nfact that the origin of ideas is due to impressions on the nerves of\nsense. The five senses give rise to five classes of ideas, the most\nnumerous of which are those from the sense of sight, visual ideas, and\nthose from the sense of hearing, auditory ideas. The former yield the\nconceptions of space, motion, and lustre (colour, brightness, etc.),\nthe latter that of time. From the sense of touch arise the \u201ctactual\u201d\nimpressions, which yield the ideas of power and might, through the\nsensations of resistance and pressure, pleasure and pain. From these\nprimary ideas (or perceptions), drawn directly from impressions,\nare derived secondary, abstract, and general ideas (apperceptions)\nby comparison and association (the laws of Identity, Diversity, and\nSimilarity).\n\nUnder ordinary conditions of human life there are many more impressions\non the senses which are everywhere the same or similar, than the\nreverse. Hence, the ideas, both primary and secondary (perceptions and\napperceptions), drawn from them are much more likely to resemble than to\ndiffer.\n\nThe consequence of this is that the same laws of growth which develop the\nphysical man everywhere into the traits of the species, act also on his\npsychical powers, and not less absolutely, to bring their products into\nconformity.\n\nThis is true not only of his logical faculties, but of his lightest\nfancies and wildest vagaries. \u201cMan\u2019s imagination,\u201d observes Mr. Hartland,\n\u201clike every other known power, works by fixed laws, the existence and\noperation of which it is possible to trace; and it works upon the same\nmaterial,\u2014the external universe, the mental and moral constitution of\nman, and his social relations.\u201d[5]\n\nIn reference to my particular subject, Professor Buchmann expressed some\nyears ago what I believe to be the correct result of modern research\nin these words: \u201cIt is easy to prove that the striking similarity\nin primitive religious ideas comes not from tradition nor from the\nrelationship or historic connections of early peoples, but from the\nidentity in the mental construction of the individual man, wherever he is\nfound.\u201d[6]\n\nWe can scarcely escape a painful shock to discover that we are bound by\nsuch adamantine chains. As the primitive man could not conceive that\ninflexible mechanical laws control the processes of nature, so are we\nslow to acknowledge that others, not less rigid, rule our thoughts and\nfancies.\n\nNowhere, however, is the truth of it more clearly demonstrated than in\nprimitive religions. Without a full appreciation of this fact, it is\nimpossible to comprehend them; and for the lack of it, much that has\nbeen written upon them is worthless. The astonishing similarity, the\nabsolute identities, which constantly present themselves in myths and\ncults separated by oceans and continents, have been construed as evidence\nof common descent or of distant transmission; whereas they are the\nproofs of a fundamental unity of the human mind and of its processes,\n\u201cbefore which,\u201d as a German writer says, \u201cthe differences in individual,\nnational, or even racial divisions sink into insignificance.\u201d[7] Wherever\nwe turn, in time or in space, to the earliest and simplest religions of\nthe world, we find them dealing with nearly the same objective facts in\nnearly the same subjective fashion, the differences being due to local\nand temporal causes.\n\nThis cardinal and basic truth of the unity of action of man\u2019s\nintelligence, which is established just as much for the arts, the laws,\nand the institutions of men as for their religions, enables me to\npresent to you broadly the faiths of primitive peoples as one coherent\nwhole, the product of a common humanity, a mirror reflecting the deepest\nthoughts of the whole species on the mighty questions of religious life\nand hope, not the isolated or borrowed opinions of one or another tribe\nor people.\n\nOf course, the recognition of this principle does not diminish the\nattention to be paid to the ethnic or local developments of culture and\nto the borrowing or transference of myths and rites. Wherever this can be\nshown to have occurred, it is an adequate explanation of identities; but\nin tribes geographically remote, the presumption is that such identities\nare due to the common element of humanity in the species.\n\nSuch similarities are by no means confined to the primitive forms of\nreligion; but in them they are more obvious, and their causes are\nmore apparent; so for that reason, a study of such primitive forms is\npeculiarly remunerative to one who would acquaint himself with the\nelements of religion in general. No one, in fact, can pretend to a\nthorough knowledge of the great historic religions of the world who has\nnot traced their outlines back to the humble faiths of early tribes from\nwhich they emerged.\n\nHe must have recourse to them for like reasons that the biologist, who\nwould learn the morphology of a mammal, betakes himself to the study of\nthe cells and fibres of the simplest living organisms; for in their\nuncomplicated forms he can discover the basic activities which animate\nthe highest structures.\n\nI must define, however, more closely what ethnologists mean by \u201cprimitive\npeoples\u201d; because the word is not used in the sense of \u201cfirst\u201d or\n\u201cearliest,\u201d as its derivation would indicate. We know little, if\nanything, about the earliest men, and their religion would make a short\nchapter. \u201cPrimitive\u201d to the ethnologist means the earliest of a given\nrace or tribe of whom he has trusty information. It has reference to a\nstage of culture, rather than to time. Peoples who are in a savage or\nbarbarous condition, with slight knowledge of the arts, lax governments,\nand feeble institutions, are spoken of as \u201cprimitive,\u201d although they may\nbe our contemporaries. They are very far from being the earliest men or\nresembling them. Hundreds of generations have toiled to produce even\ntheir low stage of culture up through others, far inferior, of which we\ncan form some idea by the aid of language and prehistoric arch\u00e6ology.\n\nThey are therefore not degenerates, ruins fallen from some former high\nestate, some condition of pristine nobility. That is an ancient error,\nnow, I hope, exploded and dismissed from sane teaching. Even the rudest\nof savages is a creation of steady, long-continued advancement from the\nprimeval man. We have the evidence of what he was, in his implements\nand weapons preserved in pre-glacial strata and in the mud-floors of the\ncaves he inhabited.\n\nThese announce to us a law of progressive advancement for all races, over\nall the earth, on the same lines of progress, toward the same goals of\nculture, extremely slow at the outset, and unequal especially in later\nages, but vindicating the unity of the species and the identity of its\nhopes and aims everywhere.\n\nYou will understand, therefore, that by \u201cprimitive peoples,\u201d I mean\nsavage or barbarous tribes, wherever they are or have been, and that I\nclaim for them brotherhood with ourselves in all the traits that go to\nmake up oneness of species. A few hundred years ago the ancestors of the\nEnglish-speaking nations were as savage as the savagest, without temples\nto their gods, in perpetual and bloody war, untamed cannibals; add a few\nthousand years to the perspective, and man over the whole globe was in\nthe same condition.\n\nThe savage state was the childhood of the race, and by some the mind of\nthe savage has been likened to that of the child. But the resemblance\nis merely superficial. It rather resembles that of the uncultivated and\nignorant adult among ourselves. The same inaccurate observation and\nillogical modes of thought characterise both. These depend on certain\nmental traits, which it is well to define, because they explain most of\nthe absurdities of primitive religions.\n\nThe first is, that the idea is accepted as true, without the process of\nlogical reasoning or inductive observation. In other words, what appears\ntrue to the individual is accepted by him as true, without further\nquestion. His dreams seem real to him; therefore they are real. What the\ntribe believes, he believes, no matter what his senses tell him.\n\nWhen an Australian Black is on a journey and fears being overtaken by the\nnight, he will place a lump of clay in the forks of a tree, believing\nthat thus he can arrest the motion of the sun and prolong the day. It is\nnot a religious act, but a piece of natural science current in the tribe,\nwhich no experience will refute in their minds.[8]\n\nJust such a notion recurs among the Mandan Indians. Captain Clark\nobserved near their villages upright poles fifteen or twenty feet\nlong with bundles of female clothing tied to them. He asked what they\nsignified, and one of the old men explained thus: \u201cIf you watch the sun\nclosely, you will see that he stops for a short time just as he rises,\nand again at midday, and as he sets. The reason is that he rests a few\nmoments to smoke in the lodges of three immortal women, and we offer them\nthis clothing that they may be induced to say a kind word to him in our\nbehalf. We were told by our ancestors not to forget this.\u201d[9] The fact\nthat the orb does not stop was of no consequence in the face of this\ntradition.\n\nThe second trait is the extreme nervous susceptibility of savages. It\nis much higher than ours, although the contrary is often taught. Their\nemotions or feelings control their reasoning powers, and direct their\nactions. Neurotic diseases, especially of a contagious character, are\nvery frequent among them, and they are far more prone than ourselves to\nyield to impressions upon their sensory organs. The traveller Castren\nrelates that a sudden blow on the outside of a tent of the Samoyeds will\nsometimes throw the occupants into spasms; and the missionary Livingstone\ndraws a touching picture of young slaves dying of \u201ca broken heart,\u201d when\nthey heard the song and music of the villagers and could not join in the\nrevelry.[10]\n\nThese two traits, therefore, the acceptance of the idea as subjectively\ntrue, and the subordination of reason to the feelings, are the main\nfeatures of the undeveloped mind. They are common in civilised\nconditions, but are universal in savagery.\n\nThe question has often been considered whether the mental powers of the\nsavage are distinctly inferior. This has been answered by taking the\nchildren of savages when quite young and bringing them up in civilised\nsurroundings. The verdict is unanimous that they display as much aptitude\nfor the acquisition of knowledge, and as much respect for the precepts\nof morality, as the average English or German boy or girl; but with less\noriginality or \u201cinitiative.\u201d\n\nI have been in close relations to several full-blood American Indians,\nwho had been removed from an aboriginal environment and instructed in\nthis manner; and I could not perceive that they were either in intellect\nor sympathies inferior to the usual type of the American gentleman.\nOne of them notably had a refined sense of humour, as well as uncommon\nacuteness of observation.\n\nThe assertion, however, is frequently advanced that in their savage state\nthey are of the earth earthy, that their whole time is taken up with the\ngratification of sensuous desires, and that they neither think nor care\nfor speculations of a super-sensuous or spiritual character.\n\nThe investigation of this point is desirable in a study of their\nreligions, for upon it depends the decision whether we can assign to\ntheir myths and rites a meaning deeper than that of deception, or\npassion, or frivolity.\n\nTo reach a decision, I take the most unfavourable example which can\nbe suggested,\u2014the Australian Blacks. Considering their number and the\nextent of their territory, they were, when discovered, the most degraded\npeople on the globe. They had nothing which could be called a government,\nand some dialects have no word for chief. None of them could count the\nfingers on one hand, for none of the dialects had any words for numerals\nbeyond _three_ or _four_. Mr. Hale, the eminent ethnographer, who was\namong them in 1843, says that they evinced \u201can almost brutal stupidity,\u201d\n\u201cdownright childishness and imbecility.\u201d[11]\n\nTheir natural feelings and moral perceptions seem incredibly blunted. I\ncan best illustrate this by narrating an incident which happened at a\nfrontier station, one of many of the same character.\n\nThe white family employed a native girl named Mattie about fifteen years\nold. She had a baby, which one day disappeared. On inquiry she stated\nthat her mother had said that she was too young to take care of a baby,\nand had therefore cooked and eaten it with some of her cronies. Mattie\ncried in telling this. Because her baby had been killed? Oh no! but\nbecause her mother had given her none of the tidbits, but only the bones\nto pick![12]\n\nYet even these seemingly hopeless brutes have an intricate system of\nkinship and marriage laws, the most rigid of any known. Marriage with\nsisters or first cousins is not only forbidden, \u201cIt is not conceived as\npossible.\u201d The prohibitions about food are so absolute that the natives\nwould perish of hunger rather than break them. Some of their religious\nceremonies entail voluntary mutilations of the most dreadful description.\nTheir mythology is extensive, and I shall have frequent occasion to quote\nit. And so far are they from an obtuse indifference to the future and the\npast, an accurate observer who lived among them says: \u201cThey wonder among\nthemselves and talk at night about these things, and the past existence\nof their race, and how they came here.\u201d[13]\n\nSavage tribes are distinctly unlettered. They belong in a stage of\nculture where the art of writing, as we understand it, is unknown. They\nhave no bibles, no sacred books, by which to teach their religions. What\nmeans have we, therefore, to learn their opinions about holy things?\n\nThe question is one which demands an answer, the more because I shall\noften refer to the religions of tribes long since extinct, and whose very\nnames are forgotten. How do we dare to speak with confidence of what they\nthought about the gods?\n\nWe can do so, and it is one of the marvels of modern scientific research,\nquite as admirable as its more familiar and practical results.\n\nOur sources of information regarding primitive peoples may be classed\nunder four titles, Arch\u00e6ology, Language, Folk-lore, and Ethnographic\ndescriptions.\n\nBy the first of these, arch\u00e6ology, we become acquainted with the\nobjective remains of beliefs long since extinguished. The temples, idols,\nand altars of dead gods reveal to us the attributes assigned to them by\ntheir votaries and the influences they were believed to exert. We can\ninterpret their symbols, and from rude carvings re-construct the story of\ntheir divine struggles. Especially, from ancient sepulchres and the modes\nof disposal of the dead which they reveal, can we discern what hopes\nvanished nations held of a life to come.\n\nIn this direction, we are powerfully aided by that close similarity of\nmental products in like stages of culture, to which I have referred,\nand shall often refer. By comparing a living tribe with one which ten\nthousand years ago was in a similar condition as shown by its relics, we\ncan with the highest probability interpret the use and motives of the\nlatter\u2019s remains.\n\nWe are further assisted in such research by the critical analysis of\nthe early forms of language, which is one of the achievements of modern\nlinguistics. By establishing the identities of names, we can trace the\ndiffusion of myths, and by tracing such names to their proper dialect and\noriginal meaning, we can locate geographically and psychologically the\norigin of given forms of religions. In fact, the value of linguistics\nto the study of religions cannot be overestimated. No one is competent\nto describe the sacred beliefs of a nation, its myths and adjurations,\nunless he has a sufficient knowledge of its tongue to ascertain the true\nsense of the terms employed in its liturgies.\n\nBut these so obvious applications are the least that language can\nfurnish. Its impress on religions goes much deeper. It was well remarked\nby the Chevalier Bunsen that in primitive conditions the two poles of\nhuman life, around which all else centres, are language and religion,\nand that each conditions the other, that is, imparts to it special forms\nand limits.\n\nFor instance, those languages which have grammatic gender almost\nnecessarily divide their deities according to sex[14]; those in which the\npassive voice is absent or feebly developed, will be led to associate\nwith their deities higher conceptions of activity than where the passive\nis a favourite form: those which have no substantive verb cannot express\nGod as pure being, but must associate with Him either position, action,\nor suffering.\n\nIn the speech of the Algonquin Indians, there is no grammatic distinction\nof sex; but there is broad discrimination between objects which are\nanimate and those which are inanimate. When the Catholic missionaries\nbrought to them the rosary, the natives at first spoke of it as\ninanimate; but as their reverence for it grew, it was transferred to the\nanimate gender, and was thus on its way to a personification.[15]\n\nThe third source of information is that which is called folk-lore. Its\nfield of research is to collect the relics and survivals of primitive\nmodes of thought and expression, beliefs, customs, and notions, in the\npresent conditions of culture. It is, therefore, especially useful in\na study like the present, the more so on account of the extraordinary\npermanence and conservative character of religious sentiments and\nceremonies. Among the peasantry of Europe, the paganism of the days of\nJulius C\u00e6sar flourishes with scarcely abated vigour, though it may be\nunder new names. \u201cThe primitive Aryan,\u201d writes Professor Frazer,[16] \u201cis\nnot extinct; he is with us to-day.\u201d And another English writer does not\ngo too far when he says: \u201cThere is not a rite or ceremony yet practised\nand revered among us that is not the lineal descendant of barbaric\nthought and usage.\u201d[17] It is this which gives to folk-lore its extremely\ninstructive character for the student of early religion.\n\nThe fourth source of information is the description of native religions\nby travellers. You might expect this to be the most accurate and\ntherefore valuable of all the sources; but it is just the reverse.\nOmitting the ordinary tourist and globe-trotter, who is not expected\nto know anything thoroughly, and never deceives the expectation, even\npainstaking observers, who have lived long with savage tribes, sometimes\nmastering their languages, are, for reasons I shall presently state,\nconstantly at fault about the native religions. We must always take their\nnarratives with hesitation, and weigh them against others by persons of\na different nationality and education. Indeed, of all elements of native\nlife, this of religion is the most liable to be misunderstood by the\nforeign visitor.\n\nBearing in mind these various sources of information, what tribes,\nabout which we have sufficient knowledge, could fairly be considered as\nexamples of primitive conditions?\n\nBeginning with those remotest in time, I believe we know enough about\nthe early Aryans to claim it for them. The acute researches of recent\nscholars, so admirably summed up in the work of Professor Schrader,\nhave thrown a flood of light on the domestic, cultural, and religious\ncondition of the pristine epoch of Aryan society from the side of\nlanguage; while the tireless prosecution of prehistoric arch\u00e6ology in\nEurope has put us into possession of thousands of objects illustrating\nthe religious arts and usages then in vogue. Classical mythology and\nritual, as well as modern folk-lore, lend further efficient aid toward\nreconstructing the modes and expressions of their sacred thought.\n\nA very ancient people, possibly of Aryan blood, but more likely, I\nbelieve, to have come from North Africa and to be of Libyan affinities,\nwere the Etruscans. They were extremely religious, and their theological\nopinions deeply coloured the worship of the Romans. We know the general\noutlines of their doctrine of the gods, and its simplicity and grandeur\nbespeak our admiration. I shall draw from this venerable \u201cEtruscan\ndiscipline\u201d from time to time for illustrations.\n\nQuite as much may be said of the diligence of the explorers and scholars\nin the field of Semitic antiquity. We can without room for doubt trace\nthe stream of Semitic religious thought through the Hebrew Bible and\nthe Assyrian and Babylonian cuneiform tablets to a possibly non-Semitic\nsource among the Accadian or Sumerian population, which ten thousand\nyears ago had already begun to develop an artistic and agricultural life\non the Babylonian plain. Numerous students have restored the outlines and\nmotives of this ancient faith, whose forms and doctrines bind and shape\nour lives in America to-day.\n\nOf the possibly still older culture of Egypt, so much cannot be said. The\noriginal creeds of its religion have been less successfully divined. Like\nits early inscriptions, they were erased and overlaid so often by the\ncaprice or prejudice of successive dynasties, and so profoundly modified\nby foreign influences, that with our present knowledge they are no\nlonger legible.[18]\n\nTurning to the religions which have preserved their primitive forms to\nmodern times, the first place should be conceded to those of America. Up\nto four hundred years ago, all of them, throughout the continent, had\ndeveloped from an unknown antiquity untouched by the teachings of Asian\nor European instructors; for no really sane scholar nowadays believes\neither that St. Thomas preached Christianity in the New World in the\nfirst century, or that Buddhist monks in the seventh or any other century\ncarried their tenets into Mexico and Guatemala.\n\nMany of the American tribes, moreover, lived in the rudest stages of\nsocial life, ignorant of agriculture, without fixed abodes, naked\nor nearly so, in constant bloody strife, destitute even of tribal\ngovernment. Here, if anywhere, we should find the religious sentiment, if\nit exists at all, in its simplest elements.\n\nOn the other hand, the first European explorers found in Peru, Yucatan,\nand Mexico numerous tribes in almost a civilised condition, builders\nof huge edifices of carved stones, cultivating the soil, and acquainted\nwith a partly phonetic system of writing. Their mythology was ample and\ntheir ritual elaborate, so that it could scarcely be called primitive in\nappearance; but in all these instances, myth and ritual were so obviously\nidentical in character with those of the vagrant tribes elsewhere, that\nwe shall make no mistake in classifying them together.\n\nEqually isolated and surely as rude as the rudest were the native\nAustralians, the wavy-haired, bearded, black people who sparsely\ninhabited that huge island, two thousand miles wide by two thousand five\nhundred miles long. Isolated by arid stretches of desert, the struggle\nfor life was incessant, and there is little wonder that we find them\nin an incredibly debased condition associated with unending war and\ncannibalism. For these very reasons, their religious notions deserve our\nclosest scrutiny.\n\nThe vast island-world of Polynesia was peopled by related tribes, usually\nof limited cultivation, but with a rich mythology, of which we have\nmany strange and beautiful fragments. They are primitive in form and\nexpression, with singular differences as well as analogies to the beliefs\nof continental tribes.\n\nAfrica, with its countless dusky hordes, offers a less promising field\nto the student of the earliest phases of religion than we might expect.\nThe conditions of the arts, and the ruins of foreign-built cities unite\nwith the classic historians to show that in remote ages the influence\nof distant nations, from Egypt, Arabia, and India, on the typical black\npopulation was profound and far-reaching. The white Hamites of the north\ncrossed the Sahara and extended their arms far into the Soudan; while\non the east coast, the black Hamites and Arabic Ethiopians drove the\naborigines far to the South. Later, Arabic influences penetrated into the\ninterior, dissolving the older faiths or discolouring them. Thus, little\nof the independent development of religious thought remains in Africa.\nIts most primitive features are probably best preserved in the extreme\nSouth, among the Hottentots, Bushmen, and Zulus.\n\nOn the Asian continent, some of the Sibiric tribes in the north and some\nof those of Dravidian descent in the mountains of Hindoostan preserved\nto a late day their primitive traits; while the fading remnants of the\nVeddahs in Ceylon and the black islanders of Melanesia still continue in\nthe simple faiths of their ancestors.\n\nThese hints will indicate the chief sources from which I shall draw the\nmaterial to illustrate the rudimentary stages of religious thought and\nact, the embryonic period, as it were, of those emotions and beliefs\nwhich to us, in riper forms, are so dear and so holy.\n\nHere I must define what is meant in these lectures by \u201creligions.\u201d Most\npeople confine that term to the historic faiths and cults, calling others\n\u201csuperstitions\u201d and \u201cpaganisms.\u201d Some will not acknowledge that there is\nany religion whatever except their own; all other beliefs are heresies,\napostasies, or heathenisms. Even such an intelligent writer as Sir John\nLubbock expressed doubts in one of his works whether he ought to apply\nthe word \u201creligions\u201d to the worship tendered their deities by savages.\n\nOn the other hand, a Protestant will freely denounce the practices\nof the Roman Church as \u201csuperstitions,\u201d and will claim that they are\ndegenerations of religion; while among Protestants, the Quaker looks upon\nall external rites as equally \u201csuperstitious.\u201d\n\nNo such distinctions can be recognised in ethnology. The principle at\nthe basis of all religions and all superstitions is the same, as I shall\nshow in the next lecture, and the grossest rites of barbarism deserve the\nname of \u201creligion\u201d just as much as the refined ceremonies of Christian\nchurches. The aims of the worshipper may be selfish and sensuous, there\nmay be an entire absence of ethical intention, his rites may be empty\nformalities and his creed immoral, but this will be his religion all the\nsame, and we should not apply to it any other name.[19]\n\nThere is no one belief or set of beliefs which constitutes a religion.\nWe are apt to suppose that every creed must teach a belief in a god or\ngods, in an immortal soul, and in a divine government of the world. The\nParliament of Religions, which lately met at Chicago, announced, in its\npreliminary call, these elements as essential to the idea of religion.\n\nNo mistake could be greater. The religion which to-day counts the largest\nnumber of adherents, Buddhism, rejects every one of these items.[20] The\nJewish doctrine of the Old Testament, the Roman religion of the time\nof Julius C\u00e6sar, and many others, have not admitted the existence of a\nsoul, or the continuance of the individual life after death.[21] Some\nbelieve in souls, but not in gods; while a divine government is a thought\nrarely present in savage minds. They do not, as a rule, recognise any\nsuch principle as that of good and evil, or any doctrine of rewards and\npunishment hereafter for conduct in the present life.\n\nThere is, in fact, not any one item in any creed which is accepted\nby all religions; yet a common source, a common end in view, and the\nclosest analogy of means to that end, bind all in one, representing\nan indefeasible element of human nature, the lowest containing the\npotentiality of the highest, the highest being but the necessary\nevolution of the lowest. The same promptings which led the earliest of\nmen to frame their crude ideas about the super-sensuous around them have\nnourished and developed religions ever since, and keep them alive to-day.\nTemples may crumble and creeds decay, but the spirit remains the same.\n\nThis inherent unity of all religious feeling and expression was\nlong ago perceived by St. Augustine. In a well-known passage of his\n_Retractations_ he makes the striking remark: \u201cRes ipsa, qu\u00e6 nunc religio\nChristiana nuncupatur, erat apud antiquos, nec defuit ab initio generis\nhumani\u201d; \u201cThat which is now called the Christian religion existed among\nthe ancients, and in fact was with the human race from the beginning.\u201d\n\nThis is, essentially, the maxim of modern ethnology. The religiosity\nof man is a part of his psychical being. In the nature and laws of the\nhuman mind, in its intellect, sympathies, emotions, and passions, lie the\nwell-springs of all religions, modern or ancient, Christian or heathen.\nTo these we must refer, by these we must explain, whatever errors,\nfalsehoods, bigotry, or cruelty have stained man\u2019s creeds and cults: to\nthem we must credit whatever truth, beauty, piety, and love have hallowed\nand glorified his long search for the perfect and the eternal.\n\nIf this opinion of the place of religion in ethnology is correct, we\nshould not expect to find any considerable number of men, in the present\nepoch of the race\u2019s development, devoid of some form of worship and\nbelief.\n\nThe fact is that there has not been a single tribe, no matter how rude,\nknown in history or visited by travellers, which has been shown to be\ndestitute of religion, under some form.\n\nThe contrary of this has been asserted by various modern writers of\nweight, for example by Herbert Spencer and Sir John Lubbock, not from\ntheir own observation, for neither ever saw a savage tribe, but from the\nreports of travellers and missionaries.\n\nI speak advisedly when I say that every assertion to this effect when\ntested by careful examination has proved erroneous.[22]\n\nWhat led to such a mistaken opinion is easily seen. The missionaries\nwould not recognise as religion the beliefs which were so different from\nand inferior to their own. The god of the heathens was to them no god\nwhatever. When they heard stories of ghosts, magic, and charms, they\nspurned these as old wives\u2019 fables, and confidently proclaimed that the\ntribe had no religion. Thus it was with those who first worked in South\nAfrica. They returned and proclaimed that atheism was \u201cendemic\u201d among the\ntribes of that region. Later observers, acquainting themselves with the\nlanguages of the Blacks, found an ample mythology and an extensive ritual\nof worship.[23]\n\nAnother example may be quoted from a recent description of the Motu\ntribe of New Guinea. The writer, a missionary, denies that they have any\nreligion whatever; but immediately proceeds to describe their numerous\n\u201csuperstitious\u201d rites, their belief in spirits, their ceremonial law,\netc.![24]\n\nAnother and potent cause of error was the unwillingness of the natives\nto speak to foreigners of the sacred mysteries. This is not peculiar to\nthem, but obtains everywhere. In the polite society of our own cities, it\nis held to be an infraction of etiquette to question a person about his\nreligious opinions and practices. Greater repugnance would be felt were\nit known that the questioner could have no sympathy with one\u2019s opinions,\nand would probably hold them up to derision and contempt.\n\nEven a stronger deterrent motive closes the mouth of most savages giving\nsuch information. It is _tabu_, prohibited under severe penalties, to\nimpart it to any stranger, or even to another tribesman. The tendency\nto secrecy, to the esoteric, belongs to all religions, and especially\nto those in which the emotions are predominant, as is the case with\nprimitive cults.\n\nEven with a willing narrator, it is impossible to acquire a true\nunderstanding of a religion without a knowledge of the language in which\nits myths and precepts are couched. Ordinary interpreters are worse than\nuseless. Captain Bourke tells us that time and again he was assured by\nMexican interpreters who had lived for years among the Apaches that this\ntribe had no religion and no sacred ceremonies.\n\n\u201cThese interpreters,\u201d he adds, \u201chad no intention to deceive; they were\nsimply unable to disengage themselves from their own prejudices; they\ncould not credit the existence of any such thing as religion save\nand except that taught them at their mother\u2019s knees.\u201d[25] If these\nSpanish-Mexicans, who had passed half their lives among the natives,\ndenied them religion, what can we expect the ordinary traveller to learn\nin a few weeks\u2019 visit?\n\nReligion, therefore, is and has been, so far as history informs us,\nuniversal in the human race. Can we go farther back in time than history\nleads us, and say that it has ever been an element of humanity?\n\nThe resources at our command to answer this inquiry lie in prehistoric\narch\u00e6ology and linguistics.\n\nBeyond historic ages, and beyond those referred to by vague tradition,\nwhich we may call semi-historic, lies the epoch of culture called from\nits chief industry the Stone Age, divided into the more recent or\n\u201cneolithic\u201d period, and the older or \u201cpal\u00e6olithic\u201d period.\n\nConcerning the former, there can be no doubt whatever that religion\nexercised a tremendous influence on men\u2019s minds. We have numberless\nsepulchres of peoples then living, mighty mounds and massive temples,\nsuch as Stonehenge and Karnac; we have them by the tens of thousands,\nover vast areas, remaining as indubitable proofs that the chief market\nof the time of those early sons of the soil was to worship the gods and\nprepare for death. We have their idols, amulets, and mystic symbols,\ntheir altars and their talismans, so as to leave no doubt of their deep\ndevotion. No arch\u00e6ologist questions this.\n\nWhen we come to pal\u00e6olithic man, however, especially to those ancient\ntribes who lived in Western Europe when the great continental glacier\nchilled the air of Southern France to an arctic frigidity, or still\nearlier, in that pre-glacial summer when the hippopotamus found a\ncongenial home in the river Thames, we are not so sure. Among the many\nthousands of artificially shaped stone and bone objects which have been\ncollected from that horizon, there is not one which we can positively\nidentify as of religious purport, as a charm, amulet, fetish, or idol.\nThe rare instances in which the bones of the men of that age have been\npreserved reveal no positive signs of funerary rites.\n\nFor these reasons some able arch\u00e6ologists, such as Professor G. de\nMortillet, have maintained that man, as he then was, had not yet\ndeveloped his religious faculties. The evidence for this, is, indeed,\nnegative, and fresh discoveries may refute it, but the present\nprobability is that in the infancy of the race there was at least no\nobjective expression of religious feeling.[26]\n\nThis appears supported by testimony from another quarter. When we can\ntrace back the sacred words of a language to their original roots, we\nfind that these roots do not have religious associations, but refer to\nconcrete and sensuous images. There must have been a time, therefore,\nwhen those who spoke that original dialect employed these words without\nany religious meaning attached to them, and therefore had no religious\nideas expressed in their language, and presumably none defined in their\nminds.\n\nI am not sure, however, that this argument is so valid as some writers\nclaim. Those early men may have had other religious terms, now lost;\nand the current belief among linguists that all radicals had at first\nconcrete meanings is one I seriously doubt. Mental processes and feelings\nare just as real as actions, and in the aboriginal tongues of America\nare expressed by radicals as distinct and as ancient as any for sensuous\nperception.\n\nThere must, however, have been a time in the progress of organic forms\nfrom some lower to that highest mammal, Man, when he did not have a\nreligious consciousness; for it is doubtful if even the slightest traces\nof it can be discerned in the inferior animals.\n\nMr. Darwin, indeed, put in a plea that his favourite dog manifested the\nsame psychical traits which lead savages to believe in gods or spiritual\nagencies[27]; and lately Professor Pinsero, of Palermo, has argued that\nthe anthropoid apes cultivate a worship of serpents, even burying them\nwith considerable ceremony, and placing in their tombs a provision of\ninsects for their consumption in their future life![28]\n\nBut these scientific speculations have not found general acceptance, and\neven Professor Pinsero himself, while conceding religion to the ape,\ndenies it to prehistoric man of the earlier epochs.\n\nWe may conclude, therefore, that the development of the religious side of\nman\u2019s nature began at a very early period in his history as a species,\nthough probably it was extremely vague or practically absent in his first\nstadia; and that it is something distinctly human, and not shared in any\ndefinite form by even the best developed of the lower animals.\n\nIt is the only trait in which he is qualitatively separated from them.\nThey, too, communicate knowledge by sounds; they have governments and\narts; but never do we see anywhere among them the notion of the Divine.\nThis was the spark of Promethean fire which has guided man along the\ndarksome and devious ways of his earthly pilgrimage to the supremacy he\nnow enjoys.\n\nThe Greek fable tells us of the shepherd lad Endymion, who fed his sheep\non Mt. Latmus, and dreamed of no higher ambition, until in his sleep the\ngoddess Selene descended from heaven and embraced him. Inspired by her\ndivine touch, he waked to noble aspirations, and went forth to become\nmonarch of Elis and father of a line of kings.\n\nSo the human mind groped for dateless ages amid brutish toils and\npleasures, unconscious of grander aims; until the thought of God, rising\nto consciousness within the soul, whispered to it of endless progress and\ndivine ideals, in quest of which it has sought and will ever continue\nseeking, with tireless endeavour and constantly increasing reward.\n\nThis question settled, another arises. The religions thus found\neverywhere among the rudest tribes, did they take root and exert a deep\ninfluence on the individual and society, or were they superficially felt,\nand of slight moment in practical life?\n\nIn reference to this I can scarcely be too positive. No opinion can\nbe more erroneous than the one sometimes advanced that savages are\nindifferent to their faiths. On the contrary, the rule, with very few\nexceptions, is that religion absorbs nearly the whole life of a man under\nprimitive conditions. From birth to death, but especially during adult\nyears, his daily actions are governed by ceremonial laws of the severest,\noften the most irksome and painful characters. He has no independent\naction or code of conduct, and is a very slave to the conditions which\nsuch laws create.\n\nThis is especially visible in the world-wide customs of totemic divisions\nand the _tabu_, or religious prohibitions. These govern his food and\ndrink, his marriage and social relations, the disposition of property,\nand the choice of his wives. An infraction of them is out of the\nquestion. It means exile or death. The notions of tolerance, freedom\nof conscience, higher law, are non-existent in primitive communities,\nexcept under certain personal conditions which I shall mention in a later\nlecture.\n\nAs has been tersely said by Professor Granger, \u201cReligion in the ancient\nworld comprised every social function\u201d; and the identity of its rules\nwith those of common life is correctly put by Professor Thiele in these\nwords: \u201cThe idea of a separation between Church and State is utterly\nforeign to all the religions of antiquity.\u201d[29]\n\nWhat was true in those ancient days is equally so in this age among\nsavage peoples. Let us take as an example the Dyaks of Borneo. A recent\nobserver describes them as utter slaves to their \u201csuperstitions,\u201d that\nis, to their religion.[30] \u201cWhen they lay out their fields, gather\nthe harvest, go hunting or fishing, contract a marriage, start on an\nexpedition, propose a commercial journey, or anything of importance,\nthey always consult the gods, offer sacrifices, celebrate feasts, study\nthe omens, obtain talismans, and so on, often thus losing the best\nopportunity for the business itself.\u201d\n\nThis is equally the case with most savage tribes. Mr. J. Walter Fewkes\ninformed me that it was a severe moral shock to the Pueblo Indians to see\nthe white settlers plant corn without any religious ceremony; and a much\ngreater one to perceive that the corn grew, flourished, and bore abundant\ncrops! The result did more to shatter their simple faith than a dozen\nmissionary crusades.\n\nTo the simple mind of the primitive man, as to the Mohammedan to-day,\nthere is no such thing as an intermediate law, directing phenomena, and\ncapable of expression in set terms. To him, every event of nature and of\nlife is an immediate manifestation of the power of God, _eine Kraftprobe\nGottes_.[31]\n\nReligion, however, does not begin from any external pressure, no matter\nhow strong this may be. If it has any vitality, if it is anything more\nthan the barrenest ceremonial, it must start within, from the soul\nitself. Thus it did in primordial ages in all tribes of men.\n\nTherefore in studying its origin and pursuing its development we must\ncommence with its fonts and springs in the mind of man, its psychic\nsources. These understood, we can proceed to its three chief expressions,\nin Words, in Objects, and in Rites.\n\n\n\n\nLECTURE II.\n\nThe Origin and Contents of Primitive Religions.\n\n    CONTENTS:\u2014Former Theories of the Origin of Religions\u2014Inadequacy\n    of these\u2014Universal Postulate of Religions that Conscious\n    Volition is the Source of Force\u2014How Mind was Assigned\n    to Nature\u2014Communion between the Human and the Divine\n    Mind\u2014Universality of \u201cInspiration\u201d\u2014Inspiration the Product of\n    the Sub-Conscious Mind\u2014Known to Science as \u201cSuggestion\u201d\u2014This\n    Explained\u2014Examples\u2014Illustrations from Language\u2014No Primitive\n    Monotheism\u2014The Special Stimuli of the Religious Emotions:\n    1. Dreaming and Allied Conditions\u2014Life as a Dream\u20142. The\n    Apprehension of Life and Death and the Notion of the Soul\u20143.\n    The Perception of Light and Darkness; Day and Night\u2014The Sky God\n    as the High God\u20144. The Observation of Extraordinary Exhibitions\n    of Force\u2014The Thunder God\u20145. The Impression of Vastness\u2014Dignity\n    of the Sub-Conscious Intelligence.\n\n\nIn the last lecture we have seen that all tribes of men, so far as is\nknown, have had religions. How this happened, what general cause brought\nabout so universal a fact, has puzzled the brains of philosophers and\ntheologians. Their explanations have been as various and as conflicting\non this as on most other subjects.\n\nA goodly number of philosophers, ancient and modern, have looked upon\nreligion of any kind as a symptom of a diseased brain. Thus Empedocles,\nin the fifth century B.C., declared it to be a sickness of the mind,\nand Feuerbach, in the present century, has characterised it as the\nmost pernicious malady of humanity. Regarding all forms of religions\nas delusions, detrimental therefore to sound reason and the pursuit of\ntruth, they believed the human intellect could freely employ its powers\nonly when liberated from such shackles.\n\nAnother ancient theory still survives, that which has its name from\nEuhemerus, a Sicilian writer of the time of Alexander the Great. He\nclaimed that religions arose from the respect and reverence paid to kings\nand heroes during their lives, continued by custom after their deaths.\nUnder the modern name of \u201cancestor worship\u201d this has been maintained by\nHerbert Spencer and others as the primitive source of all worship.\n\nYet another philosophical opinion has been that religions were due\nto the craft of rulers and priests, who, by the aid of superstitious\nfear, sought to keep their subjects and votaries in subjection. These\ntricksters invented the terrors of another world to secure their own\npower and places in this one. This opinion was a favourite about the time\nof the French Revolution and is mirrored in the poems of Shelley, who\nannounced it as one of his missions, \u201cto unveil the religious frauds by\nwhich nations have been deluded into submission.\u201d[32]\n\nThe prevailing theory of the great world-religions, Christianity and\nMohammedanism, has been substantially that of Empedocles. They have\nregarded all the religions of the world as cunning fabrications of the\nDevil and his imps, snares spread for human souls; always with one\nexception however: each excepts itself. This is the view so grandly\nexpressed in Milton\u2019s _Paradise Lost_ and quite common yet in civilised\nlands.\n\nOn the other hand, a strong school of Christian writers, led early in\nthis century by Joseph de Maistre and Chateaubriand and represented in\nour tongue by Archdeacon Trench, have asserted that all faiths, even\nthe most savage, are fragments and reminiscences, distorted and broken\nindeed, of a primitive revelation vouchsafed by the Almighty to the\nhuman race everywhere at the beginning. These have occupied themselves\nin pointing out the analogies of savage and pagan creeds and rites with\nthose of Christianity, in proof of their theory.\n\nNot remote from them are the teachers of the doctrine of the \u201cinner\nlight,\u201d that \u201clight which lighteth every man who cometh into the world,\u201d\ndisclosing unto him the existence of God and the fact of his soul. They\nteach, with Wordsworth, that\n\n    \u201cTrailing clouds of glory do we come\n    From God who is our home;\u201d\n\nand that it is by perversion or wilful blindness that any man avers\nignorance of these primal truths.\n\nThe philosophic aspect of this theory has been presented by the master\nminds of Kant, Hegel, and Schelling. Kant identified the idea of God with\nthe Ideal of Reason, the perfect Intelligence, toward which all minds,\neven the humblest, must necessarily strive. Hegel, in a fine passage of\nhis _Philosophy of Religion_, urges the study of pagan and primitive\nreligions with a view to define their real significance and to discover\nthe grains of truth which ever lie within them, the reason and the\ngoodness which give them life.\n\nThe modern German ethnographers, such as Peschel, Ratzel, and\nSchurtz,[33] have not ventured to follow these earlier thinkers of their\nnation, but have contented themselves with tracing the origin of religion\nto one characteristic of the human intellect, to wit, the notion of\nCause. The relation of cause and effect, they claim, is so ingrained in\nthe thinking mind that it inevitably leads all men to assume causes,\nsuch as spiritual agencies, when others are not visible.\n\nThis popular view seems weak; for not only is the relation of cause to\neffect a mere assumption, and, indeed, rejected by exact science; but\nit dodges the very question at issue, which is to explain why spiritual\nagencies are imagined as causes of material effects.\n\nSimilar objections lie to deriving primitive religions from a vague\n\u201cperception of the Infinite,\u201d or a _sensus numinis_, some _deus in\nnobis_, \u201cwarning us,\u201d as Virgil says, \u201cby his quick motion.\u201d These are\nunclear, unsatisfying expressions, offering no rational explanation, and\nfull of equivocations.\n\nA favourite theory in all times is that religions arose from the emotion\nof fear. It was taught by the Latin poet Petronius in a famous line,\nwhere he says \u201cFear first made the gods\u201d; and it has been strenuously\nadvocated by many modern philosophers and ethnologists.\n\nNow if this emotion is alone sufficient to evoke religious feeling, why,\nI ask, is that feeling absent in the craven and timid lower animals? Why\nis it so feeble in many a coward? Why has it been so strong in many a\nhero?\n\nMoreover, the spirit of many early religions is the reverse of that of\nfear. They are, as Dr. Robertson Smith correctly said, \u201cpredominantly\njoyous.\u201d\n\nThese are proofs enough that this ancient and popular notion rests on\na misconception of facts. The \u201cfear of God\u201d enters, indeed, into every\nreligion; but religion itself did not arise from it. We must already have\na notion of God, before we can fear Him.\n\nIf we are going to apply the scientific method to the study of religions\nwe must offer an explanation for their existence which is intelligible,\nwhich is verifiable, and which holds good for all of them, primitive or\ndeveloped, those of the remotest ages and those of to-day. Only thus can\nthe ethnologist treat them as one element of the history of Humanity, a\nproperty of the species.\n\nThis has not been done, so far as I know, up to the present time. In\nfact, much of the teaching of modern anthropology has been calculated to\ndeter it. The outspoken advocacy of atheism and materialism by the French\nSchool has led its disciples to consider the effort unprofitable;[34] and\nthe acceptance of the doctrine of \u201cAnimism\u201d as a sufficient explanation\nof early cults has led to the neglect, in English-speaking lands, of\ntheir profounder analysis. Such a writer, for instance, as Andrew Lang\ndoes not hesitate to teach that, \u201cThe origin of a belief in God is beyond\nthe ken of history and speculation.\u201d[35]\n\nThe real explanation of the origin of religion is simple and universal.\nLet any man ask himself on what his own religious belief is founded, and\nthe answer, if true, will hold good for every member of the race, past\nand present. It makes no difference whether we analyse the superstitions\nof the rudest savages, or the lofty utterances of John the Evangelist, or\nof Spinoza the \u201cgod-intoxicated philosopher\u201d; we shall find one and the\nsame postulate to the faith of all.\n\nThis universal postulate, the psychic origin of all religious thought,\nis the recognition, or, if you please, the assumption, _that conscious\nvolition is the ultimate source of all Force_. It is the belief that\nbehind the sensuous, phenomenal world, distinct from it, giving it form,\nexistence, and activity, lies the ultimate, invisible, immeasurable power\nof Mind, of conscious Will, of Intelligence, analogous in some way to our\nown; and,\u2014mark this essential corollary,\u2014_that man is in communication\nwith it_.\n\nWhat the highest religions thus assume was likewise the foundation of the\nearliest and most primitive cults. The one universal trait amid their\nendless forms of expression was the unalterable faith in Mind, in the\nsuper-sensuous, as the ultimate source of all force, all life, all being.\n\nScience and Christianity teach the same, but with this difference: the\nprogress of observation has taught us the existence of certain uniform\nsequences which we call \u201claws of nature,\u201d based solely on Mind, but\nrepresenting its processes of realisation. The savage knew not these. He\nimagined every motion in nature was the immediate exhibition of Will, his\nown will in his own motions, some seen or unseen will in other motions.\nThe seen were of another being like himself; the unseen were to that\nextent unknown, and these were his gods.\n\nI repeat, wherever we find the divine, the spiritual agency, set forth in\nmyth or symbol, creed or rite, we find it characterised by two traits: it\nis of the nature of the human mind, that is, super-sensuous; and it is\nthe ultimate source of power. It will be my aim to show the expressions\nof these universal postulates of the religious sentiment in the rudest\nfaiths of the world.\n\nYou may ask, by what process of thinking did primitive man assign\nmind to nature. The process is extremely simple, and is illustrated\nby the action of any child. Let one be accidentally hurt by an empty\nrocking-chair in motion; at once, it is angry at the chair, and is\ngratified to see it whipped! The child-mind assigns to the object the\nwill and the sensations of which it is conscious in itself. This is the\nsimplest explanation it can imagine for action.\n\nPrecisely so is it with the savage man. Wherever he perceives motion,\nindependent of a living being, he assumes the presence of a conscious\nagent, not visible to his senses. As Professor Sayce remarks of the early\nChaldeans: \u201cTo them the spiritual, the _Zi_, was that which manifested\nlife, and the test of the manifestation of life was movement.\u201d[36] This\nis universally true of primitive faiths.\n\nBut this was not enough. To most if not all primitive men, movement was\nnot the only manifestation of life. To them, the immovable, the rock,\nthe mountain, any inanimate object, was likewise a conscious spiritual\nagency, a thinking being. This, too, has its explanation in one of the\nsimplest, most elementary traits of mind, the sense of Personality. To\nthe undeveloped reason, the Other is ever conceived as Another, a Self,\nand is clothed with the attributes of _the_ Self, of the thinking Ego.\nThis is always the case in the tales of children and the myths of savage\ntribes.[37]\n\nThese are the earliest concepts of the religious faculty; but they would\nhave been powerless to seize upon the emotions and to develop the great\nreligions of the world, had they not been supported by that which is the\ncorner-stone of every creed on earth, the corollary I mentioned, to wit,\nthe direct communion between the human and the divine mind, between the\nMan and God.\n\nThis is the one trait shared by the highest as well as the lowest, it is\nthe one proof of authenticity which each proclaims for itself. I shall\ntell you of religions so crude as to have no temples or altars, no rites\nor prayers; but I can tell you of none that does not teach the belief of\nthe intercommunion of the spiritual powers and man. Every religion is a\nRevelation\u2014in the opinion of its votaries. Those which are called the\n\u201cbook-religions\u201d depend mainly upon the _record_ of a revelation, while\nin all primitive faiths inspiration is actual and constant. The human\nsoul, regarded in its origin as an emanation of the Divine, is in its\nnature omniscient when in moments of ecstasy it frees itself from its\nmaterial envelope.[38]\n\nWhen an Australian native is asked if he has ever seen the great Creator,\nBaiame, he will reply: \u201cNo, not seen him, but I have felt [or inwardly\nperceived] him.\u201d[39] A Basuto chief replied to the question whether his\npeople knew of God before the missionaries came: \u201cWe did not know Him,\nbut we dreamed of Him.\u201d\n\nAll shamanism is based on a direct relation to divinity. The shaman is an\ninspired prophet and healer, and believes as firmly in his inspiration\nas do his credulous adherents. From shamanism was developed in India the\npractice known as _Yoga_, characterised by ecstatic seizures, periods of\ncerebral exaltation, and alleged divine powers.[40] To the same origin\nwe must attribute the similar phenomena of \u201cspeaking with tongues,\u201d and\nreligious mania.\n\nI am not speaking of deceptions or illusions. When I say that all\nreligions depend for their origin and continuance directly upon\ninspiration, I state an historic fact. It may be known under other\nnames, of credit or discredit, as mysticism, ecstasy, rhapsody,\ndemoniac possession, the divine afflatus, the gnosis, or in its latest\nchristening, \u201ccosmic consciousness.\u201d[41] All are but expressions of a\nbelief that knowledge arises, words are uttered, or actions performed,\nnot through conscious ideation and reflective purpose, but through the\npromptings of a power above or beyond the individual mind.[42] Prophets\nand shamans, evangelists and Indian medicine-men, all claim, and all\nclaim with honesty, to be moved by the god within, the _deus in nobis_,\nand to speak the words of the Lord.\n\nThe intensity of purpose, and the suppression of the reason which\neverywhere and at all times this sense of inspiration brings with it,\ncannot be overestimated in their influence on the history of the race. To\nthem are due all fanaticism, religious bigotry, and illiberality.\n\nHe who has walked with God, who has felt the pressure of the divine hand,\nwho has been rewarded with the \u201cbeatific vision,\u201d to him all lesser ties\nare weak, all knowledge vain. He will say: \u201cIt is better to know God and\nbe ignorant of all else, than to know all else and be ignorant of God.\u201d\nNo reasoning can convince him of error, for his logic acknowledges not\nthe laws of human thought; no appeal will soften his judgments, for he\nutters not the decision of a man, but the unalterable edict of the God.\n\nUnless we can offer a rational explanation for this universal trait, all\nreligions become inexplicable. Fortunately the investigations of modern\npsychology enable us to present such an explanation. It teaches us by\ninnumerable examples that by far the majority of the impressions on\nour senses leave no trace in conscious recollection, although they are\nstored in the records of the brain; that what seems lost to memory, still\nlingers in its recesses; and that mental action is constantly going on\nand reaching results, wholly without our knowledge.\n\nThe psychologist calls this process by the terms \u201cunconscious\ncerebration,\u201d or \u201cpsychic automatism.\u201d It is the function of the\n\u201csub-limital consciousness,\u201d or, for short, the \u201csub-consciousness.\u201d Not\nonly is it common, it is constant, and the results of this unperceived\nlabour of our minds is often far more valuable than those of our\nintelligent efforts. The most complex mechanical inventions, the most\nimpressive art-work of the world, even the most difficult mathematical\nsolutions, have been attained through this unknowing mechanism of mind.\nThey seemed real inspirations, but we may be sure that the mind through\nlong _conscious_ effort had been storing the material and laying the\nfoundation for the perfect edifice which sprang so magically into\nexistence.\n\nThe psychologist has gone farther. Not resting content with the detection\nof this automatic mental machinery, he has studied how it is set a-going,\nand is prepared to show that in all its forms it can be produced at will\nunder favourable conditions. Like an ancient necromancer, he can inspire\nand bewitch, he can exorcise demons and cast out devils.\n\nHis power is not occult, for it belongs to science, and science has no\nsecrets. It is known as \u201csuggestion,\u201d and in it lies the sociologic power\nof all religions and superstitions whatever, primitive or present. It is\nnecessary, therefore, that I devote a few words to its explanation.\n\nSuggestion in its simplest form is the indirect evocation of an idea in\nthe mind as the starting-point of a process of thought and feeling. The\nidea may be impressed by a repetition of the stimulus, by association\nwith allied ideas, or by sensory contacts. It may be evoked by deliberate\neffort of our own, which is called \u201cauto-suggestion\u201d; or the impression\nmay be derived from or directed to a number of individuals, which is\ntermed \u201ccollective suggestion.\u201d\n\nPowerful means of suggestion are the monotonous repetitions of certain\nwords; the fixation of the sight on a single object; the concentration\nof the mind on one thought; the reduction of the ordinary nutrition;\nassociation with persons already under its influence; continuance of the\nsame motions; prolonged hearing the same note or rhythmic chord; silence,\ndarkness, and solitude. These may be variously combined and brought to\nbear upon the mind in such a manner as entirely to alter its ordinary\nhabits, and seemingly to evoke another personality.\n\nThe rationale by which this is reached is through developing the\nautomatic and unconscious action of the mind into a conscious display\nof its powers. This may be repulsive or admirable, above or below the\nnormal capacities; but is always correlated to the individual, and\nconnected with his experiences.\n\nThis is the explanation of nearly all the religious experiences of\nprimitive peoples, as it is of what is known as \u201ctheopathy\u201d everywhere,\nand of the modern forms of theosophy, mesmerism, and hypnotism.[43]\n\nAll religious teachings and associations, in the lowest as well as the\nhighest faiths, aim to cultivate these mystical feelings by increasing\nthe intensity of the suggestions which give rise to them, and diminishing\nthe force of other suggestions which may interfere.\n\nEven in civilised communities it is extraordinary with what facility\nsuggestive sense-delusions can be produced in waking persons. At least\nninety out of every hundred individuals can be persuaded thus to deceive\nthemselves. The extreme contagiousness of such delusions, common enough\nin civilised conditions, is greatly increased in the savage state. In\ntheir lives the phenomena of auto-suggestion are strikingly frequent.\nAmong the African Zulus any adult can cast himself or herself into\nthe hypnotic state, and by this obtain what they consider second\nsight,\u2014\u201cthe power to see where lost objects are, and how absent friends\nare occupied.\u201d When asked to explain this state of mind, they can only\nsay that it is one \u201cin which a man is awake, but sees things which he\nwould not see, if he were not in this state\u201d[44]; which reminds us of the\nremarkable doctrine of the Sanscrit Upanishads\u2014\u201cThere is no limit to the\nknowing of the Self that knows.\u201d[45] Among many Australian tribes, among\nthe Kamschatkans, and among the Yahgans of Tierra del Fuego, as well as\nmany other peoples, the mysterious power of the shamans or medicine men\nis shared by all adults in a greater or less degree.[46]\n\nThese are at the bottom of the scale. One degree higher, and we find\nthe priesthood a separate class, usually of both sexes, but chosen by\nnatural selection from those members of the community who by temperament\nor cultivation possess in the highest degree this tendency to mystical\npower. This is generally indicated by the clearness and character of the\ndreams and visions which appear at the time he or she enters adult life.\nThese are considered to be direct inspirations from the spirit world,\neither from the souls of the dead, or the powers other than those which\ncontrol the destiny of man.\n\nThese inspired seers represent the priesthood of every primitive\nreligion. They cultivate and preserve it, and in them the missionaries\nof higher faiths have ever found their most resolute foes and successful\nopponents. The reason is, as I have said, that the shaman has himself\nbeen face to face with God, has heard His voice, and felt His presence.\nHis faith therefore is real, and cannot be shaken by any argument. He may\nindeed, and he generally does, assist his public performances with some\ntrickery, some thaumaturgy; but that this is merely superadded for effect\nis proved by the general custom that when one such adept is ill or in\nstraits he will solicit the aid of another.[47]\n\nAmong his associates he is looked upon as set apart from other men by the\ndivinity which chooses him for its agent, or dwells within him. In the\nPolynesian islands this is forcibly expressed in the terms applied to\nthe native priests, _pia atua_, \u201cgod boxes,\u201d receptacles of divinity; and\n_amama_, \u201copen mouths,\u201d for through them the god speaks, not their own\nselves.[48]\n\nThe presence of divinity is recognised and felt only in unusual mental\nstates, in moments of ecstasy or trance, in periods of rapture,\nintoxication, or frenzy. Hence in all early and many late religions\nabnormal and pathological mental seizures are regarded as cases of\ninspiration, or else of demoniac possession. In the Quichua language of\nPeru the word _huaca_ is their most general term for the divine, but\n_huaca runa_, \u201cdivine man,\u201d means one who is crazy[49]; and in Greek, the\nword _mania_ was used for both madness and prophetic inspiration.\n\nWe thus see that in this mental state we find the psychic development of\nthe primitive idea of the divine, the notion of God. It is not, as has\nsometimes been claimed, the sudden result of a single feeling; it is a\ncomplex conception, from a multitude of obscurely felt impressions and\nemotions. It is neither an intuition nor an induction; it is neither an\ninference from observation, nor the conclusion of a logical process.\nA study of its aspect in savage life shows that it arises from the\nperception of the latent activity of the sub-consciousness, from the\nstrange sense of activity, will, and power which, under favourable\nconditions of concentration (suggestion), it imparts to the more or less\nconscious Self. This influence is at first vague, impersonal, undefined,\nbut is gradually differentiated and personified. Furthermore, it is\nconstantly strengthened and sustained by the agency of that cultivated\nsuggestion I have described, which is intended to bring the individual\ninto contact with unknown activities. Thus the idea of the superhuman is\ndeveloped from the unconscious human powers of Mind.\n\nConclusive evidence of this is offered by language. From the abundant\nmaterial at hand let us choose three examples, widely separated, one\nfrom the Dakotan stock of North American Indians, one from the ancient\nPeruvians, and one from the South Sea Islanders.\n\nThe hidden and mysterious power of the universe is expressed in the\nDakotan dialects by the word _wakan_. This term expresses infinite will;\nit is, as Miss Fletcher tells us, \u201cthe deification of that peculiar\nquality or power of which man is conscious within himself as directing\nhis own acts or willing a course to bring about certain results.\u201d\nFrom the word _wacin_, will, are derived the terms for what we call\n\u201ctelepathy,\u201d a belief in which is nigh universal in primitive cults; for\nintelligence or mentality; and for the sacred dance.[50]\n\nWhile the meaning of _wakan_ in Dakota is well defined, its derivation\nis uncertain. It is singular that precisely the same word with the same\nmeaning reappears in the Quichua and Aymara languages of the interior\nof Peru. It is there applied to everything which is extraordinary or\nimmense, out of the course of nature, and especially to everything sacred\nor divine. It was not a deity, but expressed the deific power believed to\nbe present in men, animals, or things.[51]\n\nThe identity of the two words is probably no mere coincidence, nor is\nthe one borrowed from the other. In Quichua _wakan_ expresses the sound\ncharacteristic of any animal, as _allco wakan_, the dog howls, _huallpa\nwakan_ the cock crows, and this in turn is derived from the interjection\nof surprise or astonishment or admiration, _hua_. It was that which was\nemployed in the sacred invocations.\n\nStrange as it may seem, the English word \u201cGod\u201d is traced by Aryan\nscholars through the Gothic _guth_ to the Sanscrit verb _hua_ to\ncall upon, to invoke (past participle, _hutha_), the same primitive\ninterjection in verbal form; and the holy name of the Hebrews, _Yahve_,\nis now believed to be that of the Chaldean god of the earth, waters, and\nfertility, in whose name _E\u0101_, _Ya_, or _Yah_, we recognize a cognate\ninterjection or refrain, the same which, shouted in the orgiastic rites,\ngave the name, Bacchus or Iachus.[52]\n\nTurning to the island world of the Pacific we find through its countless\ngroups of sunny isles the impersonal Divine expressed by one general\nterm, _mana_. The natives believed in the agency of departed souls and\nalso of spirits of independent origin (_vui_); but the supernatural power\nthrough which both acted on nature or events was this _mana_. If a man\nprospered in his affairs and gained influence in the tribe, it was not by\nhis own efforts, but because he had _mana_; precisely as pious persons\namong ourselves attribute their prosperity and that of their worthy\nneighbors to the favour of the Lord. The original meaning of _mana_\nappears to be \u201cthat which is within one,\u201d and, later, the intelligence on\nmind, whence power or might, as the expressions of Will applied to the\nconcept of universal life and motion.[53]\n\nThese words, I repeat, do not convey any idea of personality. They are\nnot evidences of a primitive monotheism, as has often been claimed. They,\nand all like them, are vague, indefinite terms for the supernatural, that\nwhich was inexplicable by the limited knowledge of the most ignorant of\nour species.[54]\n\nThe media of suggestion act primarily through the emotions, and in the\nreligious suggestion those emotions especially are concerned which give\nrise to thoughts concerning the super-sensuous and the manifestation of\npower.\n\nBut none of these emotions in itself, neither fear, hope, awe, wonder,\nnor any other, has the power to evoke the notion of the supernatural. It\narises from those deeper intellectual traits which are peculiarly human.\n\nYet it is true that such emotions are potent stimuli to those forms of\nsuggestion which lead up to the religious feelings; they are part of\nthem, and what arouses and incites those, develops and strengthens these;\nand they thus have their place as suggestive accessories.\n\nTo the savage, all nature testifies to the presence of the mysterious\npower which is behind its forms and motions. He sees the Divine\neverywhere. But from this multitude of impressions which excited him\nto religious thought we may separate a limited number as beyond others\npotent and universal. These are special stimuli to the religious\nemotions. They are five in number:\n\n1. Dreaming and allied conditions.\n\n2. The apprehension of Life and Death, from which arises the notion of\nthe Soul.\n\n3. The perception of Light and Darkness.\n\n4. The observation of Extraordinary Exhibitions of Force.\n\n5. The impression of Vastness.\n\n1. A line of Lucretius asserts that \u201cthe dreams of men peopled the heaven\nwith gods.\u201d We have a right to reply that if dreams alone give us the\ngods, why are they absent from the lives of dogs, who are vivid dreamers?\n\nCertain it is, however, that among all savage tribes dreams are regarded\nas a part of the experience of life. To primitive man, they are real:\nhe sees and hears in them as he does in his waking hours; he does not\ndistinguish between the subjective creation of his brain cells and\nobjective existence.\n\nIn what they differ from daily life, they are divine. They reveal the\nfuture and summon the absent. The Kamschatkans, we are told, gather\ntogether every morning to narrate their dreams and to guess at their\ninterpretation. Of the Eskimos it is stated that their daily lives \u201care\nto a great extent guided by their dreams.\u201d The Bororo of Brazil take a\ndream so literally that a whole village will decamp and seek a distant\nsite, if one dreams of the approach of an enemy.[55]\n\nThe physiological character of dreams easily explains the superstitious\nattention they have received in all ages and nations. The absence of\nexternal impressions during sleep favours the rise of unconscious mental\naction into consciousness. In them memory is often more active than while\nwaking; our personality seems doubled, because it has no longer the will\nto react against the throngs of varied impressions which arise. The\nemotions in sleep are excitable, and both fear and joy are often more\nintense than when awake. Add to this that many persons, especially those\nof nervous temperament, are subject to peculiarly vivid illusions during\nthe moments between waking and sleeping, which seem to belong as much to\nthe former as to the latter conditions,[56] and we have reasons enough\nfor the part they play in primitive religions.\n\nThere are reasons for believing that the dreams of ruder races are\nmore vivid than our own, more like pictures and realities.[57] They\ncertainly do not draw the line so sharply between the sights and sounds\nof sleeping and waking as we do. With wide-open eyes they see spectres\nand apparitions, such as are not unknown, but are ever growing scarcer,\nin civilised lands. These waking visions are assiduously cultivated,\nand become, as I have already said, the chief bond between man and\ndivinity.[58]\n\nNot only by fasting, solitude, and intense expectation centred on the\nexpected revelation, is it brought into reality, but in nearly every\nsavage tribe we find a knowledge of narcotic plants which were employed\nto induce strange and vivid hallucinations or dreams. The negroes of\nthe Niger had their \u201cfetish water,\u201d the Creek Indians of Florida their\n\u201cblack drink,\u201d for this purpose. In many parts of the United States the\nnatives smoked stramonium, the Mexican tribes swallowed the _peyotl_ and\nthe snake-plant, the tribes of California and the Samoyeds of Siberia had\nfound a poisonous toadstool;\u2014all to bring about communion with the Divine\nand to induce ecstatic visions.[59] Whatever the means employed, their\naim was everywhere the same, and was directed primarily and essentially\ntowards the excitation of the religious emotions, towards securing a\nrevelation of the will of the gods.\n\nThus it came that the whole of life, waking and sleeping, assumed a\ndreamy, unreal character. The traveller Spix says of the forest tribes of\nBrazil that they never seem fully awake; and a Pawnee war song begins\nby an appeal to the gods to decide if this life itself is aught but a\ndream.[60]\n\nThe ancient Mexicans had developed the doctrine that this life is a dream\nand that death is the awakening, the passing into a living condition.\nThey spoke of dying as the appearance of the dawn, and the approach of\nlight. This is closely akin to that doctrine of _m\u00e2y\u00e2_, or the unreality\nof the duality of the subject and object, which \u201cis the very life of the\nprimitive [East] Indian philosophy.\u201d[61]\n\nThe influence which such a view must have exerted on the religious\nthought of a nation is manifest.\n\n2. The question has been discussed by some philosophers whether the idea\nof Life is anterior in the human mind to that of Death. Had they studied\nthe beliefs of primitive peoples, their doubts would have disappeared.\nThe savage knows not death as a natural occurrence. His language has no\nword meaning \u201cto die,\u201d but only \u201cto be killed.\u201d Disease is an unseen\nshaft, or the work of a malignant sorcerer. To him, all things live\nand live forever. Each bird, each bush, each rock has its own vital\nprinciple. By reason of the consciousness of his own living Self, he\nimputes life to all around him, but in a higher degree and of some rarer\nquality to those existences which he holds as his deities. His god is\nsupremely a living god, the source of Life, its creator, preserver, and\nsustainer.\n\nIf we seek the recondite meaning hidden behind the two words which\nthroughout Polynesia expressed in its most general sense the concept of\nthe Divine, _io_, and _atua_, we discover that it is in both \u201cthe central\ncause or essentiality of Life.\u201d[62] So among the Indians of Michoacan the\nepithet of the chief goddess of their cult was, \u201cThe Sustainer of Life\u201d;\nthe highest divinity of the Aztecs was Tonacatecutli, \u201cGod of Our Life\u201d;\nand in the Muskoghean tribes His name was \u201cThe Master of Life.\u201d\n\nSo full, I say, was the mind of primitive man with the vision of\nuniversal and immortal life, that to him there was no such thing as\ndeath. The fact, indeed, remained. The tree was shrivelled by the\nlightning, the brute fell by the arrow, man himself gasped his last\nbreath and lay an inert mass. The loved child, the warrior hero, passed\nout of sight to the unseen beyond.\n\nBut not forever! No! They hovered around the familiar spot, they visited\nthe living in dreams, their voices were heard in the rustling leaves and\nthe falling waters. Not only men, but all things lived again. In the\nmythology of the Vitians there is a heaven even for cocoanuts! To the\nKamschatkans the smallest flies have souls which are immortal.[63]\n\nThis is the doctrine of souls, the source of those innumerable\nbeliefs and rites which are centred around the sepulchre, so solemn,\nso profoundly significant, that many writers have maintained that\n\u201creligion began, when the living thought seriously of the dead\u201d;\nthat \u201call religions have crystallised around the tomb\u201d; and that in\nthe propitiation of departed souls, in the worship of the spirits of\nancestors, and in the preparation in this life for another beyond the\ngrave, the whole aim and essence of religion are embraced.[64]\n\nI have already said that this is a hasty assertion, for there are\nreligions which recognise a soul scarcely or at all; but they are not\nof a primitive character.[65] In the latter, some such belief is\nuniversally shown either by the treatment of the corpse, or the modes of\nmourning for the dead, or by myths concerning the life and actions of the\ndeparted.\n\nIt is generally held that the soul is multiple, two, three, or four being\nassigned to a person. One or more of these may perish with the body, or\nshortly afterwards; but one at least survives indefinitely, and concerns\nitself with the doings of those it has left behind in life. Its powers\nfor good and evil are increased by its translation to another sphere of\nexistence; and to secure its assistance, or at least its neutrality,\nis the aim of that cult of the departed souls and of the spirits of\nancestors which is so widely defined in primitive conditions.\n\nThey are not identical, and we find in many tribes much attention paid\nto conciliating the souls of the dead where ancestor worship is unknown.\nIn fact, the former is the older and more general observance. The aim is\nto get rid of the soul, to put it to rest or send it on its journey to a\nbetter land, otherwise it will annoy the survivors.[66]\n\nIn many primitive tribes, therefore, there is little fear of death. The\nsoul leaves the body in sleep to wander over the earth, and the only\ndifference of death is that it does not return in time. More than this,\nthe soul of the living can visit the realms of the dead. The Comanches\nknew of men who had spent two days looking at the white tents of the\nencampment of souls far west under the setting sun; and the Zu\u00f1i mothers\nwho had lost their little darlings are reconciled by being cast into a\ndeep sleep, during which they go and see them in the mystic world beyond.\nSo also believe the Australians and numberless other tribes.[67]\n\nWe need not look for any definiteness of statement as to what the soul\nis. In many tribes the word for it is akin to that for breath, as in our\nown expression, \u201cthe breath of life.\u201d Frequently it is identified with\nthe shadow, as among the Zulus of Africa, and the Eskimos, Algonquins,\nand Quiches of America. Others, as the Mincopies (Andaman Islands), think\nthey see it in the reflection of the body in still water or a mirror.\nThe Australians assert that it is a mist, fog, or smoke, etc.\n\nThese ideas are, of course, material. They impute to the soul similar\nwants to that of the corporeal man. It desires a dwelling, needs food,\ntakes visible forms, and the like; but also it is endowed with faculties\ntranscending those it possessed in the flesh, and these may be directed\nto the benefit or the injury of the survivors. Therefore its wants should\nbe gratified, and its temper conciliated by offerings and appropriate\nfuneral rites.[68]\n\n3. I turn now to a perception of the primitive man, a contrast of\nimpressions on his senses, more potent, I believe, than even the\nimmeasurable one of Life and Death. It is Light and Darkness. This\nuniversal, ever recurring change in nature controlled all his actions,\nand reacted as a powerful stimulus on his religious emotions. I could\nalmost be willing to subscribe to the expression of a German writer that\n\u201cthe adoration of Light was the foundation of all religion.\u201d[69] The rude\nlitanies of paganism all over the world seem to join in the solemn chant\nof the Evangelist\u2014\u201cGod is Light, and in Him is no darkness at all.\u201d\n\nWe may begin with the Australian Blacks, who averred the supreme divinity\nlives in _keladi_, eternal brightness, up above the sky. His name is\n_Baiame_, meaning \u201cthe maker\u201d or \u201cthe cutter out,\u201d as one cuts out\npatterns from a skin. He sees and knows all things.[70]\n\nThrough most of Polynesia, the chief deity was Ka-ne, which means\nsunlight, the opposite of darkness, and is allied to the verb _kanea_, to\nsee. Another name for Ka-ne is Tangaloa, the lord of light. The colour\nred is sacred to him, he was portrayed with long blond hair, and children\nwho had light hair or were albinos were deemed his progeny. When the\nfair-skinned Europeans first landed on the islands they were called the\n\u201cchildren of Tangaloa.\u201d[71]\n\nSometimes the myths represent Tangaloa as the son of Vatea (Avatea,\nWakea), \u201cnoon\u201d or \u201cnoon-day.\u201d He was father of gods and man, half man,\nhalf fish, to typify land and water, and it was said of him that his\nright eye was the sun, his left the moon. So far removed was he that no\nworship was ever paid him, and no representation made of him.[72]\n\nIf we turn to the extremely savage inhabitants of the Andaman Islands,\na remnant of the ancient, almost pygmy, black race of Southern Asia, we\nfind that their supreme being is Puluga, the creator of all things, who\nwas never born and will never die. He is invisible, but of the nature\nof light; he lives in the sky, and placed there the sun and moon. He is\nomniscient, but only while it is day, when he can see.[73]\n\nAs the red rays of the morning and evening light caused in Polynesia all\nthings red to be sacred to Tangaloa, so among the Hottentots of South\nAfrica their supreme being was named Tsuni Goab, the red light of the\nDawn, who in mythology stood in opposition to Gaunah, the Dark Sky.[74]\n\nThis worship of light has several constant associations in religious\nthought which find expression in the myth and cult.\n\nIn nature, light is a potent stimulus of organic growth, and this fact,\nobscurely apprehended by the primitive mind, led to the equivalence of\nLight and Life. Light as the vital principle recurs in most mythologies.\nAs we obtain light artificially from fire, whose general warmth also\nis akin to that of the living as contrasted to the dead body, the soul\nor living element was allied to flame. In ancient German mythology the\nsoul was called a torch or taper (J. Grimm), and in the beliefs of the\nPolynesians and American Indians the ghosts of the dead usually appear as\nluminous masses.[75] All will remember the words of Othello\u2014\n\n    \u201cPut out the light, and then,\u2014put out the light!\u201d\n\nA second association of light was with the sky, in day the home of the\nbright sun, at night where glitter a thousand points of brilliancy.\n\nIn most mythologies the sky is supposed to be a solid, shining arch or\ndome which covers the earth like a roof. Upon it, out of sight to mortal\neyes, live the gods. It constitutes the \u201cHill of Heaven,\u201d the celestial\nmountain upon which are the homes of the divine beings. So it is oft\nlikened to some known terrestrial elevation, as in Greek mythology, Mt.\nOlympus, and in that of India, Mt. Meru. Such sacred hills are mentioned\nby most of the American tribes.[76] In Polynesian myth it was \u201cthe blue\nmountain, the land of the divine water,\u201d a fluid of such vital virtue\nthat were even a dead man sprinkled with it he would come to life. On\nthe island of Mangaia a certain hill was pointed out which in old times\npropped up the sky.[77]\n\nThe Tehuelches of Patagonia relate that the Creator first moulded men and\nall animals on the \u201cHill of God\u201d and then set them loose to people the\nearth. The natives of Southern Borneo assign to their supreme divinity\nAtala a home in the highest heaven, on the shore of the \u201ccelestial lake,\nmoved by the Moon and surrounding the Sun.\u201d Homi, the high heaven, is the\ndeity of the Hottentots, who pours the rains, blows the wind, and sends\nheat and cold on earth.[78]\n\nThus it is that everywhere the Sky God is also the High God. This\nblending of the ideas of life and light with the sky led to another and\nobvious association which has left its mark on every religion, primitive\nor developed. The sky is, in direction, above us. The god of the sky is\ntherefore the god on high. He is the one who dwells above, our lord in\nthe heaven.\n\nThis he is in all mythologies. Among the Indians of the plains he is\n(or, It is) \u201cthe great medicine _above_,\u201d and in the sign language, to\nindicate this, when the sign is made for \u201cmedicine\u201d (mystery) the finger\nis pointed to the zenith.[79] The Puluga of the Andamanese \u201clives in the\nsky.\u201d Tangaloa is addressed as \u201cHe above in the heavens\u201d; the Finnish\nUkko is also called \u201cThe Navel of the Sky,\u201d and so on.[80]\n\nExamples are innumerable. But what need of collecting them? Do we not\nourselves constantly use the adjective the _Supreme_ Being, for God,\nwhich means simply the highest being? And did not the founder of our\nreligion forbid his followers to swear by the sky, giving as the reason\nthat it was the throne of God, who sitteth upon it?[81]\n\nThis idea runs through the whole of his teachings. In the Gospel of\nMatthew the same term, \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, or, \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03bf\u1f50\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 as a descriptive\nterm of divinity, is applied not less than eighty-eight times; and\nin the first clause of the Lord\u2019s Prayer, it is to \u201cOur Father in the\nSkies,\u201d that the invocation is addressed.\n\nStrange that this very word \u03bf\u1f30\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd\u1f40\u03c2, in Sanscrit Uaruna, is that which,\nin the primitive religion of the Aryan peoples, was applied to the most\nexalted of their gods, to him \u201cwhose realm is above us,\u201d \u201cthe very\nstrong,\u201d \u201cthe shining one,\u201d \u201cthe king of sky and earth,\u201d \u201ccreator of all,\nthe earth-enveloping sky.\u201d[82]\n\nWhat more striking evidence do we wish of the indissoluble unity of\nreligious thought, no matter what its stage of development, in all\ncenturies and all races?\n\nIn the Polynesian mythology, Tangaloa, the bright daylight, has as his\nbrother, Rongo, the god of darkness and night. Tangaloa is fair-haired\nand light in hue, Rongo is black in hair and skin. Tangaloa is\nbeneficent, the dispenser of good, and inventor of the arts of peace;\nRongo is the fomenter of strife, the god of war and author of bloodshed.\nIn accordance with these, all the gods were classed in two orders,\n\u201cdwellers in day,\u201d and \u201cdwellers in night.\u201d[83]\n\nThe contrast which is here presented prevails throughout early cults.\nThe night, when man, deprived of light and sight, becomes the prey of\nstealthy beasts, was everywhere considered the time when the unseen\npowers of destruction are let loose and the malevolent agencies of the\nspirit-world run riot.\n\nThis is one of the most primitive of religious beliefs and is discovered\nin the rudest tribes. The Yahgans of Tierra del Fuego say that the\ninvisible spirits go about at night; the Australian tribes everywhere\nmanifested a deep dread of the darkness, not like the unconscious\nshuddering of a child on entering a dark room, but because they believed\nspirits walked in the gloom seeking whom they could devour. It is then,\nsaid they, that Cuchi (Kootche) goes forth, either in the form of a snake\nor some nocturnal bird. He it is who causes sickness among men. The\nthunder is the growl of his anger, the whirlwinds his breath, and the\naurora australis the fitful light of his camp fire.[84]\n\nAssociated with the gloom of night, was the darkness of the storm, which\nin many mythologies is contrasted with the sunshine in some divine\nstruggle. Endless are the tales and rites which bear upon this contest in\nearly religions. Indeed, according to some, they are the chief staple of\nall mythologies.[85]\n\n4. I have already mentioned that the idea of Power is one of the first\nto be connected with deity. The god is one who can do more than man.\nEspecially any sudden and striking display of force, either in the\nmaterial or immaterial world, stimulates the religious sense. The\nhistorian Buckle claimed that the inhabitants of countries subject\nto earthquakes are peculiarly superstitious. In myths and names, the\nhurricane of the tropics, the storm-winds of higher latitudes, indeed\nall sudden and tremendous outbreaks of natural violence, are regarded as\nexhibitions of divine Power.\n\nNotably is this the case with the thunder storm. That manifestation\nof tremendous power has excited the religious feelings of all races.\nMoreover, the highly charged electrical atmosphere exerts a special\ninfluence on the nervous system, predisposing it to emotional outbreaks.\nThe roll and reverberation of the thunder, the zigzag flash and\ndestructive blow of the lightning and the roar of the tempest, combine\nto present the phenomenon as a manifest display of supernatural power.\nHence in innumerable tribes the thunder god was identified with, or was\nthe peer of, the highest in the Pantheon.[86] The same is true of potent\nand coercive mental traits. Their possessors are regarded as partaking\nof the deific being to a greater extent than others, or even actually\ndivine. It is not merely that they excite the emotion of fear. That is\na shallow interpretation of the psychic process. Underlying it is the\ndeeper suggestion of energy, of action, of the spiritual mastery of\nmaterial existence. This is as real, though not so clear, in the mind of\nthe savage as in that of the philosopher.\n\nThis is also seen in the names and titles applied to the concept of\nDivinity by all nations. They speak of God \u201cAll-mighty,\u201d the \u201cOmnipotent\nRuler\u201d; and ever the attribute of indefinite power belongs to the great\ngods.\n\nIn early religions the manifestations of power are personified as\nsingle deities. We thus find in native American myths the figures of\nHuracan, the hurricane; Huemac, the Strong Hand, god of earthquakes, and\nnumberless thunder, lightning, and storm gods.\n\n5. It has been remarked by a German historian that the richest\ndevelopment of early poetry has been found among tribes dwelling by the\nocean or among mountains; and another writer has claimed that the most\nrapid development of religions has taken place where the broad expanses\nof deserts or seas have stimulated the mind to contemplation of spacial\nmagnitude on earth and in the sky.[87]\n\nThe languages of primitive peoples bear traces of this. In the Aztec\ntongue any wide level prairie is called _teotlalli_, godland; and the\nocean, _teoatl_, godwater; among the Peruvians the term _huaca_, holy, is\nsynonymous with \u201cvast\u201d or \u201cimmense.\u201d With the Polynesians _taula_, the\nocean space, is the home of the gods and where the souls go at death.\nThe traveller Castren once stood on the shore of the Arctic Ocean with a\nSamoyed. Turning to the native, he asked, \u201cwhere is Num?\u201d (their chief\ngod). \u201cThere,\u201d instantly replied the Samoyed, waving his hand toward\nwhere \u201cloomed the dark broad sea.\u201d[88]\n\nIn many cults this idea is attempted expression by assigning to deities\nhugeness of size. The colossal stone images of Easter Island, the huge\nstatues of the Maoris, are endeavours to present it to the senses.\n\nIn more developed faiths the same tendency prevails. The Buddhists\nrival each other in constructing enormous statues of Sakya Muni; in the\nSanscrit Upanishads, Aditi, who represents the endless visible expanse,\nis termed \u201cmother and father of all gods and men, the substance of\nwhatever has been or shall be born\u201d[89]; and according to some Mahommedan\nwriters, God is so great that it is 72,000 days\u2019 journey between his eyes!\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nSuch are some of the potent stimuli which stir the depths of man\u2019s\npsychical nature, awakening in him the belief in unknown powers far\nbeyond his ability to measure or to cope with. Not from any conscious\nact of intelligence, not from any process of voluntary reasoning, is\nthat belief born, but from the unknown, the unplumbed abyss of the\nsub-conscious mind.\n\nLet not this be considered as something degrading to the religious\nconceptions themselves. Though all are drawn from out the human spirit\nitself, and are nowise the direct revelations their believers think\nthem, yet who dare measure the height and the depth of the sub-conscious\nintelligence? It draws its knowledge from sources which elude scientific\nresearch, from the strange powers which we perceive in insects and other\nlower animals, almost, but not wholly, obliterated in the human line\nof organic descent; and from others, now merely nascent or embryonic,\nnew senses, destined in some far off \u00e6on to endow our posterity with\nfaculties as wondrous to us as would be sight to the sightless.\n\nMore than this: the teachings of the severest science tell us that Matter\nis, in its last analysis, Motion, and that motion is nought else than\nMind[90]; and who dare deny that in their unconscious functions our minds\nmay catch some overtones, as it were, from the harmonies of the Universal\nIntelligence thus demonstrated by inductive research, and vibrate in\nunison therewith?\n\n\n\n\nLECTURE III.\n\nPrimitive Religious Expression: in the Word.\n\n    CONTENTS:\u2014An Echo Myth\u2014The Power of Words\u2014Their Magical\n    Potency\u2014The Curse\u2014Power Independent of Meaning\u2014The Name as an\n    Attribute\u2014The Sacred Names\u2014The Ineffable Name\u2014\u201cMyrionomous\u201d\n    Gods\u2014\u201cTheophorous\u201d Names\u2014Suggestion and Repetition as\n    Stimulants\u2014I. The Word _to_ the gods: Prayer\u2014Its Forms,\n    Contents, and Aims\u2014II. The Word _from_ the gods: The Law and\n    the Prophecy\u2014The Ceremonial Law, or _tabu_\u2014Examples\u2014Divination\n    and Prediction\u2014III. The Word _concerning_ the gods:\n    The Myths\u2014Their Sources chiefly Psychic\u2014Some from\n    Language\u2014Examples\u2014Transference\u2014Similarities\u2014The Universal\n    Mythical Cycles: 1. The Cosmical Concepts; 2. The Sacred\n    Numbers; 3. The Drama of the Universe; Creation and Deluge\n    Myths; 4. The Earthly Paradise; 5. The Conflict of Nature; 6.\n    The Returning Saviour; 7. The Journey of the Soul\u2014Conclusion as\n    to these Identities.\n\n\nThere is a pleasant myth told by the inhabitants of the island of Mangaia\nin the South Pacific. When the Creator of all things had ordered the\nsolid land to rise from the primeval waters, he walked abroad to survey\nhis work. \u201cIt is good,\u201d said he aloud to himself. \u201cGood,\u201d answered\nan echo from a neighbouring hill. \u201cWhat!\u201d exclaimed the Creator. \u201cIs\nsome one here already? Am not I first?\u201d \u201cI first,\u201d answered the echo.\nTherefore the Mangaians assert that earliest of all existences is the\nbodiless Voice.[91] It is their way of saying, \u201cIn the beginning was the\nWord.\u201d\n\nNot only may we call it the first, it is also the mightiest of the unseen\nagencies which mould man and his destinies.\n\n\u201cPower over men,\u201d remarks Count Tolsto\u00ef in one of his essays, \u201clies not\nin material force, but in thought and its clear expression.\u201d Disraeli,\nthat subtlest of diplomats, once said, \u201cWe govern men with\u2014words.\u201d\n\nNo idea can be clearly conveyed to another unless there is a word to\nexpress it. Inward thought and outward utterance are the correlated\nconditions of intelligent advancement. The spoken word evokes in the mind\nof the hearer the picture, the emotion, the reasoning, which is occupying\nour own. A thousand minds are brought instantly to bear on the same\nthought by the words in the mouth of one. I cannot place too high the\ninstant and magical effect of the word.\n\nNot only does it convey a new thought to the mind, but it is itself\nthe begetter of thought. It is a seed sown, which grows and branches,\nbearing flower and fruit, beauteous and everlasting, or noxious and\ndestructive.\n\nThrough the faculty of speech, social life becomes possible; on it\ndepends the sweet interchange of souls; by it we are led to think in\nunison; through it we share the meditations of the philosopher, and the\ninspired visions of the poet and the prophet.\n\nIf there is any way in which the spirits of the sky and air, the hosts of\nthe Divine, can touch and teach our souls, it must be chiefly through the\nspoken word.\n\nEvery religion of the world bears witness to this. There is no other\nelement in them in which all join with like unanimity. From the rudest\nto the ripest they echo the verse of the evangelist philosopher when he\nwrote: \u201cIn the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the\nWord was God.\u201d\n\nThe highest teachings of them all are expressed in the formula: \u201cAnd the\nword of the Lord came saying\u2014\u201d\n\nWe may go back to the earliest forms of the ancient Egyptian religion,\nand we find the doctrine that the man who had learned and could pronounce\nthe divine words revealed through the god Thoth (Thought, Mind), by\ntheir utterance would be elevated to the god, and be blended with\nhim, as one and inseparable. \u201cThe primary idea concerning the ritual\nformulas was assimilation to God, brought about by the power of the words\nthemselves.\u201d[92]\n\nProbably in all primitive faiths the word is regarded as a magical power\nin itself. In Egypt it was believed that by words the most powerful of\nthe gods could be made obedient to the will of man. By them, as exorcisms\nor incantations everywhere, demons could be loosed or bound, and\nspirits summoned from the vasty deep. The stock in trade of the Indian\nmedicine-man is principally his store of exorcisms, and among the Goras\nof North-Western India any one can become a priest who will learn the\nformulas which compel the demons.[93]\n\nOur word \u201ccharm\u201d comes from the Latin _carmen_, the sacred rhythmic\nformula, such as Virgil averred could by its occult power drag the moon\nfrom the sky.\n\n    \u201cCarmina vel c\u00e6lo possunt deducere lunam.\u201d\n\nThere were such songs scarcely less potent among the Australian Blacks,\nwhich could summon the rain in dry seasons or cause it to cease in\nfloods.[94]\n\nNo demon, however malevolent, can resist, in their belief, the power of\nthe right word. The natives of New South Wales say that an evil spirit\nin the shape of a dwarf with monstrous head roams the woods at night and\ndevours those whom he meets. But if the man utters the word \u201cBoonbolong,\u201d\nthe dwarf passes on his way and does not harm him.[95]\n\nWhen Jesus was in Capernaum, and at his command an unclean spirit had\ngone out of a man possessed, the multitude said one to the other,\u2014\u03c4\u03b9\u03c2\n\u03b5\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9 \u03bf\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2, \u201cWhat is this Word, by the authority and might of which\nthis man casts out devils?\u201d (Luke iv., 36.) They believed he used some\ncabalistic formula of exorcism which constrained the demons to obey his\nwill.\n\nNowhere did the Word display its terrible effect more fearfully than in\nthe curse or imprecation. In ancient Assyria, writes Professor Sayce,\n\u201cThe power of the _mamit_, or curse, was such that the gods themselves\ncould not transgress it.\u201d[96] Not only did it unloose the demons of\ndestruction, but it constrained the gods against their will, changing\nthem from protectors to enemies.[97]\n\nAmid savage tribes, in undoubted and repeated instances, the curse kills\nas certainly as a knife. Among the western Indians of our country, when\na medicine-man \u201cgathers his medicine,\u201d that is, rises to the full height\nof inspired volition, and utters a withering curse on his antagonist,\ncommanding him to die, the latter knows all hope is lost. Sometimes\nhe drops dead on the spot, or at best lingers through a few days of\nmisery.[98] The Australians believe that the curse of a potent magician\nwill kill at the distance of a hundred miles.[99]\n\nNot only is the word thus mighty in the unseen world, but it is itself\nthe very efflux and medium of the divine power itself.\n\nThus in the drama of creation recorded in the first chapter of Genesis\nwe read: \u201cAnd God said, \u2018Light, be,\u2019 and light was\u201d; and in the\ncorresponding myth of the Quiche Indians of Central America, the maker of\nthe world calls forth, _Uleu!_ Earth! and at the word the solid land grew\nforth.[100]\n\nSir George Grey relates a story that in New Zealand there was a huge,\ncarved wooden head, which could speak, and by the dreadful might of its\nwords slew all who approached it. But when by superior magic its voice\nwas reduced to a whisper, its power was gone and it was destroyed.[101]\n\nIt is to be noted that the magical influence of the word is _independent\nof its meaning_. It is distinctly _not_ the idea, image, or truth which\nit conveys to which is ascribed its efficacy. On the contrary, the most\npotent of all words are those which have no meaning at all or of which\nthe sense has been lost.\n\nThis is constantly seen in the formulas of savage tribes. They preserve\narchaisms of language no longer understood by those who utter them,\nand in other instances they are obviously made up of syllables strung\ntogether without regard to intelligibility.\n\nThe same fact is abundantly shown in the cabalistic jargon of classical\nand medi\u00e6val diviners, and in the charms drawn from contemporary\nfolk-lore. Indeed, the famous cabalist, Pico de Mirandola, asserts that a\nword without meaning has most influence over the demons.\n\nNot only one or a few words may be thus unintelligible, but long\ncommunications may be in articulate sounds conveying no thought whatever.\nThis is the \u201cgift of tongues,\u201d the power to speak in unknown languages.\n\nIt is common in savage life. Many of the important chants at the sacred\nceremonies are mere iterations of meaningless syllables. The idea would\nseem to be that what men cannot understand, the gods do; or else, that\nit is the god expressing himself through human organs but in a speech\nunknown to human ears. Bishop Galloway says that the charm songs of the\nZulus are often quite unintelligible to themselves[102]; and this is one\nof many examples.\n\nOf all words, the most sacred is the Name. In primitive thought, the\npersonal name of an individual is not merely an attribute, it is an\nintegral part of his Self, his Ego. The Eskimos say that a man consists\nof three parts, his body, his soul, and his name, and of these the\nlast mentioned alone achieves immortality. This seems very advanced.\nMost of our ambitious men appear to think more of rendering their\nnames than their souls worthy of immortality. Very generally, the name\nwas associated with the personal guardian spirit, derived from it or\nindicating it, and hence received a ceremonial sanctity.[103]\n\nAs being a part of oneself, injury or contumely heaped upon a name\nreacted upon the individual who bore it, and even life could be destroyed\nin this manner.\n\nFor this reason, throughout America the natives rarely disclosed their\nreal appellations, but were designated by nicknames. In Australia some\ntribes were so cautious that the young men on entering adult life\nrenounced the names by which they had been known and assumed no other;\nwhile a woman preserved indeed her appellation, but no one except her\nhusband was entitled to pronounce it.[104] The Dyaks take the prudent\nprecaution, after an attack of illness, to change their names; so that\nthe demon who sent the sickness may not recognise them, and continue his\nmalevolent pursuit.[105]\n\nIn Polynesia, where the name was not thus concealed, it could be applied,\naccording to the ceremonial law, only to the person, although it was\ngenerally a common noun. Hence arose the curious custom called _tepi_.\nAll words which formed part of the name of the chieftain, and all\nsyllables of other words which had a similar sound were dropped from the\nlanguage and others substituted for them during his lifetime. Thus, forty\nor fifty of the most common terms of the language would drop out of use\nat once, and as many more be materially changed in sound, to the great\nannoyance of missionaries and visitors.[106]\n\nThe Kamschatkans were so particular that they would not name the bear\nor wolf, for these animals understood the language of men, and would be\noffended at such familiarity![107]\n\nEven if it does not hear, the power for good or evil which a being has,\ncan, in primitive opinion, be communicated through its name. For that\nreason the priest known as the _flamen dialis_ among the Romans would\nnot only avoid touching a dog or bear, but he would not pronounce their\nnames, lest he should be contaminated! And to this day a Mohammedan, if\nhe pronounces the word for \u201chog,\u201d will spit, that his mouth may not be\ndefiled by the name of the unclean beast.\n\nEven more universal was the avoidance of the names of the dead. This\nprevailed throughout Africa, Australia, Tasmania, Polynesia, and America.\nThe reason was, that the name was held to be a part of the spirit of\nthe departed, and to pronounce it would disturb the rest of the grave,\nand probably indeed bring the perturbed spirit to the circle of\nauditors.[108]\n\nIf such was the case with the names of men and beasts, how sacred must be\nthe names of the gods!\n\nThis is an extraordinary feature, common to the rudest superstitions of\nsavage and the most developed faiths of civilised lands, and it has for\nits basis the conception of the name as a real attribute, a part of the\nSelf.\n\n\u201cIn all the religions of ancient Asia,\u201d writes Lenormant, \u201cthe mysterious\nName was considered a real and divine being, who had a personal existence\nand exclusive power over both nature and the world of spirits.\u201d[109]\n\nIn the name dwelt the essential power of the deity. An Egyptian magical\nformula, placed in the mouth of a god, reads:\n\n    \u201cI am the elect of millions of years.\n    Were my name spoken on the bank of a river, it would be consumed;\n    Were it uttered on earth, fire would burst from the ground.\u201d[110]\n\nThe knowledge of this name by another enabled him to exert a power over\nthe god himself. That by naming a demon, he can be forced to appear,\nwas a cardinal principle of ancient magic. \u201cThe list of divine names\npossessed by the Roman pontiffs in their _indigitamenta_ was their most\nefficacious magical instrument, laying at their mercy all the forces of\nthe spirit world.\u201d[111]\n\nFor this reason, the gods of ancient Egypt sedulously concealed their\nnames, and we cannot doubt that it was the fear of some such subjection\nof their deity through the malicious use of his name, which led the early\nJews to conceal it so well that it is now lost. It was the same with\nthe Semitic Arabians. Instead of the true divine name, they substituted\nAllah, the Mighty One, so that now the original is conjectural or unknown.\n\nThis extends to the rudest tribes. The African traveller Holub says that\nthe actual name of the god of the Marutse and allied tribes along the\nZambesi river is Njambe; but to avoid revealing this, they employ the\nterm Molemo, \u201cHe above.\u201d Among the south-eastern Australian tribes their\nleading deity is Turramulun (the One-legged), who lives in the sky. His\nname is never revealed to women, nor to youths before their initiation to\nmanhood.[112]\n\nThe Choctaw Indians regarded the name of their highest divinity as\nself-existing, essential, and unspeakable. Therefore, when it was\nnecessary to refer to him, they adopted a circumlocution, for, says their\nhistorian, \u201caccording to their fixed standard of speech, had they made\nany nearer approach to the beloved Name, it would have been reckoned a\nprofanation.\u201d[113]\n\nHow completely this notion has survived among ourselves is shown by\nthe second clause of that prayer on which we have all been brought up,\n\u201cHallowed be Thy Name.\u201d But how few who repeat it reflect that the name\nreferred to, whatever it was, is now through long concealment totally\nlost!\n\nThus we see that the doctrine of \u201cthe ineffable Name\u201d is the common\nproperty of savage and cultured faiths.\n\nFrom the misuse of the name to compel the obedience of the god, or\nto injure his dignity and worth, came the idea of profanity, sternly\nforbidden by the early Jewish law,\u2014\u201cTake not the name of the Lord in\nvain\u201d\u2014and by many other faiths of a primitive aspect.\n\nQuite consistently with this idea of real existence in names, the god who\nhad many names had just as many powers or faculties. For that reason,\nthe prominent gods of ancient Egypt, especially Isis, were called upon\nby so numerous epithets that the Greeks spoke of them as \u201cmyrionomous,\u201d\nten-thousand-named. In later Babylonian times all the names of the fifty\ngreat gods were ascribed to \u00caa, by which process they were themselves\nabsorbed into his being. \u201cWhen they lost their names, they lost their\npersonality as well.\u201d[114] To the Mohammedan the \u201cOne hundred names of\nGod\u201d repeated in the Koran express the multitude of His powers.\n\nThe same tendency is visible in the native religions of America. The\nMexicans applied many names to the same divinity, and in the _Popol Vuh_,\nthe sacred book of the Quiches, the chief deity is called by a variety of\ntitles, some sounding strange to us, as \u201cthe opossum-hunter,\u201d the \u201cgreen\nsnake,\u201d the \u201ccalebash,\u201d all of symbolic sense.[115]\n\nIn the South Seas, the name of a god, adopted by a chief, identified\nhim in the opinion of the people with the god and secured for him the\nreverence and adoration ascribed to his divine namesake.[116]\n\nThis idea is that which in many early and later faiths led to what are\ncalled the \u201ctheophorous\u201d or god-bearing names, where the individual\nis called by the proper name of a saint or god. They were especially\nfrequent in early Semitic religions, and are customary among Catholics\nto-day.[117]\n\nWe find their origin in the custom, very general among the American\nIndians, for the person to take the name of the spirit who appears\nto him during the vigils and fasts which attend the ceremonies of\ninitiation to manhood. By assuming the name of the divinity, the two\nnatures or essences are believed to be united. This was precisely also\nthe opinion of the early Christians, as we see in the expression of St.\nEphrem, a Syrian saint of the fourth century: \u201cMerciful was the Lord in\nthat He clad on our Names. His Names make us great; our Names make Him\nsmall.\u201d[118]\n\nIf we seek the explanation of this strange power attributed to words\nand names, often apart from their signification, we shall find it in\ntheir extreme activity as agents of mental suggestion. They are intense\npsychic stimulants, stirring the soul to its depths. The Word is by odds\nthe most effective of all agencies to bring about altered and abnormal\nmental conditions either in the individual or in the mass. Through it,\njudiciously applied, the profoundest hypnotic trance, or the wildest,\nmaniacal nervous seizures can be produced at will.[119]\n\nThe repetition of a word greatly heightens its suggestive influence\nand promotes the exclusion from the mind of all other concepts and\nassociations than its own. In many languages, a word repeated is\nequivalent to the superlative degree, and in every tongue the repetition\nhas a similar effect, as in the phrase: \u201cHoly, holy, holy, Lord God of\nSabaoth.\u201d\n\nNo words in this relation are more efficient than names. Consider what\nour own lives would be if we had to change our names every year, how it\nwould seem to obliterate our personality, how it would dissipate all\ndreams of posthumous glory and renown. Our consciousness of Self would\nsuffer diminution, and the keenest interest of our lives would be lost.\nOur name is really and truly a part of ourselves, and he who would rob\nus of it would leave us poor indeed. Why is every point of view carved\nwith the names of obscure tourists, why does it give us pleasure to note\nour names among the hundreds at some grand function, but that we think\nit more desirable to live \u201cas naked nominations, without desert or noble\ndeeds,\u201d as Sir Thomas Browne said, than to pass away and leave not that\nlittle which the Roman poet considered the least,\u2014_nominis umbra_, \u201cthe\nshadow of a name.\u201d\n\nFor the practical purposes of life the name confers or creates the\npersonality. This fact exerted a profound influence in the earliest\ndevelopment of religion. The vague sense of spiritual power first became\ncentred in the idea of an individual, of a personal god, when it received\na name.\n\nThe primitive words of barbaric tongues used to signifying the divine\nhave not the connotation of individuality. _Wakan_, _mahopa_, _manito_,\n_teotl_, _huaca_, _ku_, are such words from American languages, not one\nof which conveys the concept of personality. That concept was first\ngained when some single expression of spiritual power was differentiated\nand named.[120]\n\nThe essential religious element in the Word is its power to bring man\ninto relation to the gods. This is possible in three directions,\u2014we may\naddress them; they may address us; or we may talk about them. These\nfurnish the three forms of sacred expression in speech: 1. The word _to_\nthe gods,\u2014Prayer; 2. The word _from_ the gods,\u2014Revelation; and 3. The\nword _about_ the gods,\u2014the Myth. We will consider each of these.\n\nI. THE WORD TO THE GODS.\u20141. The Word to the gods is Prayer. It is a\nvery prominent and nigh universal element in primitive religions. The\ninjunction \u201cPray always\u201d is nowhere else so nearly carried out. Captain\nClark, an officer of our army with the widest experience of Indian life,\nwrites: \u201cIt seems a startling assertion, but it is, I think, true, that\nthere are no people who pray more than Indians. Both superstition and\ncustom keep always in their minds the necessity for placating the anger\nof the invisible and omnipotent power, and for supplicating the active\nexercise of his faculties in their behalf.\u201d[121]\n\nIn fact, Prayer may be said to be the life of the faith of savage tribes,\nand it is so recognised by themselves. According to the legends of the\nMaoris of New Zealand, when they first migrated to that island from\nHawaii, they did not bring with them their ancestral gods, but took care\nto carry along the potent prayers which the gods cannot but hear and\ngrant.[122]\n\nSome writers have claimed that certain tribes have been found without any\nnotion of an appeal to unseen agencies, and have quoted as instances the\nYahgans of Tierra del Fuego, and the Mincopies of the Andaman Islands.\nBut closer examination proves that the priests of the Yahgans call upon a\nmysterious being, Aiapakal,[123] and other invisible existences, and the\nMincopies are acknowledged to have prayers at the present time.\n\nThe earliest hymns and prayers do not, as a rule, contain definite\nrequests, but are general appeals to the god to be present, to partake\nof the feast which is spread, or to join the dance and to continue his\ngood offices toward those who call upon him. Such are the hymns of\nthe Rig Veda, and those of ancient Mexico, which I have collected and\npublished.[124] They are like the _evocatio deorum_ of the Romans.\n\nThe three forms of \u201cthe Word to the gods,\u201d or Prayer, are those of\nthanksgiving, by praise or laudation; of petition for assistance or\nprotection; and of penitence or contrition for neglect of duty. All\nthese are common in the most primitive faiths. In all of them you\nwill find the deity appealed to as great, mighty, a lord, a king,\nterror-inspiring, loving his followers, and by hundreds of such epithets\nof amplification and flattery. He is addressed endearingly as father or\ngrandfather; not at all implying a physical relationship, as some modern\nwriters have erroneously stated; but with reference to the loving care he\nis supposed to extend to his worshippers.\n\nAs we might expect, most of the petitions in primitive prayers are for\nmaterial benefits. The burden of most of them is well expressed by one in\nthe Rig Veda: \u201cO God, prosper us in getting and in keeping!\u201d They ask for\nincrease of goods, abundant food, success in war, and fine weather.\n\nYet among the rudest there are signs of an appreciation of something\nhigher. A prayer of the Khonds, a Dravidian tribe of Northern India,\nreads: \u201cO Lord, we know not what is good for us. Thou knowest what it is.\nFor it we pray.\u201d\n\nIt is strange to find among the Navahoes, a rude hunting tribe of our\nwestern territories, an intense longing for the beautiful. One of their\nprayers runs: \u201cO Lord on high, whose youth is immortal, ruler above, I\nhave made you the offering, preserve my body and members, preserve it in\nbeauty, make all things beautiful, let all be completed in beauty.\u201d[125]\n\nAt other times the prayer is for moral control, as in this of a Sioux\nIndian: \u201cO my grandfather, the Earth, I ask that thou givest me a long\nlife and strength of body. When I go to war, let me capture many horses\nand kill many enemies. But in peace, let not anger enter my heart.\u201d[126]\n\nPenitential prayers are uttered when one has broken the ceremonial law or\n_tabu_; and in general, when misfortune and defeat seem to indicate that\nthe gods are irritated at some insult offered them, though the worshipper\nmay not be clear what it is.\n\n\u201cO merciful Lord,\u201d says an Aztec prayer, \u201clet this chastisement with\nwhich thou hast visited us give us freedom from evil and follies.\u201d[127]\n\nIn many prayers we find formulas preserved which are no longer\nunderstood; and very frequently the power of the prayer is believed to\nbe increased by repeating it a number of times. The prayer choruses of\nnearly all savage tribes offer endless examples of this. The notion\nof increased force by repetition, a notion founded on the augmented\nsuggestive power of the Word through its iteration, to which I have\nalready referred, is so common that it was especially noted and condemned\nby Jesus as of no spiritual value.\n\nThis form of prayer, indeed, degenerated into a mere magical formula,\nas we see was the case with the apostolic benediction of the Christian\nchurch during the middle ages, which became a charm in use by\nnecromancers and sorcerers.\n\nIn its sublimest essence, however, prayer has been recognised as\nsomething far beyond any form of suppliancy. It is, as an orthodox\nauthority says, \u201cthe habitual state of a being who constantly lives in\nrelation to God, and cultivates a constant exchange with Him.\u201d[128]\nSo understood, it is even more than inspiration; it is a communion of\nspiritual life, a dwelling in God. This is the precise mental condition\nof many of the mystics and devotees of primitive religions. They are with\nthe god, the god with and in them.\n\nII. THE WORD FROM THE GODS.\u2014If the mere name of the god was thus mighty\nand thus venerated, how much more the words he himself uttered! The \u201cWord\nof God,\u201d as understood by the worshippers, is the kernel and core of\nevery faith on earth. Every religion is, to its votaries, a revelation.\nNone is so material, none so primitive, as to claim any other foundation\nthan the expressed will of divinity. None is so devoid of ritual as to\nlack some means of ascertaining this will.\n\nThe word from the gods is clothed under two forms, the Law and the\nProphets,\u2014in other terms, Precept and Prediction. In every religion, from\nthe most primitive to the highest, we find these two modes of divine\nutterance.\n\nIn the earliest phases of religion, the law is essentially prohibitory.\nIt is in the form of the negative, \u201cThou shalt not\u2014\u2014.\u201d Ethnologists have\nadopted for this a word from Polynesian dialects, _tabu_, or _tapu_, akin\nto _tapa_, to name,[129] that which was solemnly named or announced being\nsacred, and hence forbidden to the _profanum vulgus_.\n\nThe _tabu_ extends its veto into every department of primitive life.\nIt forbids the use of certain articles of food or raiment; it hallows\nthe sacred areas; it lays restrictions on marriage, and thus originates\nwhat is known as the totemic bond; it denounces various actions, often\nthe most trivial and innocent, and thus lays the foundation for the\nceremonial law.\n\nThe penalty for the infraction of the _tabu_ includes all that flows from\nthe anger of the gods, reaching to death itself. A few examples, from the\nvery rudest religions, will serve to illustrate this.\n\nThe Kamschatkans in the beginning of the last century were very low in\nthe scale of humanity and curiously pessimistic. They had a hero-god,\nKutka, their mythic progenitor, of whom they told many strange and\ndisgusting stories. They cursed him oftener than they blessed him, and\nrefused to believe that anything good could come from the gods. But to\nescape the ill-will of these malevolent beings they practised various\nceremonies and refrained from sundry actions calculated to displease\nthose capricious spirits. Thus, one must not cook fish and flesh in the\nsame pot, or he would be punished with sores; he must not step in the\ntracks of a bear, or he would be visited with a skin disease; he must not\nscrape the snow from his shoes with a knife, or there would be violent\nstorms; and so on, through a long law of prohibitions.[130]\n\nThe Mincopies of the Andaman Islands have no forms of worship, they have\nno invocations to the gods, their language, indeed, has no original word\nfor \u201cprayer.\u201d They believe firmly, however, in the existence of numerous\nspirits, not the souls of the deceased, but self-created and undying,\nwho will injure them if they commit certain transgressions, such as to\ncook turtle or fish by burning a particular kind of wood; to roast a pig\ninstead of boiling it, and so on.[131]\n\nThe Yahgans of Tierra del Fuego have been often, though erroneously,\nquoted as a tribe devoid of religion. Their ceremonial law was rigid. The\nhairs that fell from the head must be burned, or the individual would\nfall ill; the name of the dead must not be mentioned, or the ghost would\nreturn and plague them; the young ducklings must not be killed, or bad\nweather would follow.[132]\n\nThe _tabu_ in Polynesia, whence it derives its name, was carried to an\nincredible degree of stringency. The dread of its violation was so vivid,\nthat in itself it was often the cause of the death of the offender.[133]\n\nThe second form of the \u201cWord from God\u201d was when it was uttered as\na prophecy, a prediction of the future. In this form it appears\nthroughout the world under the innumerable aspects of divination, as\noracles, prophetic utterances, forecasts of time to come, second-sight,\nclairvoyance, and the like.\n\nThe essence of every religious rite may be said to be divinatory,\ninasmuch as its final aim is either to learn or to modify the Will of\nGod, and thus to influence the future of the individual or society by\nextra-natural agencies.\n\nThere is nothing in this derogatory to religion as an element of mind.\nThe constant effort of the reason is to banish the idea of chance from\nthe universe; and he who regards the Will of God as a law of the universe\ndoes exclude chance from its events just in proportion as he learns that\nWill and acts in conformity to it.\n\nPrediction in primitive religions is by two widely different methods,\nDivination and Prophecy.\n\nThe diviner, relying on his own sense and reasoning powers, foretells\nthe future by observation of certain trains of events which he believes\nreveal the intentions of the gods; the prophet is one inspired by the\ndivine mind itself to speak its own words and to convey directly the\nthoughts and wishes of deity.\n\nThis distinction is visible in early religions. Any one can learn the\n\u201csigns\u201d and \u201comens\u201d which will be auspicious or inauspicious for his\nundertakings; though, of course, to read their full significance one must\nhave made special studies in the art of augury. To become an inspired\nprophet requires a much more serious preparation, and some form of\ncommunion direct with the gods must be established.\n\nIII.\u2014THE WORD CONCERNING THE GODS. A brilliant French writer (E. Scherer)\nhas said: \u201cIt was the Word that made the gods,\u201d \u201c_Le mot, c\u2019est l\u2019artisan\ndes idoles_.\u201d He but expressed in a pointed apothegm what the profound\nGerman mythologist Kuhn stated in more formal terms when he wrote: \u201cThe\nfoundation of mythology is to be looked for in the domain of language.\u201d\n\nWhat, indeed, does the term \u201cmyth\u201d itself mean? It is merely the Greek\nfor \u201ca word,\u201d something spoken, and in this general sense it is used\nby Homer. Later, its connotation became restricted to what was spoken\nconcerning the gods, the narratives of their doings, the descriptions of\ntheir abodes and attributes.\n\nMen began to frame such tales the moment they consciously recognised the\nexistence of such unseen agencies. They were founded on visions, dreams,\nand those vague mental states which, as I have shown, fill up so large a\npart of savage life. They were not intentional fictions, by any means,\nfor the criteria between the real and unreal fade away in those psychic\nconditions, and the faintest hold on actuality is enough to guarantee an\nindefinitely complex fancy.\n\nIt was a strange error by one of the most earnest students of primitive\nreligions, the Reverend W. Robertson Smith, when he advocated his theory\nthat the myth was derived from the ritual, not the ritual from the\nmyth.[134] Had he studied the actual religious condition of the rudest\ntribes, he would have found them with scarcely any ritual but a most\nabundant mythology; and he would have discovered that where the myth\nwas taken from the ritual, it is when the latter has lost its original\nmeaning, and some other is devised to explain it.\n\nAs examples of such notions, I may take the Bushmen of South Africa. They\nenjoy the general reputation of being the lowest of the human race. They\nhave no temples, no altars, no ritual; yet the missionary Bleek collected\namong them thousands of tales concerning their gods in their relations to\nmen and animals.[135]\n\nThe Andamanese are alleged to have no forms of worship whatever; but they\nhave many myths about the mighty Puluga, self-created and immortal, about\nthe origin of fire, and the transactions of the invisible spirits.\n\nIt would be easy to give many other examples, but it is enough to refute\nsuch an opinion by referring to the vast body of myths in all religious\npeoples which have no reference to ritual whatever.\n\nThe sources of mythology are psychic. They are not to be traced to the\nexternal world, whether ritual or natural. Myths are not figurative\nexplanations of natural phenomena, they are not vague memories of\nancestors and departed heroes, they are not philosophic speculations\nor poetic fancies. They are distinctly religious in origin, and, when\ngenuine, are the fruit of that insight into the divine, that \u201cbeatific\nvision,\u201d on which I have laid such emphasis as the real and only\nfoundation of all religions whatsoever.\n\nThey receive their form and expression through spoken language, and are,\ntherefore, intimately associated with, often dependent upon its sounds,\nand laws. In how many ways this may influence them I may briefly mention.\n\nPrimitive language is predominantly concrete. The connotations of its\nterms are mainly objective. By this necessity arose the materialisation\nof the spiritual thought. It had to be expressed under external imagery.\n\nPrimitive languages are usually intensely individualising and specific.\nThere is scarcely a native tongue in America in which one could say\n\u201chand\u201d; one must always add a pronoun indicating whose hand is meant,\n\u201cmy, thy, his,\u201d hand.\n\nThe generic distinctions in such tongues are often far reaching and\nreal, not purely formal, as with us. A word in the masculine or feminine\ngender is understood to mean that the object to which it refers is\npositively male or female. Many other distinctions are thus conveyed, as\nwhat is animate and inanimate, noble or vulgar, etc.\n\nThe result of these distinctions in such languages as the Aryan and\nSemitic was that the gods perforce were arranged sexually as male and\nfemale, and this persists to-day even in our English tongue.\n\nMany myths arose directly from words, through casual similarities\nbetween them which were attributed to some divine cause. This is the\ntheory so well known by the advocacy of Professor Max M\u00fcller, who is\ncharged, unfairly I believe, with having called mythology a \u201cdisease of\nlanguage.\u201d He, Professor Kuhn, and others lay great and just stress on\nthe influence of \u201cparonomy,\u201d that is, similarity in the sound of words,\nas the starting-point of myths. They have adduced endless examples from\nthe classical tongues, but I shall content myself with two from wholly\nprimitive sources.\n\nI have just referred to the Andamanese as at the bottom of religious\ngrowth, but with an abundant mythology. In their tongue it happens that\nthe word _garub_ means \u201cnight\u201d and also a species of caterpillar. It is\nprobably a mere coincidence of sound. But they saw in it much more.\nNight to them is a depressing period, and it would not have been created\nby the supreme Puluga without just cause. Evidently the double meaning\nof the word _garub_ indicated this. And as the wise men proceed on that\nuniversally sound opinion that when there is a row there is a woman in\nit, they perceive that some woman must have wantonly killed a _garub_, a\ncaterpillar, in order that Puluga should have sent _garub_, the night, as\na punishment. And this is the sum of a long mythical story.[136]\n\nAnother example is from a far distant area, from among the Carrier\nIndians of British America. The arctic fox which they hunt has a sharp\nyelp which sounds _khaih_. Their word for \u201clight\u201d is _yekkhaih_.\nEvidently the fox was the animal who first called for the light and, by\nthe magical power of the word, obtained it. Through what difficulties he\naccomplished this is told in a long and curious myth obtained from them\nby Father Morice.[137]\n\nIn the development of myths it was, indeed, often the case that those\nconcerning one deity could be told of another\u2014singularly incongruous as\nit often was,\u2014or that the divine attributes primarily assigned to a\ndeity and drawn from its character could be transferred to a human type,\nas when those of a flower were placed on the god.[138]\n\nIt is equally an error to suppose that myths were at first mere stories\nand received their religious character later. The true myth has a\nreligious aim from the outset, and is not the product of an idle fancy.\nThose who have taught otherwise have been misled by a superficial\nacquaintance with the psychology of savage tribes. Mythology comes from\nreligion, not religion from mythology.\n\nThe savage understands perfectly the difference between a sacred and a\nsecular story, between a narrative of the doings of the gods handed down\nfrom his ancestors, and the creation of the idle fancy brought forth to\namuse a circle of listeners.\n\nI have already referred to the strange similarity in the myths of savage\nnations far asunder in space and kinship. The explanation of this is\nnot to be found in borrowing or in recollections from a common, remote\nunity; but in the laws of the human mind. The same myths are found all\nover the world, with the same symbolism and imagery, woven into cycles\ndealing with the same great questions of human thought. This is because\nthey arise from identical psychic sources, and find expression under\nobligatory forms, depending on the relations of man to his environment,\nand on the unity of mental process throughout the race.\n\nIt is not possible for me at the present time to enter far into the vast\ntemple of mythology. I must content myself with selecting a few of the\nmost prominent mythical cycles, aiming by these to show how they form the\nground-plan and substructure of the whole edifice of mythical narrative.\n\nI will select seven which are the most prominent, those relating to:\n1. the Cosmical Concepts; 2. the Sacred Numbers; 3. the Drama of the\nUniverse; 4. the Earthly Paradise; 5. the Conflict of Nature; 6. the\nReturning Saviour; and 7. the Journey of the Soul.\n\n_1._ _The Cosmical Concepts._\u2014Wherever man is placed on the earth, he\nis guided in his movements by space and direction. These are among the\nearliest notions he derives from the impressions on his senses. His\nanatomical conformation, the anterior and posterior planes of his body\nand his right and left sides, lead him to a fourfold division of space,\nas before him and behind him, to one side or the other. He conceives the\nearth, therefore, as a plain with four quarters, the chief directions\nas four, to wit, the cardinal points, and the winds as four principal\ncurrents from these points. The sky is to him a solid covering, supported\nat each of its four corners by a tree, a pillar, or a giant, and is\nitself divided into four courts or regions like the earth.\n\nThese were his cosmical concepts, his primal ideas of the universe, and\nthey entered deeply into his life, his acts, and his beliefs. He founded\nhis social organisation on them, he pitched his tents or built his cities\non their model, he oriented his edifices to simulate them, and framed his\nmyths to explain and perpetuate them.\n\nWe find these concepts practically universal. The symbolic figures which\nrepresent them are scratched in the soil at the _Bora_, or initiation\nceremonies of the Australians; they are etched into the pots and jars\nwe dig up in the mounds of the Mississippi valley; they are painted\nin strange figures on the manuscripts of the Mayas and Mexicans; they\nreappear in the mysterious symbols of the svastika and the Chinese Ta-Ki;\nthey underlie the foundation stones of Egyptian pyramids, and recur in\nthe lowest strata of Babylonian ziggarats.[139]\n\n_2. The Sacred Numbers._\u2014The cosmical concepts were closely connected\nwith the sacred numbers. Wherever we turn in myth and rite, in symbolism\nor sacred art, we find certain numbers which have a hallowed priority\nin religious thought. These numbers are pre-eminently the three and\nthe four, and those derived from them. They are distinctly antithetic\nin character, arising from contrasting psychical sources, which I will\nbriefly explain.\n\nThe number _four_ derives its sacredness in mythology from the cosmical\nconcepts just mentioned. It was, therefore, connected with the objective\nand phenomenal world, and had a material and concrete origin and\napplications.\n\nThe number _three_, on the other hand, was surrounded with the halo of\nsanctity from the operations of the mind itself. These, the processes\nof thinking, are carried on by a triple or rather triune action of the\nintelligence, which logicians express in the three fundamental \u201claws of\nthought,\u201d and in the trilogy of the syllogism. These ever-present laws of\nthinking impress themselves on the mind and mental acts whether they are\nrecognised or not, and all the more absolutely in that involuntary action\nin which, as \u201csub-limital consciousness\u201d or \u201cpsychic automatism,\u201d I have\nrevealed to you the true source of the conception of the Divine.[140]\n\nHow natural, then, that we should find in so many primitive faiths the\nbelief in the triplicate nature of divinity, should find myths, idols,\nrites, so devised as to reflect and inculcate this! Such is the case,\nand it is easy to quote examples, whether we turn to the Indians of\nAmerica or the Indians of Hindostan, whether we touch on the triads of\nancient Egypt or those of the Druids, whether we recall the three Norns\nof Teutonic myth or the three Fates of the Hellenes. As a writer, who\nhas made the subject his special branch, observes: \u201cIt is impossible to\nstudy any single system of worship throughout the world, without being\nstruck with the peculiar persistence of the triple number in regard to\nDivinity.\u201d[141]\n\nThe exception to this would naturally be where the concept of the number\nitself was too feeble to impress itself upon the myth. There are tribes\nwho cannot count four, whose languages have no word for any number\nbeyond two, and yet who are by no means deficient either in mythologies\nor practical arts.[142] Among these, we should look in vain for the\nsacredness of numbers.\n\n_3. The Drama of the Universe._\u2014I have already quoted the saying of the\nwise men of ancient India, \u201cThere is no limit to the knowing of the Self\nthat knows.\u201d He who through meditation and prayer has become one with\nGod, knows what God knows. Thus it is that in the rudest tribes we find\nthe story of the beginning of things clearly told as coming from the\ninspired knowledge of the seers.\n\nThis story has many points of similarity, wherever we find it, not\nowing, I hasten again to say, to any unity of origin in place, but due\nto the higher unity of the mind of man, and the necessary results of its\nactivity.\n\nLook in what continent we please, we shall find the myth of a Creation\nor of a primeval construction, of a Deluge or a destruction, and of an\nexpected Restoration. We shall find that man has ever looked on this\npresent world as a passing scene in the shifting panorama of time, to be\nended by some cataclysm and to be followed by some period of millennial\nglory.\n\nWhenever we have a fairly complete body of the mythology of a primitive\nstock, we discover the same scenario of the vast drama of the universe,\nvarying abundantly in detail and local colour, but true to the grandiose\nlines of its composition.\n\nIt is instructive to analyse its various elements and trace them to their\npsychic sources. Let us begin with the modes of action of the creative\npower itself.\n\nThis mysterious power is known to man under three forms.\n\nThe simplest is that of the moulder or manufacturer, as the potter makes\nhis pots, the shoemaker his shoes. This is the conception which underlies\nmany myths of the Creator, as is shown by the names he bears. Thus the\nAustralians called him Baiame, \u201cthe cutter-out,\u201d as one cuts out a sandal\nfrom a skin, or a figure from bark. The Maya Indians used the term Patol,\nfrom the verb _pat_, to mould, as a potter his clay, Bitol, which has\nthe same meaning, and Tzacol, the builder, as of a house.[143] With\nthe Dyaks of Borneo, the Creator is Tupa, the forger, as one forges a\nspear-blade[144]; and so on.\n\nThe second form is that of creation in the sense of generation, and this\nis a constant simile in the myths, with reference to the process both in\nthe vegetable and animal kingdoms.\n\nThe Creator is often referred to as the Father, the parent, more or\nless literally, of all that is. He has many such titles in the myths of\nAmerica and Polynesia. In bi-sexual myths he is associated with some\nuniversal mother as the genetrix.\n\nThe third form is more recondite and loftier. In an earlier lecture I\nhave emphasised how man is conscious within himself of the Will as an\nultimate source of power. This he clearly recognised in his primitive\nconditions, and to its exertion repeatedly in his myths did he attribute\nthe origin of things. They were self-evolved in the thought of the primal\nBeing, or, as the native American expression is, they were \u201ccreated by\nthought.\u201d\n\nWe find this in the rudest tribes of North America; and among the\nsedentary Zu\u00f1is of New Mexico, it is said of their demiurge Awonawilona\nthat at the beginning \u201che conceived within himself and thought outward in\nspace,\u201d in order to bring nature into existence. We see the connection in\nthe Vitian dialect of Polynesian, in which _mania_ is \u201cto think\u201d; _mana_,\na miracle, and the power to perform one. According to the myths of\nHawaii, it was \u201cby an act of the will\u201d that their triple-natured Creator\n\u201cbroke up the night\u201d (Po), and from its fragments evoked into being the\nworld of light and life.[145]\n\nWhatever the mode of creation, it was felt that it did not tell the whole\nstory. The conceptions of time and space are in their essence limitless,\nand any creation must have been within them. Thus in Polynesian myth,\nPo represents not a dateless chaos but the debris of some former state\nof things; and in Algonquin legend the primeval ocean had engulfed some\nolder world.[146]\n\nThis psychic molimen, ceaselessly acting, led in more developed\nmythologies to some defined fancies of these earlier periods of cosmic\nexistence and thus to the myths of the Ages of the World or the Epochs of\nNature. These are clearly outlined among the Mexicans, Mayas, Peruvians,\nand other tribes of the New World and among many on the Eastern\nHemisphere. The Aztecs count them as four, each followed by a formidable\ncatastrophe, nearly or quite destroying all that lived.\n\nThe last of these destructions was generally blended with the notion of\nthe emergence of the solid land from the primeval waters; and this is the\norigin of the Deluge Myth, the story of the Universal Flood, which we\nfind in so many primitive peoples. It has excited especial attention, and\nby writers has been explained as the remembrance of some local overflow,\nor the recollection of the Hebrew tradition. Its real origin, purely\npsychic and derived from the myth of the Epochs of Nature, I explained\nthirty years ago in discussing its prevalence among American tribes.[147]\n\n_4. The Earthly Paradise._\u2014Associated with this cycle is the myth of\nthe terrestrial Paradise, watered by its four rivers, and enclosing the\ntree of life,\u2014the happy abode of early man. The four rivers are the\ncelestial streams from the four corners of the earth, watering the tree\nas the emblem of life. Thus we find it among the American Indians, the\nSioux and the Aztecs, the Mayas, the Polynesians, the ancient Aryans and\nSemites, etc.[148] Its origin is purely psychic, and though we can easily\nunderstand how the writer of the Book of Genesis sought to identify these\nmythical streams with some known to him, it is strangely out of date for\nscholars of to-day to follow his footsteps in that vain quest.[149]\n\n_5. The Conflict of Nature._\u2014Another great cycle of psychic myths arose\nfrom the conflict of nature as apprehended by the primitive mind.\nEverywhere it seems to be raging around us. The hourly struggle of light\nwith darkness; of day with night; of sunshine with storm; of summer with\nwinter; of youth with age, of health with disease; of life with death; of\nall that makes toward good with all that makes toward evil\u2014this endless\nbattle of two principles underlies all movement and is forever stirring\nthe soul to throw itself into the fray.\n\nIn a thousand forms this eternal combat was portrayed in myths, all\npregnant with one meaning, bodying it forth in varied symbol and\nexpression. The world-wide stories of the conflict of the first two\nbrothers, of men with gods, of giants with heroes, of the deities among\nthemselves, arose from this perception of the unceasing interaction of\nnatural forces, imagined as a war between conscious existences.\n\n_6. The Returning Saviour._\u2014Out of this imagined turmoil and slaughter\ngrew the wonderful mythical cycles concerning the Deliverer and Saviour.\nHe would come from afar, out of the morning light or the distant sky,\nor he would be born of a virgin and the son of a god. He would lead his\npeople to happiness and power, crushing by his might the enemies who\nafflicted them, whether on earth or among the envious gods. Blond-bearded\nand light-haired, even among Polynesians and Americans, we cannot\nerr in seeing in this majestic figure the personified idea of Light,\ntransferred from the plane of physical phenomena into that of psychical\nanticipation.[150]\n\n_7. The Journey of the Soul._\u2014Lastly, I mention the cycle which describes\nthe journey of the soul after death. The extraordinary similarity which\nI and others have pointed out between the opinions on this subject among\nEgyptians, Greeks, ancient Celts, and North American Indians,[151] is not\nto be explained by any theory of inter-communication, nor \u201cby chance,\u201d\nas some have argued, but by fixed psychic laws, working over the same\nmaterial under similar conditions.\n\nThe soul passes toward the west, crosses a sea or river to the abode\nof the departed, and meets everywhere nearly the same obstacles, to\nbe overcome by proper preparations and mortuary ceremonies. I need\nnot rehearse the details. They can be compared elsewhere. But their\nsubstantial identity confirms in an emphatic manner the thesis I am\nadvocating, that in these universal mythical cycles we are dealing not\nwith fragments of some one set of fancies borrowed from a common source,\nbut with independent creations of the human intellect, framed under\nlaws common to it everywhere, and which tend always to produce fruits\ngenerically everywhere the same.\n\n\n\n\nLECTURE IV.\n\nPrimitive Religious Expression: In the Object.\n\n    CONTENTS:\u2014Visual Ideas\u2014Fetishism\u2014Not Object-Worship\n    only\u2014Identical with Idolatry\u2014Modern Fetishism\u2014Animism\u2014Not a\n    Stadium of Religion\u2014The Chief Groups of Religious Objects:\n    1. The Celestial Bodies\u2014Sun and Moon Worship\u2014Astrolatry;\n    2. The Four Elements\u2014Fire, Air (the Winds), Water,\n    and the Earth\u2014Symbolism of Colours; 3. Stones and\n    Rocks\u2014Thunderbolts\u2014Memorial Stones\u2014Divining Stones; 4. Trees\n    and Plants\u2014The Tree of Life\u2014The Sacred Pole and the Cross\u2014The\n    Plant-Soul\u2014The Tree of Knowledge; 5. Places and Sites\u2014High\n    Places and Caves; 6. The Lower Animals\u2014The Bird, the Serpent,\n    etc.; 7. Man\u2014Anthropism in Religion\u2014The Worship of Beauty;\n    8. Life and its Transmission\u2014Examples\u2014Genesiac Cults\u2014The\n    Fatherhood of God\u2014Love as Religion\u2019s Crown.\n\n\nIf we analyse the concepts which occupy our minds, we shall find\nthat most of them are derived from the sense of sight; they are what\npsychologists call \u201cvisual ideas.\u201d To these alone we owe the notions of\nspace, size, form, colour, brightness, and motion.\n\nBy filling the brain with such images, sight becomes a mental stimulus\nof the highest order, and as we find it exerting its influence in other\ndirections, so in the development of the religious sense it has always\nheld a conspicuous place. It has led to the objective expression of\nthat sense under visible forms, in images, pictures, sacred structures,\nsymbolic colours and shapes, and natural substances.\n\nThis expression, universal in primitive conditions, is called fetishism,\npolytheism, and idolatry, the worship of stocks and stones. But I wish to\nimpress upon you that nowhere in the world did man ever worship a stock\nor a stone, as such. Every fetish, be it a rag-baby or a pebble from the\nroad-side, is adored, not as itself, but as possessing some mysterious,\ntranscendental power, by which it can influence the future. In some\nobscure way it is the medium or agent of that supernatural Will, the\nrecognition of which is at the basis of every religion.\n\nThe relation of the fetish to the spiritual power behind it, though\neverywhere recognised, was not easy to define. The Melanesians believe\nthat the souls of the dead act through bones; while the independent\nspirits (_vui_) choose stones as their mediums; and they say that\nthese objects are, as it were, limbs or members of these incorporeal\npowers.[152]\n\nThat the fetish itself is something else than the mere object, and is\ncertainly not identified with it (as writers have often asserted), is\nevident from the words and actions of fetish worshippers. A South African\nnegro offered food to a tree in the presence of an European traveller.\nThe latter observed that a tree cannot eat. \u201cOh,\u201d replied the negro,\n\u201ctree not fetish. Fetish spirit; not seen; live in tree.\u201d[153]\n\nIf a fetish does not bring good luck, it is thrown away, burned, or\nbroken, as having lost its virtue, ceased to be the abode of power. One\nof efficacy, on the other hand, will bring a good price, and such are\noften sold and bought. Among the Papuans of New Guinea the fetishes are\nsmall wooden dolls dressed in coloured rags. They are believed to be the\nmedia through which the ancestral spirits operate. But if a man has bad\nluck, he will beat, or break, or cast away, as of no account, such an\nimpotent object.[154]\n\nThese and scores of other examples which could be adduced disprove the\nassertion that man, even in his lowest phases of religious life, ever\nworshipped an object as an object. Even then, his intellectual insight\npenetrated to the recognition of something higher than phenomena in\nthe world about him. As has been well said by a German writer, what\nis really worshipped in the object anywhere is not itself but \u201ca\ntranscendental _x_,\u201d within and beyond it.[155]\n\nIt has been abundantly shown that amid the tribes of the West Coast of\nAfrica, to whose gods the term fetish, _feiti\u00e7o_, was first applied\nby the Portuguese, the recognition and worship of tribal and national\ndivinities and even of a Supreme Being, ruler and creator of the world,\nare clearly displayed.[156]\n\nThe house of cards therefore, erected by Auguste Comte, to represent the\nreligious progress of the race, the first floor of which was fetishism,\nthe second polytheism, and the third monotheism, falls helplessly to the\nground.\n\nThere is no real distinction between fetishism and idolatry, unless\nwe choose to say that the latter refers to the worship of objects\nartificially shaped; but many fetishes are so likewise.\n\nNor can we say, with Professor Rialle, that fetishism confounds the\nunseen agent with the thing itself, while the idolatry of developed\npolytheism regards the agent as something exterior to the object, an\nindependent existence.[157] For not only does fetishism recognise the\npower of the supernatural outside of all objects, but the idols of\npolytheism are unquestionably just as holy, just as much limbs of the\ngods, as the dolls of the Melanesians.\n\nWe cannot even take fetishism as a special form of the cult or external\nworship; for it goes hand in hand with every phase of objective religion.\nIt is quite as prevalent now, in proportion to the general strength of\nthe religious sentiment, as it ever was, and is visible in the sacredness\nwhich all sects of the highest religions attach to certain objects and\nplaces. When the Christian touches the bone of a saint that he may be\nhealed of an infirmity, or when he speaks of his church edifice as \u201cthe\nhouse of God,\u201d or when he packs in his trunk a Bible \u201cfor luck\u2019s sake,\u201d\nhe is as much a fetish worshipper as the negro _caboceer_ who collects\naround him a thousand pieces of rubbish because he thinks they have\nbrought him good fortune.[158]\n\nModern folk-lore is full of fetishism, and it is a development of the\nreligious sentiment which flourishes in all times and climes. Amulets,\ncharms, lucky stones, everything that we now call by the familiar term\nof _mascot_, partakes of the nature of a fetish. Through some fancied\npotency, not to be found among its physical qualities, it is believed to\nbring us good fortune.\n\nNor is it a distinctive character of fetish worship, as has been\nmaintained by some, that in it compulsion or constraint is endeavoured to\nbe exercised on the gods to force them to be favourable and exert their\npower in aid of the supplicant. The earliest prayers are not of this\ncharacter, as I showed in my last lecture; and, on the other hand, the\nnotion of constraining the gods extended widely in higher religions and,\nindeed, probably in a metaphysical sense, was taught by the founder of\nChristianity himself, as in the parable of the unjust judge.\n\nAs there is nothing deeper than an external distinction between fetishism\nand idolatry, so there is no special form of religious thought which\nexpresses itself as what has been called by Dr. Tylor, \u201canimism,\u201d the\nbelief that inanimate objects are animated and possess souls or spirits.\nThis opinion, which in one guise or another, is common to all religions\nand many philosophies, is merely a secondary phenomenon of the religious\nsentiment, and not a trait characteristic of primitive faiths. The\nidea of the World-Soul, manifesting itself individually in every form\nof matter from the star to the clod, is as truly the belief of the\nSioux Indian or the Fijian cannibal, as it was of Spinoza or Giordano\nBruno.[159]\n\nThis vague and universal divine potency extends through all nature,\norganic and inorganic, expressing itself in personality wherever\nseparateness, oneness, is visible. Not merely did animals and trees share\nin the World-soul, but every object whatever. With the American Indians,\nthe commonest sticks and stones, even the household vessel fashioned\nout of clay, or the hollowed stone on which the maize was pounded,\nhad its spiritual essence, which might speak, act, and require to be\nvenerated.[160] The Vitian Islanders held that each cocoanut had its own\nspirit, and occasionally many cocoanuts assembled for a jollification,\nat which times the joyous cracking of their sides kept the natives\nawake![161]\n\nBut no error would be greater than to confound this with a veneration of\nsuch objects in themselves.\n\nTo the mind of the savage, whatever displayed movement, emitted sound or\nodour, or by its defined limits and form indicated unity, was to him\na manifestation in personality of that impersonal, spiritual Power of\nwhich he felt himself but one of the expressions. All other expressions\nshared his powers, and did not, in essence, differ from him. The brute,\nthe plant, the stone, the wandering orbs of night, the howling wind,\nthe crackling fire, the towering hill, all were his fellow-creatures,\ninspired by the same life as himself, drawing it from the same universal\nfont of life.\n\nIt is not without reason, therefore, that the undeveloped religious\nlongings ask for something concrete to represent divinity. Through its\nvisible and audible traits the power of the Unseen Ruler is brought\nsharply to the consciousness. We sympathise even with the poor Oraons\nof Bengal, who, seeing nothing nobler to embody the divine, place a\nploughshare on their altar as the object of adoration.[162]\n\nAlthough in the limitless field of his religious insight everything in\nnature was to him a manifestation of divinity, primitive man everywhere\nindicated a preference for certain objects and groups of objects,\nevidently led to single them out on account of the strength or frequency\nof the appeals they make to his senses of sight and hearing.\n\nWith the utmost brevity I will enumerate the most important of these\ngroups, and endeavour at the same time to point out why they were\neverywhere selected to convey conceptions of the nature and attributes of\nGod.\n\n_1. The Celestial Bodies._\u2014The first group that I shall mention is that\nof the Celestial Bodies, the Sun, Moon, and Stars. The traits which\nconnected them with the ideas of the divine are almost too obvious to\nrequire mention. They are bringers of light and warmth, they define the\nmomentous change of day and night, their motions usher in the seasons and\nmark the progress of time. They are remote, aloft, inscrutable, dwellers\nin a realm which man may distantly perceive but never enter.\n\nSo much has been written of solar myths and star worship that every\nreader is aware of their practical universality among early nations. It\nis probable that the division of our week into seven days arose either\nfrom the dedication of one to each of the seven greatest luminaries or\nto a division of the moon\u2019s apparent course into four parts. Judicial\nastrology, which is not yet wholly dead, always maintained that the\nnativities were decided by the position of the stars.\n\nAll such survivals carry us back to primitive religions in which the\nastral bodies were prominent figures in the cult. Many writers have\nmaintained that the American Indians from north to south were always and\nmainly sun-worshippers. Though this is too hasty a statement, everyone\nwill acknowledge that the sun is ever a conspicuous figure in their myths\nand rites. So it is among the Polynesians and Africans, and so we find it\nin the early forms of Aryan, Semitic, and Egyptian belief.\n\nIt is at first sight strange that in many mythologies the moon plays a\nmore important r\u00f4le than the sun. But if we reflect that the night is the\ntime when spirits walk abroad; when sounds strike the ear with mysterious\nnotes; when nocturnal birds and beasts stir the senses with strange\ncries; when, on the other hand, the cooling zephyrs and soft moonlight\nbring sweet ease, and the gentle dews refresh the parched leaves; then we\ncan understand why, both in modern folk-lore[163] and in primitive myths,\nthe moon and the stars are often far more conspicuous than the flaming\nsun. The night, in fact, draws the veil from the spiritual world; as has\nbeen said so beautifully by Shelley:\n\n    \u201cAs if yet around her he lingering were,\n    Though the _veil of daylight_ concealed him from her.\u201d\n\nA few examples will illustrate this: The Dieyeris of Australia believe\nthat man and all other beings were created by the moon. In many American\nlanguages the moon is regarded as male and the sun is referred to as \u201chis\ncompanion.\u201d The Ipurinas, a Brazilian tribe, address the orb as \u201cOur\nFather,\u201d and imagine him a little old man who was their ancestor and\nstill watches over their prosperity. In like manner the eastern Eskimos\nsay that their ancestors came from the moon to the earth. With the rude\ntribes of southern Borneo it is stated that the veneration of the moon\nforms the chief basis of their worship and myths.[164]\n\nI can but refer to the lesser luminaries of the night. The stars have\nat all times been associated with religious meditations. The various\nconstellations are familiar to most primitive peoples and are personified\nunder living forms. Widely in South America and Polynesia the Pleiades\nenjoyed an especial homage, as marking the advent of the seasons and\nas connected with the production of vegetable life. In Peru they were\nstyled the gods of rains; and the natives of the Gulf of California\nvenerated them to that degree that even to look at them heedlessly was\ndeemed calamitous; while some Australians held that it was from them\nthat fire first descended to the world.[165] In such remote districts as\nAustralia and Greenland the Milky-way was regarded as the path by which\nthe souls ascended to their homes in the sky. In the one land the Aurora\nAustralis, in the other the Aurora Borealis, was looked upon as the dance\nof the gods across the star-lit vault. Indeed, the study of the stellar\nbodies and the definition of their periodical appearance date directly to\nthe veneration they excited in religious minds.\n\n_2. The Four Elements._\u2014The simple theory that the world is composed of\nfour elements, fire, water, air, and earth, is one which presents itself\nso naturally to primitive thought that traces of it can be seen in most\nmythologies which have passed beyond the rudimentary forms.\n\nEach of these elements has its own group of religious associations, and\nthey present themselves with that uniformity which we find so universal\nin religious expression, to be explained, as I have so often said, by\nthe identity everywhere of the psychic sources of religion.\n\nPerhaps the earliest of all the elements to receive this adoration\nwas _fire_. With its discovery man first entered into human social\nlife. Everywhere and in all peoples it has been in a manner sacred.\nWith the Kafirs every religious ceremony must be performed in front\nof a fire.[166] In the Rig Veda the crackling of the blazing twigs is\nregarded as the speech of the gods, just as it is to-day in Borneo. The\ninstitutions of the sacred fire and the perpetual fire recur in every\ncontinent, and we have but to enter a church of the Roman communion\non the morning of Holy Saturday to witness the impressive ceremonies\nwith which the creation of the \u201cnew fire\u201d is to this day celebrated in\nour midst. The custom of passing an infant \u201cthrough the fire\u201d was as\nmuch practised by the Aztecs in Mexico as by the Moloch worshippers of\nSyria.[167] The Peruvians held that divine inspiration was to be obtained\nby sacrifices to the god of fire; and those of Guatemala adored it as\ntheir greatest and oldest deity.[168]\n\nIn all these and in a hundred other examples which I might cite, the main\nthought is that in fire and its products\u2014warmth, heat, light, flame\u2014lies\nthe essential principle of life; and the worship of Life was the central,\npositive conception in primitive ceremonies.\n\nThe _air_ to early man is recognised in motion as the winds; and these,\nin his myths and rites, occupy a conspicuous position. Conceived as four,\nblowing more or less directly from the four corners of the earth-plane,\nthey are the rain-bringers, the gods of the seasons and the year,\ncontrolling the products of the harvest and hence the happiness and life\nof man. The outlines of the story are the same whether we listen to the\nMaoris of New Zealand, who tell us of Tawhiri-matea, god of the winds,\nwho divided his progeny into four broods and sent one to each quarter of\nthe compass; to the Eskimos, who narrate just the same of Sillam Innua,\nowner of the winds, and his four sons; or to a score of like myths which\nI could quote from American storyland.[169]\n\nThe house of the winds, where they are imagined to be stored, a mythical\nnotion which Professor Schwartz has shown to be so wide-spread in the Old\nWorld, recurs with scarcely less frequency in the New World.[170]\n\n_Water_, as moisture, the dew, the fertilising showers, the green\nbordered streams and lakes, was ever connected with vegetable life and\nits symbols. In most cosmogonies the land rose from the bosom of some\nprimal sea; in most primitive geographies the solid earth is surrounded\nby the mighty ocean-stream which stretches out to the uttermost space.\n\n\u201cAll of us,\u201d said the Aztecs, \u201care children of water.\u201d Hence the spring,\nthe stream, the lake, was ever regarded as a beneficent being, who should\nrightly call for the adoration of the true in soul. Tlaloc, god of rains,\nand the many-named gods of the heavenly vase in which the rains were\nstored on high, were conspicuous figures in the American pantheon.[171]\n\nVirgil speaks of \u201cOceanus, _pater rerum_\u201d; and in the Finnish epic, the\nKalewala, it reads: \u201cThree infants came forth from the same womb; water\nthe oldest, fire the youngest, and iron between them.\u201d[172]\n\nWater also entered into numberless rites of purification, of penitence,\nand sanctification.[173] Baptism by sprinkling or immersion belongs to\nthe most ancient sacred rites; and the use of the fluid in divination,\nlustration, and libation was world-wide.\n\nThe most venerable god of Chaldean mythology was \u00caa, lord of the _earth_\nand \u201cthe waters under the earth.\u201d He was the deity in whose gift were\nthe harvest, the germination of seeds, the fertility of the soil.\nExtending the idea to embrace all life, the Aztecs worshipped the earth\nas Tonantzin, Our Beloved Mother, and the Peruvians as Mama Cocha, Mother\nEarth. From her womb, said they, do all that live proceed, and to her\nsilent breast will all again return. Far below her opaque surface is the\nrealm which the sun lights at night, the abode of happy souls, said the\nAztecs, ruled by the clement Quetzalcoatl, who there abides until the\ntime fixed for his return to men.\n\nFrom beneath the earth, repeat a hundred mythologies, did the first of\nmen emerge seeking the light above but losing the joy below. So that\nin such distant points as Kamtschatka and the Andaman Islands we meet\nthe same prophetic myth that at the end of the world the present earth\nwill be turned upside down, and its then inhabitants will rejoice in the\nperennial warmth and light of the happier under-world.[174]\n\nIntimately associated with the worship of the four elements, and also\nwith the myths of the cosmical concepts, we trace through primitive\nreligions the sacredness and symbolism of _colours_. Everywhere, in all\ncults, they are connected with certain trains of religious thoughts,\ncertain expressions of religious emotions, though by no means always\nthe same. But I can only refer, in passing, to this extended subject,\nwhich has not yet received the psychologic analysis which its importance\ndemands.[175]\n\n_3. Stones and Rocks._\u2014When we turn from these universal elements, which\nwe can readily conceive portrayed with some commensurate greatness the\nidea of the supernatural, to such a gross and material object as a\n_stone_, a common stone or rock, it is at first difficult to understand\nits wide-spread acceptance as a symbol of the divine. But if we reflect\non its hardness and durability, on its colour and lustre, and on the\nstrange shapes in which it is found, we can see why it was so chosen.\n\nIn the early Semitic records we often read of Beth-el, the House of God.\nThis was usually nothing but an amorphous stone, which the god was\nsupposed to inhabit. The holy Kaaba of Mahometanism is no doubt such\nan one, a rough, black piece of rock. The sacred image of Diana of the\nEphesians was nothing more, and the Latin father Arnobius tells us that\nthe image of earth, the Great Mother, brought to Rome from Phrygia with\nsumptuous pomp, was merely \u201ca small black stone, rough and unhewn.\u201d[176]\n\nTo this instance, where the stone represents the Earth as the common\nmother, we find many exact parallels in savage faiths. In the Tahitian\nmyths, _Papa_, Rock, was the name of the wife of the first man, mother\nof the race of men, and under this form she was adored.[177] The Zulus\nconsidered certain stones as sacred, because from one such, which split\nin two, their ancestors emerged. Their neighbours, the Basutos, entertain\nthe same notion of a spheroidal granite boulder in their country, and\ntheir worship of it consists in dancing around it and spitting at it. The\nIndians of Colombia asserted that all men were once stones, and all will\nagain become such.[178] Those of Guatemala were wont to place a small\npolished stone in the mouth of the dying to receive the soul, and thus\nsupply it with a permanent abode.\n\nThe most common of mascots is a \u201clucky stone,\u201d and this goes back to the\ntime when such was the favourite material for household fetishes. To this\nday the Canaras of India believe that the Bhutas, or familiar spirits,\ninhabit rough stones, and in Melanesia similar stones are held to be the\nabode of the _vui_ or demonic intelligences.[179]\n\nAnother source of the sacredness of stones was their identification as\n\u201cthunderbolts.\u201d Certain ones were believed to be the missiles hurled from\nthe sky by the Thunder God in the lightning flash; though the Peruvians\nhad the prettier belief that, as the product of the heavenly fire, they\nmust retain its ardency, and therefore used them as love charms.[180]\nFlint, which when struck with a bit of pyrites emits a spark, and\nmeteoric stones were especially recognised by these marks as of celestial\norigin.\n\nSuch a flint stone, say the legends of the Nahuas, in the beginning of\nthe world fell from heaven to earth; as it broke to pieces each fragment\nrose to life as a demi-god. All men, added the Mexicans, came originally\nfrom such stones.[181]\n\nYet another origin of god-stones was the custom of erecting them as\nmonuments of the dead. We can see this in its simplicity in Southern\nPolynesia. When a chief dies, a coral slab about three feet long is\nplaced erect over his grave\u2014a tombstone, in other words. This is decked\nwith flowers and garlands, food is offered it, and invocations pronounced\nbefore it, precisely as to a divinity. This is because the spirit of the\ndeparted chief is believed to dwell within it.[182]\n\nIt was equally sacred when the stone was a mere cenotaph erected in\nmemory of a departed chief or saint. Such are found in all lands and in\nall cults. They are the _menhirs_ of the Celts, and the grave-stones of\nthe Koders of India, often painted in strong colours.[183]\n\nCertain stones, especially those we call \u201cprecious,\u201d the gems, have\nphysical traits of transparency, lustre, and colour, which have ever made\nthem prized, and led to the belief that they exercise peculiar powers on\nthe mind.\n\nThroughout Asia and America the varieties of jade or nephrite, a\ngreenish, semi-translucent mineral, has had a wide-spread reputation for\nsacred meaning and magical potency. The _chalchiuhite_ of the Mexicans,\nsmall green stones, believed to control the weather and representative of\nthe goddess of the waters and the rains, were of this material.\n\nBy attentively gazing into the transparency of a quartz crystal, the\nMaya shaman of Yucatan still believes that he will see in its depths,\nunfolded by the god whose dwelling it is, the picture of the future and\nthe decrees of fate.\n\n_4. Trees and Plants._\u2014Primitive man was arboreal. A hollow tree was\nhis home, its branches his place of refuge, its fruit his sustenance.\nNaturally the tree became associated with his earliest religious\nthoughts. It represented his protecting deity. He would not willingly\ninjure it. When the Mandans cut a pole for their tents, they swath it in\nbandages so that its pain may be allayed. The Hidatsas would not cut down\na large cottonwood tree, because it guarded their tribe. The Algonquins\ndecked an old oak with offerings suspended to its branches, for the same\nreason.[184]\n\nTrees from their dripping foliage, and because their shade was associated\nwith the grey of a cloudy day, were believed to make the rains and thus\nto refresh the fields and fertilise the seeds of the vegetable world.\nThe step was easily taken to extend this to all germs, animal as well\nas vegetable. Thus the tree came to symbolise the source of Life, and to\nrepresent both the clouds and rains and the fatherhood of men and brutes.\nIt could cause flocks to multiply and the barren womb to conceive.[185]\n\nAmong the Mexicans, the tree was invoked as Tota, \u201cOur Father,\u201d and was\nspoken of as god of the waters and the green foliage. Some particular\nspecies was chosen as the totem of various American gentes, and in the\nearliest legends of Greece and Persia sundry famous families traced their\ndescent from a tree.\n\nThese ideas led to the mythical association of the tree with the origin\nof life, and with various objective expressions of this in the cult.\n\nIn most American stories where we hear of the first of men emerging\nfrom the under-world, it is by climbing a tree. This tree also supports\nthe sky, and is so represented in the native books of the Mayas and\nNahuas.[186] The Yurucares of Bolivia relate that their god Tiri, when he\nwould people the earth with men, cleft a tree, and from the opening came\nforth the various tribes of the world.[187]\n\nWhen the tree was not worshipped as itself, but under a symbolic form,\nthis was usually as the sacred pole or the cross.\n\nThe sacred pole was found widely among the American Indians. It was\nplanted in the centre of their villages, or, if the tribe was nomadic, it\nwas carried about in an ark or wrapping and set up in a tent by itself\nin their encampment. It typified the communal life of the tribe and\nrepresented the \u201cmystery tree,\u201d which was intimately associated in their\nlegendary origin.[188]\n\nIn early art the cross as a sacred design is often derived from the\nconventional figure of a tree, and symbolises the force of life, the four\nwinds, the rain, and the waters. This is notably the case in Mexico and\nCentral America, where we have abundant testimony that this is the origin\nand meaning of the cross-symbol so frequent on their monuments.\n\nThe sacred tree is a conspicuous figure in the earliest bas-reliefs\nof the Chaldeans. It is often represented in a cruciform shape, and\nfrequently a winged seraph is holding up to it a pine cone, the fruit of\nthe sacred cedar, either as an emblem of fertility, or, more likely, as\nan aspergillum, with which to bedew it from the holy water, which is\ncarried in a bucket in the other hand.[189]\n\nThat a tree is a \u201cthing of life\u201d it is hard for us even yet to doubt,\nand we can scarcely avoid being attracted by Fechner\u2019s pleasing theories\nof a \u201cplant-soul.\u201d[190] The sound of the wind in the leaves, rising from\nthe softest of mystic whispers to the roaring of the wild blast, seems to\nproceed from some mind or spirit. The Australians say that these are the\nvoices of the ghosts of the dead, communing one with another, or warning\nthe living of what is to come. They and other tribes also believe that\nit is through understanding this mysterious language that the \u201cdoctors,\u201d\nor shamans, communicate with the world of spirits and derive their\nsupernatural knowledge.[191] Hence we can easily see arose the myth of\n\u201cthe tree of knowledge,\u201d which we find in the earliest Semitic annals and\nmonuments. It belonged to the same species as the oracular oak of Zeus at\nDodona, and the laurel of Apollo at Delphi, from the whispers of whose\nleaves the sibyls interpreted the sayings of the gods.\n\nNot only was a tree the earliest house of man, it was also his first\ntemple. That very word \u201ctemple\u201d bears witness to the fact, for it is\nfrom the Greek \u03c4\u03ad\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2, a sacred grove set apart as a place of worship.\nThe aspiring lines of Gothic cathedrals simulate the trunks of slender\nand majestic trees carrying the eye and the soul aloft, and by their\noverreaching limbs shutting out the glare of day, thus leading the mind\nto holy meditation. Tacitus describes the Germans as building no temples,\nbut worshipping their mysterious divinity, _secretum illud_, in the gloom\nof the forest.\n\n_5. Places and Sites._\u2014Early man stays close to the soil. It is proved,\nby the distribution of the oldest stone implements, that primitive\ntribes were not generally migratory, and had little intercourse with\ntheir neighbours. Hence the more closely did they study their immediate\nsurroundings; and a spot which was marked by some peculiar feature was\nsoon associated with their all-permeating religious notions, and was\ndeemed sacred.\n\nThese features can usually be easily recognised. A spring, well, or\nfountain, where from dry earth, or out of the rock, pours forth the\ncrystal fluid on which depends the life of man and brute and plant, was\neverywhere a holy spot. The brook which flowed from it, chattering its\nendless tale among the pebbles, was scarcely less so. It was directly\nsaid and oft repeated by the Greeks that the _manteia_, the holy\ninspiration, was imparted at the fountain of Parnassus or at the Pierian\nspring. The Moxos of Bolivia claim descent from the stream on which\ntheir villages are situated, a more than figurative expression of their\ndependence on it for food and drink.[192]\n\nThe sacred character of \u201chigh places,\u201d such as hills, mountains, or\nelevated plateaux, is intimately connected with the universal belief\nin \u201cthe Father in Heaven,\u201d the sky as the home and the throne of the\ngreatest divinities. I have already referred to the terrestrial \u201cHills of\nHeaven,\u201d located, as a rule, within the tribal area.[193]\n\nA high hill or mountain, regarded by itself as a personality, would\njustly be looked upon as of extraordinary might, and invoked as a potent\naid in the undertakings of life. In the invocations of the Quiches of\nCentral America, who live in the midst of lofty peaks, over one hundred\nof them are named and implored for aid. The \u201cHeart of the Hills\u201d is the\ntitle which the ancient Mexicans applied to one of their greatest gods.\n\nA third and important trait which gave them sacredness is the strength of\nthe echo which is returned from their narrow gorges or precipitous sides.\nMountain worship is very generally oracular in character. Classical and\nfamiliar examples of this are the Pythoness and the Roman Sibyl.\n\nMountain caves are natural temples, and as the cave, like the hollow\ntree, is a ready-built house for the wandering savage, so it is also\nmarvellously adapted to his ends as a shrine. Throughout Mexico and\nCentral America we find the caves chosen as the temples of the mightiest\ndeities and the depositories of the holiest relics.[194]\n\nThe sacredness of some spots arose from their adaptation to certain\nrites, religious or magical. Thus, for the haruspices to practise their\nspecialty in divination, they must choose a spot where they could watch\nthe flight of birds. The sacrifices to the god of heaven should be under\nthe open sky, and the Mayas of Yucatan believed that when the sun was\nin the zenith and the sacred fire was kindled beneath it, the ineffable\nDeity descended in the form of a bright plumaged _ara_ and partook of the\noffering.\n\nPlaces of this kind were of course laid under _tabu_, and thus reserved\nfor their sacred uses only. Sometimes they were enclosed, but often the\ncommunity was sufficiently informed about them to make this unnecessary.\n\nThe fame of these sacred places and the powers of the gods who dwelt\nwithin them extended widely even in very primitive conditions. This gave\nrise to the custom of pilgrimages, quite as familiar to the American\nIndians before Columbus as to the Europeans of the Middle Ages. There\nwere famous holy places on the island of Cozumel and in Colombia and\nPeru, to which pious palmers wended their way over many hundred miles of\nweary journeying.\n\nThe local divinity naturally drew his colouring and his main attributes\nfrom the spot itself, and those in turn gave a similar local physiognomy\nto his rites and functions. We have thus a kind of geographical character\nimpressed on early religions, which their later developments retained\nlong after they had been severed from their first meanings and had\ndrifted to other climes and alien races.\n\n_6. The Lower Animals._\u2014The primitive mind did not recognise any deep\ndistinction between the lower animals and man. The savage knew that\nthe beast was his superior in many points, in craft and strength, in\nfleetness and intuition, and he regarded it with respect. To him, the\nbrute had a soul not inferior to his own, and a language which the wise\namong men might on occasion learn. The strange powers and mysterious\nfaculties they often possess were to him inexplicable by any other\ndoctrine than that they were divine; therefore, with wide unanimity, he\nplaced certain species of animals nearer to God than is man himself, or\neven identified them with the manifestations of the Highest.\n\nNone was in this respect a greater favourite than the bird. Its soaring\nflight, its strange or sweet notes, the marked hues of its plumage,\ncombined to render it a fit emblem of power and beauty.\n\nThe Dyaks of Borneo trace their descent to Singalang Burong, the god of\nbirds; and birds as the ancestors of the totemic family are extremely\ncommon among the American Indians. The Eskimos say that they have the\nfaculty of soul or life beyond all other creatures, and in most primitive\ntribes they have been regarded as the messengers of the divine and the\nspecial purveyors of the vital principle.\n\nAccording to the myths of the Polynesians, the gods in the old times\nused to speak to man through the carols of the feathered songsters; and\neverywhere, to be able to understand the language of birds was equivalent\nto being able to converse with the gods.\n\nThe chief god of the Murray River Australians was Nourali. He was\nimmortal, self-created, and the creator of all. The form under which\nthey conceived him was that of a bird, a crow or eagle. Among nearly all\nthe tribes of the North-west Coast and the adjacent interior of British\nAmerica, the creation of the world is attributed to a raven, Yetl, who is\npersonated in the dark thunder-cloud.\n\nSouth of them, in the wide-spread Algonquin stock, this \u201cthunder-bird\u201d\nis a conspicuous figure in art and myth; and we could pursue our way\nquite to the extreme south of the continent, and everywhere among\nthe aboriginal tribes we should discover similar sacred associations\nconnected with the birds.\n\nThey are universal in religions, and those which we meet in Christian\nart, the eagle, the dove, etc., carry with them significations allied to\nthose they bear in earlier and primitive symbolism.[195]\n\nClosely connected with these ideas was the reverence of the egg as the\nsymbol of the origin of life. Plutarch tells us that in the Bacchic\nmysteries the egg represented matter in its germinal condition, that\nis, the potentiality of life; and this meaning we have retained with\nthe symbol in our customs relating to Easter eggs on the morning of the\nResurrection.\n\nThe derivation from the observation of the bird brooding on its nest is\nobvious, and no wonder therefore that the symbol with allied myths and\nrites extends through all religions.\n\nIn the creation legend of the Yaros, a Dravida tribe of Northern India,\nthe goddess Nustoo, who created the world, came into life from a\nself-evolved egg, and dwelt on the petals of a water-lily until she had\nformed and moulded the land for her abode. The Dyaks of Borneo relate\nthat after the Supreme Being had created the world, the god Ranying\ndescended to the new earth and formed there seven eggs, which contained\nthe germs of man and woman, all animals and plants.[196]\n\nThis example, of the bird, which I have given in some detail, will\nillustrate the cult of an animal form. It by no means stands alone\nin its universality. Perhaps even more striking is the so-called\n\u201cserpent-worship,\u201d which has occupied the attention of so many writers.\nThe adoration of the serpent-symbol is wonderfully wide-spread. Scarcely\na native tribe can be named in regions where this animal is known, which\ndoes not pay it some sort of reverence. Some writers have traced the\nsentiment back to the anthropoid progenitor of man, supposed to dwell in\ntropical forests abounding in venomous snakes. But into this extensive\nquestion I cannot enter.\n\nThe symbolic value of most animal deities can be traced to some peculiar\ntrait of the species. Thus the lizard, very prominent in the religions\nof Polynesia, Australia, and South Africa, derived its significance\nfrom the nocturnal habits of some species and the diurnal habits of\nothers.[197] In America, the frog was the symbol of water, over a vast\narea; and that it has precisely the same meaning in Australia, will cause\nno astonishment when we recall its amphibious nature. The fish, as the\nemblem of life, familiar in Christian symbolism, dates back to earliest\nChaldean times, when Oannes, a form of the god \u00caa, appeared as half fish\nand half man, and is a parallel of the fish-god who sows the seed of\nman in the flood myths of both the Brahmans and the Mexicans. It is but\nanother expression of the recognition of water as the source or condition\nof life.\n\nThe totemic animals, or \u201ceponymous ancestors,\u201d of the clans or gentes\namong the American Indians, are not to be taken literally. They were not\nunderstood as animals of the sort we see to-day, but as mythical, ancient\nbeings, of supernatural attributes, who clothed themselves in those forms\nfor their own purposes.\n\n_7. Man._\u2014That when the brute was at times invested with the aureole of\nthe Divine, man himself should at times partake of its glory, need be\nexpected. But here let an important distinction be drawn. Never _as man_\nwas he clothed in the attributes of Deity, but just in so far as he was\ndeemed to be _more than man_. The Latin saying, _deus homini deus_, never\nwas true anywhere in its literal sense. Anthropism never existed in any\nreligion. Man or the likeness of man was never worshipped by reason of\nany human attribute, but solely for those believed to be more than human,\nsuperhuman.\n\nThe tribes of Polynesia did adore their chieftains; the ancient Egyptians\nand many another people did pay their rulers divine honour, and rank them\namong the gods; but always because they considered them partakers of the\ndivine nature, sharers in that which is ever beyond mere humanity.[198]\n\nThis profound distinction between the human and the humanised divine\nwas sought to be expressed by most tribes by fashioning the images of\nthe gods in vaguely human shapes, but with non-human elements. Diana\nwith her hundred breasts, Brahma with his dozens of arms, Janus with\nhis double face, and scores of other instances will at once rise in the\nmemory. Enormous size, impossible features, accessories such as wings,\ntails, multiple heads and limbs, indicate not, as some would have it, a\ndepraved artistic taste, but the effort of the pious carver to express\nin his work the non-human and superhuman character of the being he sets\nbefore the adoring eyes of the votaries.\n\nIt was only in a few gifted and glorious natures, notably the ancient\nGreeks, that the true distinction rose to full consciousness in the\nartistic soul\u2014that in their corporeal forms the gods differ from men in\ntheir superior and matchless beauty, in their perfect symmetry and noble\nproportions. They recognised that there is something in beauty itself,\nwhich, in its highest expression, partakes truly and really of the\ndivine, and leads man to the contemplation of laws beyond those of nature\nor of life, laws which are the expression of the deep harmonies of the\nuniverse.\n\nThis was the triumph of anthropomorphism. Pursuing the merely objective,\nthe merely animal, it was led by the unseen hand which guides man to his\ndestiny into the path which conducted far beyond what the senses can\nteach, into the realm of the ideal and the eternal, to\n\n            \u201cthe measures and the forms,\n    Which the abstract intelligence supplies,\n    Whose kingdom is where Time and Space are not.\u201d\n\nSuch are some of the numberless objects with which primitive man\nassociated his idea of the Divine. The nature of this association must\nnot be misunderstood. I repeat what I have already said, that it was not\nan identification of the spiritual with the material. The object was\nhallowed, not from anything in itself, but as the medium of invisible\npower.\n\n_8. Life and its Transmission._\u2014What Professor Otfried M\u00fcller has so\nwell said of the oldest forms of the Greek and Etruscan religions holds\ntrue in all primitive faiths: \u201cTo them, divinity seemed a world of\nLife, blossoming forth from an impenetrable depth into definite forms\nand individual expressions.\u201d[199] All gods and holy objects were merely\nvehicles through which Life and Power poured into the world from the\ninexhaustible and impersonal source of both.\n\nI will illustrate this first from the very ancient religion of the\nEtruscans and then point out sufficient analogies in modern savage tribes.\n\nThat venerable people, whose massive cities built before Rome was founded\nstill survive, held that there was a single source of all existence,\nanimate and inanimate. Its immediate agents were the mysterious \u201cveiled\ngods,\u201d whose number was unknown and whose names were never uttered. They\nwere the channels of the divine Will, through which it passed to the\ntwelve highest known gods, called the _Consentes_ or Companions, and\nthese transmitted it through those innumerable spirits, whom the Latins\ncalled Genii, to its realisation in objective existence.\n\nThe word _genius_ means a producer or begetter; but not in any literal\nsense, for not only every man and animate being had such a genius, but\nalso every plant, every city, every place, every inanimate object, had\none also. Clearly, therefore, the word refers to an act of the creative\npower in the abstract or spiritual sense. The genii were the proximate\ncauses of existence, but they were themselves \u201cemanations from the great\ngods,\u201d and these in turn were merely the channels of the inexhaustible\nsource of all life beyond.\n\nThis was the doctrine of the Etruscans and also of the Greeks. I may\ncompare it with the belief of one of the most brutish of barbarian\nhordes, the Itelmen of Kamtschatka.\n\nBeyond all visible things, say they, is the ultimate Power,\nDusdachtschish, invisible, remote. No worship and no offerings are\ntendered him other than that certain pillars are erected and decked\nwith flowers and garlands in his honour. Their Jupiter is Kutka. It was\nsaid of him that he had married all creatures and was the common father\nof all. It was he who made land and water in their present forms and\ninvented all arts. To him the visible world owed its existence, though\nnot its origin. Many discreditable stories were told of him, and he is as\nmuch cursed for the evils of life as praised for its advantages. It is he\nwho finds souls for all existences, and preserves their spirits when the\nbody decays.\n\nWe must not be blinded to the true significance of such myths by the\noften material, coarse, and vulgar images under which they are presented.\nIndeed, if they are properly comprehended, we may explain and redeem\nfrom obloquy much in the heathen legends which Arnobius[200] and other\nfathers of the Church denounced with bitter and vehement imprecation.\nWe should consider whether they are not na\u00efve symbols, chosen, with a\ncrude innocence of evil, to convey objectively the idea of the eternally\nrenewed life of nature.\n\nThis reflection will explain to us the true significance of those\nobjects from ancient and savage cults which are preserved in the locked\nrooms of museums, in their secret drawers and curtained cases. They are\ntoo apt to be construed as proofs of impurity and degradation. Such an\ninterpretation would be sadly at variance with the fact.\n\nThere were, indeed, and often, licentious rites, deliberate indecencies,\npractised under the cloak of religion by unscrupulous rulers and debased\npriests. These were alienations and prostitutions of religion. In the\ngenuine and primitive faiths, the symbols of the reproduction and\ntransmission of life were frequent and public, and were not associated\nwith thoughts or acts of debauchery. They were visible emblems of that\nSpirit of Life which, beyond all else, was the unifying instinct of\nreligious expression.\n\nThis instinct led man everywhere to call upon God as Father, as parent of\nwhatever is, \u201cPan-genitor,\u201d as he is styled in the Orphic hymns. In every\nrace, in all ages, have men\u2019s prayers ascended to \u201cOur Father who art in\nheaven.\u201d\n\nWere we to listen to the rude Australian, we should hear him invoking\n_Papang_, \u201cFather\u201d; or _Mamin-gata_, or _Mungan-naur_, \u201cOur Father,\u201d in\nhis various dialects. Among the Aztecs of Mexico, it would be _To-ta_,\n\u201cOur Father\u201d; with the American tribes of the north, \u201cgrand-father,\u201d or\n\u201cgreat father\u201d; in the Brahm\u0101nas of India, _Pita_, \u201cFather\u201d; with the\nGreeks and Romans, _Dios Pater_, \u201cthe heavenly Father\u201d; and with the\nnorthern Vikings, _Odin All-father_.[201]\n\nBut a vital distinction has been claimed to exist between such terms and\nthat fatherhood of God which we have been taught to acknowledge. \u201cIn\nheathen religions,\u201d asserts an eminent writer, \u201cthe fatherhood of the\ngods is physical fatherhood only\u201d; and this is repeated by many Christian\ntheologians and commentators.[202]\n\nIt is easy to refute this assertion. It would not have been made but for\nreligious partisanship. Ethnologists are well aware that the word for\n\u201cFather\u201d in primitive life is much more frequently a term of respect,\napplied to elders, than necessarily denotive of kinship. The father,\n_Pita_, of the Brahm\u0101nas is at once the Creator, Preserver, and Destroyer\nof all things, and far remote from physical parentage[203]; neither\nin American nor Australian myths is \u201cthe Father above\u201d identified\nas the ancestor of the gens; among the Zulus, the best instructed\nmissionaries report that Unkululu, the \u201cFather\u201d of their creeds, was\nnot meant literally so, but only as \u201cthe means of helping the race into\nbeing\u201d[204]; and this is the general sense of the term in every instance\nwhich I have analysed.\n\nAs some sort of a crude effort to express this comprehensibly, we\nfind that frequently in primitive myths and art the god, regarded\nas the creator, is shown or spoken of as \u201candrogynous,\u201d\u2014that is,\nof both sexes at once. He is addressed as \u201cfather-mother,\u201d or\n\u201cmother-father,\u201d\u2014bi-sexual rather than non-sexual in nature.[205]\nSuch expressions are of constant occurrence, and some of the most\nobjectionable portions of the ritual and of idolatrous art arose from the\neffort to translate this mystical characteristic into objective forms.\n\nYet it remains true that the sexual antithesis, that which mythologists\ncall the worship of \u201cthe reciprocal principles of nature,\u201d is interwoven\nwith the fibre of nearly all religions, primitive or developed. Under\none form or another, it is the impulse which ever appeals most potently\nto the human heart.\n\nThe sentiment which attracts the one sex to the other, the passion of\nLove, exceeds all others in the power it exerts on the individual life.\nThis it is, which in some of its forms, rude or refined, is at the\nroot of half the expressions of the religious sentiment. We may trace\nit from crude and coarse beginnings in the genesiac cults of primitive\npeoples, through ever nobler and more delicate expressions, up through\nthe celibate sacrifices of both sexes, spouses of God,[206] until in its\ncomplete expansion it reaches the perfect _agape_, where the union of the\nhuman with the divine in the life eternal, here on earth, or beyond, one\nand the same, is believed to have been reached.[207]\n\nThis, the loftiest of all the religious mystical ideals is but the result\nof a gradual evolution from those low beginnings which I have mentioned\nas perceptible in most primitive religions.\n\nIt is the ripened manifestation of that profound psychical truth, so\nincomparably expressed in the lines of the philosopher-poet, Coleridge:\n\n    \u201cAll thoughts, all passions, all delights,\n      Whatever stirs this mortal frame,\n    All are but ministers of Love,\n      And feed his sacred flame.\u201d\n\n\n\n\nLECTURE V.\n\nPrimitive Religious Expression: In the Rite.\n\n    CONTENTS:\u2014The Ritual a Mimicry of the Gods\u2014Magical\n    Rites\u2014Division of Rites into I. Communal, and II. Personal. I.\n    Communal Rites: 1. The Assemblage\u2014The Liturgy\u20142. The Festal\n    Function\u2014Joyous Character of Primitive Rites\u2014Commensality\u2014The\n    \u201cCeremonial Circuit\u201d\u2014Masks and Dramas\u20143. The Sacrifice\u2014Early\n    and Later Forms\u20144. The Communion with God\u2014Pagan Eucharists.\n    II. Personal Rites: 1. Relating to Birth\u2014Vows and\n    Baptism\u20142. Relating to Naming\u2014The Personal Name\u20143. Relating\n    to Puberty\u2014Initiation of Boys and Girls\u20144. Relating to\n    Marriage\u2014Marriage \u201cby Capture\u201d and \u201cby Purchase\u201d\u20145. Relating\n    to Death\u2014Early Cannibalism\u2014Sepulchral Monuments\u2014Funerary\n    Ceremonies\u2014Modes of Burial\u2014Customs of Mourning.\n\n\nWe have seen how the religious sentiment finds expression in the Word and\nin the Object. It remains to consider it as revealed in the Act. This\nis known as the Rite or the Ritual. It is a combination of forms and\nceremonies collectively known as Worship.\n\nSo important is it that one eminent German authority has declared the\nritual to be \u201cthe source of all religions\u201d[208]; and Dr. W. Robertson\nSmith, also a profound student of the subject, has maintained that \u201cin\nthe study of ancient religions we must begin, not with the myth, but with\nthe ritual\u201d; because, he adds, \u201cin almost every case the myth was derived\nfrom the ritual, and not the ritual from the myth.\u201d[209]\n\nIf I do not follow these authorities, it is because my own studies have\nled me to a different opinion from theirs. I believe that every rite is\noriginally based on a myth. In later days the myth was often obscured or\nlost, and another coined to explain the rite; and this second growth is\nwhat has misled the authors I have quoted.\n\nThe evidence which has convinced me is, that in truly primitive condition\nthe rite is constantly a mimicry of the supposed doings of the god; or\nit is a means of summoning him according to accepted statements; or it\nis a method of communing with the Divine, plainly drawn from the facts\nof suggestion and sub-conscious mentality. Occasionally it is a magical\nprocedure to constrain the deities; but this is rare in primitive\nconditions.[210]\n\nThe mimicry or imitative origin of rites is well illustrated in that\nin use for \u201crain-making,\u201d one of the commonest of all. In periods of\ndrought, \u201cThe Indian rain-maker mounts to the roof of his hut, and\nrattling vigorously a dry gourd containing pebbles to represent the\nthunder, scatters water through a reed on the ground beneath, as he\nimagines up above in the clouds do the spirits of the storm.\u201d[211]\n\nThe Australian rite is analogous. The women of the tribe erect a hut of\nleaves and branches, in which are placed some stones. The men enter, and\nwhile some scatter bird\u2019s down in the air, others scarify their arms and\nlet the blood drop upon the stones. These are then placed high up in\ntrees, and the hut demolished. The symbolism is, that the hut represents\nthe firmament; the down, the light cirrus clouds which precede the storm;\nthe stones, the heavy rain-clouds; the dropping blood, the fertilising\nrain.[212] This is again an imitation of their myth of the making of rain\nby the celestial powers.\n\nVery many rites are of this character. Others again are of the nature of\nan invitation to the divinity, based on beliefs and narratives of his\nsupposed actions or customs. The Mayas of Yucatan, for instance, had a\ndeity doubtless of solar character, who bore the name, \u201cThe Eye of the\nDay.\u201d The myth stated that his form was that of a bird of brilliant\nplumage, and that he was nearest the earth at high noon about the summer\nsolstice. At that time, therefore, they constructed an altar in an open\nspot, built upon it a fire and placed the sacred offerings. The people\nthen witnessed the gorgeous parrot, the sacred _ara_, descend through\nthe air to take the offerings, who was none other than the god himself,\nresponding to the invitation.[213]\n\nThe magical class of rites was common in the Orient. To this day in China\nit is believed that if a military camp be laid out in a particular form,\nand under the proper auspicious conditions, not only is it impregnable\nby foes, but neither gods nor demons can prevail against it. Many later\nrituals are thus magical, or have magical elements in them by the aid of\nwhich the celebrant claims to control the powers divine.\n\nThe Mexican Nagualist, or priest, for instance, after he has performed\nhis magical rites and spoken the words of power, does not hesitate to\nshout: \u201cLo! I myself am here! I am most furious! I make the loudest\nnoise! I respect no one! Even sticks and stones tremble before me! What\ngod or mighty demon dares face me?\u201d[214] Here, through the power of the\nrite, the celebrant has become as one of the gods themselves.\n\nThese examples further serve to illustrate a fundamental distinction in\nrites themselves. It has been well expressed by a German writer, Dr.\nFreihold, who has said that their tendencies point toward one of two\naims, either to bring down the god to men, to have \u201cGod with us\u201d; or,\nto elevate the man to God, to clothe him with supernatural powers. The\none culminates in the epiphany, the other in the apotheosis. The writer\nquoted believes that this special culmination of one or the other of\nthese tendencies is largely a matter of race, that it is an ethnic trait,\nand explains much otherwise obscure in the historical development of\nreligions.[215]\n\nWithout entering into this interesting but too extensive inquiry, I will\nremark that these two tendencies run closely parallel to the division of\nrites which I shall adopt, a division based on a comparison of the large\nnumbers which I have classified in the study of primitive religions.\n\nThis division is also twofold. It embraces, first, all those rites which\nare primarily intended for the benefit of the community; and, second, all\nthose primarily intended for the benefit of the individual. The former I\nshall call _communal_, the latter, _personal_ rites.\n\nIt is the more necessary that I shall insist on this distinction because\nit has been overlooked and even denied by some eminent scholars. Dr.\nRobertson Smith, for example, with whom I have been before compelled to\ndisagree, refused to recognise personal worship in primitive conditions.\nHe wrote thus: \u201cIt was the community and not the individual who was sure\nof the help of its deity.\u201d The individual, he adds, was obliged to have\nrecourse to merely magical measures for his own protection.[216]\n\nThis statement is contradicted by nearly every primitive religion known\nto me; and it can be explained only by the concentration of the writer\u2019s\nmind on a faith so peculiar as that of the ancient Hebrews.[217]\n\nI. THE COMMUNAL RITES, those for the benefit of the community, be it\nlarge or small, may be classed under four forms: 1, the assemblage; 2,\nthe festal function; 3, the sacrifice; and 4, the communion with the\nDivine.\n\n_1. The Assemblage._\u2014Of these the _assemblage_ should first be\nconsidered, as it is the necessary condition of all communal worship. The\n_ecclesia_, the meeting, the gathering together, the congregation, has a\nfar higher importance than for the mere purpose of unity in an outward\nfunction. It is the means by which that most potent agent in religious\nlife, _collective suggestion_, is brought to bear upon the mind. It\nhas been instinctively recognised by every religion, and especially by\nmystical teachers, as an indispensable element in the dissemination of\ndoctrine.\n\nStrange, indeed, is the influence on the individual of \u201cthe crowd,\u201d\nwhen it is animated by deep feeling, by positive belief, by intense\nactivity! It is difficult even for the calmest mind not to be thrilled\nwith the contagious impulses of an assemblage tossed on the waves of wild\nreligious emotion. Its vertiginous passion whirls those who yield to it\nout of themselves, beyond their senses, into some lofty, hyper-sensuous\nstate, where reason totters and reality fades. We have but to watch\nan active \u201crevival,\u201d or the hysterical outbursts of an old-fashioned\n\u201ccamp-meeting,\u201d to be convinced of this.\n\nThese effects are hastened and strengthened by the Liturgy, the\nresponsive songs and chants, the music, the dancing hand in hand, the\ntouch of flesh, and the intoxication of breath with breath,\u2014all that the\ntheologians class as the _anaphora_, the going back and forth of mind and\nmind, through the varied forms of sensuous expression.[218]\n\nAll this is perfectly familiar to primitive religions. Among the rude\ntribes of our Western plains, the Dakotas and Chipeways for instance,\nthousands will gather at the annual festivals to unite in common worship\nand ceremonies. The first missionaries to Mexico report it a common sight\nto see six or seven thousand natives moving as one man in the swaying\nfigures of the sacred dances; and it were easy to multiply examples.\nEverywhere was the religious value of worship in common recognised.\n\n_2. The Festal Function._\u2014I have already referred to the fact that\nalthough the fear of demons and ghosts prevailed generally in early\nfaiths, their prevailing character was by no means always gloomy.\n\nIn early conditions the public religious ceremonies have an atmosphere\nof joyousness about them. They are thanksgivings and merrymakings,\nsuch as still exist among us in pale survivals in our harvest homes,\nChristmas festivities, and Easter-tide amusements. In ancient Greek\nand Roman rites this is still more visible. \u201cWorship the gods with a\njoyous heart,\u201d prescribes Cicero; and true to the precept, the Romans\nincluded among their acts of worship such cheering adjuncts as theatrical\nperformances, horse races, games, and dancing girls. No sign of mourning\nwas permitted, no word of lamentation was allowed, and a serene mood, a\njoyous countenance and bright garments were enjoined, that the gaiety of\nthe occasion might not suffer diminution.[219]\n\nThere was nothing in this peculiar to the Romans. The same is well\nknown to be true of the Greeks; Jacob Grimm is our authority that the\nreligious rites of the ancient Germans were as a rule cheerful, and those\nwhich were most cheerful were \u201cthe earliest and the commonest\u201d; while\nRobertson Smith testifies to the effect that the early Semitic ceremonies\nwere likewise gay and festal, passing at times into a truly orgiastic\ncharacter.[220]\n\nProbably most of us will feel some surprise when this trait of early\nand heathen religions is pressed upon our attention. We have been\naccustomed to hear of their dark and cruel mysteries, their immolations\nand holocausts, their cries of anguish and blood-stained altars, until\nwe have imagined that light-hearted gaiety was even farther from their\nteachings than it is from our own faith, whose cardinal principle is the\nholiness of suffering and self-abnegation.\n\nNothing could be wider from the truth. Probably the first of all public\nrites of worship was one of joyousness, to wit, the invitation to the\ngod to be present and partake of the repast. To spread a meal and ask\nthe deity to share it, that which is called _commensality_, belongs to\nthe most archaic of ceremonies. Captain Clark tells us of the Western\nIndians that \u201cfeasts form an essential part of every ceremony.\u201d There is\na certain solemnity observed about them, even when not strictly religious\nin character. The first mouthful is offered to the gods, and \u201csomething\nin the manner of a grace\u201d is usual when the person begins and finishes\nhis meal.[221]\n\nIt was but a step from this to purely religious banquets, festal\ncommemorations for thanksgiving, in acknowledgment of benefits received.\nThey were derived from the older practice of asking the god to share\nthe common meal, not, as some have argued, from the later custom of\noffering food before the idols. Such solemn banquets occur where idols\nare unknown, or form a minor element in religious expression. Sacrificial\nbanquets assume a different phase, to which I shall presently refer.\n\nNext in antiquity to the commensality of God with man, was the sacred\nprocession, that which is known as the \u201cceremonial circuit.\u201d\n\nJacob Grimm informs us that the ancient Germans were accustomed at\ncertain seasons to carry the images of the gods, Holda, Bertha, and\nothers, or the sacred symbols, the plough, the ship, etc., around the\nborders or marches of the tribal territory, over which they were held to\nexercise especial protection. Thus they bestowed the active beneficence\nof their personal presence on these confines. This divine progress was\naccompanied with shouts and songs and joyous acclamations.[222]\n\nTo this day in central France, when the seed is sown in the spring and\nthe husbandman has trusted his labour and his grain to the uncertain\nseason, the image of Our Lady of Mercy is solemnly carried through the\nprepared fields, with song and prayer, that her blessing may rest upon\nthem, and the grain return a hundred-fold.\n\nFar away from France and Germany, up in the chilly valleys of the\nPeruvian Andes, when the natives used to fear, for their crops, killing\nfrost or withering drought, the sacred _huaca_, the divine guardian of\nthe village, was brought forth and carried in solemn procession around\nthe fields, and its intercession beseeched in moving cries and with\nabundant gifts.[223]\n\nNumberless other examples of this universal rite might be mentioned, a\nrite the shadow of which still falls among us in the processional and\nrecessional of high Protestant churches. Among primitive peoples and in\nthe folk-lore of modern nations, it develops into the forms which are\nknown as \u201cthe sinistral and dextral circuits,\u201d depending on whether the\nprocession is from right to left or the reverse, connected doubtless with\nthe motion of the celestial bodies, and with the reverse of that motion,\neach appropriate to certain forms of worship. Throughout the American\ntribes this is always a point of the greatest importance, and constantly\nappears, not merely in their religious exercises, but in their social\ncustoms, their arts, and their habits of life.[224]\n\nI mentioned that the old Romans used to consider theatrical\nentertainments a proper part of a religious ceremony. They were not alone\nin that. In fact, the opinion was so universal that students of literary\norigins are agreed that the beginning of the drama, both comedy and\ntragedy, was in sacred scenic representations of the supposed doings of\nthe gods. We may recognise the earliest form of the drama in the masked\nactors of the American Indian medicine dances. They usually take the\npart of some lower animal, comic or serious, the face concealed either\nwith a part of its hide, or with a wooden mask, on which is painted\nsome semblance or symbol of the animal. The language of the actor is\nappropriate to his r\u00f4le, and often involves curious modifications of the\ncustomary tongue, to suit the creature he represents.[225]\n\nLong before the discovery of America by Columbus the native tribes of\nMexico, Guatemala, and Peru had developed from this source a dramatic\nliterature, which, like that of the early Greek classic period, had\nthrown off its first, purely religious garb, and had developed into an\nindependent art, devoted equally to Melpomene and Thalia, the tragic and\nthe comic muses.\n\nThese latter, of which a few specimens survive, were exotic plants\ncompared to the indigenous growth of the American sacred dramas. So\nessential, indeed had these become to the native notions of worship of\nany sort, that the Christian missionaries were fain to compromise the\nsituation, and permit them to remain, merely changing the names of the\nheathen gods to those of Christian saints, and modifying where necessary\nthe wording of the older text and its heathen _scenario_.\n\nThe extreme of these festal rejoicings is seen in the orgiastic\nceremonies so widely prevalent in early cults, the Bacchanalia, the\nSaturnalia, the \u201cWitches\u2019 Sabbath\u201d of the Middle Ages, and the like. They\nare nowise peculiar to primitive religions, although in them they hold a\nmore conspicuous place. Within a year, the \u201cangel-dancers\u201d of Hoboken,\nNew Jersey, have reproduced them in their true original colours, and they\nare always ready to crop out under the influence of the proper stimuli to\nthe religious emotions.\n\nIn their earliest forms, they are far from deserving the odium which\nattached to them later. The Bacchantes of Greece were, at first, not a\nrout of dissolute women, but an inspired train of devout virgins and\nchaste matrons. No man was permitted in the ranks under pain of death.\nThis was true also in Rome, in the Orient, and in many tribes of America.\nIt was a later and an evil innovation which sanctioned the unrestrained\nmingling of the sexes in these wild processions of intoxicated fanatics.\nTheir intoxication was, however, with the divine spirit, not the purple\ngrape-juice. They were, as the Greeks said, \u201ctheoleptic,\u201d possessed or\ninfuriated with the maddening joy of the gods, drunk with the celestial\nambrosia.\n\nTo our cold observation, they were in hysterical mania, with minds\ndisordered by religious excitement, worked up to a high contagious pitch\nthrough collective suggestion, following crazily the disordered fancies\nof their sub-conscious selves, mistaking them for the inspiration of\ndivine emanations.\n\n_3. The Sacrifice._\u2014In the custom of offering to the divine visitant a\nportion of the food and drink, we discover the origin of sacrifice. The\nword has acquired sad associations, seen in our common expression \u201cto\nmake a sacrifice,\u201d which signifies some painful self-surrender.\n\nThis was foreign to its original meaning. The sacrifice at first was a\nfree-will offering, a pleasing and grateful recognition of the kindness\nof the deity. The first-fruits, the young kid, the earliest ear of corn\nto mature, were offered to the beneficent being who had sent them for the\ngood of man. It was the willing acknowledgment we pay to a kind friend.\nThe earliest species of sacrifice is in the nature of a thank-offering.\nThey were of the class which has been termed \u201chonorific,\u201d and were little\nmore than \u201cmeals offered to the deity.\u201d[226]\n\nI may illustrate it from a custom of the Papuans of New Guinea. They\nbelieve, being ancestral worshippers, that the good things of life are\nmainly owing to the continuing solicitude of their departed progenitors.\nTherefore, to testify their gratitude, once in several years they dig up\nthe skulls of those deceased relations, paint them with chalk, decorate\nthem with feathers and flowers, and placing them on a scaffold, offer to\nthem food and trinkets.[227]\n\nThere is nothing of fear in this rite, and nothing fearful, for it is\nmade the occasion of a merry festival.\n\nSoon, however, in the development of the cult it was perceived that loss\nand affliction abounded and increased; the gods grew careless of their\nvotaries, or angry with them. They must be pacified and propitiated.\nHence arose the second form of sacrifices, those which are called\n\u201cconciliatory\u201d or \u201cpiacular.\u201d[228] They were atoning in significance,\nmystic in their symbolism, expiatory in their aims. The gods were\ndispleased at what man had done or had left undone, and they must be\nreconciled by humility and self-abnegation.\n\nIn this the primitive worshipper acted towards his deity just as he would\ntoward an earthly superior whose displeasure he had incurred. There was\nno new sentiment or line of action introduced. The rite of sacrifice\nin any of its phases offers nothing apart from the general motives of\nmankind.\n\nThe most common reason for early sacrifice was to expiate breaches of the\nceremonial law. Whether this occurred intentionally or not of purpose, it\nwas deemed requisite to make amends by some painful act, to pacify the\ndemonic power behind the law.\n\nNaturally, the greater the self-denial displayed in the offering, the\nhigher its merit and the more efficacious its character. The ancient\nGermans laid it down that in time of famine beasts should first be\nslain and offered to the gods. Did these bring no relief, then men must\nbe slaughtered; and if still there was no aid from on high, then the\nchieftain of the tribe himself must mount the altar[229]; for the nobler\nand dearer the victim, the more pleased were the gods!\n\nThe same doctrine prevailed practically through most primitive religions,\nand was carried to a like extent. Painful mutilations of oneself, the\nlopping of a finger, scarification, driving thorns through the tongue or\nthe flesh elsewhere, burning with hot coals, scourging, and supporting\ncrushing weights: these are but a few of the many terrible sufferings\nwhich the individual inflicted on himself.\n\nThus steeled to pain in his own person, he knew no limit to its\ninfliction on others. The tortures of captives or of slaves dedicated to\nthe gods, common in American religions, formed part of the religious\nvalue of the ceremony. Not merely captives and slaves, but those of his\nown household and blood, his nearest and his dearest, must the true\nworshipper be prepared to surrender, were it his first-born son or the\nwife of his bosom. It was not heartlessness or cruelty which prompted\nhim, but obedience to that law of the supernatural, which ever claims for\nitself supremacy over all laws and all passions of the natural man.\n\nTraces of human sacrifice are discovered in the early history of even the\nnoblest religions, and the rite extended so widely that scarce a cult can\nbe named in which it did not exist.\n\nWhat rendered them the more general was the underlying belief that, let\nthe sacrifice be sufficiently exalted, the gods _could not_ resist it.\nThey were constrained by its magical power, and whatever was desired\ncould be extorted from them, with or without their volition. So to this\nday teach the Hindu priests, and so believed the ancient Romans and\nvarious primitive nations.\n\n_4. The Communion with God._\u2014The idea of atonement in the piacular\nsacrifice is in reality that of being _one with the god_, that of\nentering into union or communion with him. This, indeed, lies largely at\nthe base of all the forms of ritualistic worship. Its purpose, more or\nless clearly avowed, is to bring into spiritual unison the worshipper and\nthe worshipped.\n\nA few examples from American rites will illustrate this.\n\nThe natives of Nicaragua at the time of maize gathering were accustomed\nto sacrifice a man to the gods of the harvest. Around the altar were\nstrewn grains of corn. Over these the worshippers stood and with flint\nknives let blood from the most sensitive parts of their bodies, the drops\nfalling on the grains. These were then eaten as holy food, part of the\nsacrifice.[230]\n\nSomething very similar obtained in Peru. At the time of the vernal\nequinox, all strangers were bidden to leave the sacred city of Cuzco,\nwhere the Inca resided. A human victim was immolated, and the spotless\n\u201cVirgins of the Sun\u201d were deputed to mingle his blood with meal and bake\nit into small cakes. These were distributed among the people and eaten,\nand one was sent to every holy shrine and temple in the kingdom.[231]\nPrecisely such a rite prevailed among the ancient Germans. At the harvest\nsupper the spirit of the corn, represented latterly under the form of an\nanimal but in earlier days as a child, was slain and eaten by those who\nhad aided in the harvest. It was the literal and corporeal union of man\nand the god.[232]\n\nStill clearer was the similar ceremony of the Aztecs. A youth was chosen\nand named for the god. For months his every wish was gratified. Then he\nwas slain on the altar and his fresh blood was mixed with dough which was\ndivided among the worshippers and eaten. Thus they became partakers of\nthe Divine Nature.[233]\n\nThe fearful similarity of this ceremony both in its form and in its\nintention to that of the Christian Eucharist could not escape the\nnotice of the Spanish missionaries. They attributed it to the malicious\nsuggestions of the Devil, thus parodying in cruel and debased traits the\nsacred mysteries of the Church. But the psychologist sees in them all the\nsame inherent tendency, the same yearning of the feeble human soul to\nreach out towards and make itself a part of the Divine Mind.\n\nII. THE PERSONAL RITES, those for the benefit of the individual, will\nnext occupy us.\n\nI have already observed that while the tribe or gens in primitive\nconditions worships in common one or several divinities, most of the\nreligious acts of the individual are directed toward a deity whom he may\nclaim as his own special guardian and friend. This is his tutelary god,\nhis personal \u03b4\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03c9\u03bd, his \u201cmystagogue,\u201d who will not merely look after the\nwelfare of his human ward, but introduce him into the higher and occult\nknowledge and power.\n\nThis personal deity reveals himself at birth, or may await some later\nyear or incident of life to manifest his name and nature. He may be the\nspirit of some ancestor or great chieftain or mighty shaman; or he may\nbelong to those deities who never assume mortal habiliments. The teachers\nof early faiths differed on these points; but nearly all agreed that to\neach person some such guardian angel or genius was assigned. From these\nspirits the personal names were frequently received, and, lest these\nshould be misused, they were usually kept secret.\n\nThese beliefs are too wide-spread to require support from examples.\nProbably every American tribe shared them. They are familiar in classic\nGreece and Rome. The Finns and the ancient Celtic peoples possessed them\nin marked forms; and they survive in the tutelary Saints of the Roman\nChurch.\n\nPrincipally to these the adults paid their devotions and offered their\nvows for what concerned their personal welfare; and many of the rites\nwhich I am about to describe, derive their meaning from their connection\nwith this belief. I shall classify them as relating: 1, to birth; 2, to\nnaming; 3, to puberty; 4, to marriage; and 5, to death and the disposal\nof the corpse.\n\n_1. Rites Relating to Birth._\u2014Although the immediate act of childbirth\nmay not cause the savage mother severe suffering, the appearance of a new\nhuman being in the world is not considered of light importance. In her\ndescription of the Pueblo Indians of New Mexico, Mrs. Stevenson remarks\nthat some \u201cof their most sacred and exclusive rites are connected with\nchildbirth,\u201d and her full and accurate account of them reveals in a\nstrong light how solemn the event was considered.[234]\n\nIn many tribes the child was considered bound to its father by some\nmysterious tie closer than connected it with its mother. Among the\nNorthern Indians, the father will not bridle a horse or perform sundry\nother acts for a fixed period after the birth of his child, for if he\ndid it would die![235] In the rites of Mexico and South America, this\nrefraining from certain labours passed into the strange custom of the\n_couvade_. This was, that upon the birth of the child, the _father_ took\nto his bed and remained there for a number of days. Did he neglect this,\nit was believed that the child would die or have bad luck. For the same\nreason he had to be extremely careful of his own health and guarded in\nhis actions during his wife\u2019s pregnancy, or otherwise the unborn babe\nwould suffer.[236]\n\nNot less strange are the wide-spread rites and opinions connected with\nthe umbilical cord. As it united the unborn infant to the life of the\nmother, it was generally held to retain that power in a mystical sense.\nAmong the American Indians, it was a frequent custom to carry it to a\ndistance and bury it, and it became the duty of the individual, in his\nlater life, to visit alone from time to time that spot, and perform\ncertain ceremonies.[237]\n\nThus the religious life of a person began with his birth. Not\ninfrequently at that time his tutelary divinity was ascertained by the\npriests and assigned him, as among the Mayas, and the Africans of the\nCongo River. With the latter, it was also customary to lay upon the\nnew-born babe a series of \u201cvows,\u201d or resolutions touching his conduct in\nlife. These were impressed on the mother, who adopted it as a sacred duty\nto bring up her child in obedience to them. A similar habit prevailed in\nthe Andaman Islands and elsewhere.[238]\n\nWith these vows was often associated the rite of baptism, by sprinkling\nor by immersion in water. Even among the rude Yahgans of Tierra del Fuego\nwe find that the child, when born, was promptly dipped in water, not for\nsanitary but for religious reasons.\n\nThe ancient inhabitants of Teneriffe considered it necessary to have\na child formally asperged by a priestess before acknowledging it as a\nmember of the family,[239] and some such rite was prevalent in many\ntribes. It was in one sense an initiation, as it was with the neophytes\nof the mysteries of Mithras, who, according to Tertullian, were baptised\nupon entering the novitiate. In another, it would seem to have been a\npurification from inherited sin, in which sense it was practised by the\nNahuas of Mexico and the Quichuas of Peru. With the Mayas of Yucatan, it\nwas in common usage and was known by the significant name, \u201cthe second\nbirth.\u201d[240]\n\n_2. Relating to the Name_.\u2014The Name, as we have already seen, was\nlooked upon as a part of the person, one of his forms or modes of life.\nVery generally, its selection was a matter of religious moment, and\naccompanied with solemn ceremonies. A person might have many names, but\nthere was one which was taken from or referred to his or her tutelary\nspirit, and this was holy and not to be lightly used.\n\nAmong the Nahuas this was generally announced by the priest on the\nseventh day after birth, but as it would be profane to speak it\nconstantly, another was employed for ordinary conversation. The Algonquin\nchildren, says one who lived among them long, are taught by their mothers\nnot to divulge their real names, lest by so doing they should offend the\npersonal god who has taken them under his protection.[241]\n\nWhen a babe, among the Seminoles of Florida, was about a fortnight old,\nthe mother took it in her arms and walked three times around the public\nsquare of the village, calling aloud the name given it; but this name\nwas not that by which it was later known; and \u201cthey were always averse\nto telling it.\u201d[242] With some tribes, as the Choctaws, the idea of\nprofanity existed only if the person himself spoke his name; so that, \u201cit\nis impossible to get it from him unless he has an acquaintance present,\nwhom he will request to tell it for him.\u201d[243] Analogous customs abound\nin early religions and many of them survive in modern folk-lore.[244]\n\nIn some instances the American Indian would exchange his name for that\nof a friend, or extend to him his name; a rare and high sign of amity,\nas it signified that the receiver was thus placed under the guardianship\nof the same tutelar deity. This custom extended widely throughout the\nisland world of the Pacific and among many primitive peoples. It has\noften been noted, but its peculiarly religious meaning has generally been\nmisunderstood.\n\nThat certain names are auspicious and others inauspicious is a belief\nthat belongs everywhere to mankind in the primitive stage of thought.\nBut it is curious to note that while generally the auspicious names are\nthose of sweet sound and favourable sense, in Tonkin, Siam, and some\nother regions ugly and unpleasant names are preferred, because these will\nfrighten away the evil spirits.[245]\n\n_3. Rites Relating to Puberty._\u2014On the momentous crisis in the personal\nlife when the boy enters into manhood and the girl becomes a woman, in\nnearly all primitive tribes a solemn rite is prescribed, the object of\nwhich is to prepare the child for the duties of the wider life, which it\nis about to begin.\n\nNo better example for such a ceremony could be selected than that which\nprevails among the southern tribes of Australia. It is their principal\npublic act of worship. The name by which it is known is the _Bora_,[246]\na word derived from the belt or girdle which the men wear, and which is\nat that time conferred on the youth. Its celebration involves extensive\npreparations and occupies a number of days. The youths are submitted to\nsevere tests and sometimes to dreadful mutilations. They are taught the\nholy names and sacred traditions; and when they have satisfied their\nelders of their endurance and fidelity, they are admitted to the manhood\nof the tribe.\n\nThe _Bora_ is a distinctly religious ceremony. It is said to have been\ninstituted by their chief god Turamulun himself, and remains under\nhis spiritual charge. Its rites \u201cinvolve the idea of a dedication to\nsupernatural powers,\u201d and the figure of the god, moulded in high relief\non the earth in the costume and attitude of the sacred dance, is intended\nto represent his personal presence. The aim is the education of the\nindividual to fill his place properly in the tribal life; and one of the\nmost intelligent of English observers expresses his conviction that\n\u201cevery rule of conduct under which the novice is placed is directly\nintended to some end beneficent to the community or believed to be.\u201d\n\nThroughout most of America, a similar initiation was required of the\nyouth before he was entitled to the privileges of manhood. It was\nfrequently accompanied by the most painful tests of his courage and\nendurance. His naked back was lacerated with rods, his strength was tried\nby prolonged hunger, thongs were inserted into his flesh and torn out by\nthe bystanders.\n\nMore frequently the boy was sent alone into the woods, and there,\nexposed to inclement weather, cold, hunger and thirst, self-torture and\nmeditation, awaited the divine revelation which entitled him to call\nhimself a man!\n\n\u201cCould it be possible,\u201d exclaims an intelligent traveller, \u201cto hear\nanything stranger, more wonderful, than these stories of unheard-of\ncastigations and torments to which boys of thirteen or fourteen subject\nthemselves, merely for the sake of an idea, a dream, the fulfilment of a\nreligious duty? More surprising is it that not merely some extraordinary\nyouth is capable of this, but that every young Indian, without exception,\ndisplays such heroism.\u201d[247]\n\nThe same rule applied to the girl. As it became evident that the period\nhad arrived in her life-history when she was capable of the sacred duties\nof motherhood, she either retired into the forest, there to commune alone\nwith her guardian spirit, or, as among the Sioux Indians, the fact was\nmade known to the village, and a solemn feast announced by her parents.\nAt this, some venerable priest addressed the guests, \u201ccalling attention\nto the sacred and mysterious manner in which nature had announced the\nfact that she was ready to embrace the duties of matrimony!\u201d[248]\n\nIn these ceremonies, which may be said to belong to primitive religions\nin all times, we recognise again the one idea which more than any other\npermeated all their myths and rites,\u2014the idea of Life. It was because\nthe boy and girl, passing to riper years, indicated the acquisition of\nthe power to perpetuate and transmit Life, that at this age it was held\nnecessary for them to mark the epoch by rites of the most sacred import.\n\n_4. Rites Relating to Marriage._\u2014If the notion of life was thus the\ninspiration of the rites of puberty, still more potently did it control\nthose relating to marriage.\n\nMuch has been written by special students concerning the forms of\nprimitive marriage, and much of what has been written is theory only, not\nsupported by actual and intimate knowledge of facts.\n\nThe assertion is common in works of the kind that the earliest form of\nmarriage was no marriage at all,\u2014mere promiscuity,\u2014and that, later, a\nmodified form of the same, known as \u201ccommunal\u201d marriage, prevailed.\nNot a single example of either of these has been known in history or\nin ethnology, and it is a gratuitous hypothesis only that either ever\nprevailed in a permanent community.\n\nWhat we first discern is the family, generally centred around the mother,\nand tracing descent through the maternal ancestors only. This is the\n\u201cmatriarchal\u201d as distinguished from the \u201cpatriarchal\u201d system, the latter\nbeing that in which the father is the centre and head of the family, and\nthe genealogy is traced in his line. Both these forms, however, have\nexisted, so far as we know, in wholly primitive conditions. The selection\nof one or the other was a matter of local accident or incident.\n\nThe primitive family, held together by one or other of these ties of\nblood-relationship, was a close corporation. It might adopt outsiders,\nbut after admission they were considered of the same blood and lineage.\nIts property was in common, its laws were laid on all, its very gods\nwere its own. Especially, the rules relating to marriage were prescribed\nwith rigid formality.\n\nThe general practice was that the youth must seek his bride from another\nrecognised family (gens or totem) of the tribe. To choose her from his\nown immediate family was a crime of such deep dye that even an Australian\nsavage \u201ccould not consider such a thing possible\u201d; although, in later\nconditions, this artificial barrier was often weakened.[249]\n\nIn matriarchal systems, the husband usually went to live with the gens\nof the wife, but did not become a member of it. He was looked upon as a\nstranger and an interloper. Among some Australian and American tribes,\nhe never spoke directly to his wife\u2019s mother, or even looked at her.\nHis children did not acknowledge him as a blood-relation, and when he\ngrew old and useless, he had to look to his own family, not to his own\noffspring, for his maintenance.\n\nThe origin of these strange usages was strictly religious. They have been\nanalysed as they existed in many nations by one of the ablest of German\nethnologists, and their source has been shown to be that the gods of\nthe one gens never willingly accept the introduction of a stranger into\nthe household except by the regular formulas of adoption, which would\nprevent marriage; hence, the husband is, and ever remains, a foreigner\nand an interloper in the matriarchal household. His wife\u2019s god is not his\ngod, nor are her people his people.[250]\n\nThe actual ceremony of marriage itself often indicates this. Much has\nbeen said by writers on ethnology of \u201cmarriage by capture,\u201d and it is\noften asserted to be that most usual among primitive peoples, and to\ncontinue in survivals in higher conditions of culture.\n\nThere is, indeed, very frequently a ceremony which presents the\nappearance of violently seizing and carrying away by main force the\nbride-elect. But it is not to be understood as the reminiscence of a\ntime when the man went forth and snatched a girl from some neighbouring\ntribe to become his slave and his wife. I doubt if in the true totemic\nmarriage, considered as distinct from concubinage, any such method was\npractised. It is not so to-day, even among the Australian Blacks. If they\nsteal a woman, they first inquire as to her kinship, and if she belongs\nto a class into which her captor cannot marry, according to the laws of\nhis clan, he sets her free.[251]\n\nThe so-called \u201cmarriage by capture\u201d was either a recognised tribute\nto maidenly coyness, by which her real or feigned resistance was to\nbe overcome in a manner creditable to herself,\u2014a sentiment constantly\nwitnessed in the lower animals as well as in modern life; or it was a\nmethod of conciliating her household gods, the deities of the gens, by\ngiving the appearance of constraint and succumbing to force on the part\nof the girl. Some of the northern tribes of America carried these notions\nto the extent of a pretended concealment of the marriage long after it\nhad been performed. The husband was obliged to enter the home of his wife\nby night and secretly. To approach it in daytime or to be seen in her\ncompany would have been a grave impropriety.[252]\n\nThe second primitive form of marriage is by purchase. This also is\nfar less usual than many writers have assumed. There is indeed, very\ncommonly, as in civilised society, an exchange of goods along with or\nprevious to the marital ceremony. But with us it is not regarded as a\npurchase and sale when an American girl\u2019s father gives his daughter and a\nmillion to a foreign nobleman in exchange for the title conferred on the\nbride. It may in reality be a mere commercial transaction, but in theory\nit is not so.\n\nJust as little is the \u201cmarriage by purchase\u201d among most of the aboriginal\ntribes, where we find it in vogue. The exchange of goods is often a form\nof compensation to the household gods for the privilege of remaining\na member of the clan, or for the permission to enter its ranks as an\nauthorised resident.\n\nOf course, women were bought and sold as any other commodity; they were\npart of the booty of victors, and were dispensed as gifts, or kept for\nenjoyment. But when we confine ourselves to the examination of the\nstrictly totemic marriage we find even among the wildest tribes that it\nwas generally founded in mutual liking, that it was contracted under the\nsanction of the recognised family laws, and that its ritual was that\nof a religious ceremony.[253] The poor Bushmen, even, believe that the\nlaws relating to marriage are of divine origin, enacted by the sacred\nant-eater, and that their infraction will be severely punished.[254]\n\nThe gifts which accompanied the rite were in the nature of offerings.\nCeremonies of lustration and purification, in which the sacred\nelements, fire and water, took a prominent part, were general, and\nthe relationship established was in its essence one of religious\nsignificance, and not one of mere secular import.\n\n_5. Relating to Death._\u2014An attractive writer, Professor Frank Granger,\nremarks in a recent volume: \u201cThe first attitude of primitive man to his\ndead seems to have been one of almost unmixed terror.\u201d[255] Would that we\ncould give primitive man so much credit! But we cannot. The evidence is\nmountain-high that in the earliest and rudest period of human history the\ncorpse inspired so little terror that it was nearly always eaten by the\nsurviving friends![256]\n\nWe can look back clearly through the corridors of time to that stage of\ndevelopment when death and the dead inspired no more terror or aversion\nin man than they do to-day among the carnivorous brutes.\n\nThroughout the whole of the pal\u00e6olithic period of culture we discover\nextremely faint traces of any mode of sepulture, any respect for the dead.\n\nThe oldest cemeteries or funeral monuments of any sort date from the\nneolithic period. Then the full meaning of Death seems to have broken\nsuddenly on man, and his whole life became little more than a _meditatio\nmortis_, a preparation for the world beyond the tomb. What Professor\nGranger says of the ancient Romans applies to very many primitive tribes:\n\u201cIn the belief of the Romans, the right to live was not estimated more\nhighly than the right to receive proper burial.\u201d[257]\n\nThe funeral or mortuary ceremonies, which are often so elaborate, and\nso punctiliously performed in savage tribes, have a twofold purpose.\nThey are equally for the benefit of the individual and for that of the\ncommunity. If they are neglected or inadequately conducted, the restless\nspirit of the departed cannot reach the realm of joyous peace, and\ntherefore he returns to lurk about his former home and to plague the\nsurvivors for their carelessness.\n\nIt was therefore to lay the ghost, to avoid the anger of the disembodied\nspirit, that the living instituted and performed the burial ceremonies;\nwhile it became to the interest of the individual to provide for it that\nthose rites should be carried out which would conduct his own soul to the\nabode of the blessed.\n\nThese were as various as were the myths of the after-world and the\nfancies as to the number and destiny of the personal souls.\n\nMost common of them all was some sort of funeral feast. The disagreeable\nsuggestion is close, that this was a survival of the habit of eating\nthe corpse itself. Up to a very recent date that habit prevailed among\nthe Bolivian Indians; and so desirable an end was it esteemed that the\ntraveller D\u2019Orbigny tells of an old man he met there whose only regret at\nembracing Christianity was that his body would be eaten by worms instead\nof by his relations!\n\nThe later theory, however, was that then the soul itself was supplied\nwith food. It partook spiritually of the viands and thus, well fortified\nfor its long journey, departed in good humour with those it left behind.\nThe same notion led to the world-wide custom of providing it with many\narticles by placing them in the tomb or burning them on the funeral pyre.\nThis extended not only to weapons, utensils, ornaments, and clothing,\nbut not infrequently to companions. On the coast of Peru the wives of\na man were burned alive with his dead body, and among the Natchez they\nwere knocked on the head and interred under the same mounds.[258] I have\nseen the mummy of a woman from the Cliff Dwellers of Arizona, holding\nin her arms the body of her babe which had been strangled with a cord,\nstill tightly stretched around its little neck. Plainly the sympathetic\nsurvivors had reflected how lonely the poor mother would be in the next\nworld without her babe, and had determined that its soul should accompany\nhers. Elsewhere, slaves or companions in arms were slain or slew\nthemselves that they might accompany some famous chieftain to his long\nhome.\n\nIn these funeral rites the disposal of the corpse depended upon ethnic\ntraits, ancestral usage, or the instructions of the priests.\n\nPerhaps the earliest was simple exposure. The body was left in the forest\nfor the beasts and birds to consume, as among the Caddo Indians and\nothers; or it was sunk in the waters that the fish should perform the\nsame office; the usual object being to obtain the bones with the least\ntrouble. The oldest of all burials yet discovered, those in the caves in\nthe south of France, were of this character, simple \u201cseposition\u201d as it\nis called. The body was merely laid in a posture of repose on the cave\nfloor, with the weapons and ornaments it had used during life.[259]\n\nNext in point of time doubtless came inhumation, the interment of the\nbody in the ground or covering it, laid on the surface, with stones and\nearth,\u2014the burial mound. Homeric Greeks, American Indians, and tribes of\nall continents practised this method in different ages, and the barrows\nor tumuli thus erected remain in thousands to this day to attest the\nreligious earnestness of those early peoples. The vast monuments which\nat times they constructed for their dead, the pyramids, dolmens, and\nteocalli, have never since been equalled in magnitude or cubical contents.\n\nAnother and significant funeral rite of high antiquity is that of\ncremation or incineration. It was symbolic in character, the body being\ngiven to the flames in order that the spirit, by their purifying agency,\nshould promptly be set free and united with the gods. This method\nalso prevailed extensively among the American race, and was quite in\nconsonance with their opinions of the after-life. \u201cIt is the one passion\nof his superstition,\u201d writes Mr. Powers of the Californian Indian, \u201cto\nthink of the soul of his departed friend as set free, and purified by the\nflames; not bound to the mouldering body, but borne up on the soft clouds\nof the smoke toward the beautiful sun.\u201d[260]\n\nOther peoples entertained the opinion that the body as it is, in all\nits parts, must be preserved in order that it might be again habitable\nfor the soul, when this ethereal essence should return to earth from\nits celestial wanderings. Therefore, with utmost care they sought for\nmeans to preserve the fleshly tenement. In Virginia, in some parts of\nSouth America, on the Madeira Islands, the aboriginal population dried\nthe corpse over a slow fire into a condition that resisted decay;\nwhile elsewhere, the nitrous soil of caves offered a natural means of\nembalming. The Alaskan and Peruvian mummies, like those of ancient\nEgypt, were artificially prepared and swathed in numerous cerecloths.\nIn all, the same faith in the literal resurrection of the flesh was the\nprevailing motive.\n\nMore generally, the belief was held that the soul remained attached in\nsome way to the bones. These were carefully cleaned and either preserved\nin the house, or stored in ossuaries. Frequently they were kept as\namulets or mascots, in the notion that the friendly spirit which animated\nthe living person would continue to hover around his skeleton or skull,\nand exert its amicable power. The Peruvians held that the bones of\ntheir deceased priests were oracular, speaking good counsel, and the\nmissionaries were obliged to break them into small fragments to dispel\nthis superstition[261]; though they themselves continued to hold it\nheretical to doubt the efficacy of the bones of the saints! A tribe on\nthe Orinoco was wont to beat the bones of their dead into powder and mix\nit with their cassava bread, holding that thus their friends and parents\nlived again in the bodies of the eaters!\n\nAfter cremation, the ashes were left upon the altar, and the whole\ncovered with earth; or they were preserved in urns with the fragments of\nthe bones; or, as with a tribe of the Amazon, they were cast upon the\nwaters of the great river and floated down to the limitless ocean.\n\nThus closed the last scene in the existence of the primitive man. From\nbirth to death he had been surrounded and governed by the ceremonies of\nhis religion; and on his passage out of this life, he confidently looked\nto another in which he should find a compensation and a consolation for\nthe woes of his present condition.\n\nFollowing these funerary functions came the customs of mourning. They\nwere often excessively protracted and severe, involving self-mutilation,\nas the lopping of a finger or an ear, scarification, flagellation,\nfasting, and cutting the hair. These were shared by the friends and\nrelatives of the deceased, and at the death of some famous chief \u201cthe\nwhole tribe will prostrate themselves to their woe.\u201d\n\nThe psychic explanation of these demonstrations is not wholly clear. By\nsome they have been interpreted as a commutation for cannibalism, and\nby others as an excuse for not accompanying the corpse into the other\nworld. One writer says: \u201cBarbarism, abandoned to sorrow, finds physical\nsuffering a relief from mental agony.\u201d[262] On the other hand, a recent\nstudent of the subject claims that in these rites we perceive \u201cthe oldest\nevidence of active conscience in the human race; the individual laid\nhands on himself in order to restore the moral equilibrium.\u201d[263] Need\nwe go farther than to see in them merely exaggerated forms of the same\nemotional outbursts which lead nervous temperaments everywhere to wring\nthe hands and tear the hair in moments of violent grief?\n\n\n\n\nLECTURE VI.\n\nThe Lines of Development of Primitive Religions.\n\n    CONTENTS:\u2014Pagan Religions not wholly Bad\u2014Their Lines of\n    Development as Connected with: 1. The Primitive Social Bond\u2014The\n    Totem, the Priesthood, and the Law; 2. The Family and the\n    Position of Woman; 3. The Growth of Jurisprudence\u2014The Ordeal,\n    Trial by Battle, Oaths, and the Right of Sanctuary\u2014Religion is\n    Anarchic; 4. The Development of Ethics\u2014Dualism of Primitive\n    Ethics\u2014Opposition of Religion to Ethics; 5. The Advance in\n    Positive Knowledge\u2014Religion _versus_ Science; 6. The Fostering\n    of the Arts\u2014The Aim for Beauty and Perfection\u2014Colour-Symbolism,\n    Sculpture, Metre, Music, Oratory, Graphic Methods\u2014Useful Arts,\n    Architecture; 7. The Independent Life of the Individual\u2014His\n    Freedom and Happiness\u2014Inner Stadia of Progress: 1. From the\n    Object to the Symbol; 2. From the Ceremonial Law to the\n    Personal Ideal; 3. From the Tribal to the National Conception\n    of Religion\u2014Conclusion.\n\n\nIt has always been, and is now, the prevailing belief in Christendom that\npagan or heathen religions cannot exert and never have exerted any good\ninfluence on their votaries.\n\nThis opinion has also been defended by some modern and eminent\nauthorities in the science of ethnology, as, for example, the late\nProfessor Waitz.[264] It is a favourite teaching in missionary societies\nand in works of travellers who are keen observers of the shortcomings of\nothers\u2019 faiths.\n\nI have never been able to share such a view. The lowest religions\nseem to have in them the elements which exist in the ripest and the\nnoblest; and these elements work for good wherever they exist. However\nrude the form of belief in agencies above those of the material world,\nin a higher law than that confessedly of solely human enactment, and\nin a standard of duty prescribed by something loftier than immediate\nadvantage,\u2014such a belief must prompt the individual, anywhere, to a\nsalutary self-discipline which will steadily raise him above his merely\nanimal instincts, and imbue him with nobler conceptions of the aims of\nlife.\n\nWhen he feels himself under the protection of some unseen, but ever near,\nbeneficent power, his emotions of gratitude and love will be stimulated;\nand when he recognises in the ceremonial law a divine prescription for\nhis own welfare and that of his tribe, he will cheerfully submit to the\nrigours of its discipline.\n\nThe various lines of development which were thus marked out and pursued\nthrough the influence of early religious thought, and which reacted to\ndevelop it, deserve to be pointed out in detail, since they have so\ngenerally been overlooked or misunderstood.\n\nFor convenience of presentation they may be examined under seven\nheadings, as they were connected with: 1. The primitive social bond; 2.\nThe family and the position of woman; 3. The growth of jurisprudence; 4.\nThe development of ethics; 5. The advance in positive knowledge; 6. The\nfostering of the arts; and 7. The independent life of the individual.\n\nThese are the main elements of ethnology; and as they progressed to\nhigher forms and finer specialisations, partly through the influence of\nreligion, they in turn reflected back to it their brighter lustre, and\nthe symmetrical growth of a richer culture was thus secured.\n\n1. The first to be named should be the construction of the primitive\nsociety. This was essentially religious. I have already emphasised how\ncompletely the savage is bound up in his faith, how it enters into nigh\nevery act and thought of his daily life. This may be illustrated by its\npart in four very early and widely existing forms of social ties\u2014the\ntotem, the sacred society, the priesthood, and the ceremonial law.\n\nThe totemic bond I have previously explained. It existed in many\nAmerican and Australian tribes and relics of it can be discerned in\nthe early peoples of Europe, Asia, and Africa. Its constitution was\navowedly religious. The supposed or \u201ceponymous\u201d ancestor of the totem\nwas a mythical existence, a sort of deity. He was known only through\na revelation, either in visions, or, through the assertions of the\nelders of the clan, in which latter case the myth was the origin of the\nrelationship. Theoretically, all members of the totem were kinfolk, \u201cof\none blood,\u201d and the numerous rites connected with the letting of blood\nwere generally to symbolise this teaching.[265]\n\nIn various tribes, as among the Sioux and in Polynesia, the totem did\nnot prevail. Its place was taken by societies, sacred in character, the\nmembers of which were bound closely together by some supernatural tie. As\nour Indians say, all the members \u201chad the same medicine.\u201d The relation\nthese societies bear to the tribe is not dissimilar to that elsewhere\nheld by totems.\n\nIn nearly all primitive peoples the priesthood exerts a powerful\ninfluence in preserving the unity of the tribe, in presenting an\nimmovable opposition to external control. This is well known to the\nChristian missionaries and bitterly resented by them. These shamans\nand \u201cmedicine-men\u201d are the most persistent opponents of civilisation\nand Christianity; but it must be remembered that the same conservatism\non their part has for centuries been the chief preventive of tribal\ndissolution and decay. While we regret that they should resist what is\ngood, we must recognise the value of their services to their people in\nthe past.[266]\n\nThe ceremonial law belongs, as I have elsewhere said, to the primary\nforms of religion. It is in full force, as among the Mincopies and\nYahgans, where it is difficult to perceive any other form of religious\nexpression. It is deemed by all to be divine in origin, imparted in\ndreams or visions by supernatural visitors, transcending therefore all\nhuman enactments. It defines the proper conduct of the individual, and\nprescribes what is allowed and what is forbidden to him. Obedience to it\nis constantly inculcated under the threat of the severest penalties.\n\nThese are the main forces which moulded the earliest human societies\nknown to us, and may be said to have first created society itself. They\nare all distinctly religious, and their consideration obliges us to\nacknowledge the correctness of the statement of a distinguished Italian,\nProfessor Tito Vignoli,\u2014\u201cThere is no society, however rude and primitive,\nin which all the relations, both of the individual and of the society\nitself, are not visibly based on superstitions and mythical beliefs.\u201d[267]\n\n2. Earlier, perhaps, than any definite social organisation was the\nfamily bond which united together those of one kinship. This rested upon\nmarriage, the religious character of which in even the rudest tribes I\ndwelt upon in the last lecture. I then explained the matriarchal system\nprevalent in so many savage peoples. Necessarily, this exalted the\nposition of woman, by conferring upon her the titular position of head of\nthe house, and often the actual ownership of the family property.\n\nIt is a general truth in sociology that we may gauge the tendencies of a\ngiven society towards progressive growth by the position it assigns to\nwoman, by the amount of freedom it gives her, and by the respect it pays\nto her peculiar faculties. Religions which, like Mohammedanism, reduce\nher to a very subordinate place in life, wholly secondary to that of the\nmale, have worked detrimentally to the advancement of the peoples who\nhave adopted them.\n\nIn some savage tribes, the woman is a mere chattel or slave, denied\nactual participation in religious rites. But that is by no means the\ncase with all. Among the Hottentots, for example,\u2014who were, when first\ndiscovered, a people of respectable culture,\u2014a man can take no higher\noath than to swear by his eldest sister; and such is the respect\ninculcated through his religion, that he never speaks to her unless she\naddresses him first.[268]\n\nThe more delicate nervous organisation of women adapts them peculiarly\nto the perception of those sub-conscious states which are the psychic\nsources of inspiration and revelation. Very widely, therefore, in\nprimitive religions they occupied the position of seeresses and\npriestesses, and were reverenced in accordance therewith. Among the Dyaks\nof Borneo, in former days, all the recognised priestly class were women.\nTheir bodies were supposed to be the chosen residence of the Sangsangs,\nbeautiful beings, friendly to men. These inspired women, called Bilians\nor Borich, were subject to theoleptic fits, in which they gave advice,\nforetold the future, recited rhythmic songs, etc. They were under no\nrestraint of conduct, as what they did, it was held, was the prompting of\nthe god. So firm was their influence that, when, in modern days, the men\nalso became priests, they were obliged to wear the garb of women.[269]\n\nThe Siamese also entertain this opinion. Their gods speak through the\nmouth of some chosen woman. When she feels the visit of the spirit to be\nnear, she arrays herself in a handsome red silk garment, and as the deity\nenters her, she discourses of the other world, tells where lost objects\nare to be found, and the like. The assembled company worship her, or\nrather the god in her. On recovering from her theopneustic trance, she\nprofesses entire unconsciousness of what has taken place.[270]\n\nThe American Indians very generally concede to their women an exalted\nrank in their religious mysteries. The Algonquins had quite as famous\n\u201cmedicine-women\u201d as medicine-men, and the same was true generally. Mr.\nCushing tells me that there is only one person among the Zu\u00f1is who is a\nmember of all the sacred societies and thus knows the secrets of all, and\nthat person is a woman.\n\nWhen Votan, the legendary hero of the Tzentals of Chiapas, left them for\nhis long journey, he placed his sacred apparatus and his magical scrolls\nin a cave under the charge of a high priestess, who was to appoint her\nsuccessor of the same sex until his return. The secret was faithfully\nkept and the successors appointed for more than a hundred and fifty years\nafter their conversion to Christianity; until, in 1692, on the occasion\nof the visit of the Bishop to the hamlet where the priestess lived, she\ndisclosed the story, and the holy relics were burned.[271]\n\nTwenty years later, as if to avenge this, the Tzentals revolted in a\nbody, their leader being an inspired prophetess of their tribe, a girl of\ntwenty, fired with enthusiasm to drive the Spaniards from the land and\nrestore the worship of the ancient gods.[272]\n\nIt is quite usual to find in early religions many rites, such as dances\nand sacrifices, which women alone carry out, and to which it is _tabu_\nfor any man to be admitted. This naturally arises in those cults where\nthe deities are divided sexually into male and female. Such in their\norigin were the Bacchanals of ancient Greece, participated in at first by\nwomen and girls only, celebrated in devotion to the productive powers of\nnature, which were held to belong more especially to the female sex.[273]\nThe \u201cwise women\u201d of many primitive faiths formed a close caste by\nthemselves, no male being admitted, in imitation of their mythological\nprototypes in the heavens. The \u201cwitches\u201d of the Middle Ages were lineal\nsuccessors of the Teutonic priestesses, who took as their model the\n\u201cswan-maidens\u201d or \u201cwish-women\u201d of Odin.[274]\n\nAnother form of early institutions was that of the societies of virgins,\nsuch as that which from primitive Italic times kept alive the holy fire\nof Vesta, goddess of the hearth and home. Extensive associations of a\nsimilar nature were found by the European explorers in Mexico, Yucatan,\nPeru, and elsewhere.\n\nA curious teaching of several wide-spread cults was that women alone\nwere endowed with immortality. Such was the opinion of the natives of\nthe Marquesas Islands, and in Samoa the myth related that the god Supa\n(paralysis) ordained in the council of creation that the life of a man\nshould be like a torch, which, when blown out, cannot be again lighted by\nblowing; but that a woman\u2019s soul should live always.[275]\n\nNo one can doubt that in thus assigning a high and often the highest\nplace in the religious mysteries to woman, many primitive religions\nsurrounded her with a sacredness which was constantly recognised, and\nthus aided in the improvement of her social relations. The value of\nvirtue and purity was increased, mere animal desires were subjected to\nreligious restraint, and the relations of sex came increasingly to be\nregarded as instituted by divine wisdom for special purposes.\n\n3. Although the specifications of the ceremonial law were often\ncapricious and absurd, and sometimes positively hurtful, yet it developed\nthe habit of obedience and the respect for authority. In this manner it\npotently aided the evolution of jurisprudence\u2014that is, of those rules\nof conduct which grow out of the habit of men living together and which\nare necessary to preserve amicable relations. These had their origin in\nother than religious considerations, but when once consciously recognised\nas beneficial, the religion of the tribe generally adopted them, claimed\ntheir creation, and threw around them the garb of its own protective\npower. Religion then actively aided in the fulfilment of purely social\nduties, as these were understood by the tribe.\n\nIn primitive conditions, all laws are God\u2019s laws. As we would say, there\nis no separation of the civil and criminal from the canon law. To the\nMohammedan, the Koran is the source of all jurisprudence. This is a\nsurvival from early thought.\n\nFrom this it followed that the punishment of crime and the decisions\nbetween litigants were, properly, judgments of God. This universal\nopinion is reflected in a number of traits in jurisprudence, some of\nwhich are still in vogue in civilised lands. The most noteworthy are the\nordeal, trial by battle, oaths, and the privilege of sanctuary.\n\nOrdeals were universal. They all rested on the belief that the gods would\nrescue the innocent man from danger. He might be required to hold red-hot\niron in his hands; he might be plunged long under water; swallow poison;\nor in any other way expose himself to pain or death; if he were unjustly\naccused, the invisible powers would protect him.[276]\n\nThe trial by battle involved the same opinion. \u201cIf the Lord is on my\nside, why should I fear?\u201d is the confident belief at the basis of every\nsuch test of skill and strength.[277]\n\nThese forms of decision have disappeared, but the oath remains as\nvigorous as ever in our law courts. It is, however, as has been pointed\nout by the able ethnologist and lawyer, Dr. Post, originally and in\nspirit nothing else than an ordeal. The false witness, the perjurer,\nis believed to expose himself to the wrath of God and to suffer the\nconsequences in this or another life.[278]\n\nThe rite of sanctuary was distinctly religious. The criminal among the\nHebrews, who could escape to the temple and cling to the horns of the\naltar, must not be seized by the officers of justice. The Cherokee\nIndians, like the Israelites, had \u201ccities of refuge,\u201d which they called\n\u201cwhite towns.\u201d With the Acagchemem, a Californian tribe, the temples were\nso purifying that the evil-doer, were he guilty even of murder, who could\nreach them before he was caught, was cleansed of his sin and absolved\never after from any punishment for it.[279]\n\nIn these vital relations we see how religion entered deeply into civil\nlife, and became a guide and director of its most essential procedures.\nIts development grew with its responsibilities and with the intimacy it\ncultivated with practical affairs.\n\nThe codes of statutes instituted by ancient legislators, usually\npersonified under some one famous name, as Moses, Manu, Menes, or the\nlike, obtained general adoption through the belief that they emanated\ndirectly from divinity, and were part of the ceremonial law. Under favour\nof this disguise, they worked for the good of those who followed them,\nand gained a credence which would not have been conceded to them, had it\nbeen thought that they were of human manufacture.\n\nToward merely human law the religious sentiment is in its nature and\nderivation in frequent opposition. It claims a nobler lineage and a\nhigher title. In theory, the Church must always be above the State,\nas God is superior to man. Religion, when vital and active, is ever\nrevolutionary and anarchic. It ever aims at substituting divine for human\nordinances.\n\nThis has been from earliest times its constant tendency. It has been a\npotent dissolvent of states and governments and of such older religious\nexpressions as have become humanised by usage and formality.\n\nIn this manner it has been the most powerful of all levers in stimulating\nthe human mind to active enterprise and the use of all its faculties. Man\nowes less to his conscious than to his sub-conscious intelligence, and of\nthis religion has been the chief interpreter.\n\n4. The severest blows have been dealt at primitive or pagan religions on\naccount of the inferiority of their ethics. It has often been asserted\nthat they do not cultivate the moral faculties and benevolent emotions,\nbut stifle and pervert them. They are, therefore, considered to be\ndistinctly evil in tendency.\n\nThis important criticism cannot be disposed of by a mere denial. There is\nno doubt that the ethics of barbarism is not that of a high civilisation.\nBut if we understand the necessary conditions of tribal life in the\nunending conflicts of the savage state, we can see that the highest moral\ncode would find no place there.\n\nAll tribal religions preach a dualism of ethics, one for the members of\nthe tribe, who are bound together by ties of kinship and by union to\npreserve existence; and the other, for the rest of the world. To the\nformer are due aid, kindness, justice, truth and fair dealing; to the\nlatter, enmity, hatred, injury, falsehood, and deceit. The latter is just\nas much a duty as the former, and is just as positively enjoined by both\nreligion and tribal law.[280]\n\nThe state of barbarism is one of perpetual war, in which each petty\ntribe is striving to conquer, rob, and destroy its neighbours. The\nPatagonians and Australians wander about their sterile lands in small\nbands, naked and shelterless, owning nothing but the barest necessities.\nBut whenever two of these bands approach each other, it is the signal for\na murderous struggle, in order to obtain possession of the wretched rags\nand trumperies of the opponent.\n\nFor this reason, the development of ethics must be studied on inclusive\nlines, as to what extent they were cultivated between members of the\nsame social unit, the totem or the tribe. The duty of kindness to others\nextended to a very limited distance, but, within that area, may have\nbeen, and generally was, punctually observed. The devotion of members\nof the same gens to each other, even to the sacrifice of life, has been\noften noted among savages. The duties involved by this connection were\nfrequently onerous and dangerous, as in the common custom of blood\nrevenge, where a man, at the imminent peril and often at the loss of his\nown life, felt constrained to slay the murderer of a fellow-clansman.\n\nThe character of the early gods was, as a rule, non-ethical. They\nwere generally neither wholly good nor wholly bad. They were more or\nless friendly toward men, but rarely constantly either beneficent or\nmalignant. They were too human for that.[281]\n\nHence the religions which were founded upon such conceptions were not in\ntheir prescriptions of conduct chiefly ethical, but rather ceremonial.\nMoral conduct was of less importance than the performance of the rites,\nthe recitation of the formulas, and the respect for the _tabu_.[282]\n\nI may go farther, and say that in all religions, in the essence of\nreligion itself, there lies concealed a certain contempt for the merely\nethical, as compared with the mystical, in life. That which is wholly\nreligious in thought and emotion is conscious of another, and, it claims,\na loftier origin than that which is moral only, based as the latter is,\non solely social considerations. I have heard from the pulpits of our own\nland very gloomy predictions of the fate of the \u201cmerely moral man.\u201d[283]\n\n5. That which we call \u201cmodern progress\u201d is due to the increase of\npositive knowledge, the enlargement of the domain of objective truth.\nTo this, religion in its early stages made important contributions. The\nmotions of the celestial bodies were studied at first for ceremonial\nreasons only. They fixed the sacred year and the periods for festivals\nand sacrifices. Out of this grew astronomy, the civil calendar, and other\ndepartments of infantile science.\n\nThe rudiments of mathematics were discovered and developed chiefly by the\npriestly class, and at first for hieratic purposes; and the same is true\nof the elements of botanical and zo\u00f6logical knowledge. The practice of\nmedicine owes some of its most useful resources to the observations of\nthe \u201cmedicine-men\u201d or shamans of savage tribes.\n\nWhile this much and more may justly be stated concerning the\ncontributions of Religion to Science, there can be no question of the\nirreconcilable conflict between the two. They arise in totally different\ntracts of the human mind, Science from the conscious, Religion from the\nsub- or unconscious intelligence. Therefore, there is no common measure\nbetween them.\n\nScience proclaims that man is born to know, not to believe, and that\ntruth, to be such, must be verifiable. Religion proclaims that faith is\nsuperior to knowledge, and that the truth which is intuitive is and must\nbe higher than that which depends on observation. Science acknowledges\nthat it can reach no certain conclusions; its final decisions are always\nfollowed by a mark of interrogation. Religion despises such hesitancy,\nand proceeds in perfect confidence of possessing the central and eternal\nverity. Science looks upon the ultimate knowable laws of the universe as\nmechanical, religion as spiritual or demonologic.\n\nThese differences have always existed, and have, in the main, resulted\nin placing religions at all times in antagonism to universal ethics, to\ngeneral rules of conduct, and to objective knowledge. Everywhere, the\nreligious portion of the community have entertained a secret or open\ncontempt for \u201cworldly learning\u201d; everywhere they have proclaimed that\nthe knowledge of God is superior to the knowledge of his works; and that\nobedience to his law is of more import than the love of humanity.\n\nWe may turn to the American Indians, the tribes of Siberia or the Dyaks\nof Borneo, and we shall find that the ordinary \u201cdoctor\u201d who cured by\na knowledge of herbs, of nursing, and of simple mechanical means, was\nfar less esteemed than the shaman who depended not on special knowledge\nbut on the possession of mysterious powers which gave him control over\ndemons[284]; or we may take that Protestant sect of the Reformation, who\nopposed anyone learning the alphabet, lest he should waste his time on\nvain human knowledge[285]; or a thousand other examples; and the contrast\nis always the same.\n\nThe conclusion, therefore, is that early religion did assist the\ndevelopment of the race along these lines, but only incidentally and, as\nit were, unwittingly; while it was, at heart, unfriendly to them.\n\n6. It is otherwise when we turn to Art, especially esthetic Art. Its aim\nis the realisation, the expression in the object, of the idea of the\nBeautiful. This idea does not belong to the conscious intelligence. It\ncannot be expressed in the formulas of positive knowledge. The esthetic,\nlike the religious, emotions, send their roots far down into the opaque\nstructure of the sub-conscious intelligence, and hence the two are\nnatural associates. What Professor Bain says of Art may be extended to\nReligion: \u201cNature is not its standard, nor is [objective] truth its chief\nend.\u201d[286]\n\nIt has been seriously questioned whether the idea of the beautiful\nexisted among primitive peoples, apart from a desire for mere gaudy\ncolouring or striking display. No one would doubt its universal presence\ncould he but free his judgment from his own canons of the beautiful, and\naccept those which prevail in the savage tribe he is studying. Darwin,\nin his work on the _Descent of Man_, collected evidence from the rudest\nhordes of all continents to prove that all were passionate admirers\nof beauty, as measured by their own criteria; and he reached also the\nimportant conclusion that their completest expression of it was to be\nfound in their religious art. \u201cIn every nation,\u201d he says, \u201csufficiently\nadvanced to have made effigies of their gods, or of their deified rulers,\nthe sculptors no doubt have endeavoured to express their highest idea of\nbeauty.\u201d[287]\n\nWe should also remember that the same great teacher says: \u201cIt is\ncertainly not true that there is in the human mind any universal\nstandard of beauty;\u201d and this is so, both of the human form and of those\nexpressions of the beautiful which appeal to the ear and the touch. The\nmusic and the metre of one race generally displease another; and there\nis no one norm by which the superiority of either can be absolutely\nascertained.\n\nIn their own way, however, Art and Religion have this in common, that\nthey make a study of Perfection, and aim to embody it in actuality;\nwhereas Science or positive knowledge confines itself to reality, which\nis ever imperfect.\n\nPerfection is, however, an unconditioned mode of existence, not\nmeasurable by our senses, and hence outside the domain of inductive\nresearch. The tendency of organic forms and cosmic motions is always\ntoward it, but they always fall short of it.[288] We are aware of it only\nthrough the longings of our sub-conscious minds, not through the laws of\nour reasoning intelligence. Yet so intense is our conviction, not only\nthat it is true, but that final truth lies in it alone, that it has ever\nbeen and will ever be the highest and strongest motive of human action.\n\nBeginning with those arts which are avowedly the expression of beauty\nin line, colour, or form, it is easy to show how they were fostered by\nthe religious sense. The inscribed shells and tablets from the mounds of\nthe Mississippi Valley present complex and symmetrical drawings, clearly\nintended for some mythical being or supernatural personage.\n\nAmong the Salishan Indians of British Columbia, when a girl reaches\nmaturity she must go alone to the hills and undergo a long period of\nretirement. At its close, she records her experiences by drawing a\nnumber of rude figures in red paint on a boulder, indicating the rites\nshe has performed and the visions she has had.[289] Such rock-writing,\nor petroglyphs, nearly always of religious import, are found in every\ncontinent, and offer the beginnings of the art of drawing.\n\nIt is possible that the oldest known examples, scratched with a flint\non the bones of reindeers dug up in the caves of southern France, may\nrepresent the totems or deified heroes of the clan. Certain it is that\na class of symbolic figures, which recur the world over, often dating\nfrom remote ages, such as the crescent, the cross, the svastika, the\ntriskeles, the circle, and the square, were of religious intention, and\nconveyed mystic knowledge or supernatural protection in the opinion of\nthose who drew them.\n\nThe early cultivation of painting in religious art arose chiefly from\nthe symbolism of colours, to which I previously made a passing allusion.\nIts origin was in the effect which certain hues have upon the mind,\neither specifically or from association. Colour-symbolism, indeed, forms\na prominent feature in nearly every primitive religion. The import of\nthe different colours varies, but not to the degree which excludes some\ngeneral tendencies. The white and the blue are usually of cheerful and\npeaceful signification, the black and the red are ominous of strife and\ndarkness. In many tribes the yellow bore the deepest religious meaning.\nThe Mayas of Yucatan assigned it to the dawn and the east; and when the\nAztecs gathered around the dying bed of one they loved, and raised their\nvoices in the paean which was to waft the soul to its higher life beyond\nthe grave, they sang: \u201cAlready does the dawn appear, the light advances.\nAlready do the birds of yellow plumage tune their songs to greet thee.\u201d\n\nThese symbolic colours are those with which the early temples were tinted\nand the rude images of the gods stained. They were rarely harmonious,\nbut they were effective, and appealed to the people for whom they were\nintended. Their preparation and their technical employment were improved,\nand, as the art advanced, it reacted on the religion, directing its\nconceptions of divinity into higher walks and toward nobler ideals.\n\nArt in line and colour is of vast antiquity, probably preceding that in\nshape or form, carving or sculpture. But this, too, we find was fairly\nunderstood by the cave-dwellers of France and Switzerland at a time when\nthe great glacier still covered a good part of the European continent,\nand there is scarcely a savage tribe to-day that does not make some rude\nattempts at carving the images of its deities.\n\nA natural object which has a chance resemblance to a man or beast is\nchosen as a fetish, and the worshipper by chipping or rubbing increases\nslightly the likeness. This is the infancy of the sculptor\u2019s art, and\nit is usually for a religious purpose that it is exercised. Soon it is\ndeveloped, and in stone, or bone, or wood, in baked clay, or rags, or\nleaves, we find thousands of effigies in use to represent the tutelary\ndeities and the other denizens of the supernatural world.\n\nSo prominent was the early progress of religious art in this direction\nthat it gave the name to early religion itself. It was distinctly\n\u201cidolatry,\u201d or \u201cimage worship,\u201d the objective expression overwhelming the\ninward sentiment.\n\nIts excess in this direction led to reactions and protests as long ago as\nthe dawn of history. \u201cThou shalt not make to thyself any graven image,\nnor the likeness of anything,\u201d was a command taken so literally that it\nhas swept away ever since in some of the Semitic peoples all interest in\nplastic or pictorial art, whether sacred or secular. It was believed that\nthe contemplation of a divinity not represented by any visible object\nwould maintain and develop a higher conception than if portrayed under\ntangible form, no matter how beautiful or how symbolic.\n\nThis opinion would not and did not exclude the cultivation of the\nbeautiful under non-sensuous forms, such as appeal to the ear rather\nthan to the eye. I refer to metre and music, to oratory and literary\ncomposition.\n\nFrom some cause which it might be difficult to explain satisfactorily\nthe natural expression of religious emotion in language is universally\nmetrical. The rites of every barbarous tribe are conducted in or\naccompanied by rude chants or songs, which both stimulate the religious\nfeelings and give appropriate vent to them. Many of these chants are\nmere repetitions of phrases, or refrains, destitute of meaning, but\nthey answer the purpose, and are the germs from which, in appropriate\nsurroundings, have been developed the great poems of the race, the\ninspirations of its immortal bards.\n\nHundreds of examples of these primitive religious chants have been\ncollected of recent years, when, for the first time, their ethnologic\nimportance has been understood. They present a striking similarity,\nwhether from the Polynesian Islands, the desert-dwellers of Australia, or\nthe Navahoes and Sioux of our own reservations. Many of them are scarcely\nmore than inarticulate cries, but even these have a certain likeness,\ncontaining the same class of vowels, and often leading, through this\nphysiological correlation of sound to emotion, to similar words in the\nreligious language of far-distant peoples.\n\nEverywhere we find these metrical outbursts controlled by the sense of\nrhythmical repetition; and it was to accentuate this that instruments of\nmusic were first invented. Their rudest forms may be seen in the two flat\nsticks which the Australians use to beat time for their singing in their\n_corroborees_, or festal ceremonies; or in the hollow log, pounded by a\nclub, which some Central American tribes still employ. All the native\nAmerican musical instruments appear to have been first invented for\naiding the ritual; and tradition assigns with probability the same origin\nfor most of those in the Old World.\n\nUniform rhythmic motion is a powerful means of intensifying collective\nsuggestion; and its action is the more potent the more we yield our minds\nto the control of their unconscious activities,\u2014the realm in which the\nreligious sentiment is supreme.\n\nIn the initiation ceremonies of the Australians\u2014called the _Bora_\u2014the\nyouth are obliged to listen to long speeches from the old men, containing\ninstructions in conduct and the ancestral religious beliefs. Such\ncustoms as this,\u2014and in one or another form they are universal in\nprimitive religions\u2014led to the development of the art of Oratory. It\nwas cultivated assiduously in primitive conditions. We have several\nvolumes largely filled with the prolix addresses of the Aztec priests and\npriestesses on various solemn occasions, as birth, entering adult life,\nmarriage, etc.[290] To learn these long formulas by heart was one of the\nduties, and not an easy one, of the neophytes.\n\nIn most tribes they are couched in forms apart from those of daily use,\nthe words being unusual, with full vowels and sonorous terminations. Some\nof these peculiarities survive in the \u201cpulpit eloquence\u201d of our own day,\ntestifying to the influence of religious thought on the development of\nthe modes of dignified expression.\n\nIt was in this connection and under this inspiration that man invented\nthe greatest boon which humanity has ever enjoyed,\u2014a system of writing, a\nmeans of recording and preserving facts and ideas. Our present alphabet\nis traced lineally back to the sacred picture-writing of ancient Egypt;\nand the less efficient method employed by the natives of Mexico and\nCentral America originated in devices to preserve the liturgic songs\nand religious formulas. For generations, in both areas, its chief\ncultivation and extension lay with the priestly class: although its\nfinal application to the uses of daily life was due to merchants rather\nthan to scholars.\n\nThis discovery made possible such a treasure as a literature; and that we\nfind its beginnings and oldest memorials chiefly of religious contents\nis ample testimony to this incalculable debt we owe to the religious\nsentiment. The papyri of Egypt, the codices of Central America, the\nSanscrit Rig Veda, and the Persian Vendidad testify to the diligence with\nwhich the ancient worshippers sought to preserve the sacred chants and\nformulas.\n\nWe discern the same anxiety among rude savages to pass down in their\nintegrity the liturgies of their worship; and in the \u201cmeday sticks\u201d of\nthe Chipeways and the curiously incised wooden tablets of Easter Island,\nwe have the beginnings of written literature,\u2014always the purpose being\nreligious in character.\n\nIt is unnecessary to dwell in detail upon the fostering influence of\nearly religion on the useful arts. In their numerous applications to the\nritual and the objective expression of the religious sentiment, they were\nconstantly stimulated by it and by the reward it was ever prepared to\noffer, both in this world and that to come.\n\nBut one art of utility was so pre-eminently religious in its source that\nit merits especial comment, that is, building or architecture. Nearly\nall the great monuments of the ancient world, most of the important\nstructures of primitive tribes everywhere, have in them something\nreligious in aim, or are avowedly so. We know little or nothing of the\nbuilders of the mysterious \u201cmegalithic monuments,\u201d the dolmens and\ncromlechs which to the number of thousands rise on the soil of France\nand England; but their arrangement and character leave no doubt that\nthey were for some religious purpose. So the mighty piles which excite\nour astonishment in the valley of the Nile or the Euphrates, or on the\nhighlands of Mexico, or in the tropical forests of Yucatan, reveal the\nsame inspiration.\n\nIn his altars and temples, in his shrines and funerary monuments, his\nfanes and cathedrals, man has at all times expended his efforts and his\nmeans with a prodigality lavished on no other edifices. The orders of\narchitecture arose from his desire to erect dwellings worthy of the god\nwho should inhabit them. No beauty of line, no majesty of proportion,\nno abundance of decoration, was too great to secure this purpose. Such\nsurroundings in time imparted dignity and permanence to the cult, and\nembellished the religious sentiment through noble artistic associations.\n\n7. Let us now turn from these considerations of a general nature to the\nmore pointed one, whether primitive religions exerted an improving\ninfluence on the independent life of the individual; for that is the test\nto which all institutions should finally be brought.\n\nThe savage is not the type of a free man, although in popular estimation\nhe is generally so considered. He is, in fact, tyrannically fettered by\ntraditional laws and tribal customs. He is merged in his clan or gens,\nagainst whose rules, often most painful and arbitrary, he dares take no\nstep. As an individual, he cannot escape from their invisible chains.[291]\n\nHis only avenue to permitted freedom is through the higher law of his\npersonal religion. If he pleads that his own tutelary spirit has ordered\nhim to an act contrary to custom, or that his own magical powers enable\nhim to defy established usage, his disregard of it will be condoned.\n\nIn savage life, the inspired and the insane are always ranked in the same\ncategory as above the law. Among the Kamschatkans, if a man declares that\nhis personal divinity has in a dream commanded him to unite with some\nwoman of the tribe, it is her duty to obey, no matter what her position\nor relationship.[292]\n\nAlthough at times this freedom was doubtless abused, it secured for the\nindividual a degree of personal liberty which he could have attained in\nno other manner. By recognising a law for the single conscience above\nthat of either ancestral usage or popular religion, it paved the way to\nthe development of the individual, free from all restraints other than\nhis clear judgment would lay upon himself.\n\nHe who possessed the hidden knowledge, the esoteric _gnosis_, was by that\nknowledge released from bondage to his fellow-men. As the poet Chapman so\nwell says:\n\n    \u201cThere is no danger to a man who knows\n    What life and death is; there\u2019s not any law\n    Exceeds his knowledge: neither is it lawful\n    That he should stoop to any other law.\u201d\n\nThis sense of superiority to all surroundings is disclosed everywhere in\nmystic religions. A Hindu prophetess was a few years ago imprisoned by\nthe English civic judge for violation of the local laws and disturbing\nthe peace. Her only statement in defence was: \u201cYears ago, when a girl,\nI met in the jungle, face to face, the god Siva. He entered into my\nbosom. He abides in me now. My blessing is his blessing; my curse his\ncurse.\u201d[293] The Malay, when he \u201cruns amuck,\u201d regards himself exonerated\nfrom all restraint, moral or social; and that custom and belief are not\nconfined to his race.[294]\n\nIt was held among the ancients that those who are \u201cborn of God,\u201d that is,\ninspired by the divine afflatus, are not only above human law, but \u201care\nnot subject even to the decrees of Fate.\u201d[295]\n\nThe ceremonial law, so powerful in primitive condition, must have exerted\na beneficial influence on the training of the individual. Its severe\nrestrictions, its minute and ceaseless regulations of his life, taught\nhim self-control and self-sacrifice. His first duty was not to himself\nbut to the other members of his clan or totem. Obedience and systematic\nrestraint were useful lessons inculcated on him from earliest childhood.\nThe Congo Negro, the Andaman Islander, the American Indian, for whom his\nsponsors had taken vows at his birth, grew up to consider the fulfilment\nof these the chief end of his life. Their violation would entail disaster\nand disgrace not merely on himself but on his people. His religious\neducation, therefore, cultivated in him some of the finest qualities\nof perfected manhood,\u2014self-abnegation and altruism; for, as Professor\nGranger well says, \u201cThe primitive idea of holiness implies as its chief\nelement, relation to the _communal_ life.\u201d[296]\n\nIf, therefore, with some writers, we must concede that in primitive\nconditions the individual was ever conceived with reference to the gens\nor community, on the other hand, we must recognise the potency of the\nreligious element occasionally to separate him from others as one of \u201cthe\nelect\u201d; to train him in self-realisation and self-government; and to\ncherish in his mind the germs of a free personality.[297]\n\nMore difficult is the decision of the question whether primitive\nreligions increased the happiness of the individual.\n\nI have mentioned more than once the generally joyous character of many\nof them, as seen in their rituals. But it would be a grave error not to\ndwell also upon the dread of evil spirits which is so conspicuous a part\nof most, and which keeps their votaries in a state of perpetual anxiety.\nNor can the self-sacrifice I have referred to increase the cheerfulness\nof life, associated as it often is with painful mutilations, with\nprolonged fasting, and exposure to cold and heat. The cruelty of the\nceremonies is often shocking, the edicts of the religious code merciless.\n\nTo compensate this, \u201cthe fearful looking forward to the wrath to come,\u201d\nthe fertile source of mental misery in advanced faiths, scarcely exists\nin those of primitive conditions. Death itself is thus deprived of its\ngreatest terror, and the indifference with which it is met by most\nsavages is matter of common note among travellers.\n\nNor does there exist in primitive conditions that fertile source of\nhuman misery, religious bigotry or intolerance, with its fatal train\nof persecutions, torture, and suspicion. The bloodiest sacrifices of\nheathendom have never entailed such personal unhappiness as the gloomy\nfanaticism of some forms of Christianity.\n\nAll these several lines of development are, it will be noted, external to\nreligion itself. They modify it, and are modified by it. But there are\nother changes, wrought within the religious sense itself, which we must\nnow consider.\n\nReligions, like all other institutions, are subject to growth and decay,\nevolution and retrogression, development and death.\n\nThe vast majority of primitive faiths have disappeared totally, leaving\nno trace behind except the nameless images of their gods, or not even\nthese. They were obliterated by conquest, or merged and lost in other\nforms of belief, or degenerated and petrified until they died a natural\ndeath.\n\nOthers grew and extended, vitalised by new thoughts, appropriate to\nthe new environment, or were carried far and wide by victorious rulers\nor enthusiastic votaries. It is generally true, as Professor Toy has\nobserved, that, in early conditions, the life of a religion depends\non the life of the tribe or state which has adopted it, and that \u201cthe\nlarger the community, the more persistent and vigorous its religion will\nbe.\u201d[298]\n\nBut the secret of success lay within rather than without; the particular\nfaith must pass through certain internal transformations in order to\nfit it for the wider field opened to it. The chief of these stadia of\nprogress may be described as a transference of religious thought: 1. From\nthe object to the symbol; 2. From the ceremonial law to the personal\nideal; and 3. From the tribal to the national conception of religion.\n\n1. The rudest phases of religion connect the ideas of the Divine with\nparticular external objects, a tree, a rock, a special place, around\nwhich grow up a series of local myths and usages. Such ideas, to develop,\nmust break away from these connections with concrete and localised\nrelations. They must become generalised, and the symbol be substituted\nfor the object.\n\nInstead of a particular tree, for instance, the sign of the tree, the\ncross or the pole (_asherim_), will be adopted. This represents not the\noriginal object but the personified activity, the spirit or god which was\nsupposed earlier to inhabit the given object or spot.\n\nThus the mind is freed from its bondage to a purely material,\ngeographically single, perception, and the first step is taken toward\nuniversal or world-ideas of divinity. In metaphysical terms, it is a\npassage from the concrete to the abstract, from the particular to the\ngeneral, from the real to the ideal; a line of progress which must\nnecessarily be followed by man\u2019s intelligence in order to develop his\nespecially human attributes.\n\n2. The second important step was that which substituted for the bare\nand cold prescriptions of the ceremonial law the ideal of personal\nperfection. The beginnings of this are visible even in the lowest\nfaiths, as we see in their veneration of those who, they considered, had\nfulfilled most completely their notions of duty. Such persons were held\nto have descended from the gods, or were inspired by them.\n\nIt is true these early ideals are of little more than physical strength\nand mental cunning; but their attributes gradually expanded to include\ncorporeal beauty, intellectual power, and ethical grandeur.\n\nWe thus arrive, still in primitive conditions, to such personal ideals\nas Quetzalcoatl among the Aztecs, of whom it was said in their legends\nthat he was of majestic presence, chaste in life, averse to war, wise and\ngenerous in actions, and delighting in the cultivation of the arts of\npeace; or as we see among the Peruvians, in their culture hero Tonapa,\nof whose teachings a Catholic writer of the sixteenth century says: \u201cSo\nclosely did they resemble the precepts of Jesus, that nothing was lacking\nin them but His name and that of His Father.\u201d[299]\n\nWhen these ideals were not distinctly men, but were partially or wholly\ndivine, nevertheless the contemplation of an existence whose chief aim\nwas to do good to those who complied with his instructions, to protect\nthose who fled to him, and to grant the petitions of those who prayed to\nhim, was both a comforting and ennobling conception.\n\n3. Professor Thiele in his work on the ancient Egyptian religion\nmakes the wise observation: \u201cThe revolution brought about by religious\nuniversalism is the greatest and most complete which the history of the\nworld can show.\u201d[300]\n\nIt is true that no primitive religion aimed at universalism or even\ndeemed it desirable or possible. The gods of the gens or tribe belonged\nto that community, were its own exclusively, and stood in antagonism to\nall other gods. There was no notion of proselytising or missionary work,\nno desire to extend the worship of the tribal god beyond the limits of\nthe tribe.\n\nThis exclusiveness was broken down by the inter-communication of\ntribes, their confederations and conquests, which forced the religious\nconceptions to take broader views. The priests and philosophers began\nto recognise in the deities of other nations types of their own, as we\nsee in Greek and Roman writers. This gradually led to the comprehensive\nspeculations of the world-religions, in which all men are considered to\nstand equally before God, and all entitled to the same share of His grace.\n\nThe early stages of these transitions are easily recognised in primitive\nfaiths. The adoption of foreign gods appears early. When a tribe met with\nfrequent reverses, it began to distrust the power of its own deities,\nand apply to those of its conquerors for aid. The custom of exogamy\nintroduced divinities of other gentes. Personal and communal wants led to\npilgrimages to the famous oracles and fanes of distant religions, and the\nvotaries in returning brought with them the memory and the cult of alien\ngods. In many such ways the barriers of the tribal faith were gradually\nbroken down.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nWe may expect to find faint traits or none of the purely abstract stage\nof religion in the cults of savage tribes. Yet they are not absolutely\nlacking.\n\nThis abstract stage is when the Idea, no longer merged in the Ideal,\nstands by itself as the recognised guide of conscious effort. The\nconception of infinity or perfection is not then conceived in relation\nto a being or personality. It will still act as the loftiest motive of\naction, the deepest source of spiritual joy.\n\nThus understood and recognised, it will not be a cold product of the\nreason, but the warm and potent efflux of the heart, of the impulses,\nand the emotions. In him who rises to this height, the sympathy for\nand the active love of the good and the true will be all the stronger,\nbecause he will see that man must hope only from man, from diligent\nself-perfecting; but may thus hope confidently from the best there is in\nman.\n\nToward this end, though unseen and unacknowledged, were all religions of\nprimitive peoples unconsciously directing and impelling the human mind.\nLong has been the path, many the false routes followed, far away is still\nthe goal; but ever firmer in faith, and clearer in purpose, man will in\ndue time and fit season be established in this, the last and innermost\nmystery of his religious nature.\n\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES\n\n\n[1] \u201cReligion,\u201d observes Professor Toy, \u201cmust be treated as a product of\nhuman thought, as a branch of Sociology, subject to all the laws that\ncontrol general human progress.\u201d\u2014_Judaism and Christianity_, p. 1.\n\n[2] Rev. John M. Neale, _History of the Holy Eastern Church_, vol. i., p.\n37.\n\n[3] Granger, _The Worship of the Romans_, p. vii.\n\n[4] A. H. Post, _Grundriss der ethnologischen Jurisprudenz_, Bd. i., s. 4.\n\n[5] _The Science of Fairy Tales_, p. 2.\n\n[6] _Zeitschrift f\u00fcr V\u00f6lkerpsychologie_, Bd. xi., s. 124.\n\n[7] J. J. Honegger, _Allgemeine Culturgeschichte_, Bd. i., s.\n332. \u201cSimilar conceptions,\u201d observes Professor Bastian, \u201crepeat\nthemselves, under fixed laws, in localities wide apart, in ages far\nremote.\u201d\u2014_Grundz\u00fcge der Ethnologie_, p. 73.\n\n[8] E. M. Curr, _The Australian Race_, vol. i., p. 50.\n\n[9] W. P. Clark, U. S. A., _Indian Sign Language_, p. 241.\n\n[10] This subject is fully discussed by Fl\u00fcgel, _Zeit. f\u00fcr.\nV\u00f6lkerpsychologie_, Bd. xi.; by Prof. James Sully in his _Studies of\nChildhood_; and by Dr. Friedmann, _Centralblatt f\u00fcr Anthropologie_, Bd.\ni. The last mentioned argues that the mind of the savage has more points\nof resemblance to the insane than to the child mind. The higher emotional\nsusceptibility of savages can be illustrated by abundant examples.\n\n[11] _Ethnography and Philology of the United States Exploring\nExpedition_, p. 108.\n\n[12] The case was not exceptional. Among several tribes it was an\nestablished custom for a mother to kill and eat her first child, as\nit was believed to strengthen her for later births. See examples in\n_Zeitschrift f\u00fcr V\u00f6lkerpsychologie_, Bd. xiv., pp. 460, _sq._\n\n[13] Palmer in _Jour. Anthrop. Inst._, vol. xiii., pp. 294, 399.\n\n[14] Professor Sayce believes that the Sumerian of ancient Babylonia was\ngenderless; and that the local gods were first endowed with sex on being\nadopted by the Semites.\u2014_Hibbert Lectures_, p. 176.\n\n[15] Cuoq, _Lexique Algonquine_, p. 21, note.\n\n[16] _The Golden Bough_, Preface.\n\n[17] Ed. Clodd, _Myths and Dreams_, p. 168.\n\n[18] Besides the general works on Egyptian religion, I may note R.\nPietschmann, \u201cAegypt. Fetischdienst und G\u00f6tterglaube,\u201d in _Zeitschrift\nf\u00fcr Ethnologie_, Bd. x., s. 153, _sq._ He points out that there was no\nunity in the ancient cults of Egypt, as the gods were those of the nomes\nonly. The worship of Osiris did not prevail generally till after the\nsixth dynasty (p. 165).\n\n[19] Some have explained superstition as \u201cdegenerate religion\u201d; others\nas \u201creligious error\u201d; others (Pfleiderer) as \u201ca pathological condition\nof normal belief\u201d; but all such definitions depend on the view-point. As\nRoskoff remarks: \u201cThe man who is plunged in superstition is sure to hold\nit for the only true faith, and is contented with it so long as he is not\ntroubled with doubts.\u201d\u2014_Das Religionswesen der Naturv\u00f6lker_, p. 17.\n\n[20] See T. Rhys Davids, _Indian Buddhism_, p. 29 (Hibbert Lectures), and\nin the first volume of the present series of lectures.\n\n[21] Death was to the Roman the _somnum eternale_. Prof. Sayce remarks\nof the ancient Chaldeans that they had no definite belief in an after\nlife.\u2014_Hibbert Lectures_, p. 358.\n\n[22] The question has been carefully examined by G. Roskoff in his\nwork _Das Religionswesen der Rohesten Naturv\u00f6lker_ (Leipzig, 1880). He\nconclusively refutes the assertions that tribes have been encountered\nwithout religion.\n\n[23] Calloway, _Religious System of the Amazulus_, p. 113.\n\n[24] Rev. W. Y. Turner in _Jour. Anthrop. Institute_, vol. vii., p. 492.\n\n[25] _Medicine Men of the Apache_, pp. 499, 500.\n\n[26] The question is carefully discussed by Hoernes, _Urgeschichte des\nMenschen_, p. 93, _sq._, who disputes Mortillet\u2019s opinion. The latter is\ngiven in his _Pr\u00e9historique Antiquit\u00e9 de l\u2019Homme_, p. 603, _sq._\n\n[27] _The Descent of Man_, p. 95.\n\n[28] Quoted in _L\u2019Anthropologie_, vol. viii., p. 334.\n\n[29] Granger, _Religion of the Romans_, p. 21; Thiele, _Hist. of the\nEgyptian Religion_, Introd.\n\n[30] Dr. Schwaner, in H. Ling Roth, _The Natives of Sarawak_, vol. ii.,\nApp. p. clxii.\n\n[31] H. Grimme, _Mohammed_, p. 38.\n\n[32] In his Preface to _The Revolt of Islam_.\n\n[33] O. Peschel, _V\u00f6lkerkunde_, s. 255; F. Ratzel, _Ethnographie_, Bd.\ni;\u2014Schurtz, _Catechismus der V\u00f6lkerkunde_, s. 88.\n\n[34] The eminent anthropologist Broca denied that _religiosity_ is a\ndistinctive trait of humanity. See further in Hovelacque et Herv\u00e9,\n_Pr\u00e9cis d\u2019Anthropologie_, pp. 634-636.\n\n[35] _Myth, Ritual, and Religion_, vol. i., chap. xi.\n\n[36] _Hibbert Lectures_, p. 328. Darwin has a parallel passage, _Descent\nof Man_, p. 95.\n\n[37] \u201cEverything, animate or inanimate, which has an independent being,\nor can be individualised, possesses a spirit, or, more properly, a shade\n(_idahi_, a shadow, or reflection).\u201d Washington Matthews, _Ethnog. of\nthe Hidatsa_, p. 48. This expresses the general _Weltanschauung_ of the\nsavage mind. Let it be remembered that it is also characteristic of the\npoetic, or personifying representation of nature, and thus belongs to the\nhighest artistic expressions of the human mind as well as to its feeblest\nutterances.\n\n[38] This was the universal opinion of classical antiquity. See Payne\nKnight, _Ancient Art_, p. 45. It was also the orthodox theory of the\nearly Church concerning the redeemed soul. It \u201cwill know all things\nas God doth. Whatsoever is in Heaven and whatsoever is in earth,\neverything will he see with that veritable knowledge which nothing\nescapeth.\u201d\u2014_Select Works of St. Ephrem the Syrian_, translated by Rev. J.\nB. Morris, p. 353.\n\n[39] Ridley, in _Jour. Anthrop. Institute_, vol. ii., p. 269.\n\n[40] Mr. A. E. Gough gives reasons for the opinion that the _yogin_,\nwho practises the _yoga_, is a lineal follower of the ancient local\nshaman.\u2014_Philosophy of the Upanishads_, p. 221.\n\n[41] This curious recent development of most ancient experience is\ndescribed by Dr. M. Bucke in the work, _In Re Walt Whitman_.\n\n[42] The phenomena of \u201cdemoniac possession\u201d are so remarkable, and so\nfrequent in lower conditions of culture that they have been defended as\nthe actual influence of evil spirits by intelligent modern observers\n(see the work of Rev. Dr. Nevins, _Demoniac Possession in China_, etc.).\nBishop Calloway says most of the negro converts in Natal have such\nattacks after embracing Christianity (_Jour. Anthrop. Society_, vol.\ni., p. 171). Brough Smith describes such attacks among the Australians.\nStrong men are suddenly seized with violent convulsions. They dance\nwildly, scream at the top of their voices, foam at the mouth, and\ncontinue until utterly exhausted. They are homicidal when in this\ncondition, and their companions fear to approach them (_The Aborigines of\nVictoria_, vol. i., p. 466).\n\n[43] The most complete study of this subject in connection with the\ndevelopment of religions is the work of Dr. Otto Stoll, _Suggestion und\nHypnotismus in der V\u00f6lkerpsychologie_ (Leipzig, 1894).\n\n[44] Bishop Calloway, in _Jour. Anthrop. Institute_, i., p. 177; and in\nhis _Religious System of the Amazulu_, p. 232. The Bushmen explain it\nas \u201ca kind of beating of the flesh,\u201d which tells them the future, and\nwhere lost things may be found. They add: \u201cThose who are stupid do not\nunderstand this teaching.\u201d\u2014Bleek, _Bushman Folk-lore_, p. 17.\n\n[45] A. E. Gough, _Philosophy of the Upanishads_, p. 243.\n\n[46] Klemm, _Allgemeine Culturgeschichte_, Bd. ii., s. 337; A. M. Curr,\n_The Australian Race_, vol. i., p. 48.\n\n[47] Curr notes this among the Australians, _ubi supra_, vol. i., p. 48;\nand it is general among American Indians.\n\n[48] W. W. Gill, _Myths and Songs from the South Pacific_, p. 35.\n\n[49] Middendorf, _Keshua W\u00f6rterbuch_, s. v.\n\n[50] _Proceedings of the American Association for the Advancement of\nScience_, 1896. Sect. H.\n\n[51] On the meaning of _huaca_ see von Tschudi, _Beitr\u00e4ge zur Kennt. des\nalten Peru_, p. 156; Bertonio, _Vocab. de la Lengua Aymara_, s. v.\n\n[52] The probable identity of Heb. _Iah_ with Chald. _Iah_ is\nacknowledged by Pinches, Sayce, and other eminent Assyriologists (see\nan article by the former, in the _Proc._ of the Victorian Institute for\n1895). That the Greek Iachus is from the Chaldeo-Syrian (as his myth\nclaims, referring to him as \u201cThe Assyrian stranger,\u201d etc., L. Dyer _The\nGods in Greece_, p. 165) was maintained by Herodotus, Macrobius, and\nPlutarch, among the ancients, and by various modern authors. It can be\nshown, however, that _Yah_ as a name of God was derived from a sacred\ninterjection or cry of the same phonetic value, which recurs repeatedly\nin the cults of America, Polynesia, and Australia. This is also true of\n_hua_ or _wa_, the radical of the English \u201cGod.\u201d They are both what have\nbeen called \u201cuniversal\u201d radicals.\n\n[53] Codrington in _Jour. Anthrop. Inst._, vol. x., p. 279; Fornander,\n_The Polynesian Race_, vol. iii., pp. 225-7. In some dialects _mana_ has\nthe special meanings, omen; the thunder; the breath; the belly (_i.e._,\nthe interior), etc. Hale gives the definition \u201cpower\u201d as common to all\ndialects (_Polynesian Lexicon_, s. v.). Fornander notes the similarity to\nSanscrit, _mana_, _manu_, mind, thought.\n\n[54] I have dwelt on the absence of monotheism among the American tribes\nin _Myths of the New World_, p. 75. Dr. Washington Matthews, a most\ncompetent, authority, expresses the universally correct view, when,\nspeaking of Mahopa, the divine conception of the Hidatsa Indians, he\nsays: \u201cIt refers to an influence or power above all things, but not\nattaching to it any ideas of personality.\u201d\u2014_Ethnography of the Hidatsa\nIndians_, p. 48.\n\n[55] Klemm, _Culturgeschichte_, Bd. ii., s. 338; L. M. Turner, _The\nHudson Bay Eskimos_, p. 272; von den Steinen, _Die Naturv\u00f6lker\nZentral-Brasiliens_, p. 340. Among the Australians, both men and women\nbecome \u201cdoctors\u201d or shamans by dreaming.\u2014Curr, _The Australian Race_,\nvol., ii., p. 74.\n\n[56] These are called \u201chypnogogic hallucinations.\u201d They have been studied\nby Maury, _Annales Medico-psychologiques_, tome xi., p. 252, _sq._\n\n[57] This point is discussed by Professor Granger, _Worship of the\nRomans_, pp. 28, _sq._\n\n[58] Bishop Calloway describes the regimen adopted to become inspired\namong the Zulus, in _Jour. Anthrop. Soc._, vol. i., p. 175. Among the\nDyaks of Borneo the ceremony is called _nampok_, and its conditions are:\n1. To be alone; 2. To pass the night on a mountain top; 3. To offer a\nsacrifice and call for the god. Ling Roth, _Natives of Sarawak_, vol. i.,\np. 185.\n\n[59] I have treated this question at some length in my _Myths of the New\nWorld_, p. 314, and _Nagualism_, p. 7, _sq._\n\n[60] I have given a translation of it in _Essays of an Americanist_, p.\n293.\n\n[61] A. E. Gough, _Philosophy of the Upanishads_, p. 237. The Mexican\nadjurations referred to are given by Sahagun, _Historia de Nueva Espa\u00f1a_,\nlib. x., cap. 29.\n\n[62] W. W. Gill, _Myths and Songs of the South Pacific_, pp. 28, 34. The\nconcrete meaning of both words is pith, kernel, core, centre, etc.\n\n[63] Hale, _Ethnography of the U.S. Exploring Expedition_, p. 55; Klemm,\n_Culturgeschichte_, Bd. ii., s. 315; after Stoll. The Algonkian myth\nrelates that the hero-god Nanabojou could converse with the spirits of\nall things, with trees, flowers, butterflies, the thunder, etc. (Clark,\n_Indian Sign Language_, p. 113).\n\n[64] Elys\u00e9e Reclus, _Le Primitif d\u2019Australie_, p. 232.\n\n[65] The Greeks had but vague notions of an after life, and Professor\nSchrader remarks: \u201cThe cult of the dead has no place in the Homeric\nworld.\u201d _Prehist. Antiqs. of the Aryan Peoples_, p. 424. The \u201cindigetes\ndii\u201d of the Romans were rather heroes than divinities, though Arnobius,\n_Adv. Gentes_, lib. i., cap. 64, asserts that they were worshipped.\n\n[66] The most satisfactory recent study on the worship of ancestors and\nof the dead, is that by Dr. S. R. Steinmetz in his _Ethnologische Studien\nzur ersten Entwicklung der Strafe_, Bd. i., ss. 141-287 (Leiden, 1894).\n\n[67] Clark, _Indian Sign Language_, pp. 121, 165, 199, 207, etc.; Howitt\nin _Jour. Anthrop. Institute_, vol. xiii., p. 186. If one wakes a sleeper\nsuddenly, he may die, as his vagrant soul may not get back in time. Von\nden Steinen, _Naturv\u00f6lker Zentral-Brasiliens_, p. 510. In all these\nprimitive views the real soul is regarded as merely a tenant of the body\n(not a function or the result of functions), as it is to-day in the\npopular religions of civilised lands.\n\n[68] The fear of ghosts in civilised countries is the survival of a\nwide-spread, ancient belief in the malevolence of souls. I have found\nno instance of this more striking than among the Finns. They believed\nthat the souls of the dead lie in wait for the living, in order to kill\nand eat them, especially their hearts and lungs, so that the slain\ncould not live again. The ghosts did not spare their nearest relatives,\nand the story is told of an old man, who warned his beloved young wife\nnot to follow his corpse to the grave, or his ghost would eat her. She\ndisobeyed, and saved herself only by pronouncing the name of God. _Cong.\nInternat. d\u2019Arch\u00e9ologie de Moscou_, Tom. ii., p. 316. In about one third\nof known savage tribes, the ghosts are considered kind and friendly to\nthe survivors. See Steinmetz\u2019s analysis in his _Entwicklung der Strafe_,\nBd. i., s. 142, _sq._\n\n[69] Friedrich Freihold, _Die Lebensgeschichte der Menschheit_, Bd. i.,\ns. 35.\n\n[70] Baiame is from the verb bhai. _Jour. Anthrop. Institute_, vol.\nviii., p. 242. The \u201cNurali\u201d of the Murray River tribes is also an\nembodiment of light. B. B. Smyth, _Aborigines of Victoria_, vol. i., p.\n423.\n\n[71] Gill, _Myths and Songs_, p. 13; Fornander, _The Polynesian Race_,\nvol. iii., p. 153.\n\n[72] Gill, _ubi supra_, pp. 3, 17, 44.\n\n[73] E. W. Man, in _Jour. Anthrop. Institute_, vol. xii., p. 166.\n\n[74] Th. Hahn, _Tsuni \u01c1Goam_, pp. 124, 126.\n\n[75] Clark, _Indian Sign Language_, p. 186; _Jour. Anthrop. Institute_,\nvol. x., p. 285.\n\n[76] _Myths of the New World_, pp. 97, 165, etc.\n\n[77] Fornander, _Polynesian Race_, vol. i., p. 78; Gill, _Myths and\nSongs_, p. 18.\n\n[78] Musters, _Among the Patagonians_, ch. v.; Ling Roth, _Natives of\nSarawak_, vol. ii., App., p. clxx.; Hahn, _Tsuni \u01c1Goam_, p. 37.\n\n[79] Clark, _Indian Sign Language_, p. 189.\n\n[80] Castren observes: \u201cEs hat innerhalb der weitgestreckten Gr\u00e4nzen\nAsiens kaum ein einziges Volk gegeben, welches nicht den Himmel verehrt\nh\u00e4tte.\u201d\u2014_Finnische Mythologie_, p. 14. He might as well have said, \u201cthe\nhabitable globe\u201d instead of Asia only.\n\n[81] Matthew, v., 34.\n\n[82] Hopkins, _Religions of India_, pp. 62, _seq._\n\n[83] Gill, _ubi supra_, pp. 10-14; Sir George Grey, _Polynesian\nMythology_, ch. i.\n\n[84] B. Brough Smith, _Aborigines of Victoria_, vol. i., p. 457.\n\n[85] Notably by Prof. F. L. W. Schwartz in his numerous works, and in his\ncontributions to the _Zeitschrift f\u00fcr Ethnologie_, etc.\n\n[86] The Hebrew name Jahve (Jehovah) is derived by some from the verb \u201cto\nthunder.\u201d In the Vedas, Parjanja, the Thunderer, is a conspicuous figure.\nMumpal, the Thunder, say the Australians, created all things. (_Reise der\nFregatte Novara_, Anthrop. Theil, s. ix.) Among the Bechuanas, \u201cWhen it\nthunders, every one trembles, and each asks the other, \u2018Is there anyone\namong us who has devoured the wealth of others?\u2019\u201d (Calloway, _Relig.\nSystem of the Amazulu_, p. 117). Any number of other examples could be\nadded.\n\n[87] Klemm, _Culturgeschichte_, Bd. i., s. 64; Honegger,\n_Culturgeschichte_, Bd. i., s. 332.\n\n[88] Castren, _Finnische Mythologie_, p. 17.\n\n[89] Gough, _Philosophy of the Upanishads_, p. 17.\n\n[90] I refer especially to the results of the physical investigations of\nHelmholtz, and to their logical application to mental science, by George\nJ. Romanes, in his _Mind and Motion_; to the position of Prof. Paulsen\nin his _Introduction to Philosophy_; and to such lines of thought as are\npresented in Professor Dolbear\u2019s _Matter, Ether, and Motion_.\n\n[91] Related in Gill\u2019s _Myths and Songs of the South Pacific_. M. van\nEnde, in his _Histoire Naturelle de la Croyance_, p. 83, sq., has some\nsuggestive remarks on sound as regarded by primitive nations as a mark of\nlife. Hence, their myths of brooks, trees, etc., as conscious beings.\n\n[92] A Lenormant, _Chaldean Magic_, p. 96.\n\n[93] E. F. Dalton, _Ethnology of Bengal_, p. 60. \u201cNothing more colors\nHindu life,\u201d writes Mr. Walhouse, \u201cthan the belief in the efficacy of\n_mantras_\u2014forms of prayer or powerful words, by which all the relations\nof life may be influenced, and even the gods may be bound.\u201d\u2014_Jour.\nAnthrop, Inst._, vol. xiv., p. 189.\n\n[94] Curr, _The Australian Race_, vol. i., p. 48.\n\n[95] _Report of Com. of N. South Wales to the Columbian Exposition_, p. 7.\n\n[96] Sayce, _Hibbert Lectures_, p. 309.\n\n[97] Lenormant, _Chaldean Magic_, p. 63.\n\n[98] Brinton, _Myths of the New World_, p. 318.\n\n[99] The appropriate rite thus to destroy an enemy is described by Curr,\n_The Australian Race_, vol. ii., p. 610.\n\n[100] _Popol Vuh, le Livre Sacr\u00e9 des Quiches_, p. 10.\n\n[101] _Polynesian Mythology_, p. 284.\n\n[102] _Religious System of the Amazulu_, p. 413.\n\n[103] The expression in the Algonkin tongue for a person of the same name\nis _nind owiawina_, \u201cHe is another myself\u201d (Cuoq, _Lexique Algonquine_,\np. 113).\n\n[104] Curr, _ubi supra_, p. 246.\n\n[105] Ling Roth, _Natives of Sarawak_, vol. i., p. 288.\n\n[106] H. Hale, _Ethnography of the U. S. Exploring Expedition_, p. 288.\n\n[107] Klemm, _Culturgeschichte_, Bd. ii., p. 329.\n\n[108] This subject has been discussed by Andree, _Ethnographische\nParallelen_, pp. 165-184, and other writers. On the \u201cname soul\u201d among the\nAmerican Indians I have collected material in _Myths of the New World_,\np. 277, _sq._ Most American and Australian tribes would not name the\ndead. On the other hand, in the robust religion of the ancient Germans,\nthe names of the loved departed and of great chiefs were shouted out at\nthe banquets, and a horn drained to their _minni_, affectionate memory.\nJ. Grimm, _Teutonic Mythology_, vol. i., p. 59.\n\n[109] _Chaldean Magic_, p. 104.\n\n[110] The original is in the Turin papyrus.\n\n[111] Granger, _Worship of the Romans_, p. 277.\n\n[112] Howitt, in _Jour. Anthrop. Inst._, xiii., p. 192.\n\n[113] James Adair, _Hist. of the North Am. Indians_, p. 54.\n\n[114] Prof. Sayce in _Hibbert Lectures_, p. 305.\n\n[115] Sahagun, _Historia de Nueva Espa\u00f1a_, lib. i., _passim_; _Popol\nVuh_, cap. i.; Stoll, _Ethnographie der Rep. Guatemala_, p. 118.\n\n[116] Gill, _Myths and Songs of the South Pacific_, p. 6.\n\n[117] Comp. W. Robertson Smith, _Religion of the Semites_, p. 41.\n\n[118] _Select Works of St. Ephrem_, p. 122. (Trans. by the Rev. J.\nB. Morris.) The name of Jesus was regarded by the early church as\nmagical in itself. Arnobius says of him, \u201cwhose Name, when heard,\nputs to flight evil spirits, imposes silence on soothsayers, prevents\nmen from consulting the augurs, and frustrates the efforts of\nmagicians.\u201d\u2014_Adversus Gentes_, lib. i., cap. 46.\n\n[119] See Stoll, _Suggestion und Hypnotismus_, p. 14, _seq._\n\n[120] The _p\u0115tara_ of the Borneans is at times used as a personal name\nof the chief divine being, at others in the vague sense of \u201cduty\u201d or\n\u201csupernatural.\u201d Ling Roth, _Natives of Sarawak_, vol. i., 179. Analogous\ninstances have already been mentioned.\n\n[121] _Indian Sign Language_, p. 309.\n\n[122] Sir George Grey, _Polynesian Mythology_, p. 164.\n\n[123] Hyades et Deniker, _Mission Scientifique au Cap Horn_, p. 376.\nEarlier voyagers write: \u201cThey certainly have ideas of a spiritual\nexistence.\u201d\u2014_Narrative of the Voyages of the Adventure and Beagle_, vol.\nii., p. 179.\n\n[124] _Ancient Nahuatl Poetry_ (Philadelphia, 1890); _Rig Veda\nAmericanus_ (Philadelphia, 1890).\n\n[125] Dr. W. Matthews, _The Mountain Chant of the Navahoes_, p. 465.\n\n[126] Clark, _Indian Sign Language_, p. 309.\n\n[127] Sahagun, _Hist. de Nueva Espa\u00f1a_, lib. vi. Other examples are given\nby this writer.\n\n[128] _Encyclop\u00e9die des Sciences Religieuses_, s. v. Pri\u00e8re.\n\n[129] Other forms are _tapui_, to make sacred; _tabui_, to keep from;\n_tabuaki_, to bless. Here, as elsewhere, there is a synonomy between\n\u201csacred\u201d or \u201choly\u201d and \u201caccursed,\u201d because it is accursed to defile that\nwhich is holy. Another, and less probable, derivation is given by Frazer,\nin the _Encyclop\u00e6dia Britannica_, s. v. \u201cTaboo.\u201d He is perfectly right,\nhowever, in saying that the original form of the _tabu_ is due, not to\nits civil, but to its religious element.\n\n[130] Klemm, _Culturgeschichte_, vol. ii., pp. 368, _sq._, after Steller,\nwho visited Kamschatka about 1740.\n\n[131] Man, in _Jour. Anthrop. Society_, vol. xii., pp. 159, 173.\n\n[132] Authorities above quoted, and Darwin, _Descent of Man_, p. 95.\n\n[133] For abundant examples of the _tabu_ in various nations see Frazer\u2019s\narticle in the _Encyc. Britannica_ above referred to.\n\n[134] _Religion of the Semites_, p. 18.\n\n[135] Filling in manuscript, he says, seventy-seven quarto volumes, and\nfar from exhausting the supply! _Bushman Folk-lore_, p. 6. (London, 1875.)\n\n[136] Man, _ubi supra_, p. 172.\n\n[137] Morice, _Trans. Roy. Soc. Canada_, 1892, p. 125.\n\n[138] This branch of the subject has been fully discussed by Keary,\n_Outlines of Prim. Belief_, Preface and chapter i.; and Frazer, _The\nGolden Bough_, _passim_.\n\n[139] See _Myths of the New World_, chap. iii.; also, an article on\nsymbolism in ancient American art, by Prof. Putnam and Mr. Willoughby in\n_Proc. Am. Ass. Adv. Science_, vol. xliv., p. 302.\n\n[140] I have presented this subject with greater detail in an article \u201cOn\nthe Origin of Sacred Numbers\u201d in the _American Anthropologist_, April,\n1894. The contrast of symbolism of the three and the four is familiar\nto students. Such a popular text-book as Keil\u2019s _Manual of Biblical\nArch\u00e6ology_ states that four was the predominating number in the temples,\naltars, and rites of the ancient world, it being, \u201caccording to an idea\ncommon to all antiquity, the symbol of the cosmos\u201d; while the three was\n\u201cthe mark of the Divine Being in His various manifestations\u201d (pp. 127,\n128).\n\n[141] Westcott, _Symbolism of Numbers_, p. 7. I have given several\nexamples of triple or triune deities in America in _Myths of the New\nWorld_, pp. 84, 187, 188. From other fields I may note the triad Kane,\nKu, and Lono of Hawaii (Fornander, _Polynesian Race_, vol. i., p.\n61); that on the Marquesas objectively represented by three sticks\ntied together (Dr. Tautain, in _L\u2019Anthropologie_, tom. vii., p. 544);\nthe triad of Tangaloa, Creator, Maui, Sustainer, and Tiki, Revealer,\nelsewhere in Polynesia (Hale, _Ethnog. and Philol._, p. 24).\n\n[142] Numerous examples are collected in L. L. Conant, _The Number\nConcept_, chap. ii.\n\n[143] In the Quiche and Tzental dialects.\n\n[144] From the verb _tumpa_, to forge. Ling Roth, _Natives of Sarawak_,\nvol. i., p. 165.\n\n[145] The Tinn\u00e9 of British America have the word _Nay\u00e9weri_, he who\ncreates by thought (Petitot, _Les Den\u00e9 Dindjie_, p. 63); the Algonquian\nKitch\u00e9 Manito created the world \u201cby an act of his will\u201d (Schoolcraft,\n_One\u00f3ta_, p. 342). For the Zu\u00f1ians, see Cushing, _Zu\u00f1i Creation Myths_,\np. 379; for the Polynesians, Hale, _Ethnography of the U. S. Exploring\nExpedition_, p. 399, and Fornander, _The Polynesian Race_, vol. i., p. 62.\n\nThere is no distinction between these opinions and that of the Christian\nchurch, so beautifully expressed by St. Ephrem the Syrian: \u201cAt the nod of\nHis will, noiseless and gentle, out of nothing He created all.\u201d (_Select\nWorks_, Translated by Rev. J. B. Morris, p. 185.)\n\n[146] Fornander, _The Polynesian Race_, vol. i., p. 67; _Rel. de la Nouv.\nFrance_, 1634, p. 13.\n\n[147] In _Myths of the New World_, ch. vii. (first ed., 1868). Numerous\nwriters, Klee, Andree, Lucas, etc., have treated the deluge myth with\nfulness. It is found even among the Mincopies of the Andaman Islands\n(Man, _u. s._) and is quite common throughout Polynesia (Fornander, _u.\ns._, vol. i., pp. 88, _sq._). Various Australian tribes record it in\ndetail, Smyth, _The Aborigines of Victoria_, vol. i., p. 430.\n\n[148] Fornander (_u. s._, vol. i., p. 79, _sq._) discusses it in\nPolynesia. Their \u201ctree of life\u201d was a sacred \u201ctabooed\u201d bread-fruit tree.\nFor America, see _Myths of the New World_, pp. 103-106.\n\n[149] For this reason the works of Delitsch, Haupt, etc., on the\nquestion, _Wo lag das Paradies?_, are much less to the point than if\ntheir writers had studied the comparative mythology of the subject.\n\n[150] This mythical cycle, as it arose among the native tribes of\nAmerica, was made by me the special subject of a volume, _American\nHero-Myths_ (pp. 251, Philadelphia, 1882).\n\n[151] See my _Essays of an Americanist_, pp. 135-147; J. Grimm, _Teutonic\nMythology_, vol. ii., p. 832; Schrader and Jevons, _Prehistoric\nAntiquities of the Aryan Peoples_, p. 424.\n\n[152] Codrington in _Jour. Anthrop. Soc._, vol. x., p. 285.\n\n[153] Waitz, _Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_, Bd. ii., p. 188.\n\n[154] Von Hasselt, in _Zeitschrift f\u00fcr Ethnologie_, Bd. viii., p. 196.\n\n[155] J. G. Pfleiderer, _Die Genesis des Mythus der Indogermanischen\nV\u00f6lker_, p. 48.\n\n[156] References in Pietschmann, _Zeitschrift f\u00fcr Ethnologie_, Bd. x., p.\n159, who points out that fetishism should be, as a term, confined to the\ncult and not applied to the content of a religion.\n\n[157] Rialle, _La Mythologie Compar\u00e9e_, ch. i.\n\n[158] Prof. Granger remarks that \u201cthe influence of the fetish is\ninterpreted as a kind of life of which the fetish is the seat.\u201d\u2014_Worship\nof the Romans_, p. 201. Bastian defines it as \u201can incorporation of a\nsubjective emotional state,\u201d and his disciple Achelis recognises that it\nis not a stadium of religious development. See his _Moderne V\u00f6lkerkunde_,\np. 366.\n\n[159] The insufficiency of animism as a theory of primitive religions has\nbeen previously urged by Van Ende, _Histoire Naturelle de la Croyance_,\np. 21. Like fetishism and shamanism, animism should be regarded, not as a\nform or stadium of religion, but, to use Castren\u2019s excellent expression,\n\u201cnur ein Moment in der G\u00f6tterlehre.\u201d _Finnische Mythologie_, Einleitung.\n\n[160] Dorsey, _Siouan Cults_, p. 433; the _Popol Vuh_, _passim_.\n\n[161] Hale, _Ethnog. and Philol. of the U. S. Exploring Expd._, p. 55.\n\n[162] E. T. Dalton, _Ethnology of Bengal_, p. 258.\n\n[163] See remarks of W. W. Newell in his introduction to Fanny D. Bergen,\n_Current Superstitions_ (_Mems. Amer. Folk-lore Society_, vol. iv.).\n\n[164] Klemm, _Culturgeschichte_, Bd. ii., s. 316; Ling Roth, _Natives of\nSarawak_, vol. ii., App., p. cxcviii.; Brinton, _Myths of the New World_,\np. 154; Curr, _The Australian Race_, vol. ii., p. 48. The moon was sacred\nto Tina, the chief god of the Etruscans. M\u00fcller, _Die Etrusker_, Bd. ii.,\np. 43. N\u011b d\u00eed\u00e2, better known as Dido, has been identified with the moon\nas the leading deity of the Carthaginians and Ph\u0153nicians. Otto Meltzer,\n_Geschichte der Karthager_, Bd. i., s. 128. Danu, the goddess who\npresided over the Irish pantheon, the _tuatha de Danann_, was the moon\n(from _daon_, to rise).\n\n[165] Montesinos, _Ancien Perou_, p. 17; Venegas, _Hist of California_,\np. 107; Smyth, _Aborigines of Victoria_, vol. i., p. 459.\n\n[166] Brincker in _Globus_, Bd. lxviii., p. 97.\n\n[167] Martin de Leon, _Camino del Cielo_, fol. 101.\n\n[168] Montesinos, _Ancien Perou_, pp. 14-16; Ximenes, _Origen de los\nIndios de Guatemala_, p. 157.\n\n[169] Sir George Grey, _Polynesian Mythology_, p. 5; Egede, _Nachrichten\nvon Gr\u00f6nland_, s. 137.\n\n[170] _Zeitschrift f\u00fcr Ethnologie_, Bd. ix. The Eskimo called it _Sillam\nEipane_, winds-house. Egede, _u. s._\n\n[171] The urn or vase was, in classical antiquity, the emblem of the\nfecundating waters (Guigniaut, _Religions de l\u2019Antiquit\u00e9_, tom. i.,\np. 509). Vases full of water were interred with the dead in Peru to\nsymbolise the life beyond. Meyen, _Die Ureinwohner von Peru_, p. 29.\n\n[172] _Kalewala_, Runa iv.\n\n[173] Probably for this reason the ceremonial law of the Bushmen,\nespecially that relating to puberty and marriage, enjoins \u201cto avoid the\nwrath of the Water.\u201d Bleek, _Bushman Folk-lore_, p. 18.\n\n[174] Compare Klemm, _Culturgeschichte_, Bd. ii., s. 315 (after Steller),\nwith Man, in _Jour. Anthrop. Soc._, vol. xii., p. 163.\n\n[175] The specific effect of certain colours on the sub-consciousness,\nand thus on the religious emotions, is practically recognised in sacred\nart; but so far as I know this has not been made a subject of study\nby the experimental psychologist. Allowance must always be made for\nassociation of ideas; as when the Mozambique negroes paint the images of\ntheir bad spirits white, on account of their hatred of Europeans!\n\n[176] Arnobius, _Adversus Gentes_, lib. vii., cap. 49.\n\n[177] Fornander, _The Polynesian Race_, _u. s._; Hale, _Ethnog. and\nPhilol_., p. 25.\n\n[178] Calloway, _Relig. System of the Amazulus_, p. 34; Hahn, _Tsuni\n\u01c1Goam_, p. 91; Garcia, _Origen de los Indios_, lib. iv., cap. 26.\n\n[179] _Jour. Anthrop. Inst._, vols. v., p. 412, x., p. 280.\n\n[180] They were called _huacanqui_. Montesinos, _Mems. Hist. sur l\u2019ancien\nPerou_, p. 161.\n\n[181] Garcia, _Origen de los Indios_, lib. iv., cap. 26; Torquemada,\n_Monarquia Indiana_, lib. vi., cap. 41.\n\n[182] Hale, _Ethnog. and Philol. of the U. S. Explor. Exped._, p. 97.\n\n[183] Hopkins, _Religions of India_, p. 97.\n\n[184] Clark, _Indian Sign Language_, p. 241; Matthews, _Ethnog. of the\nHidatsa_, p. 48, etc.\n\n[185] See Frazer, _The Golden Bough_, _passim_.\n\n[186] See, for illustrative examples, my _Primer of Mayan Hieroglyphics_,\np. 49, etc.; and comp. Keary, _Outlines of Primitive Belief_, p. 63, _sq._\n\n[187] A. d\u2019Orbigny, _L\u2019Homme Am\u00e9ricain_, tome ii., p. 365.\n\n[188] Dorsey, _Siouan Cults_, pp. 390, 455; Alice C. Fletcher in _Proc.\nAmer. Assoc. Adv. Science_, 1895 and 1896; Brinton, _Myths of New World_,\npp. 118, 119, and _Nagualism_, pp. 42, 47, 48.\n\n[189] As suggested by E. Bonavia, _Flora of the Assyrian Monuments_\n(1894). This is a more likely interpretation than that of Dr. Tylor, that\nthe conical object is the inflorescence of the male date palm; as it is\nin some bas-reliefs shown presented toward a city gate, a person, etc.\n\n[190] Fechner, _Nana, oder das Seelenleben der Pflanze_.\n\n[191] Curr, _The Australian Race_, vol. ii., p. 199; Palmer in _Jour.\nAnthrop. Inst._, vol. xiii., p. 292.\n\n[192] A. d\u2019Orbigny, _L\u2019Homme Am\u00e9ricain_, tom. i., p. 240.\n\n[193] A careful discussion of \u201cH\u00f6hencultus,\u201d by Baron von Andrian, may be\nfound in the _Bericht der Deutschen Anthrop. Gesellschaft_, August, 1889.\nHe believes the earliest form to have been that of the individualised\nheight; later, that of its cosmic relations.\n\n[194] On the Mexican cave-god, Oztoteotl, see my _Nagualism_, pp. 38-41.\n\n[195] Walcott, _Sacred Arch\u00e6ology_, pp. 233, 236, etc.\n\n[196] Dalton, _Ethnology of Bengal_, p. 59; Ling Roth, _Natives of\nSarawak_, vol. ii., App., p. clxx.\n\n[197] M. d\u2019Estrey, in _L\u2019Anthropologie_, tom. iii., pp. 712, _sq._, has\nmade an interesting study of the lizard symbol in Polynesia, to which\nmuch could be added from other fields of primitive life.\n\n[198] As Keary well says: \u201cThe essence of primitive belief lies not in\nany likeness to humanity, but in differences from it.\u201d _Outlines of\nPrim. Belief_, p. 26. The Neo-Platonic doctrine of \u201cemanation\u201d led to\nthe belief that a man might become so filled with the divine essence as\nto become divine himself. This was the claim of Simon the Magician, who\n\u201cbecame confessedly a god to his silly followers,\u201d says Hippolytus in his\n_Refutation of all Heresies_, bk. vi., cap. 13.\n\n[199] _Die Etrusker_, Bd. ii., s. 111.\n\n[200] Speaking of Jupiter, this fiery preacher exclaims: \u201cNor is there\nany kind of baseness in which you do not associate his name with\npassionate lusts.\u201d\u2014_Adversus Gentes_, lib. v., cap. 22.\n\n[201] Howitt, in _Jour. Anthrop. Inst._, vol. xiii., pp. 192, 194; vol.\nxiv., p. 313.\n\n[202] Robertson Smith, _Religion of the Semites_, p. 41; Herzog und\nPlitt, _Real-Encyclop\u00e4die f\u00fcr Prot. Theologie_, _s. v._ Gebet, etc.\n\n[203] Hopkins, _Religions of India_, p. 412.\n\n[204] Calloway, _Religious System of the Amazulu_, p. 34.\n\n[205] As examples, I may name Unkululu, among the Zulus (Calloway,\n_Relig. System of the Amazulu_, pp. 40, 43); Singbonga, of the\nMunga-Kohls (Jellinghaus, in _Zeit. f\u00fcr Ethnologie_, Bd. iii., p. 330);\nthe Hunahpu of the Quiches (_Popol Vuh_, p. 1); the Ahsonnuth of the\nNavahoes (_8th Rep. Bur. Ethnol._, p. 275); etc. I have discussed the\npsychic origin of androgynous deities in _The Religious Sentiment_, pp.\n66, _sqq._ It was also strong in the early Christian Church, Origen and\nothers of the fathers teaching that the Holy Ghost was the feminine\nprinciple in God (C. J. Wood, _Survivals in Christianity_, p. 63).\n\n[206] These were frequent in quite primitive faiths. Some of the priests\nof ancient Mexico, for example, wholly extirpated the genitalia.\u2014Davila\nPadilla, _Hist. de la Prov. de Mexico_, lib. ii., cap. 88. Comp.\nCharlevoix, _Journal Historique_, p. 350.\n\n[207] I have pointed out that in various American dialects, as the\nChipeway and Cree, the Maya, Quichua, etc., there are words of native\norigin, which were used to convey the notion of the love of the gods\nin pure and high senses. See the article on \u201cThe Conception of Love in\nAmerican Languages,\u201d in _Essays of an Americanist_, pp. 416, 421, 428,\netc.\n\n[208] Otto Gruppe, quoted by Schrader.\n\n[209] _Religion of the Semites_, p. 18.\n\n[210] The idea of mimicry survived long, and indeed still exists, in what\nis called \u201csympathetic magic\u201d; when, for instance, to produce blindness\nin an enemy, an image is made of him and its eyes transfixed with thorns.\nCompare Lenormant, _Chaldean Magic_, p. 12.\n\n[211] _Myths of the New World_, p. 17.\n\n[212] Curr, _The Australian Race_, vol. ii., pp. 66, 67.\n\n[213] Cogolludo, _Historia de Yucatan_, lib. iv., cap. viii.\n\n[214] Brinton, _Nagualism_, p. 53.\n\n[215] Freihold, _Die Lebensgeschichte der Menschheit_, p. 134. His\nexpressions are: 1. Das Menschenwerden des G\u00f6ttlichen; and, 2. Die\nVerg\u00f6tterung des Menschen.\n\n[216] _Religion of the Semites_, p. 263. This statement will also be\nconsidered in the sixth lecture of this series.\n\n[217] Indeed, among the Patagonian Indians, according to a competent\nobserver, there are no fixed religious ceremonies whatever, except\nthose of a personal character, referring to births, marriages, deaths\netc.\u2014George C. Musters, _Among the Patagonians_, chap. v.\n\n[218] The anaphora, remarks the Rev. John M. Neale, in his _History of\nthe Holy Eastern Church_, vol. ii., chap, i., has always been \u201cby far the\nmost important part\u201d of the Christian liturgies. It recurs in nearly all\nprimitive worship.\n\n[219] Granger, _Worship of the Romans_, pp. 272, 303, etc.\n\n[220] Grimm, _Teutonic Mythology_, vol. i., p. 42; Robertson Smith,\n_Religion of the Semites_, p. 260; Payne Knight, _Ancient Art_, p. 50.\n\n[221] _Indian Sign Language_, pp. 167-70.\n\n[222] _Teutonic Mythology_, vol. i., p. 42.\n\n[223] Von Tschudi, _Beitr\u00e4ge zur Kenntniss des Alten Peru_, p. 156.\n\n[224] See _Myths of the New World_, pp. 112, _sq._\n\n[225] See Richard Andree\u2019s remarks on \u201cdie Masken im Kultus,\u201d in his\n_Ethnographische Parallelen_, _Neue Folge_, p. 109, _sq._\n\n[226] Jacob Grimm, _Teutonic Mythology_, vol. i., p. 48, _sq._\n\n[227] A. B. Meyer, in _Globus_, Bd. lxvii., p. 334.\n\n[228] The terms \u201chonorific\u201d and \u201cpiacular\u201d were, I believe, first\nsuggested by Dr. W. Robertson Smith. They are very appropriate.\n\n[229] Holtzmann, _Deutsche Mythologie_, p. 232.\n\n[230] Oviedo, _Historia de las Indias_, lib. x., cap. xi.\n\n[231] Balboa, _Histoire du Perou_, pp. 125-7.\n\n[232] Frazer, _The Golden Bough_, vol. ii., p. 31.\n\n[233] Sahagun, _Historia de la Nueva Espa\u00f1a_, lib. i.\n\n[234] Mrs. M. C. Stevenson, in _An. Rep. Bureau of Ethnology_, vol. xi.,\np. 132.\n\n[235] Dorsey, _Siouan Cults_, p. 511.\n\n[236] A. d\u2019Orbigny, _L\u2019Homme Am\u00e9ricain_, tom. i., p. 237.\n\n[237] Examples in my _Native Calendar of Central America_, p. 18. It was\na favourite amulet among the Crees (Mackenzie, _Hist. of the Fur Trade_,\np. 86).\n\n[238] Achelis, _Moderne V\u00f6lkerkunde_, p. 370; Man, in _Jour. Anthrop.\nInst._, vol. xii., p. 172.\n\n[239] Charlevoix, _Hist. de la Nouvelle France_, ch. vi. Sprinkling the\nnew-born child as a religious ceremony prevailed in New Zealand and\nthroughout Polynesia. (Fornander, _The Polynesian Race_, vol. i., p. 236.)\n\n[240] Cogolludo, _Historia de Yucatan_, lib. iv., cap. vi. The same\nbelief prevailed in some African tribes; see Achelis, _Moderne\nV\u00f6lkerkunde_, p. 393.\n\n[241] H. R. Schoolcraft, _One\u00f3ta_, pp. 331, 456.\n\n[242] _Notices of East Florida by a Recent Traveller_, p. 79.\n\n[243] Gregg, _Commerce of the Prairies_, vol. ii., p. 271.\n\n[244] Examples in E. S. Hartland\u2019s _Science of Fairy Tales_, p. 309.\n\n[245] R. Andree, _Ethnographische Parallelen_, p. 177.\n\n[246] The _Bora_ has been often described, by no one better than Mr. A.\nW. Howitt in _Jour. Anthrop. Inst._, vol. vii., p. 242, _sq._, and vol.\nxiv., p. 306, _sq._\n\n[247] J. G. Kohl, _Kitchi Gami_, p. 228.\n\n[248] Captain Clark, _Indian Sign Language_, p. 254. D\u2019Orbigny describes\nthe bloody ordeals through which girls in South American tribes were\nobliged to pass. _L\u2019Homme Am\u00e9ricain_, tom. i., pp. 193, 237.\n\n[249] Curr, _The Australian Race_ vol. i., pp. 45-50; Palmer, in _Jour.\nAnthrop. Inst._, vol. xiii., p. 301.\n\n[250] See Post, in _Globus_, B. lxvii., s. 274.\n\n[251] Palmer, _ubi supra_, p. 301.\n\n[252] Lafitau, _M\u0153urs des Sauvages Am\u00e9ricains_, lib. ii., ch. vi.\n\n[253] Musters asserts this positively of the Tehuelche and other tribes\n(_Among the Patagonians_, chap. v.); Captain Clark, whose long experience\namong our Western tribes constituted him an authority of the first rank,\ntakes pains to correct the notion that _among the natives_ wives are\nbought, although they are by white men (_Indian Sign Language_, pp.\n245-6). It would be easy to multiply references to the same effect.\n\n[254] Bleek, _Bushman Folk-lore_, p. 13.\n\n[255] _Worship of the Romans_, p. 67.\n\n[256] This has been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt by Dr. S. K.\nSteinmetz in a remarkable study of \u201cEndo-cannibalismus,\u201d in the _Archiv\nf\u00fcr Anthropologie_, 1896.\n\n[257] Granger, _ubi supra_, p. 37. The word \u201cburial\u201d in ethnology is used\nto denote all modes of disposal of the corpse. This is etymologically\ncorrect. See Yarrow, _Mortuary Customs of the North American Indians_, p.\n5.\n\n[258] Navarrete, _Viages_, tom. iii., p. 401; Dumont, _Mems. Hist. sur la\nLouisiane_, tom. i., p. 178; Gumilla, _Hist. del Orinoco_, p. 201. Cor\u00e9al\nsays, the widows esteemed it a privilege to be buried with the corpse and\ndisputed among themselves for the honour, _Voiages_, tom. ii., pp. 93,\n94. The Taenzas had the same customs as the Natchez, Tonty, _M\u00e9moire_, in\nFrench, _Hist. Colls. of Louisiana_, p. 61.\n\n[259] Arthur J. Evans, in _Proc. Brit. Assoc. Adv. Science_, 1896, Sect.\nH.\n\n[260] Stephen Powers, _Indians of California_, pp. 181, 207. The\nTasmanians and Fuegians, probably the lowest of known tribes, burned\ntheir dead. Hyades et Deniker, _Mission Scientifique_, p. 379; Fenton,\n_History of Tasmania_, p. 95. Some tribes gave as a reason for burning\ntheir dead that otherwise bears and wolves would eat the corpse, and the\nsoul would be obliged to take on their forms.\u2014_Pres. Message and Ac.\nDocs._, 1851, pt. iii., p. 506.\n\n[261] Alonso de la Pe\u00f1a Montenegro, _Itinerario para Parrocos de Indios_,\np. 185 (Madrid, 1771).\n\n[262] Clark, _Indian Sign Language_, p. 263.\n\n[263] K. T. Preuss, in the _Bastian Festschrift_.\n\n[264] _Anthropologie des Naturv\u00f6lker_, Bd. i., p. 459.\n\n[265] The application of the blood, observes Professor Granger, \u201cbound\ntogether in some way those who were present at the rite\u201d (_Worship of the\nRomans_, p. 210). This subject is fully discussed by Dr. H. C. Trumbull\nin his works, _The Blood Covenant_, and _The Threshold Covenant_.\n\n[266] Castren, in the Introduction to his _Finnische Mythologie_, has\nsome excellent remarks on the beneficial effects of shamanism. It is an\neffort to free the human mind from the shackles of blind natural forces;\nit recognises the dependence of the subjective on an objective will, etc.\n\n[267] _Myth and Science_, p. 41.\n\n[268] Hahn, _Tsuni \u01c1Goam_, p. 21.\n\n[269] Ling Roth, _Natives of Sarawak_, vol. i., pp. 259, 271, 282; vol.\nii., App., p. clxxv.\n\n[270] Walthouse, in _Jour. Anthrop. Inst._, vol. v., p. 415.\n\n[271] Nu\u00f1ez de la Vega, _Constituciones Diocesanas de Chiapas_, fol. 9.\n\n[272] The locally famous Maria Candelaria. At the head of fifteen\nthousand warriors, she defied the Spanish army for nearly a year, and,\nthough defeated, was never captured. Her story is scantily recorded by\nVicente Pineda, in his _Historia de las Sublevaciones Indigenas en el\nEstado de Chiapas_, pp. 38-70.\n\n[273] Otfried M\u00fcller, _Die Etrusker_, Bd. ii., ss. 77, 78.\n\n[274] Compare Keary, _Outlines of Primitive Belief_, p. 60; and Maury,\n_La Magie et Astrologie_, p. 386, _sq._\n\n[275] Geo. Turner, _Samoa_, p. 9; Dr. Tautain, in _L\u2019Anthropologie_, tome\nvii., p. 548.\n\n[276] On the ordeal, see Post, _Ethnologisches Jurisprudenz_, Bd. ii.,\nss. 459, _sq._, 479; Waitz, _Anthropologie der Naturv\u00f6lker_, Bd. i.,\ns. 461. The assertion by some writers that the ordeal was not known to\nthe American Indians is incorrect. For example, Captain Clark recounts\nthose to test the virtue of women who have been accused. _Indian Sign\nLanguage_, pp. 45, 208.\n\n[277] See S. K. Steinmetz on \u201cDer Zweikampf als Ordal\u201d in his\n_Ethnologische Studien zur ersten Entwicklung der Strafe_, Bd. ii., s.\n76, _sq._\n\n[278] Post, _ubi supra_, Bd. ii., s. 478.\n\n[279] Adair, _Hist. of the N. American Indians_, p. 158; Boscana, _Acc.\nof the Indians of California_, p. 262.\n\n[280] This is presented admirably and at length by M. Kulischer in an\narticle \u201cDer Dualismus der Ethik bei den primitiven V\u00f6lkern,\u201d in the\n_Zeitschrift f\u00fcr Ethnologie_, Bd. xvii., pp. 205, _sqq._ He also sees\nclearly enough that the same principle, masked and denied though it be,\nreigns to-day. The \u201ccategorical imperative\u201d of Kant, is as far from\nrealisation as is \u201cthe golden rule.\u201d\n\n[281] There were, of course, some hobgoblins always ready to eat up or\ninjure man; but not for any moral or ethical reason. \u201cThey afflict men,\nnot out of anger or to punish sin, but because it is their nature to do\nso,\u201d as Dalton says of the devils of the Oraons. _Ethnology of Bengal_,\np. 256.\n\n[282] This explains what Dr. Robertson Smith, in his _Religion of the\nSemites_, p. 140, says is so difficult to grasp,\u2014that the primitive idea\nof holiness is apart from personal character, and even shameful wretches\ncould lay claim to it. Entirely parallel instances are found in the\nhistory of Christian heresies, as the Anomians and Anabaptists, who were\nso holy that they could commit no sin, and hence allowed themselves the\nwildest licence.\n\n[283] It is in this sense that Wilhelm von Humboldt wrote: \u201cWahre Tugend\nist unvertr\u00e4glich mit auf Autorit\u00e4t geglaubter Religion.\u201d (_Gesammelte\nWerke_, Bd. vii., p. 72.) This is a cardinal principle in studying the\nhistory of ethics.\n\n[284] Ling Roth, _Natives of Sarawak_, vol. i., p. 271; Hoffman, _Secret\nSocieties of the Ojibway_, _passim_.\n\n[285] They were called the Abecedarians, because they distrusted even the\nABC. Some learned scholars actually threw away their books and joined\nthem.\n\n[286] Bain, _The Senses and the Intellect_, p. 607.\n\n[287] _The Descent of Man_, p. 581.\n\n[288] As Wilhelm von Humboldt remarked: \u201cDas Streben der Natur ist auf\netwas Unbeschr\u00e4nktes gerichtet.\u201d The meaning of this profound observation\nis ably discussed by Steinthal, _Die sprachphilosophischen Werke W. von\nHumboldt\u2019s_, p. 178.\n\n[289] _Bull. Amer. Museum Nat. History_, vol. viii., p. 227.\n\n[290] They were preserved in the original tongue by the first\nmissionaries, Sahagun, Olmos, Bautista, etc., and have, in part, been\npublished.\n\n[291] This is further set forth in Rostock, _Das Religionswesen der\nrohesten Naturv\u00f6lker_, p. 145, sq.; and Curr, _The Australian Race_, vol.\ni., pp. 51-54.\n\n[292] Klemm, _Culturgeschichte_, Bd. ii., s. 309.\n\n[293] Walthouse, in _Jour. Anthrop. Soc._, vol. xiv., p. 189.\n\n[294] The _amok_ of the Malays, the _mali-mali_ of the Tagalese, etc., is\na maniacal religious psychosis in which the subject will rush violently\nthrough a street, killing or wounding any one he meets. See Dr. Rasch\u2019s\ndiscussion of it in _Centralblatt f\u00fcr Anthropologie_, vol. i., p. 54, who\nconsiders it a \u201csuggestive influence.\u201d Similar examples are common among\nAmerican Indians.\n\n[295] Arnobius, _Adversus Gentes_, bk. ii., cap. 62.\n\n[296] _Worship of the Romans_, p. 211. This was, of course, but one side\nof it, though usually the most important.\n\n[297] Professor Lazarus observes: \u201cIn der Religion zeigt sich der ganze\nMensch\u201d (_Zeitschrift f\u00fcr V\u00f6lkerpsychologie_, Bd. i., s. 47). That is,\nthat the individual in no other condition of mind realises and reveals\nhis full personality so completely as in that which is created by the\nreligious sentiment.\n\n[298] _Judaism and Christianity_, pp. 5-7.\n\n[299] The literature relating to these august characters in American\nlegendary literature is presented in my _American Hero-Myths_, _passim;_\nalso, _Myths of the New World_, pp. 336, 337.\n\n[300] _Ancient Egyptian Religion_, Introduction.\n\n\nTHE END.\n\n\n\n\nINDEX OF AUTHORITIES.\n\n\n  Achelis, Th., 134, 194, 195\n\n  Adair, J., 98, 226\n\n  Andree, R., 96, 126, 184, 197\n\n  Andrian, von, 155\n\n  Arnobius, 71, 100, 147, 166, 246\n\n  Augustine, St., 29\n\n\n  Bain, A., 233\n\n  Balboa, M. C., 190\n\n  Bastian, A., 9, 134\n\n  Bautista, J., 241\n\n  Bergen, Fanny D., 139\n\n  Bertonio, L., 67\n\n  Bleek, W. H., 57, 113, 144, 205\n\n  Bonavia, E., 152\n\n  Boscana, Y. de, 226\n\n  Bourke, J. G., 32\n\n  Brincker, H., 142\n\n  Broca, P., 46\n\n  Bruno, G., 136\n\n  Buchmann, Prof., 8\n\n  Bucke, M., 52\n\n  Buckle, 81\n\n\n  Calloway, Bishop, 31, 52, 57, 66, 82, 93, 147, 169\n\n  Castren, A., 14, 78, 83, 218\n\n  Chapman, J., 245\n\n  Charlevoix, P., 170, 195\n\n  Cicero, M. T., 180\n\n  Clark, W. P., 14, 70, 72, 76, 103, 181, 205, 213\n\n  Clodd, E., 21\n\n  Codrington, R. H., 63, 131\n\n  Cogolludo, P., 175, 195\n\n  Coleridge, S. T., 171\n\n  Comte, A., 133\n\n  Conant, L. L., 122\n\n  Cor\u00e9al, F., 208\n\n  Cuoq, M., 20, 93\n\n  Curr, E. M., 13, 57, 58, 65, 90, 140, 174\n\n  Cushing, F. H., 125, 221\n\n\n  Dalton, E. F., 89, 137, 160, 230\n\n  Darwin, Ch., 36, 49, 110, 234\n\n  Davis, T. Rhys, 28\n\n  Disraeli, B., 87\n\n  Dolbear, Prof., 85\n\n  Dorsey, J. O., 136, 152, 193\n\n  Dyer, L., 62\n\n\n  Egede, P., 143\n\n  Ende, Van, M., 87, 136\n\n  Ephrem, Saint, 51, 100, 125\n\n  d\u2019Estrey, M., 161\n\n  Evans, Arthur J., 209\n\n\n  Fechner, 153\n\n  Fenton, 210\n\n  Fewkes, J. W., 39\n\n  Fletcher, Alice, 60, 152\n\n  Fl\u00fcgel, Dr., 14\n\n  Fornander, A., 63, 77, 126\n\n  Frazer, J. G., 21, 108, 117, 151, 191\n\n  Freihold, F., 74, 175\n\n  Friedmann, Dr., 14\n\n\n  Garcia, G. de, 148\n\n  Gill, W. W., 59, 69, 74, 77, 87, 100\n\n  Gough, A. E., 51, 57, 68, 84\n\n  Granger, F., 6, 38, 66, 97, 134, 180, 206, 217, 247\n\n  Gregg, Capt., 196\n\n  Grey, George, 79, 91, 104\n\n  Grimm, J., 76, 96, 128, 180, 182, 186\n\n  Grimme, H., 40\n\n  Gruppe, Otto, 172\n\n  Guigniaut, 144\n\n  Gumilla, P., 208\n\n\n  Hahn, Th., 75, 77, 220\n\n  Hale, Horatio, 16, 63, 70, 95, 121, 125, 136, 149\n\n  Hartland, E. L., 8, 197\n\n  Hasselt, von, 132\n\n  Helmholtz, Prof., 85\n\n  Herv\u00e9, G., 46\n\n  Herzog and Plitt, 168\n\n  Hippolytus, 162\n\n  Hoernes, M., 35\n\n  Hoffman, W., 233\n\n  Holtzmann, 188\n\n  Holub, H., 97\n\n  Honegger, J. J., 9, 83\n\n  Hovelacque, A., 46\n\n  Hopkins, E. W., 79, 149, 168\n\n  Howitt, A. B., 72, 98, 168, 198\n\n  Humboldt, W. von, 230, 235\n\n  Hyades, Dr., 104\n\n\n  Jellinghaus, 169\n\n\n  Kalewala, the, 144\n\n  Kant, I., 228\n\n  Keary, C. F., 117, 151, 162, 223\n\n  Keil, Prof., 121\n\n  Klemm, K., 57, 65, 95, 109\n\n  Knight, P., 51, 180\n\n  Kohl, J. G., 199\n\n  Koran, the, 99, 225\n\n  Kuhn, Prof., 112, 115\n\n  Kulischer, M., 228\n\n\n  Lafitau, P., 204\n\n  Lang, A., 47\n\n  Lazarus, Prof., 247\n\n  Lenormant, F., 89, 91, 96, 173\n\n  Leon, Martin de, 142\n\n  Lubbock, Sir John, 27, 30\n\n\n  Mackenzie, A., 194\n\n  Maistre, J. de, 43\n\n  Man, E. W., 75, 110, 126, 145\n\n  Matthews, W., 50, 63, 106, 150\n\n  Maury, A., 66, 223\n\n  Meltzer, Otto, 140\n\n  Meyen, H., 144\n\n  Meyer, A. B., 187\n\n  Middendorf, Dr., 59\n\n  Mirandola, P. de, 92\n\n  Montenegro, A. de la P., 212\n\n  Montesinos, F., 141, 148\n\n  Morice, P., 116\n\n  Morris, J. B., 51, 100\n\n  Mortillet, G. de, 34, 35\n\n  M\u00fcller, F. Max, 115\n\n  M\u00fcller, O., 140, 164, 222\n\n  Musters, G. C., 77, 177, 205\n\n\n  Navarrete, M., 208\n\n  Neale, J. M., 5, 179\n\n  Nevins, Dr., 52\n\n  Newell, W. W., 139\n\n\n  Olmos, A. de, 241\n\n  d\u2019Orbigny, A., 151, 155, 200\n\n  Oviedo, F., 190\n\n\n  Padilla, D., 170\n\n  Palmer, E., 17, 153, 202\n\n  Paulsen, F., 85\n\n  Peschel, O., 44\n\n  Petitot, E., 125\n\n  Pfleiderer, J. G., 28, 133\n\n  Pietschmann, R., 24, 133\n\n  Pinches, 62\n\n  Pineda, V., 222\n\n  Pinsero, Prof., 36\n\n  Popol Vuh, the, 91, 99, 136, 169\n\n  Post, A. H., 6, 203, 225, 226\n\n  Powers, Stephen, 210\n\n  Preuss, K. T., 213\n\n  Putnam, F. W., 119\n\n\n  Rasch, Dr., 246\n\n  Ratzel, F., 44\n\n  Reclus, E., 70\n\n  Rialle, G. de, 133\n\n  Ridley, W., 51\n\n  Romanes, G. J., 85\n\n  Roskoff, G., 28, 31, 244\n\n  Roth, H. Ling, 39, 67, 77, 94, 102, 140, 160\n\n\n  Sahagun, B., 68, 99, 106, 191\n\n  Sayce, Professor, 20, 49, 90, 99\n\n  Scherer, E., 112\n\n  Schoolcraft, H. H., 125, 196\n\n  Schrader, Prof., 22, 28, 70, 128\n\n  Schurtz, H., 44\n\n  Schwaner, Dr., 39\n\n  Schwartz, F. L. W., 80\n\n  Shelley, P. B., 42, 139\n\n  Smith, W. Robertson, 46, 112, 168, 172, 177, 180, 187, 230\n\n  Smyth, B. B., 52, 74, 80\n\n  Spencer, Herbert, 30, 42\n\n  Spinoza, B., 47, 136\n\n  Steinen, K. von den, 65, 72\n\n  Steinmetz, S. R., 71, 73, 206, 225\n\n  Steinthal, H., 235\n\n  Stevenson, Maria C., 193\n\n  Stoll, Otto, 56, 99, 101\n\n  Sully, James, 14\n\n\n  Tautain, Dr., 121\n\n  Thiele, C. P., 38, 251\n\n  Tolsto\u00ef, Count, 87\n\n  Tonty, S. de, 208\n\n  Torquemada, P., 148\n\n  Toy, C. H., 3, 249\n\n  Trumbull, H. C., 217\n\n  Tschudi, J. von, 61, 183\n\n  Turner, George, 223\n\n  Turner, L. M., 65\n\n  Turner, W. Y., 31\n\n  Tyler, E. B., 135, 153\n\n\n  Vega, N. de la, 222\n\n  Vignoli, T., 219\n\n  Venegas, M., 141\n\n\n  Waitz, Th., 132, 213, 225\n\n  Walcott, 159\n\n  Walthouse, J., 89, 221, 245\n\n  Westcott, S., 121\n\n  Willoughby, C. C., 119\n\n  Wood, C. J., 169\n\n\n  Ximenes, F., 142\n\n\n  Yarrow, H. C., 207\n\n\n\n\nINDEX OF SUBJECTS.\n\n\n  Abecedarians, sect of, 233\n\n  Accadians, the, 23\n\n  Aditi, a Sanscrit Deity, 83\n\n  African tribes, 26\n\n  Ages of the World, the, 125\n\n  Aiapakal, deity of the Yahgans, 104\n\n  Air, worship of, 143\n\n  Algonkian myths, 70, 72, 150\n\n  Alphabet, origin of, 241\n\n  Amazulus, the, 57, 169\n\n  American culture indigenous, 24\n\n  Amok, the, of Malays, 246\n\n  Anaphora, influence of the, 179\n\n  Ancestor-worship, 42, 70, 71\n\n  Andaman Islanders, beliefs of, 72, 75, 113, 115, _see_ Mincopies.\n\n  Androgynous deities, 169\n\n  Animism as a religious theory, 46, 135\n\n  Anthropism, 162\n\n  Anthropology, defined, 1\n\n  Apache Indians, the, 32, 33\n\n  Arch\u00e6ology, what it teaches, 18\n\n  Architecture, religious, 243\n\n  Art and religion, 233\n\n  Aryans, the early, 22\n\n  Asherim, the sacred pole, 250\n\n  Atala, deity in Borneo, 77\n\n  Atheism, in Buddhism, 28\n\n  \u201d among Africans, 31\n\n  Aurora Australis and Borealis, 141\n\n  Australians, native, 13, 16, 17, 25, 51, 52, 65, 72, 126, 140, 153,\n    158, 167, 174, 198\n\n  Automatism of the human mind, 6\n\n  \u201cAuto-suggestion,\u201d 55\n\n  Avatea, _see_ Vatea\n\n  Awonawilona, god of the Zu\u00f1is, 124\n\n  Aztec prayers, 106\n\n  Aztecs, the, 126, 144, 145, 167, 191, 240\n\n\n  Babylonia, ancient, 20, 23\n\n  Bacchanalia, the, 185, 222\n\n  Baiame, an Australian deity, 74\n\n  Baptism, rite of, 144, 145\n\n  Basutos, their knowledge of God, 51\n\n  Battle, trial by, 225\n\n  \u201cBeatific vision,\u201d the, 53, 114\n\n  Beauty, the ideal of, 234\n\n  Bechuanas, beliefs of, 82\n\n  Beth-el, in Semitic myth, 146\n\n  Bilians, inspired women, 220\n\n  Bird as a sacred animal, 158\n\n  Birth, rites relating to, 193\n\n  Bi-sexual deities, 169\n\n  Bitol, a deity of the Mayas, 123\n\n  Black drink of Creek Indians, 67\n\n  Bones, beliefs respecting, 131, 211\n\n  \u201cBook-religions,\u201d 50\n\n  Boonbolong, a magic word, 90\n\n  Bora, the Australian, 119, 198, 240\n\n  Borneo, natives of, _see_ Dyaks\n\n  Bororos, the, 65\n\n  Brazil, native tribes of, 65, 67, 140\n\n  Brutes, devoid of religious sentiment, 36;\n    worship of, 157\n\n  Buddhism, alleged in America, 24\n\n  Buddhism, atheistic in creed, 28\n\n  Burial, modes of, 207\n\n  Bushmen, the, 57, 113, 144, 205\n\n\n  Cabalistic doctrines, 92\n\n  Canaras, a Dravidian tribe, 148\n\n  Cannibalism, 17, 190, 206, 208\n\n  Carrier Indians, myths of, 116\n\n  Cause, the notion of, 44, 45\n\n  Caves as holy places, 156\n\n  Ceremonial circuit, the, 182\n\n  Chaldean mythology, 145, 152, 161\n\n  Charm-songs, 89, 93\n\n  Child mind compared to Savage mind, 14\n\n  Chinese magical rites, 175\n\n  Choctaws, myths of, 98, 196\n\n  Colours, symbolism of, 146, 236\n\n  Comanche Indians, the, 72\n\n  Commensality in rites, 181\n\n  Communal rites, 177;\n    marriage, 201\n\n  Comparative method, the, 5\n\n  Cosmic consciousness, 52\n\n  Cosmical concepts, the, 118\n\n  Couvade, the, explained, 193\n\n  Creation, the, how understood, 123 _sq._\n\n  Creek Indians, the, 67\n\n  Cross, symbolism of the, 152\n\n  Crowd, influence of, 178\n\n  Cuchi, an Australian deity, 80\n\n\n  Dakotas, religious views of the, 60\n\n  Danu, an Irish Goddess, 140\n\n  Dawn, myths of the, 75\n\n  Dead, cult of the, 70, 71\n\n  Death, rites relating to, 206\n\n  Deluge, myth of the, 122, 126\n\n  Demoniac possession, 52\n\n  Diana, the Ephesian, 147\n\n  Dido, a moon goddess, 140\n\n  Dieyeris, an Australian tribe, 140\n\n  Divination, methods of, 111\n\n  Drama, of the Universe, 122;\n    religious, origin of, 183 _sq._\n\n  Dravidian tribes, the, 26, 105\n\n  Dreams and dreaming, 64 _sqq._\n\n  Dusdachtschish, a Kamtschatkan god, 165\n\n  Dyaks, the, of Borneo, 39, 67, 123, 158, 220\n\n\n  \u00caa, a Babylonian deity, 99, 145, 161\n\n  Earth, worship of the, 145\n\n  Easter Island, images in, 83\n\n  Echo in myths, 86\n\n  Egg as a religious symbol, 159\n\n  Egypt, early religions of, 23, 24\n\n  Elements, worship of the, 141\n\n  Emanation, the doctrine of, 162, 165\n\n  Endymion, fable of, 37\n\n  Epochs of Nature, the, 125\n\n  Eponymous ancestors, 161\n\n  Eskimos, the, 65, 72, 158\n\n  Ethics and religion, 228 _sq._\n\n  Ethiopians, the, 26\n\n  Ethnology defined, 2\n\n  Etruscans, the, 23, 142\n\n  Eucharist, heathen analogies to, 191\n\n  Euhemerus, doctrines of, 42\n\n  Evocatio deorum, the, 104\n\n\n  Family, the primitive, 201, 219\n\n  Fatherhood of God, the, 124, 167\n\n  Fear in religion, 45, 46\n\n  Fetishism explained, 131 _sq._\n\n  Fetish water of Africans, 67\n\n  Finns, beliefs of the, 73, 192\n\n  Fire, worship of, 142\n\n  Fish in sacred art, 161\n\n  Flint stone in myths, 149\n\n  Folk-lore, value of, 20\n\n  Four as sacred number, 120\n\n  Freedom, limited in savage tribes, 244\n\n  Frog as a sacred animal, 161\n\n\n  \u201cGenius,\u201d explained, 165\n\n  Ghosts, the fear of, 73;\n    beliefs about, 76\n\n  Gnosis, the esoteric, 245\n\n  \u201cGod,\u201d derivation of, 61, 62\n\n  God-stones, 149\n\n  Goras, customs of, 89\n\n\n  Hamites, the, 26\n\n  Happiness and religion, 247\n\n  Hidatsa Indians, the, 63, 150\n\n  High places sacred, 155\n\n  Hills sacred, 77, 155\n\n  Hill of God, 77, 155\n\n  Hill of Heaven, the, 76, 155\n\n  Historic method, the, 5\n\n  Holiness, primitive idea of, 108, 230\n\n  Homi, deity of Hottentots, 77\n\n  _Hua_, a sacred interjection, 61\n\n  Huaca in Peru, 102, 182\n\n  Huemac, an Aztec deity, 82\n\n  Human sacrifices, 189 _sq._\n\n  Huracan, an American deity, 82\n\n  Hypnogogic hallucinations, 66\n\n\n  \u201cIdeal of Reason,\u201d the, 44\n\n  Idolatry in early religion, 238\n\n  Illogical reasoning of savages, 13\n\n  Incineration of dead, 210\n\n  \u201cIndigetes dii,\u201d the Roman, 71\n\n  _Indigitamenta_, of Romans, 97\n\n  Infinite, the perception of the, 45\n\n  Inhumation of dead, 209\n\n  \u201cInner light,\u201d the, 43\n\n  Insanity, of savage mind, 14\n\n  Ipurinas, a Brazilian tribe, 140\n\n  Isis, the many-named, 99\n\n  Itelmen, a Kamtschatkan tribe, 165\n\n\n  Jade, in myths, 149\n\n  Joyous character of early rites, 179\n\n  Jupiter, his base traits, 166\n\n\n  Kaaba, a stone, 147\n\n  Kamtschatkans, the, 57, 65, 109, 165, 244\n\n  Ka-ne, a Polynesian deity, 74\n\n  Khonds, a Dravidian tribe, 105\n\n  Knowledge, tree of, 153\n\n  Koders, a Dravidian tribe, 149\n\n  Ku, a Polynesian deity, 121\n\n  Kutka, god of the Kamtschatkans, 109, 166\n\n\n  Language and myth, 114 _sq._\n\n  Law, the ceremonial, 218, 224\n\n  Life and Death, ideas of, 68 _sq._\n\n  Life, as a divine attribute, 68;\n    and its transmission, 164, 200\n\n  Light, the adoration of, 74 _sq._\n\n  Linguistics, the study of, 19, 35, 115;\n    influence on religious ideas, 20, 115\n\n  Liturgy, power of the, 178\n\n  Lizard, the, as a symbol, 161\n\n  Lono, a Polynesian deity, 121\n\n  Love as a root of religion, 170\n\n  Love charms, 148\n\n\n  Magic, sympathetic, 173\n\n  Magical rites, 175\n\n  Mahopa, a name of divinity, 63\n\n  Mamit, the curse, 90\n\n  Man worshipped as a god, 161\n\n  _Mana_ in Polynesian dialects, 62\n\n  Mandan Indians, 13, 150\n\n  Mangaians, myths of, 77, 86\n\n  Manito of Algonquins, 102, 125\n\n  Mantras, power of, 89\n\n  Maoris, the, 83, 103, 143\n\n  Maria Candelaria, a heroine, 222\n\n  Marriage, rites relating to, 200, 219\n\n  Masks, religious use of, 184\n\n  \u201cMaster of Life,\u201d the, 69\n\n  _M\u00e2y\u00e2_, the doctrine of, 68\n\n  Mayas, the tribe of, 123, 125, 151, 156, 174, 199;\n    shamans, 150\n\n  Meday sticks, 242\n\n  Medicine-men, Indian, 52;\n    women, 221\n\n  Melanesians, beliefs of, 131, 148\n\n  Menhirs, of Celts, 149\n\n  Mexicans, ancient, 125, 148, 149, 151, 155, 179\n\n  Mexico, ancient, 24\n\n  Michoacan, Indians of, 69\n\n  Milky way, worship of, 141\n\n  Mincopies, beliefs of the, 72, 109, 115, 126, _see_ Andamanese\n\n  Molemo, an African deity, 97\n\n  Moon-worship, 139 _sq._\n\n  Motu, a tribe, 31\n\n  Mourning, customs of, 212\n\n  Moxos, an American tribe, 155\n\n  Mummies, why made, 211\n\n  Mumpal, an Australian deity, 81\n\n  Music in religion, 240\n\n  Mysticism, religious, source of, 56\n\n  Mythical cycles, the Universal, 118\n\n  Myths, meaning of, 112 _sq._\n\n\n  Nagualism, references to, 67, 156, 175\n\n  Nahuas, myths of the, 148, 151, 195, 196\n\n  Name, the sacred, 93 _sq._\n\n  Name-soul, the, 96\n\n  Names, rites relating to, 195\n\n  Names of the dead avoided, 95\n\n  Nanabojou, a hero-god, 70\n\n  Natal, natives of, 52\n\n  Nature, conflict of, 127\n\n  Navahoes, a prayer of the, 105;\n    deity of the, 169\n\n  Navel of the Sky, the, 78\n\n  Neolithic period, the, 33\n\n  Nervous susceptibility of savages, 14\n\n  Nicaraguans, customs of, 190\n\n  Njambe, god of the Marutse, 97\n\n  Norns of Teutonic mythology, 121\n\n  Num, god of the Samoyeds, 83\n\n  Numbers, the sacred, 119\n\n  Nurali, an Australian deity, 74, 159\n\n\n  Oannes, a Chaldean god, 161\n\n  Oaths are ordeals, 226\n\n  One-legged god, the, 98\n\n  Oraons, cult of the, 137, 230\n\n  Ordeals in religions, 225\n\n  Origin of religion, theories about, 41 _sq._\n\n  Osiris, worship of, 24\n\n  Oztoteotl, a Mexican god, 156\n\n\n  Pal\u00e6olithic man, 34\n\n  _Papa_, Rock, a god of the Tahitians, 147\n\n  Papuans, customs of, 186\n\n  Paradise, the earthly, 126\n\n  Parjanja, deity in the Vedas, 81\n\n  Parliament of Religions, the, 28\n\n  Patagonians, 177\n\n  Patol, a deity of the Mayas, 123\n\n  Pawnee war song, 67\n\n  Perfection the aim of Religion, 235\n\n  Personality, the Sense of, 49\n\n  Personal rites, 191\n\n  Peru, culture of, 24\n\n  Peruvians, myths and rites of, 141, 142, 148, 190, 251\n\n  P\u0115tara, sacred name in Borneo, 102\n\n  _Peyotl_, an intoxicant, 67\n\n  Pilgrimages in primitive religions, 157, 253\n\n  Pita, Father, the Brahmanic, 168\n\n  Places, worship of, 154\n\n  Plant-soul, the, 153\n\n  Pleiades, worship of the, 140\n\n  Po in Polynesian Myths, 125\n\n  Pole, the sacred, 152, 250\n\n  Polynesians, the, 25, 58, 59, 121, 124, 127, 140, 149, 158, 195\n\n  Prayer in primitive faiths, 103 _sq._\n\n  \u201cPrimitive\u201d peoples defined, 11\n\n  Prophecy explained, 110\n\n  Psychic automatism, 54\n\n  Psychologic Method, the, 6\n\n  Psychology, experimental, 7\n\n  Puberty, rites relating to, 197\n\n  Pueblo Indians, the, 39\n\n  Puluga, god of the Mincopies, 75, 78, 113, 116\n\n\n  Quetzalcoatl, a hero-god, 145, 251\n\n  Quiche Indians, the, 72, 155, 169\n\n\n  Rain-making, rites of, 174\n\n  Reciprocal principle, worship of, 169\n\n  Revelation, universality of, 50\n\n  Ritual in Religion, 172 _sq._\n\n  Rongo, a Polynesian deity, 79\n\n\n  Sacrifice as a rite, 186 _sq._\n\n  Samoyeds, beliefs of, 14, 67, 83\n\n  Sanctuary, rite of, 226\n\n  Sangsangs of Borneo, 220\n\n  Saviour, myths of the, 128\n\n  Science and religion, 231\n\n  \u201cScience of religion\u201d premature, 3\n\n  Selene, the goddess, 37\n\n  Seminoles, customs of, 196\n\n  Semites, primitive, 23\n\n  Seposition of dead, 209\n\n  Serpent-worship, 160\n\n  Sex in deities, 20\n\n  Shamanism, origin of, 51, 57;\n    nature of, 136, 218\n\n  Shamans, their occult powers, 65, 232\n\n  Sibiric tribes, the, 26\n\n  Sioux Indians, prayer of, 106\n\n  Sky, the notions concerning, 76\n\n  Sky-god, the, 78\n\n  Song in religion, 239\n\n  Soul, journey of the, 128\n\n  Souls, the doctrine of, 28, 70 _sq._;\n    beliefs concerning, 76\n\n  Star-worship, 140\n\n  Stone Age, the, 33\n\n  Stonehenge, monuments of, 33\n\n  Stones, worship of, 146\n\n  \u201cSub-limital consciousness,\u201d the, 54\n\n  \u201cSuggestion\u201d explained, 54 _sq._\n\n  Sumerians, gods of, 20, 23\n\n  Sun-worship, 138 _sq._\n\n  Supa, a Samoan god, 223\n\n  Superstition, a form of religion, 27\n\n  Svastika, the, 119, 236\n\n  Swan-maidens, the, 223\n\n\n  Tabu, the, 32, 38, 108, 156, 222, 230\n\n  Tahitians, myths of the, 147\n\n  Tangaloa, a Polynesian deity, 74, 75, 78, 99\n\n  Tehuelches, myth of, 77\n\n  Tepi, the custom of, 94\n\n  Teutonic rites, 182, 188, 190, 223\n\n  Theoleptic worshippers, 185\n\n  Theology, its aim, 4\n\n  \u201cTheopathy\u201d explained, 56\n\n  Theophorous names, 100\n\n  Thought, creation by, 124\n\n  Three as sacred number, 120\n\n  Thunder in mythology, 80, 81\n\n  Tina, an Etruscan god, 140\n\n  Tinn\u00e9, an American tribe, 125\n\n  Tonantzin, an Aztec deity, 145\n\n  Tongues, the gift of, 93\n\n  Tota, a Mexican deity, 151, 167\n\n  Totemic animals, the, 161;\n    bond, the, 216\n\n  Tree of knowledge, the, 153\n\n  Trees, worship of, 150 _sq._\n\n  Trinities of heathen religions, 121\n\n  Tsuni \u01c1Goab, a deity of the Hottentots, 75\n\n  Tupa, a deity of the Dyaks, 123\n\n  Turramulun, an Australian god, 98\n\n  Tutelary personal deities, 192\n\n  Tzentals, customs of, 221, 222\n\n\n  Ukko, deity of Finns, 78\n\n  Umbilical cord, rites respecting, 194\n\n  Unconscious cerebration, 54\n\n  Unity of human intelligence, 9\n\n  Unkululu, deity of the Zulus, 168\n\n  Upanishads, teachings of the, 57, 83\n\n\n  Varuna, Sanscrit deity, 79\n\n  Vase, symbolism of the, 144\n\n  Vatea, a Polynesian deity, 75\n\n  Veddahs, the, 26\n\n  \u201cVeiled gods\u201d of Etruscans, 165\n\n  Vesta, the goddess, 223\n\n  Virgins of the Sun, 190\n\n  Visual ideas, 130\n\n  Votan, hero-god of the Tzentals, 221\n\n  Vows taken at birth, 193\n\n\n  _Wakan_, in Dakota, 60, 61;\n    in Quichua, 61\n\n  Waking visions, 66\n\n  Water, worship of, 144\n\n  Will as the source of Force, 47 _sq._\n\n  Winds, worship of the, 143\n\n  Witches\u2019 Sabbath, the, 185\n\n  Woman, her position in Religion, 219\n\n  Word, the, in religion, 88 _sq._\n\n  World-soul, belief in a, 136\n\n  Writing, religious origin of, 241\n\n\n  _Yah_, a sacred interjection, 62\n\n  Yahgans, the, 57, 80, 104, 110, 195\n\n  Yahve, derivations of, 62, 81\n\n  Yetl, a sacred bird, 159\n\n  Yoga philosophy, the, 51\n\n  Yucatan, culture of, 24, 150\n\n  Yurucares, tribe of, 151\n\n\n  Zi, Chaldean term for spirits, 49\n\n  Zulus, the, their beliefs, 26, 56, 67, 147, 168\n\n  Zu\u00f1i Indians, the, 72, 124, 125, 221\n\n\n\n\n_A Selection from the Catalogue of_\n\nG. P. PUTNAM\u2019S SONS\n\n[Illustration]\n\nComplete Catalogue sent on application\n\n\nAMERICAN LECTURES ON THE HISTORY OF RELIGIONS\n\nI. =Rhys-Davids\u2014Buddhism: Its History and Literature.= By T. W.\nRHYS-DAVIDS, LL.D., Ph.D., Professor of Pali and Buddhist Literature at\nUniversity College, London. Crown octavo. _Net_, $1.50.\n\n    \u201c...An admirable handbook of Buddhism, written from a point of\n    view at once scholarly and unprejudiced.\u201d\u2014_St. Paul Pioneer\n    Press._\n\nII. =Brinton\u2014Religions of Primitive Peoples.= By DANIEL G. BRINTON,\nA.M., M.D., LL.D., Sc.D., Professor of Arch\u00e6ology and Linguistics in the\nUniversity of Pennsylvania. Crown octavo. _Net_, $1.50.\n\n    \u201c...No book has yet appeared which brings the religious\n    thought of all races and times within closer range of the\n    modern reader; and to the reader who revels in tracing the\n    psychic history of man, no book can be more welcome.\u201d\u2014_Boston\n    Transcript._\n\nIII. =Cheyne\u2014Jewish Religious Life after the Exile.= By Rev. T. K.\nCHEYNE, M.A., D.D., Oriel Professor of Interpretation of Holy Scripture\nin the University of Oxford, and formerly Fellow of Balliol College;\nCanon of Rochester. Crown octavo. _Net_, $1.50.\n\n    \u201cFew men are as well qualified as Canon Cheyne to discuss\n    the Jewish literature and life of the period covered by this\n    course, and the treatment of the subject before us in this\n    handsome volume is all that could be desired.... The whole book\n    is exceedingly interesting and instructive.\u201d\u2014_Universalist\n    Leader._\n\nIV. =Budde\u2014Religion of Israel to the Exile.= By KARL BUDDE, D.D.,\nProfessor of Theology in the University of Strassburg. Crown octavo.\n_Net_, $1.50.\n\n    \u201cThe chief merit of Professor Budde\u2019s book is its condensation.\n    He gives a distinct view of the subject, undistracted by\n    details. While the book will take its deserved place in the\n    estimation of scholars it is also a book for the general\n    reader.\u201d\u2014_The Outlook._\n\nV. =Steindorff\u2014The Religion of the Ancient Egyptians.= By G. STEINDORFF,\nPh.D., Professor of Egyptology at the University of Leipzig. Crown\noctavo. _Net_, $1.50.\n\n    \u201cPresents in compact form and interesting style the latest\n    information, and should find a place in every library of\n    comparative religions.\u201d\u2014_The Congregationalist._\n\nVI. =Knox\u2014The Development of Religion in Japan.= By GEORGE WILLIAM KNOX,\nD.D., Professor of the History and Philosophy of Religion in Union\nTheological Seminary, and Sometime Professor of Philosophy and Ethics at\nthe Imperial University, Tokyo.\n\n_Crown octavo, net, $1.50_\n\n    \u201cA notable addition to this excellent series.\u201d\u2014_The Churchman._\n\n    \u201cThe author is peculiarly qualified for appreciative treatment\n    of his subject.\u201d\u2014_The Outlook._\n\nVII. =Bloomfield\u2014The Religion of the Veda. The Ancient Religion of Veda\n(from Rig-Veda to Upanishads).= By MAURICE BLOOMFIELD, Ph.D., LL.D.,\nProfessor of Sanscrit and Comparative Philology in the Johns Hopkins\nUniversity.\n\n_Crown octavo. $1.50 net. By mail, $1.65_\n\n    \u201cIt presents interestingly, and brings out as markedly as\n    possible the development of the religious thought of the Veda\n    in distinction from myth and ceremony.\u201d\u2014_N. Y. Times._\n\nVIII. =Cumont\u2014Astrology and Religion among The Greeks and Romans.= By\nFRANZ CUMONT, Ph.D., LL.D., Conservator of the \u201cMus\u00e9e du Cinquantenaire,\u201d\nBrussels.\n\n    M. Cumont shows the influence which Oriental star-worship\n    exercised on the beliefs of the Greco-Roman world and how it\n    led to a transformation of the old paganism and prepared the\n    coming of Christianity.\n\nIX. =Jastrow\u2014Aspects of Religious Belief and Practice in Babylonia and\nAssyria.= By MORRIS JASTROW, JR., Ph.D., Professor of Semitic Languages\nin the University of Pennsylvania.\n\n_With 54 Illustrations and a Map and Chronological Lists of the Rulers of\nBabylonia and Assyria._\n\n_Crown octavo. $2.25 net. By mail, $2.45_\n\n    Professor Jastrow has during many years made a special study\n    of the religion of the Babylonians and Assyrians, and has\n    contributed many authoritative volumes and papers embodying the\n    results of his researches.\n\n\nInternational Handbooks to the New Testament\n\nEdited by Orello Cone, D.D.\n\nFour volumes. Octavo. Each, net, $2.00\n\nBy mail, $2.15\n\nI.\u2014=The Synoptic Gospels, together with a Chapter on the Text-Criticism\nof the New Testament.= By George Lovell Gary, A.M., L.H.D., President of\nthe Meadville Theological School.\n\n    \u201cWe need hardly say that we find ourselves differing very\n    seriously and very often from the editor of this volume, but\n    we gladly recognize the thoughtfulness and intelligence with\n    which he has worked. The student may learn much from this\n    volume.\u201d\u2014_N. Y. Observer._\n\nII.\u2014=The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, Thessalonians,\nGalatians, Romans, and Philippians.= By James Drummond, M.A., LL.D.,\nLitt.D., Principal of Manchester College, Oxford.\n\n    \u201cIf the promise given by this volume is fulfilled, the series\n    will prove of the highest value. It is attractive for the\n    general reader, while it is of special value to advanced\n    students.\u201d\u2014_The Outlook._\n\nIII.\u2014=The Epistles to the Hebrews, Colossians, Ephesians, and Philemon,\nThe Pastoral Epistles, The Epistles of James, Peter, and Jude=, together\nwith a Sketch of the History of the Canon of the New Testament. By Orello\nCone, D.D., Professor of Biblical Theology in the Canton Theological\nSchool.\n\n    \u201cIt is interesting to note the meaning often hitherto\n    unexplained. The author succeeds because his explanations\n    are reasonable and plausible. He is not bound to any rule of\n    dogma or sect, but takes a broad and understanding view of his\n    subject.\u201d\u2014_Church Review._\n\nIV.\u2014=The Johannine Literature and the Acts of the Apostles.= By Henry\nP. Forbes, A.M., D.D., Professor of Biblical Literature in the Canton\nTheological School.\n\n    \u201cDr. Forbes has laid the ministry under perpetual obligation\n    to him. Not only does he keep up to the high standard of the\n    three preceding volumes of the set, but he fully sustains the\n    purpose indicated by the editor-in-chief. The full set is one\n    that every student of the Bible will make large use of.\u201d\u2014_The\n    Universalist Leader._\n\nSend for complete descriptive circular\n\nNew York\u2014G. P. PUTNAM\u2019S SONS\u2014London","title":"Religions of Primitive Peoples","tradition":"myth-cosmogony","translated_text":null,"word_count":63511}