XLIX. DUTIES TO GODS (concluded)…

XLIX. DUTIES TO GODS (concluded)

SUPERNATURAL beings are widely believed to have a feeling of their worth and dignity. They are sensitive to insults and disrespect, they demand submissiveness and homage.

"The gods of the Gold Coast," says Major Ellis, "are jealous gods, jealous of their dignity, jealous of the adulation and offerings paid to them; and there is nothing they resent so much as any slight, whether intentional or accidental, which may be offered them. . . . There is nothing that offends them so deeply as to ignore them, or question their power, or laugh at them."[1] The wrath of Yahveh burst forth with vehemence whenever his honour or sanctity was in the least violated, however unintentionally.[2] Many peoples consider it insulting and dangerous merely to point at one of the celestial bodies;[3] and among the North American Indians it is a widespread belief that, if anybody points at the rainbow, the finger will wither or become misshapen.[4]

[Footnote 1: Ellis, Tshi-speaking Peoples of the Gold Coast, p. 11.]

[Footnote 2: Cf. Montefiore, Hibbert Lectures on the Religion of the Ancient Hebrews, pp. 38, 102.]

[Footnote 3: Liebrecht, Zur Volkskunde, p. 341, Dorman, Origin of Primitive Superstitions, p. 344 (Chippewas). Wuttke, Der deutsche Volksaberglaube der Gegenwart, § 11, p. 13 sq.]

[Footnote 4: Mooney, 'Myths of the Cherokee,' in Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn. xix. 257, 442.]

Nor is it to supernatural danger only that a person exposes himself by irreverence to a god, but in many cases he is also punished by his fellow men. On the Slave Coast insults to a god "are always resented and punished by the {640} priests and worshippers of that god, it being their duty to guard his honour."[5] Among the ancient Peruvians[6] and Hebrews,[7] as also among Christian nations up to comparatively recent times, blasphemy was a capital offence. In England, in the reign of Henry VIII., a boy of fifteen was burned because he had spoken, much after the fashion of a parrot, some idle words affecting the sacrament of the altar, which he had chanced to hear but of which he could not have understood the meaning.[8] According to Muhammedan law a person guilty of blasphemy is to be put to death without delay, even though he profess himself repentant, as adequate repentance for such a sin is deemed impossible.[9] These and similar laws are rooted in the idea that the god is personally offended by the insult. It was the Lord himself who made the law that he who blasphemed His name should be stoned to death by all the congregation.[10] "Blasphemy," says Thomas Aquinas, "as being an offence directly against God, outweighs murder, which is an offence against our neighbour . . . . The blasphemer intends to wound the honour of God."[11] That blasphemy is, or should be, punished not as a sin against the deity but as an offence against the religious feelings of men, is an idea of quite modern origin.

[Footnote 5: Ellis, E[(w]e-speaking Peoples of the Slave Coast, p. 81.]

[Footnote 6: Prescott, History of the Conquest of Peru, i. 42.]

[Footnote 7: Leviticus, xxiv. 14 sqq.]

[Footnote 8: Pike, History of Crime in England, ii. 56.]

[Footnote 9: Lane, Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians, p. 123.]

[Footnote 10: Leviticus, xxiv. 16.]

[Footnote 11: Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologica, ii.-ii. 13. 3. 1.]

In many cases it is considered offensive to a supernatural being merely to mention his name. Sometimes the name is tabooed on certain occasions only or in ordinary conversation, sometimes it is not to be pronounced at all.

In Morocco the jnûn (jinn) must not be referred to by name in the afternoon and evening after the [(]â[s.]ar. If speaking of them at all, the people then make use of some circumlocution; the Berbers of Southern Morocco call them w[=i]d-iá[d.]nin, "those others," or w[=i]d-ur[d.]-h[)e]r'nin, "those unseen," or w[=i]d-tntl-tísnt, "those who shun salt." The Greenlanders dare not pronounce the name of a glacier {641} as they row past it, for fear lest it should be offended and throw off an iceberg.[12] Some North American Indians believe that if, when travelling, they mention the names of rocks or islands or rivers, they will have much rain or be wrecked or be devoured by some monster in the river.[13] The Omahas, again, "are very careful not to use names which they regard as sacred on ordinary occasions; and no one dares to sing sacred songs except the chiefs and old men at the proper times."[14] Some other Indians considered it a profanation to mention the name of their highest divinity.[15] Among certain Australian natives the elders of the tribe impart to the youth, on his initiation, the name of the god Tharam[=u]l[)u]n; but there is such a disinclination to pronounce his name that, in speaking of him, they generally use elliptical expressions, such as "He," "the man," or "the name I told you of," and the women only know him by the name of Papang (father).[16] The Marutse and allied tribes along the Zambesi shrink from mentioning the real name of their chief god Nyambe and therefore substitute for it the word molemo, which has a very comprehensive meaning, denoting, besides God, all kinds of good and evil spirits, medicines, poisons, and amulets.[17] According to Cicero, there was a god, a son of Nilus, whose name the Egyptians considered it a crime to pronounce;[18] and Herodotus is unwilling to mention the name of Osiris on two occasions when he is speaking of him.[19] The divine name of Indra was secret, the real name of Agni was unknown.[20] The gods of Brahmanism have mystic names, which nobody dares to speak.[21] The real name of Confucius is so sacred that it is a statutable offence in China to {642} pronounce it; and the name of the supreme god of the Chinese is equally tabooed. "Tien," they say, "means properly only the material heaven, but it also means Shang-Te (supreme ruler, God); for, as it is not lawful to use his name lightly, we name him by his residence, which is in tien."[22] The "great name" of Allah is a secret name, known only to prophets, and possibly to some great saints.[23] Yahveh said, "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain";[24] and orthodox Jews avoid mentioning the word Yahveh altogether.[25] Among Christian nations, as Professor Nyrop observes, there is a common disinclination to use the word "God" or its equivalents in everyday speech. The English say good instead of God ("good gracious," "my goodness," "thank goodness"); the Germans, Potz instead of Gotts ("Potz Welt," "Potz Wetter," "Potz Blitz"); the French, bleu instead of Dieu ("corbleu," "morbleu," "sambleu"); the Spaniards, brios or diez instead of Dios ("voto á brios," "juro á brios," "par diez").[26]

[Footnote 12: Nansen, Eskimo Life, p. 233.]

[Footnote 13: Nyrop, 'Navnets magt,' in Mindre Afhandlinger udgivne af det philologisk-historiske Samfund, 1887, p. 28.]

[Footnote 14: Dorsey, 'Omaha Sociology,' in _Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn._ iii. 370.]

[Footnote 15: Adair, History of the American Indians, p. 54.]

[Footnote 16: Howitt, 'Some Australian Beliefs,' in Jour. Anthr. Inst. xiii. 192. See also Idem, Native Tribes of South-East Australia, pp. 489, 495.]

[Footnote 17: Holub, Seven Years in South Africa, ii. 301.]

[Footnote 18: Cicero, De natura deorum, iii. 22 (56).]

[Footnote 19: Herodotus, ii. 132, 171.]

[Footnote 20: Hopkins, Religions of India, pp. 93, 111.]

[Footnote 21: Ibid. p. 184.]

[Footnote 22: Friend, 'Euphemism and Tabu in China,' in Folk-Lore Record, iv. 76. Cf. Edkins, Religion in China, p. 72.]

[Footnote 23: Sell, Faith of Islám, p. 185. Lane, Modern Egyptians, p. 273.]

[Footnote 24: Exodus, xx. 7.]

[Footnote 25: Herzog-Plitt, Real-Encyklopädie für protestantische Theologie, vi. 501 sq.]

[Footnote 26: Nyrop, loc. cit. p. 155 sqq.]

These taboos have sprung from fear. There is, first, something uncanny in mentioning the name of a supernatural being, even apart from any definite ideas connected with the act. But to do so is also supposed to summon him or to attract his attention, and this may be considered dangerous, especially if he is looked upon as malevolent or irritable, as is generally the case with the Moorish jnûn. The uncanny feeling or the notion of danger readily leads to the belief that the supernatural being feels offended if his name is pronounced; we have noticed a similar association of thought in connection with the names of the dead. But a god may also have good reason for wishing that his name should not be used lightly or taken in vain. According {643} to primitive ideas a person's name is a part of his personality, hence the holiness of a god may be polluted by his name being mentioned in profane conversation. Moreover, it may be of great importance for him to prevent his name from being divulged, as magic may be wrought on a person through his name just as easily as through any part of his body. In early civilisation there is a common tendency to keep the real name of a human individual secret so that sorcerers may not make an evil use of it;[27] and it is similarly believed that gods must conceal their true names lest other gods or men should be able to conjure with them.[28] The great Egyptian god Râ declared that the name which his father and mother had given him remained hidden in his body since his birth, so that no magician might have magic power over him.[29] The list of divine names possessed by the Roman pontiffs in their indigitamenta was a magical instrument which laid at their mercy all the forces of the spirit world;[30] and we are told that the Romans kept the name of their tutelary god secret in order to prevent their enemies from drawing him away by pronouncing it.[31] There is a Muhammedan tradition that whosoever calls upon Allah by his "great name" will obtain all his desires, being able merely by mentioning it to raise the dead to life, to kill the living, in fact to perform any miracle he pleases.[32]

[Footnote 27: Tylor, Early History of Mankind, p. 139 sqq. Andree, Ethnographische Parallelen, p. 179 sqq. Frazer, Golden Bough, i. 403 sqq. Clodd, Tom Tit Tot, pp. 53-55, 81 sqq. Haddon, Magic and Fetishism, p. 22 sq.]

[Footnote 28: Tylor, op. cit. p. 124 sq. Frazer, op. cit. i. 443. Clodd, op. cit. p. 173. Haddon, op. cit. p. 23 sqq.]

[Footnote 29: Frazer, op. cit. i. 444.]

[Footnote 30: Granger, Worship of the Romans, pp. 212, 277. Cf. Jevons, in Plutarch's Romane Questions, p. lvii.]

[Footnote 31: Plutarch, Questiones Romanæ, 61. Pliny, Historia naturalis, xxviii. 4. Macrobius, Saturnalia, iii. 9.]

[Footnote 32: Sell, op. cit. p. 185. Lane, Modern Egyptians, p. 273.]

* * * * *

One of the greatest insults which can be offered a god is to deny his existence. Plutarch was astonished at people's saying that atheism is impiety, while at the same time they attribute to gods all kinds of less creditable qualities. "I for my part," he adds, "would much rather have men to say of me that there never was a {644} Plutarch, at all, nor is now, than to say that Plutarch is a man inconstant, fickle, easily moved to anger, revengeful for trifling provocations, vexed at small things."[33] But Plutarch seems to have forgotten that a person is always most sensitive on his weak points, and that the weakest point in a god is his existence. Religious intolerance is in a large measure the result of that feeling of uncertainty which can hardly be eradicated even by the strongest will to believe. It is a means of self-persuasion in a case where such persuasion is sorely needed. Moreover, a god who is not believed to exist can be no object of worship, and to be worshipped is commonly held to be the chief ambition of a god. But atheism is a sin of civilisation. Uncultured people are ready to believe that all supernatural beings they hear of also exist.

[Footnote 33: Plutarch, De superstitione, 10.]

Some gods are extremely ungenerous towards all those who do not recognise them, and only them, as their gods. To believe in Ahura Mazda was the first duty which Zoroastrianism required of a man; it was Angra Mainyu, the evil spirit, that had countercreated the sin of unbelief.[34] Doubt destroyed even the effects of good actions;[35] indeed, only the true believer was to be regarded as a man.[36] The faithful were summoned to a war to the death against the opposing spirits, the Daevas, and their followers.[37] And to judge from ancient writers, the Persians, when they came into contact with nations of another religion, also carried into practice the intolerant spirit of their own.[38] Yahveh said:--"Thou shalt have no other gods before me. . . . Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God."[39] In the pre-prophetic period the existence of other gods was recognised,[40] but they were not {645} to be worshipped by Yahveh's people. Nor was any mercy to be shown to their followers, for Yahveh was "a man of war."[41] The God of Christianity inherited his jealousy. In the name of Christ wars were waged, not, it is true, for the purpose of exterminating unbelievers, but with a view to converting them to a faith which alone could save their souls from eternal perdition. So far as the aim of the persecution is concerned we can thus notice a distinct progress in humanity. But whilst the punishment which Yahveh inflicted upon the devotees of other gods was merely temporal and restricted to a comparatively small number of people--he took notice of such foreign nations only which came within his sphere of interests,--Christianity was a proselytising religion on a large scale, anxious to save but equally ready to condemn to everlasting torments all those who refused to accept it, nay even the milliards of men who had never heard of it. In this point Christianity was even more intolerant than the Koran itself, which does not absolutely confine salvation to the believers in Allah and his Prophet, but leaves some hope of it to Jews, Christians, and Sabæans, though all other infidels are hopelessly lost.[42]

[Footnote 34: Vendîdâd, i. 8. 16.]

[Footnote 35: Darmesteter, Ormazd et Ahriman, p. 330, n. 4.]

[Footnote 36: Dînâ-î Maînôg-î Khirad, xlii. 6 sqq.]

[Footnote 37: See Darmesteter, in Sacred Books of the East, iv. p. lii.; Spiegel, Erânische Alterthumskunde, iii. 692.]

[Footnote 38: Spiegel, op. cit. iii. 708.]

[Footnote 39: Exodus, xx. 3, 5.]

[Footnote 40: Kuenen, Hibbert Lectures on National Religions and Universal Religions, p. 119. Baudissin, Studien zur semitischen Religionsgeschichte, i. 49 sqq.]

[Footnote 41: Exodus, xv. 3.]

[Footnote 42: Koran, v. 73.]

That Muhammedanism has in course of time become the most fanatical of existing religions is due to political rather than religious causes. For a thousand years the Christian and Muhammedan world were engaged in a deadly contest, in which the former came off victorious. Most nations confessing Islam have either lost their independence or are on the verge of losing it. The memory of past defeats and cruelties, the present state of subjection or national weakness, the fear of the future--are all factors which must be taken into account when we judge of Moslem fanaticism. In its younger days Islam was undoubtedly, not only in theory but in practice, less intolerant than its great rival, Christian subjects of Muhammedan rulers being on the whole treated with {646} consideration.[43] Earlier travellers in Arabia also speak favourably of the tolerance of its inhabitants. Niebuhr was able to write:--"I never saw that the Arabs have any hatred for those of a different religion. They, however, regard them with much the same contempt with which Christians look upon the Jews in Europe . . . . The Mahometans in India appear to be even more tolerant than those of Arabia . . . . The Mussulmans in general do not persecute men of other religions, when they have nothing to fear from them, unless in the case of an intercourse of gallantry with a Mahometan woman."[44] In China the Muhammedans live amicably with the infidel, regarding their Buddhist neighbours "with a kindly feeling which it would be hard to find in a mixed community of Catholics and Evangelicals."[45] Muhammedanism looks upon the founder of Christianity with profound reverence, as one of the apostles of God, as the only man without sin. Christian writers, on the other hand, till the middle of the eighteenth century universally treated Muhammed as a false prophet and rank impostor. Luther called him "a devil, and a first-born child of Satan," whilst Melanchthon was inclined to see in him both Gog and Magog.[46]

[Footnote 43: See von Kremer, Culturgeschichte des Orients, ii. 166 sq.]

[Footnote 44: Niebuhr, Travels through Arabia, ii. 192, 189 sq. Cf. d'Arvieux, Travels in Arabia the Desart, p. 123; Wallin, Notes taken during a Journey through Northern Arabia, p. 21.]

[Footnote 45: Lane-Poole, Studies in a Mosque, p. 298 sq.]

[Footnote 46: [Deutsch,] 'Islam,' in Quarterly Review, cxxvii. 295 sq. Bosworth Smith, Mohammed and Mohammedanism, pp. 67, 69. Pool, Studies in Mohammedanism, p. 406.]

Equal in enormity with the sin of not believing in a certain god is sometimes the sin of having a false belief about him. It seems strange that a god should be so easily offended as to punish with the utmost severity those who hold erroneous notions regarding some attribute of his which in no way affects his honour or glory, or regarding some detail of ritual. Thomas Aquinas himself admits that the heretic intends to take the word of Christ, although he fails "in the election of articles whereon to take that word." But it is in this election that his sin consists. {647} Instead of choosing those articles which are truly taught by Christ, he chooses those which his own mind suggests to him. Thus he perverts the doctrines of Christ, and in consequence deserves not only to be separated from the Church by excommunication, but to be banished from the world by death.[47] Moreover, the heretic is an apostate, a traitor who may be forced to pay the vow which he has once taken.[48] The extreme rigour of this sophistical argumentation can only be understood in connection with its historical surroundings. It presupposes a Church which not only regards itself as the sole possessor of divine truth, but whose cohesion and power depend upon a strict adherence to its doctrines.[49] Nor was it a religious motive only that induced Christian sovereigns to persecute heretics. Certain heresies, as Manichæism and Donatism, were expressly declared to affect the common welfare;[50] and the Frankish kings treated heretics not only as rebels against the Church, but as traitors to the State, as confederates of hostile Visigoths or Burgundians or Lombards.[51]

[Footnote 47: Thomas Aquinas, op. cit. ii.-ii. 11. 1, 3.]

[Footnote 48: Ibid. ii.-ii. 10. 8.]

[Footnote 49: Cf. Ritchie, Natural Rights, p. 183.]

[Footnote 50: Milman, History of Latin Christianity, ii. 33.]

[Footnote 51: Ibid. ii. 61.]

Whilst intolerance is a characteristic of all monotheistic religions which attribute human passions and emotions to their godhead, polytheism is by nature tolerant. A god who is always used to share with other gods the worship of his believers cannot be a very jealous god. The pious Hennepin was struck by the fact that Red Indians were "incapable of taking away any person's life out of hatred to his religion."[52] Among the natives of the African Gold and Slave Coasts, though a man must show outward respect for the gods so as not to provoke calamities, he may worship many gods or none, just as he pleases. "There is perfect liberty of thought in matters of religion. . . . At this stage, man tolerates any form of religion that tolerates others; and as he thinks it perfectly {648} natural that different people should worship different gods, he does not attempt to force his own personal opinions upon anyone, or to establish conformity of ideas."[53] On the Slave Coast even a sacrilege committed by a European is usually regarded with indifference, as the gods of a country are supposed to be concerned about the actions of the people of that country only.[54] "The characteristics of Natural Religion," says Sir Alfred Lyall, "the conditions of its existence as we see it in India, are complete liberty and material tolerance; there is no monopoly either of divine powers or even of sacerdotal privilege."[55] In China the hatred of foreigners has not its root in religion. The Catholics residing there were left undisturbed until they began to meddle with the civil and social institutions of the country;[56] and the difficulty in persuading the Chinese to embrace Christianity is said by a missionary to be due to their notion that one religion is as good as another provided that it has a good moral code.[57] Among the early Greeks and Romans it was a principle that the religion of the State should be the religion of the people, as its welfare was supposed to depend upon a strict observance of the established cult; but the gods cared for external worship rather than for the beliefs of their worshippers, and evidently took little notice even of expressed opinions. Philosophers openly despised the very rites which they both defended and practised; and religion was more a pretext than a real motive for the persecutions of men like Anaxagoras, Protagoras, Socrates, and Aristotle.[58] So also the measures by which the Romans in earlier times repressed the introduction of new religions were largely suggested by worldly considerations; "they grew out of that intense national spirit which sacrificed every {649} other interest to the State, and resisted every form of innovation, whether secular or religious, that could impair the unity of the national type, and dissolve the discipline which the predominance of the military spirit and the stern government of the Republic had formed."[59] It has also been sufficiently proved that the persecutions of the Christians during the pagan Empire sprang from motives quite different from religious intolerance. Liberty of worship was a general principle of the Imperial rule. That it was denied the Christians was due to their own aggressiveness, as also to political suspicion. They grossly insulted the pagan cult, denouncing it as the worship of demons, and every calamity which fell upon the Empire was in consequence regarded by the populace as the righteous vengeance of the offended gods. Their proselytism disturbed the peace of families and towns. Their secret meetings aroused suspicion of political danger; and this suspicion was increased by the doctrines they professed. They considered the Roman Empire a manifestation of Antichrist, they looked forward with longing to its destruction, and many of them refused to take part in its defence. The greatest and best among the pagans spoke of the Christians as "enemies," or "haters of the human race."[60]

[Footnote 52: Hennepin, _New Discovery of a Vast Country in America_, ii. 70.]

[Footnote 53: Ellis, _Yoruba-speaking Peoples of the Slave Coast_, p. 295. See also Idem, _E[(w]e-speaking Peoples of the Slave Coast_, p. 81; Monrad, Skildring af Guinea-Kysten, p. 28; Kubary, 'Die Verbrechen und das Strafverfahren auf den Pelau-Inseln,' in _Original-Mittheil. aus d. ethnol. Abtheil. d. königl. Museen zu Berlin_, i. 90.]

[Footnote 54: Ellis, E[(w]e-speaking Peoples, p. 81.]

[Footnote 55: Lyall, Natural Religion in India, p. 52.]

[Footnote 56: Davis, China, ii. 7. Cf. Edkins, op. cit. p. 178.]

[Footnote 57: Edkins, op. cit. p. 75.]

[Footnote 58: See Schmidt, Die Ethik der alten Griechen, ii. 24 sqq.]

[Footnote 59: Lecky, History of European Morals, i. 493. Cf. Dio Cassius, Historia Romana, lii. 36.]

[Footnote 60: Lecky, op. cit. i. 408 sqq. Ramsay, The Church in the Roman Empire, p. 346 sqq. See also supra, i. 345 sq.; ii. 178 sq.]

The same difference in toleration between monotheistic and polytheistic religions shows itself in their different attitudes towards witchcraft. A monotheistic religion is not necessarily averse from magic; its god may be supposed to have created magical as well as natural energy, and also to have given mankind permission to utilise it in a proper manner. Both Christianity in its earlier phases and Muhammedanism are full of magical practices expressly sanctioned by their theology--for instance, the use made of sacred words and of the relics of saints. But besides this sort of magic there is another kind--witchcraft, in the narrow sense of the term,--which is ascribed to the {650} assistance of exorcised spirits, regarded not as the willing agents but as the adversaries of God; and this practice is naturally looked upon as highly offensive to His feelings. In Christianity witchcraft was esteemed the most horrible form of impiety.[61] The religious law of the Hebrews--which generally prohibited all practices that savoured of idolatry, such as soothsaying and oracles--punished witches and wizards with death.[62] Islam disapproves of all magic which is practised with the assistance of evil spirits, or jinn, although such magic is very prevalent and popularly tolerated in Muhammedan countries.[63] Among polytheistic peoples, again, witchcraft is certainly in many cases treated with great severity; a large number of uncivilised races punish it with death,[64] and among some of them it is the only offence which is capital.[65] But then witchcraft is punished because it is considered destructive to human life or welfare.[66] "In Africa," says Mr. Rowley, "there is what is regarded as lawful as well as unlawful witchcraft, the lawful being practised professedly for the welfare of mankind, and in opposition to the unlawful, which is resorted to for man's injury." But "the purposes of witchcraft {651} are now generally wicked; its processes generally involve moral guilt; the spirits invoked are, for the most part, avowedly evil and maleficent."[67] Among the Gaika tribe of the Kafirs "witchcraft is supposed to be an influence for evil, possessed by one individual over another, or others."[68] Among the Bondeis "the meaning of witchcraft is simply murder."[69] That witchcraft, as a malicious practice, must be a grave and at the same time frequent offence among savages, is obvious from the common belief that death, disease, and misfortunes of every description are caused by it. From a similar point of view it is condemned by polytheistic nations of a higher type. Among the Aztecs of ancient Mexico anybody who employed sorcery or incantations for the purpose of doing harm to the community or to individuals was sacrificed to the gods.[70] The Chinese Penal Code punishes with death those who have been convicted of writing and editing books of sorcery, or of employing spells and incantations, "in order to agitate and influence the minds of the people."[71] But, according to Mr. Dennys, the hatred of witches and wizards cherished in the West does not seem to exist in China; "those reputed to possess magic powers are regarded with dread, but it is rare to hear of any of them coming to untimely end by mob violence."[72] The Laws of [Hv]ammurabi, the ancient Babylonian legislator, enjoin that "if a man weave a spell and put a ban upon a man, and has not justified himself, he that wove the spell upon him shall be put to death."[73] It is said in 'Vishnu Purâna' that he who practises magical rites "for the harm of others" is punished in the hell called Krimîsa.[74] Among the ancient Teutons not every kind of magic but only such as was considered of injurious nature was criminal.[75] {652} In Rome, also, what was deemed harmless magic was left undisturbed, whereas, according to the 'Law of the Twelve Tables,' "he who affects another by magical arts or with poisonous drugs" is to be put to death;[76] and during the Empire persons were severely persecuted for political astrology or divination practised with a view to discovering the successors to the throne.[77] Plato, writes in his 'Laws':--"He who seems to be the sort of man who injures others by magic knots or enchantments or incantations or any of the like practices, if he be a prophet or divine, let him die; and, if not being a prophet, he be convicted of witchcraft, as in the previous case, let the court fix what he ought to pay or suffer."[78] As Mr. Lecky justly remarks, both in Greece and Rome the measures taken against witchcraft seem to have been almost entirely free from religious fanaticism, the magician being punished because he injured man and not because he offended God.[79] Sometimes we find even among a polytheistic people that sorcery is particularly opposed by its priesthood;[80] but the reason for this is no doubt hatred of rivals rather than religious zeal. Miss Kingsley, however, does not think that the dislike of witchcraft in West Africa at large has originally anything to do with the priesthood.[81]

[Footnote 61: Lea, History of the Inquisition, iii. 422, 453. Pollock and Maitland, _History of English Law before the Time of Edward I._ ii. 552 sqq. Milman, op. cit. ix. 69. Lecky, Rise and Influence of Rationalism in Europe, i. 26. Keary, _Outlines of Primitive Belief among the Indo-European Races_, p. 511 sqq. Rogers, Social Life in Scotland, iii. 265, 268. Ralston, Songs of the Russian People, pp. 386, 416 sq.]

[Footnote 62: Exodus, xxii. 18. Leviticus, xix. 26, 31; xx. 6, 27. Deuteronomy, xviii. 10 sqq.]

[Footnote 63: Polak, Persien, i. 348. Lane, Modern Egyptians, i. 333.]

[Footnote 64: Supra, i. 189 sq. Cruickshank, _Eighteen Years on the Gold Coast_, ii. 179. Bowdich, Mission to Ashantee, p. 260. Johnston, British Central Africa, p. 403 (Bakongo). Cunningham, Uganda, pp. 35 (Banyoro), 140 (Bavuma), 305 (Basukuma), Arnot, Garenganze, p. 75. Decle, _Three Years in Savage Africa_, p. 76 (Barotse). Casalis, Basutos, p. 229. Kidd, The Essential Kafir, p. 148 sq. Sibree, _The Great African Island_, p. 292 (Malagasy). Swettenham, Malay Sketches, p. 196 (Malays of Perak). Dalton, Ethnology of Bengal, (Oraons). Egede, Description of Greenland, p. 123 sq. Krause, Die Tlinkit-Indianer, p. 293 sq. Jones, quoted by Kohler, 'Die Rechte der Urvölker Nordamerikas,' in _Zeitschr. f. vergl. Rechtswiss._ xii. 412 (Chippewas). Morgan, _League of the Iroquois_, p. 330; Seaver, Life of Mrs. Jemison, p. 167 (Iroquois). Powell, 'Wyandot Government,' in _Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn._ i. 67. Stevenson, 'Sia,' ibid. xi. 19. Lumholtz, Unknown Mexico, i. 325 (Tarahumares). Forbes, 'Aymara Indians of Bolivia and Peru,' in Jour. Ethn. Soc. N. S. ii. 236, n. *]

[Footnote 65: Supra, i. 189.]

[Footnote 66: Cf. Dorsey, 'Omaha Sociology,' in Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn. iii. 364.]

[Footnote 67: Rowley, Religion of the Africans, p. 125 sq. See also Kidd, The Essential Kafir, p. 148.]

[Footnote 68: Maclean, Compendium of Kafir Laws, p. 123.]

[Footnote 69: Dale, in Jour. Anthr. Inst. xxv. 223.]

[Footnote 70: Bancroft, Native Races of the Pacific States, ii. 462.]

[Footnote 71: Ta Tsing Leu Lee, sec. cclvi. p. 273.]

[Footnote 72: Dennys, Folk-Lore of China, p. 80.]

[Footnote 73: Laws of [Hv]ammurabi, 1.]

[Footnote 74: Vish['n]u Purá['n]a, p. 208.]

[Footnote 75: Brunner, Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte, ii. 678.]

[Footnote 76: Lex Duodecim Tabularum, viii. 25.]

[Footnote 77: Lecky, History of European Morals, i. 420.]

[Footnote 78: Plato, Leges, xi. 933.]

[Footnote 79: Lecky, Rationalism in Europe, i. 18.]

[Footnote 80: Kingsley, West African Studies, p. 137. Rink, Greenland, p. 201.]

[Footnote 81: Kingsley, West African Studies, p. 135 sq.]

The religious intolerance which has accompanied the rise of monotheism is, as we have just observed, the result of the nature attributed to its godhead. But the evolution of religion does not end with the triumph of a jealous and irritable heavenly despot. There is a later stage where men believe in a god or supernatural power which is absolutely free from all human weakness, and in such a religion intolerance has no place. It has been said that the tolerant spirit of Buddhism[82] is due to religious {653} indifference,[83] but the original cause of it seems to be the absence of a personal god; and the increasing tolerance of modern Christianity is undoubtedly connected with the more ethical view it takes of the Deity when compared with the opinions of earlier ages. It should be remembered, however, that religious toleration does not mean passive indifference with regard to dissenting religious ideas. The tolerant man may be a great propagandist. He may do his utmost to eradicate, by means of persuasion, what he considers to be a false belief. He may even resort to stronger measures against those who do mischief in the name of their religion. But he does not persecute anybody for the sake of his faith; nor does he believe in an intolerant and persecuting god.

[Footnote 82: Hardy, Eastern Monachism, p. 412. Monier-Williams, Buddhism, p. 126. Waddell, Buddhism of Tibet, p. 568. Edkins, Religion in China, p. 127. Gutzlaff, Sketch of Chinese History, i. 70. Forbes, British Burma, p. 322 sq.]

[Footnote 83: Forbes, op. cit. p. 322. Cf. Kuenen, Hibbert Lectures on National and Universal Religions, p. 290.]

* * * * *

Supernatural beings, according to the belief of many races, desire to be worshipped not only because they depend upon human care for their subsistence or comfort, but because worship is an act of homage. We have seen that sacrifice, after losing its original significance, still survives as a reverent offering. So also prayer is frequently a tribute to the self-regarding pride of the god to whom it is addressed. A supplication is an act of humility, more or less flattering to the person appealed to and especially gratifying where, as in the case of a god, the granting of the request entails no deprivation or loss, but on the contrary is rewarded by the worshipper. Moreover, the request is very commonly accompanied by reverential epithets or words of eulogy; and praise, nay even flattery, is just as pleasant to superhuman as to human ears. Gods are addressed as great or mighty, as lords or kings, as fathers or grandfathers.[84] A prayer of the ancient Peruvians began with the following words:--"O conquering Viracocha! Ever present Viracocha! Thou art in the ends of the earth without equal!"[85] {654} The ancient Egyptians flattered their gods,[86] the Vedic and Zoroastrian hymns are full of praise. Muhammedans invoke Allah by sentences such as, "God is great," "God is merciful," "God is he who seeth and heareth." Words of praise, as well as words of thanks, addressed to a god, may certainly be the expressions of unreflecting admiration or gratitude, free from all thought of pleasing him; but where laudation is demanded by the god as a price for good services, it is simply a tribute to his vanity. There is a Chinese story which amusingly illustrates this little weakness of so many gods:--At the hottest season of the year there was a heavy fall of snow at Soochow. The people, in their consternation, went to the temple of the Great Prince to pray. Then the spirit moved one of them to say, "You now address me as Your Honour. Make it Your Excellency, and, though I am but a lesser deity, it may be well worth your while to do so." Thereupon the people began to use the latter term, and the snow stopped at once.[87] The Hindus say that by praise a person may obtain from the gods whatever he desires.[88]

[Footnote 84: See Brinton, Religions of Primitive Peoples, p. 105.]

[Footnote 85: de Molina, 'Fables and Rites of the Yncas,' in Narratives of the Rites and Laws of the Yncas, p. 33.]

[Footnote 86: Amélineau, L'évolution des idées morales dans l'Égypte ancienne, p. 214.]

[Footnote 87: Giles, Strange Stories from a Chinese Studio, ii. 294.]

[Footnote 88: Ward, _View of the History, Literature, and Religion of the Hindoos_, ii. 69.]

We have different means of gratifying a person's self-regarding pride: one is to praise him, another is to humiliate ourselves. Both have been adopted by men with reference to their gods. Besides hymns of praise there are hymns of penitence, the object of which is largely to appease the angry feelings of offended gods. Prayers for remission of sins form a whole literature among peoples like that of the Vedic age, the Chaldeans,[89] and the Hebrews, who commonly regarded calamities to which men were subject not as the result of an inexorable fate nor as the machinations of evil spirits, but as divine punishments. According to early ideas, as we have seen, sin is a substance charged with injurious {655} energy, from which the infected person tries to rid himself by mechanical means.[90] But at the same time the effect of sin is conceived as a divine punishment, and this suggests atonement. In the Rig-Veda we not only hear of the removal of sins by magical operations, but the gods are requested to free the sufferer from his sin.[91]

[Footnote 89: Zimmern, Babylonische Busspsalmen, passim. Mürdter-Delitzsch, Geschichte Babyloniens und Assyriens, p. 38 sq. Delitzsch, Wo lag das Paradies? p. 86. Hommel, _Die semitischen Völker und Sprachen_, p. 315 sqq. Meyer, Geschichte des Alterthums, i. 178.]

[Footnote 90: Supra, i. 52 sqq.]

[Footnote 91: See Oldenberg, Die Religion des Veda, pp. 292, 296, 317 sq.]

Gods are fond of prayers not only as expressions of humility or repentance but for other reasons as well. In early religion a prayer is commonly connected with an offering, since the god is not supposed to bestow his favours gratuitously.[92] By the call contained in it he is invited to partake of the offering, or his attention is drawn to it.[93] "Compassionate father!" says the Tanna priest when he offers first-fruits to a deified ancestor; "here is some food for you, eat it, and be kind to us on account of it!"[94] In one of the Pahlavi texts it is said that when the guardian spirits of the righteous are invited they accept the sacrifice, whereas if they are not invited "they go up the height of a spear and will remain."[95] Throughout the Yasts we hear of the claims of deities to be worshipped with sacrifices in which they are invoked by their own names and with the proper words.[96] Mithra complains, "If men would worship me with a sacrifice in which I were invoked by my own name, as they worship the other Yazatas with sacrifices in which they are invoked by their own names, then I would come to the faithful at the appointed time."[97] {656} According to Vedic and Zoroastrian texts the gods were purified, strengthened, and encouraged not only by offerings but by prayers, although it is difficult in this respect to distinguish between two elements in one and the same rite which are so closely interwoven with each other.[98] By his invocations man assists the gods in their combats with evil demons, he sends his prayer between the earth and the heavens there to smite the fiends.[99] In a Vedic hymn the people are exhorted to "sing to Indra a song very destructive to the demons."[100] By pronouncing the praise of Asha, Zarathustra brings the Daevas to naught;[101] by mentioning the name of Ahura Mazda their malice is most effectually destroyed.[102] Thus prayer may be a religious duty also on account of the magic efficacy ascribed to it, and the same is the case with incantations directed against evil spirits.

[Footnote 92: Tylor, Primitive Culture, ii. 364 sqq. Georgi, Russia, iii. 272 (shamanistic peoples of Siberia). Maspero, Études de mythologie et d'archéologie égyptiennes, i. 163; Idem, Dawn of Civilization, p. 124, n. 5 (ancient Egyptians). Darmesteter, in Sacred Books of the East, iv. (1st ed.) p. lxix. (Zoroastrians). Oldenberg, op. cit. p. 430 sqq.; Barth, Religions of India, p. 34 (Vedic people). Donaldson, 'Expiatory and Substitutionary Sacrifices of the Greeks,' in Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh, xxvii. 430. Grimm, Teutonic Mythology, i. 29. Among the Kafirs of Natal "a soldier wounded in battle would only pray if his hurt were slight; but if it were serious, he would vow a sacrifice on his return, naming perhaps the particular beast" (Shooter, Kafirs of Natal, p. 164).]

[Footnote 93: Cf. Brinton, Religions of Primitive Peoples, p. 104.]

[Footnote 94: Turner, Nineteen Years in Polynesia, p. 88.]

[Footnote 95: Shâyast Lâ-Shâyast, ix. 12.]

[Footnote 96: Yasts, viii. 23 sqq.; x. 30.]

[Footnote 97: Ibid. x. 55. Cf. ibid. x. 74.]

[Footnote 98: See Bergaigne, La religion védique, ii. 237, 250, 273 sqq.; Zimmer, Altindisches Leben, p. 337 sqq.; Oldenberg, Religion des Veda, p. 437; Macdonell, _Vedic Mythology_, p. 60; Meyer, Geschichte des Alterthums, i. 534 sq. (Zoroastrianism).]

[Footnote 99: Yasna, xxviii. 7. Yasts, iii. 5. Vendîdâd, xix. 1, 2, 8 sqq. Darmesteter, Ormazd et Ahriman, pp. 101, 119, 131, 193. Idem, in Sacred Books of the East, iv. (1st ed.) p. lxix.]

[Footnote 100: Rig-Veda, viii. 78. 1.]

[Footnote 101: Yasts, xiii. 89. Cf. ibid. xiii. 90.]

[Footnote 102: Ibid. i. 3, 4, 10, 11, 19.]

In earlier chapters we have often noticed how curses gradually develop into genuine prayers, and vice versa may a prayer develop into a curse or spell. Dr. Rivers observes that the formulæ used in Toda magic have the form of prayers.[103] So also Assyrian incantations are often dressed in the robe of supplication, and end with the formula, "Do so and so, and I shall gladden thine heart and worship thee in humility."[104] Vedic texts which were not originally meant as charms became so afterwards. Incantations are comparatively rare in the Rig-Veda, and seem even to be looked upon as objectionable, but towards the end of the Vedic period the reign of Brahma, the power of prayer, as the supreme god in the Indian Pantheon began to dawn.[105] {657}Brahma is a force by which the gods act, by which they are born, and by which the world has been formed;[106] but it is also the prayer which ascends from the altar to heaven and by means of which man wrests from the gods the boon he demands[107]--"the prayer governs them."[108] This omnipresent force is personified in Brahma[n.]aspati, the lord of prayer, who resides in the highest heaven but of whom not only every separate god but the priest himself becomes a manifestation at the moment he pronounces the mantras or sacred texts.[109] It is a current saying in India that the whole universe is subject to the gods, that the gods are subject to the mantras, that the mantras are subject to the Brahmans, and that therefore the Brahmans are the real gods.[110] In Zoroastrianism prayers are not made efficacious by devotion and fervency, but to the words themselves belongs a mysterious power and the mere recitation of them, if correct and faultless, brings that power into action;[111] in the Yasts prayer is regarded as a goddess, as the daughter of Ahura Mazda.[112] In ancient Egypt, M. Maspero observes, "la prière n'était pas comme chez nous une petition que l'homme présente au dieu, et que le dieu est libre d'accepter ou de refuser à son gré: c'était une formule dont les terms ont une valeur impérative, et dont l'énonciation exacte oblige le dieu à concéder ce qu'on lui demande."[113] Greek literature supplies other instances of men conjuring their gods by incantations;[114] the word [Greek: a)ra/] means both prayer and curse.[115] And "in the Roman, as in the majority of the old Italian cults, prayer is a magic formula, producing its effect by its own inherent quality."[116]

[Footnote 103: Rivers, Todas, pp. 450, 453.]

[Footnote 104: Tallqvist, 'Die assyrische Beschwörungsserie Maqlû,' in Acta Soc. Scient. Fennicæ, xx. 22.]

[Footnote 105: Oldenberg, op. cit. p. 311 sqq. Hopkins, op. cit. p. 149. Roth, 'Brahma und die Brahmanen,' in Zeitschr. d. Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellsch. i. 67, 71. Darmesteter, Essais orientaux, p. 132.]

[Footnote 106: Atharva-Veda, xi. 5. 5. Barth, op. cit. p. 38.]

[Footnote 107: Roth, loc. cit. p. 66 sqq. Barth, op. cit. p. 38. Darmesteter, Ormazd et Ahriman, p. 101.]

[Footnote 108: Rig-Veda, vi. 51. 8.]

[Footnote 109: Barth, op. cit. p. 15 sq. Roth, loc. cit. p. 71.]

[Footnote 110: Monier-Williams, Br[=a]hmanism and Hind[=u]ism, p. 201 sq.]

[Footnote 111: See Geiger, _Civilization of the Eastern Ir[=a]nians_, i. 71.]

[Footnote 112: Yasts, xiii. 92; xvii. 16.]

[Footnote 113: Maspero, Études de mythologie et archéologie égyptiennes, i. 163.]

[Footnote 114: See Usener, Götternamen, p. 335 sq.]

[Footnote 115: Cf. von Lasaulx, Der Fluch bei Griechen und Römern, p. 6. So also the Manx word gwee means both prayer and curse (Rhys, Celtic Folklore, i. 349).]

[Footnote 116: Renan, Hibbert Lectures on the Influence of the Institutions, &c. of Rome on Christianity, p. 10 sq. Cf. Jevons, in Plutarch's Romane Questions, p. xxviii.; Granger, Worship of the Romans, p. 158.]

{658} Whilst an ordinary curse readily develops into a prayer when the name of a god is brought in for the purpose of giving magic efficacy to the curse, a prayer may contrariwise assume a magic character by being addressed to a god--just as a sacrifice becomes endowed with magic energy in consequence of its contact or communion with the supernatural being to which it is offered; and the constraining force in the prayer or sacrifice may then be directed even against the god himself. But there can be little doubt that the extreme importance which the magic element in the cult attained among the nations of ancient civilisation was chiefly due to the prevalence of a powerful priesthood or class of persons well versed in sacred texts. A successful incantation presupposes a certain knowledge in him who utters it. The words of the formulæ are fixed and may not suffer the slightest modification under penalty of losing their potency. Right intonation is equally important.[117] The Brahmanic mantras "must be pronounced according to certain mystic forms and with absolute accuracy, or their efficacy is destroyed"; nay, if in the repetition of a mantra the slightest mistake is made, either by omission of a syllable or defective pronunciation, the calamity which it was intended to bring down on an enemy will inevitably recoil on the head of the repeater.[118] The potency of the incantation largely lies in the voice, which is the magical instrument par excellence.[119] A Buddhist priest who was asked what advantage he could expect to derive from merely repeating a number of words with the sense of which he was entirely unacquainted, gave the answer that the advantage of often repeating the sounds was incalculable, infinite;[120] and a Muhammedan writer argues that prayers which are offered in any other language than {659} Arabic are profane and useless, because "the sounds of this language"--whether understood or not--"illuminate the darkness of men" and "purify the hearts of the faithful."[121] Ideas of this sort are of course most strongly advocated by those who derive the greatest profit from them--priests or scribes. And it is easy to understand that with their increasing influence among a superstitious and credulous people the magic significance which is so readily ascribed to a religious act also has a tendency to grow in importance.

[Footnote 117: Maspero, Études, i. 109; Idem, Dawn of Civilization, pp. 146, 213 (ancient Egyptians). Sayce, Hibbert Lectures on the Religion of the Andent Babylonians, p. 319. Darmesteter, Ormazd et Ahriman, p. 9. Sell, Faith of Islám, pp. 53, 79, 334, 341.]

[Footnote 118: Monier-Williams, Br[=a]hmanism and Hind[=u]ism, p. 199.]

[Footnote 119: Yasts, iv. 5. Maspero, Études, ii. 373 sq.; Idem, Dawn of Civilization, p. 146 (ancient Egyptians). Sell, op. cit. p. 318 (Muhammedans).]

[Footnote 120: Indo-Chinese Gleaner, iii. 145.]

[Footnote 121: Indo-Chinese Gleaner, iii. 146.]

* * * * *

Among all sins there is none which gods resent more severely than disobedience to their commandments. Mr. Macdonald says of the Efatese, in the New Hebrides, that no people under the sun is more obedient to what they regard as divine mandates than these savages, who believe that an offence against a spiritual being means calamity and death.[122] The Chaldeans had a lively sense of the risks entailed upon the sinner by disobedience to the gods.[123] According to the Bible disobedience was the first sin committed by man, and death was introduced into the world as its punishment. "Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry."[124] On the history of morals this demand of obedience has exercised considerable influence. It gives emphasis to moral rules which are looked upon as divine injunctions, and it helps to preserve such rules after the conditions from which they sprang have ceased to exist. The fact that they have become meaningless does not render them less binding; on the contrary, the mystery surrounding them often increases their sanctity. The commandments of a god must be obeyed independently of their contents, simply because disobedience to him is a sin. Acts totally different in character, crimes of the worst description and {660} practices by themselves perfectly harmless, are grouped together as almost equally offensive to the deity because they have been forbidden by him.[125] And moral progress is hampered by a number of precepts which, though rooted in obsolete superstitions or antiquated ideas about right and wrong, have an obstinate tendency to persist on account of their supposed divine origin.[126]

[Footnote 122: Macdonald, Oceania, p. 201.]

[Footnote 123: Maspero, Dawn of Civilization, p. 682. Delitzsch, Wo lag das Paradies? p. 86.]

[Footnote 124: 1 Samuel, xv. 23. Schultz, _Old Testament Theology_, ii. 286. For other instances see Rig-Veda, vii. 89. 5; Geiger, Civilization of the Eastern Ir[=a]nians, i. p. li.; Schmidt, Die Ethik der alten Griechen, ii. 51 sq.]

[Footnote 125: Cf. supra, i. 193 sqq.]

[Footnote 126: Cf. Pollock, _Essays on Jurisprudence and Ethics_, p. 306 sq.]

* * * * *

Duties to gods are in the first place based on prudential considerations. Supernatural beings, even when on the whole of a benevolent disposition, are no less resentful than men, and, owing to their superhuman power, much more dangerous. On the other hand, they may also bestow wonderful benefits upon those who please them. The general rule that prudence readily assumes a moral value holds particularly true of religious matters, where great individual interests are at stake. Waterland says in his Sermon on Self-love:--"The wisest course for any man to take is to secure an interest in the life to come. . . . He may love himself, in this instance, as highly and as tenderly as he pleases. There can be no excess of fondness, or self-indulgence, in respect of eternal happiness. This is loving himself in the best manner, and to the best purposes. All virtue and piety are thus resolvable into a principle of self-love. . . . It is with reference to ourselves, and for our own sakes, that we love even God himself."[127]

[Footnote 127: Waterland, 'On Self-Love,' in The English Preacher, i. 101 sq. Cf. Paley's definition of virtue in his Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy, i. 7 (Complete Works, ii. 38; supra, i. 300).]

At the same time it may be not only in people's own interests, but in the interests of their fellow men as well, for them to be on friendly terms with supernatural beings. These beings often visit the iniquity of fathers or forefathers upon children or descendants, or punish the community for the sins of one of its members;[128] and, on the other hand, they reward the whole family or group for the virtues of a single individual.[129] So also, when the {661} members of a community join in common acts of worship, each worshipper promotes not only his own welfare, but the welfare of his people. In early religion it is of the utmost importance for the tribe or nation that the established cult should be strictly observed. This is a fact which cannot be too much emphasised when we have to explain how conduct which is pleasing to a god has come to be regarded as a moral duty; for, if the latest stages of religious development be excepted, the relations between men and their gods are communal rather than individual in character. Ahura Mazda said, "If men sacrifice unto Verethraghna, made by Ahura, if the due sacrifice and prayer is offered unto him just as it ought to be performed in the perfection of holiness, never will a hostile horde enter the Aryan countries, nor any plague, nor leprosy, nor venomous plants, nor the chariot of a foe, nor the uplifted spear of a foe!"[130] Thus the duties to gods are at the same time social duties of the first order, owing to the intensely social character of religious relationships.

[Footnote 128: Supra, i. 48 sqq.]

[Footnote 129: Supra, i. 96 sqq.]

[Footnote 130: Yasts, xiv. 48.]

Another circumstance which has contributed to the moral condemnation of offences against gods is that people are anxious to punish such offences in order to prevent the divine wrath from turning against themselves;[131] for punishment, as we have seen, easily leads to moral disapproval. But although prudential considerations of some kind or other be the chief cause of the obligatory character attached to men's conduct towards their gods, they are not the only cause. We must also remember that gods are regarded with genuine reverence by their worshippers; and where this is the case offences against religion naturally excite sympathetic resentment in the latter, whilst great piety calls forth sympathetic approval and is praised as a virtue.

[Footnote 131: Supra, i. 194.]

I have here spoken of duties which men consider they owe to their gods, not of duties to supernatural beings in general. This distinction, though not always easy to {662} follow in detail, is yet of vital importance. People may no doubt be afraid to offend and even anxious to please other spirits besides their gods, but religious duties chiefly arise where there are established relationships between men and supernatural beings; indeed, it may even be a duty to refrain from worshipping or actually to persecute other spirits, as is the case in monotheistic religions. Men depend for their welfare on their gods more than on any other members of the spiritual world. They select as their gods those supernatural beings from whom they think they have most to fear or most to hope. Hence it is generally in the relations to them only that those factors, prudential and reverential, are to be found which lead to the establishment of religious duties.

L. GODS AS GUARDIANS OF MORALITY

AS men are concerned about the conduct of their fellow men towards their gods, so gods are in many cases concerned about men's conduct towards one another--disapproving of vice and punishing the wicked, approving of virtue and rewarding the good. But this is by no means a universal characteristic of gods. It is a quality attributed to certain deities only and, as it seems, in most instances slowly acquired.

We are told by competent observers that the supernatural beings of savage belief frequently display the utmost indifference to all questions of worldly morality. According to Messrs. Spencer and Gillen, the Central Australian natives, though they assume the existence of both friendly and mischievous spirits, "have not the vaguest idea of a personal individual other than an actual living member of the tribe who approves or disapproves of their conduct, so far as anything like what we call morality is concerned."[1] The Society Islanders maintained that "the only crimes that were visited by the displeasure of their deities were the neglect of some rite or ceremony."[2] The religious belief of the Gonds of Central India is said to be wholly unconnected with any idea of morality; a moral deity demanding righteous conduct from his creatures, our informant adds, is a religious {664} conception far beyond the present capacity either of the Indian savage or the ordinary Hindu.[3] Of the E[(w]e-, Yoruba-, and Tshi-speaking peoples of the West African Slave and Gold Coasts Major Ellis writes:--"Religion, at the stage of growth in which we find it among these three groups of tribes, has no connection with morals, or the relations of men to one another. It consists solely of ceremonial worship, and the gods are only offended when some rite or ceremony has been neglected or omitted. . . . Murder, theft, and all offences against the person or against property, are matters in which the gods have no immediate concern, and in which they take no interest, except in the case when, bribed by a valuable offering, they take up the quarrel in the interests of some faithful worshipper."[4] So also among the Bambala, a Bantu tribe in the Kasai, south of the River Congo, "there is no belief that the gods or spirits punish wrong-doing by afflicting the criminal or his family, nor are the acts of a man supposed to affect his condition after death."[5] The Indians of Guiana, says Sir E. F. Im Thurn, observe an admirable code of morality, which exists side by side with a simple animistic form of religion, but the two have absolutely no connection with one another.[6] With reference to the Tarahumares of Mexico Dr. Lumholtz states that the only wrong towards the gods of which an Indian may consider himself guilty is that he does not dance enough. "For this offence he asks pardon. Whatever bad thoughts or actions toward man he may have on his conscience are settled between himself and the person offended."[7] In the primitive Indian's conception of a god," Mr. Parkman observes, "the idea of moral good {665} has no part. His deity does not dispense justice for this world or the next."[8]

[Footnote 1: Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes of Central Australia, p. 491.]

[Footnote 2: Ellis, Polynesian Researches, i. 397.]

[Footnote 3: Forsyth, Highlands of Central India, p. 145. See also Hodgson, Miscellaneous Essays, i. 124 (Bódo and Dhimáls); Caldwell, Tinnevelly Shanars, p. 36; Lyall, Asiatic Studies, p. 45; Radloff, Das Schamanenthum, p. 13 (Turkish tribes of the Altai).]

[Footnote 4: Ellis, Yoruba-speaking Peoples of the Slave Coast, p. 293. Idem, Tshi-speaking Peoples of the Gold Coast, p. 10. The E[(w]e god Mawu is represented as an exception to this rule (infra, p. 686).]

[Footnote 5: Torday and Joyce, 'Ethnography of the Ba-Mbala,' in Jour. Anthr. Inst. xxxv. 415.]

[Footnote 6: Im Thurn, Indians of Guiana, p. 342.]

[Footnote 7: Lumholtz, Unknown Mexico, i. 332.] [Footnote 8: Parkman, Jesuits in North America, p. lxxviii. See also Eastman, Dacotah, p. xx.; Schoolcraft, Indian Tribes of the United States, ii. 195 (Dacotahs).]

That many savage gods are so thoroughly selfish as to care about nothing else than what concerns their own interests, may also be inferred from the character attributed to them. We have seen that the altruistic sentiment is the chief source from which moral emotions spring, and of the gods of various uncivilised peoples we hear not only that they are totally destitute of benevolent feelings, but that they are of a malicious nature and mostly intent on doing harm to mankind.[9]

[Footnote 9: See Meiners, Geschichte der Religionen, i. 405; Tylor, Primitive Culture, ii. 329; Avebury, _Origin of Civilisation_, p. 232 sqq.; Roskoff, Geschichte des Teufels, i. 20 sq.; Frazer, Golden Bough, iii. 40 sqq.; Karsten, Origin of Worship, p. 46 sqq.]

The Maoris of New Zealand regarded their deities as the causes of pain, misery, and death, as mighty enemies from whom nobody ever thought of getting any aid or good, but who were to be rendered harmless by means of charms or spells or by sacrifices offered to appease their wrath.[10] The Tahitians "supposed their gods were powerful spiritual beings, in some degree acquainted with the events of this world, and generally governing its affairs; never exercising any thing like benevolence towards even their most devoted followers, but requiring homage and obedience, with constant offerings; denouncing their anger, and dispensing destruction on all who either refused or hesitated to comply."[11] The Fijians "formed no idea of any voluntary kindness on the part of their gods, except the planting of wild yams, and the wrecking of strange canoes and foreign vessels on their coast";[12] and that some of these beings were conceived as positively wicked is indicated by the names given them--"the adulterer," "the rioter," "the murderer," and so forth.[13] The people of Aneiteum, in the New Hebrides, maintained that "earth and air and ocean were filled with natmasses, spiritual beings, but all malignant, who ruled over everything that affected the human race. . . . Their deities, like themselves, were {666} all selfish and malignant; they breathed no spirit of benevolence."[14]

[Footnote 10: Taylor, Te Ika a Maui, pp. 104, 148. Colenso, Maori Races of New Zealand, p. 62. Cf. Dieffenbach, Travels in New Zealand, ii. 118.]

[Footnote 11: Ellis, Polynesian Researches, i. 336.]

[Footnote 12: Williams and Calvert, Fiji, p. 195.]

[Footnote 13: Ibid. p. 185.]

[Footnote 14: Inglis, In the New Hebrides, pp. 30, 32.]

The Santal of India believes in no god from whose benignity he may expect favour, but in "a multitude of demons and evil spirits, whose spite he endeavours by supplications to avert." Even his family god "represents the secret principle of evil, which no bolts can shut out, and which dwells in unseen but eternally malignant presence beside every hearth."[15] The Kamchadales do not seem to have hoped for anything good from their deities; Kutka himself, the creator of the universe and the greatest of the gods, was once caught in adultery and castrated.[16]

[Footnote 15: Hunter, Annals of Rural Bengal, i. 181 sq.]

[Footnote 16: Klemm, Cultur-Geschichte der Menschheit, ii. 318 sq. Steller, Beschreibung von Kamtschatka, p. 264.]

According to the beliefs of the Koksoagmyut, or Hudson Bay Eskimo, all the minor spirits are under the control of the great spirit whose name is Tung ak, and this being "is nothing more or less than death, which ever seeks to torment and harass the lives of people that their spirits may go to dwell with him."[17] Nay, even the special guardian spirit by which each person is supposed to be attended is malignant in character and ever ready to seize upon the least occasion to work harm upon the individual whom it accompanies; its good offices can be obtained by propitiation only.[18] Among the Nenenot, or Indians of Hudson Bay, "the rule seems to be that all spirits are by nature bad, and must be propitiated to secure their favour."[19] Of various Brazilian tribes we are likewise told that they do not believe in the existence of any benevolent spirits. Thus the Coroado Indian acknowledges only an evil principle, which sometimes meets him in the form of a lizard or a crocodile or an ounce or a man with the feet of a stag, sometimes transforms itself into a swamp, and leads him astray, vexes him, brings him into difficulty and danger, and even kills him.[20] The Mundrucus of the Cuparí have no notion of a good supreme being, but believe in an evil spirit, regarded merely as a kind of hobgoblin, who is at the bottom of all their little failures and gives them troubles in fishing, hunting, and so forth.[21] The Uaupés, says Mr. Wallace, "appear to have no definite idea of a God. . . . They have much more definite ideas of a bad spirit, 'Juruparí,' or Devil, whom they fear and {667} endeavour through their pagés [or medicine men] to propitiate. When it thunders, they say the 'Juruparí' is angry, and their idea of natural death is that the 'Juruparí' kills them."[22]

[Footnote 17: Turner, 'Ethnology of the Ungava District,' in Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn. xi. 272.]

[Footnote 18: Ibid. p. 194.]

[Footnote 19: Ibid. p. 193 sq.]

[Footnote 20: von Spix and von Martius, Travels in Brazil, ii. 243.]

[Footnote 21: Bates, The Naturalist on the River Amazons, ii. 137.]

[Footnote 22: Wallace, Travels on the Amazon, p. 500.]

In Eastern Africa, according to Burton, "the sentiment generally elicited by a discourse upon the subject of the existence of a Deity is a desire to see him, in order to revenge upon him the deaths of relatives, friends, and cattle."[23] The only quality of a moral character which the Wanika are said to ascribe to the supreme being, Mulungu, is that of vindictiveness and cruelty.[24] To the Matabele the idea of a benevolent deity is utterly foreign, but they have a vague notion of a number of evil spirits always ready to do harm, and the chief among these are the spirits of their ancestors.[25] All the good the Bechuanas enjoy they ascribe to rainmakers, but "all the evil that comes they attribute to a supernatural being";[26] of their principal god, Morimo, Mr. Moffat never once, in the course of twenty-five years spent in missionary labour, heard that he did good or was capable of doing so.[27] Among various other African peoples, travellers assure us, supernatural beings are supposed to exercise a potent influence for evil rather than for good, or beneficent spirits are, at any rate, almost unknown.[28] On the Gold Coast, according to Major Ellis, the majority of spirits are malignant, and every misfortune is ascribed to their action. "I believe," he adds, "that originally all were conceived as malignant, and that the indifference, or the beneficence (when propitiated by sacrifice and flattery), which are now believed to be characteristics of some of these beings, are later modifications of the original idea."[29]

[Footnote 23: Burton, Lake Regions of Central Africa, ii. 348.]

[Footnote 24: New, _Life, Wanderings, and Labours in Eastern Africa_, p. 103 sq.]

[Footnote 25: Decle, Three Years in Savage Africa, p. 153.]

[Footnote 26: Campbell, Second Journey in the Interior of South Africa, ii. 204.]

[Footnote 27: Moffat, Missionary Labours in Southern Africa (ed. 1842), p. 262.]

[Footnote 28: Rowley, Religion of the Africans, p. 55. Kingsley, Travels in West Africa, p. 443. Mockler-Ferryman, British Nigeria, p. 255 sq.]

[Footnote 29: Ellis, Tshi-speaking Peoples, pp. 12, 18, 20. Cf. Cruickshank, Eighteen Years on the Gold Coast, ii. 134.]

Of many savages it is reported that they have notions of good, as well as of evil spirits, but that they chiefly or exclusively worship the evil ones, since the others are supposed to be so good that they require no offerings or homage.[30] But adoration of supernatural beings which are {668} considered at least occasionally beneficent is also very prevalent among uncivilised peoples.[31] The gods of the pagan Lapps were all good, although they took revenge upon those who offended them.[32] Among the Navaho Indians of New Mexico "the gods who are supposed to love and help men the most receive the greatest honour"; whereas the evil spirits are not worshipped except, rumour says, by the witches.[33] The belief in guardian or tutelary spirits of tribes, clans, villages, families, or individuals, is extremely widespread.[34] These spirits may be exacting enough--they are often greatly feared by their own worshippers, and sometimes described as distinctly malignant {669} by nature;[35] but their general function is nevertheless to afford assistance to the person or persons with whom they are associated. At the same time it should be noticed that the goodness of many savage gods only consists in their readiness to help those who please them by offerings or adoration; and in no case does their benevolence prove that they take an active interest in morality at large. A friendly supernatural being is not necessarily a guardian of men's behaviour towards their fellow men. In Morocco the patron saint of a town, village, or tribe is not in the least concerned about any kind of conduct which has not immediate reference to himself.[36] It is believed that even the robber may, by invoking a dead saint, secure his assistance in an unlawful enterprise.

[Footnote 30: Wilken, _Het Animisme bij de volken van den Indischen Archipel_, p. 207 sq. Perham, 'Sea Dyak Religion,' in Jour. Straits Branch Roy. Asiatic Soc. no. 10, p. 220; St. John, Life in the Forests of the Far East, i. 69 sq. (Sea Dyaks). Blumentritt, 'Der Ahnencultus und die religiösen Anschauungen der Malaien des Philippinen-Archipels,' in Mittheil. d. kais. u. kön. Geograph. Gesellsch. in Wien, xxv. 166 sqq. Prain, 'Angami Nagas,' in _Revue coloniale internationale_, v. 489. Forsyth, op. cit. pp. 141, 143 (Gonds). Hooker, Himalayan Journals, i. 126 (Lepchas). Robertson, History of America, i. 383; Müller, _Geschichte der Amerikanischen Urreligionen_, pp. 150, 151, 232, 260; Dorman, Origin of Primitive Superstition, p. 30 (American Indians). Sproat, Scenes and Studies of Savage Life, p. 212 (Ahts). Falkner, Description of Patagonia, p. 116; Prichard, _Through the Heart of Patagonia_, p. 97.]

[Footnote 31: See supra, ii. 615 sq.]

[Footnote 32: von Düben, Lappland, pp. 227, 285. Friis, Lappisk Mythologi, p. 106. Jessen, _Norske Finners og Lappers Hedenske Religion_, p. 33.]

[Footnote 33: Matthews, Navaho Legends, p. 40. See also ibid. p. 33.]

[Footnote 34: Ellis, Tshi-speaking Peoples of the Gold Coast, pp. 17, 18, 77, 92. Idem, _E[(w]e-speaking Peoples of the Slave Coast_, p. 75. Wilson, Western Africa, p. 387 (Mpongwe). Tuckey, River Zaire, p. 375. Ellis, History of Madagascar, i. 395 sq. Ratzel, History of Mankind, i. 321 (various South Sea Islanders). Turner, Samoa, p. 17 sq. Williams and Calvert, Fiji, p. 185 sq. Inglis, op. cit. p. 30 (people of Aneiteum). Christian, Caroline Islands, p. 75. Wilken, _Het Animisme_, pp. 231 sqq. (Minahassers, Macassars, and Bugis of Celebes), 243 (Javanese). Selenka, Sonnige Welten, p. 103 sq. (Dyaks). Forbes, Insulinde, p. 203 (natives of Tenimber). von Brenner, Besuch bei den Kannibalen Sumatras, p. 221 (Bataks). Mason, 'Religion, &c. among the Karens,' in _Jour. Asiatic Soc. Bengal_, xxxiv. 196. Hunter, Annals of Rural Bengal, i. 182, 186 sq. (Santals). Hodgson, Miscellaneous Essays, i. 128 (Bódo and Dhimáls). Bailey, 'Veddahs of Ceylon,' in _Trans. Ethn. Soc._ N.S. ii. 301; Nevill, 'Vaeddas of Ceylon,' in Taprobanian, i. 194. Schmidt, Ceylon, p. 291 sq. (Tamils). Bergmann, Nomadische Streifereien unter den Kalmüken, iii. 182 sq. Abercromby, Pre- and Proto-historic Finns, i. 160 (Ostiaks). Buch, 'Die Wotjaken,' in Acta Soc. Scient. Fennicæ, xii. 595 sq. Castrén, Nordiska resor och forskningar, iii. 106, 107, 174 sq. (Finnish tribes). Boas, 'Central Eskimo,' in Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn. vi. 591. Turner, ibid. xi. 193 sq. (Hudson Bay Eskimo), 272 (Hudson Bay Indians). Hoffman, 'Menomini Indians,' ibid. xiv. 65. McGee, 'Siouan Indians,' ibid. xv. 179; Parkman, op. cit. p. lxx; Dorman, op. cit. p. 227 (North American Indians). Müller, _Geschichte der Amerikanischen Urreligionen_, pp. 72 (North American Indians), 171 (Indians of the Great Antilles). Couto de Magalhães, _Trabalho preparatorio para aproveitamento do selvagem no Brazil--O selvagem_, p. 128 sqq. Tylor, op. cit. ii. 199 sqq.]

[Footnote 35: Schmidt, Ceylon, p. 291 sq. (Tamils). Turner, in Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn. xi. 193 sq. (Hudson Bay Eskimo), 272 (Hudson Bay Indians). McGee, ibid. xv. 179; Müller, op. cit. p. 72 (North American Indians).]

[Footnote 36: For a singular exception to this rule see supra, ii. 67 sq.]

On the other hand, instances are not wanting in which savage gods are supposed to punish the transgression of rules relating to worldly morality. Occasionally, as we have noticed above, such gods are represented as avengers of some special kind of wrong-doing--murder,[37] theft,[38] niggardliness,[39] want of hospitality,[40] or lying.[41] Of certain Negro tribes we are told that, "when a man is about to commit a crime, or do that which his conscience tells him he ought not to do, he lays aside his fetiche, and covers up his deity, that he may not be privy to the deed."[42] The Tonga Islanders "firmly believe that the gods approve of virtue, and are displeased with vice; that every man has his tutelar deity, who will protect him as long as he conducts himself as he ought to do; but, if he does not, will leave him to the approaches of misfortune, disease, and death. . . . All rewards for virtue or punishments for vice happen to men in this world only, {670} and come immediately from the gods."[43] The Ainu of Japan are heard to say, "We could not go contrary to the customs of our ancestors without bringing down upon us the wrath of the gods."[44] And of various savages we are told that they believe in the existence of a supreme being who is a moral lawgiver or judge.

[Footnote 37: Supra, i. 378 sq.]

[Footnote 38: Supra, ii. 59 sq.]

[Footnote 39: Supra, i. 561 sq.]

[Footnote 40: Supra, i. 578.]

[Footnote 41: Supra, ii. 114 sq.]

[Footnote 42: Tuckey, op. cit. p. 377. Cf. Monrad, Skildring af Guinea-Kysten, p. 27, n. *]

[Footnote 43: Mariner, Natives of the Tonga Islands, ii. 149, 107.]

[Footnote 44: Batchelor, Ainu of Japan, p. 243 sq.]

In Australia, especially in New South Wales and Victoria but also in other parts of the continent, many of the native tribes have the notion of an "All-father," called Baiame, Daramulun, Mungan-ngalla, Bunjil, Nurelli, Nurundere, or by some other name.[45] He is represented as an anthropomorphic, supernatural being and as the father of the race or the maker of everything, who at one time dwelt on the earth but afterwards ascended to a land beyond the sky, where he still remains. He is of a kindly disposition, and requires no worship; in a very few cases only we meet with some faint traces of a cult offered him.[46] {671} He is frequently believed to have instituted the initiation ceremonies,[47] and to have given the people their laws.[48] Thus Nurundere is said to have taught the Narrinyeri all the rites and ceremonies whether connected with life or death; on inquiry why they adhere to any custom, the reply is that Nurundere commanded it.[49] At the boorah, or initiation, of the Euahlayi tribe, Byamee is proclaimed as "Father of All, whose laws the tribes are now obeying"; and in one of their myths he is described as the original source of all the totems and of the law that persons of the same totem may not intermarry.[50] Bunjil taught the Kulin the arts of life, and told them to divide themselves into two intermarrying classes so as to prevent marriages between kindred.[51] Daramulun instructed the Yuin what to do and gave them laws which the old people have handed down from father to son to the present time.[52] And in several instances the Australian "All-father" is represented as a guardian of morality who punishes the wicked and rewards the good. Bunjil "very frequently sent his sons to destroy bad men and bad women . . . who had killed and eaten blacks."[53] Daramulun, or Tharamulun, who from his residence in the sky watches the actions of men, "is very angry when they do things that they ought not to do, as when they eat forbidden food."[54] The natives of the Herbert River, in Queensland, believe that anybody who takes a wife from the prohibited sub-class, or who does not wear the morning necklace for the prescribed period, or who eats forbidden food, will sooner or later die in consequence, since his behaviour is offensive to Kohin, a supernatural being who is supposed to have his dwelling in the Milky Way but to roam about at night on earth as a gigantic warrior killing those whom he meets.[55] Most commonly, however, the retribution is said to come after death. {672} The tribes about Maryborough, in Queensland, maintain that the ghosts of those who are good or those who have a high degree of excellence in any particular line--fishing, hunting, fighting, dancing, and so forth--are directed by Birral to an island in the Far North, where he resides.[56] Among the Cape River tribes, "when a Blackfellow dies whose actions during life have been what they hold to be good, he is said to ascend to Boorala (i.e., to the Creator, literally 'good'), where he lives much as he did on earth, less the usual terrestrial discomforts"; whereas to the man who has led a bad life death is thought to be simple annihilation.[57] The Kulin said that when they die they will be subjected to a sort of trial by Binbeal, "the good being rewarded in a better land, the bad driven away, but where they seemed to have no idea."[58] According to another account, again, Binbeal, after he has subjected the spirits of the deceased to an ordeal of fire to try whether they are good or bad, liberates the good at once, whereas the bad are confined and punished.[59] The Illawarra, who lived from thirty to a hundred miles south of Sidney, believed that when people die they are brought up to a large tree where Mirirul, the supreme ruler, examines and judges them. The good he takes up to the sky, the bad he sends to another place to be punished. The women said to their children when they were naughty, "Mirirul will not allow it."[60] Among the Wathiwathi, in New South Wales, the belief prevails that if the spirit of a bad man escapes the traps which are set for it on its course in the sky, it is sure to fall into the hell of fire. The good spirit, on the other hand, is received by two old women who take care of it till it becomes accustomed to its new abode; and after a time the great God, Tha-tha-puli, comes with a host of spirits to see the newcomer and try his strength.[61] According to a report written by Archdeacon Günther in 1839, Baiame is supposed to like the blacks who are good; and "there is also an idea entertained by the more thoughtful that good natives will go to Baiame when they die."[62] Later authorities state that Baiame is believed not only to reward the good after death, but also to punish the wicked--that is, persons who tell lies or kill men by striking them secretly or who are unkind towards the old and sick or, generally, who break his laws.[63] A very elaborate {673} theory of retribution is communicated by Mr. Manning, whose notes date from 1844 or 1845. Boyma (Baiame) is said to be seated far away in the north-east on an immense throne made of transparent crystal and standing in a great lake. He has a son, Grogoragally, equal with him in omniscience, who acts as mediator for the souls to the Great God. His office is to watch over the actions of mankind and to bring to life the dead to appear before the judgment-seat of his Father, who alone pronounces the judgment of eternal happiness in heaven or eternal misery in a hell of everlasting fire. Women and boys dying before the initiation, however, do not go to heaven; the men have a vague idea that another world is reserved for them. There is also a third person, half human, half divine, called Moodgeegally, who makes Boyma's will known to mankind and is the avowed enemy of all wicked people, transmitting their misdeeds to Grogoragally.[64]

[Footnote 45: Henderson, Colonies of New South Wales, p. 147. de Strzelecki, New South Wales, p. 339. Manning, 'Aborigines of New Holland,' in Jour. and Proceed. Roy. Soc. N.S. Wales, xvi. 157 sqq. Ridley, Kámilarói, p. 135 sqq. Cameron, 'Some Tribes of New South Wales,' in Jour. Anthr. Inst. xiv. 364 sq. Langloh Parker, Euahlayi Tribe, p. 4 sqq. Threlkeld, An Australian Language as spoken by the Awabakal, p. 47. Mathews, Aboriginal Tribes of New South Wales and Victoria, p. 138 sqq. Mathew, Eagle-hawk and Crow, p. 146 sqq. Fountain and Ward, Rambles of an Australian Naturalist, p. 296. Missions-Blatt aus der Brüdergemeine, xvi. 101, 143; Parker, Aborigines of Australia, p. 24; Dawson, Australian Aborigines, p. 49 (tribes in Victoria). Brough Smyth, Aborigines of Victoria, i. 423 sqq. Taplin, 'Narrinyeri,' in Woods, Native Tribes of South Australia, p. 55 sqq. Howitt, Native Tribes of South-East Australia, p. 489 sqq. Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes of Central Australia, p. 498 sq. (Kaitish). Strehlow, quoted by Thomas, 'Religious Ideas of the Arunta,' in Folk-Lore, xvi. 429 sq. Idem, quoted by von Leonhardi, 'Religiöse und totemistische Vorstellungen der Aranda und Loritja in Zentralaustralien,' in Globus, xci. 286 sq. Curr, The Australian Race, i. 253 (Larrak[=i]a); ii. 465, 475 (some Cape River natives). Lang, Cooksland, p. 459 sq.; Idem, Queensland, p. 379 sq. Roth, Ethnol. Studies among the North-West-Central Queensland Aborigines, pp. 16, 153. 158. Salvado, Mémoires historiques sur l'Australie, p. 258 (natives of West Australia).]

[Footnote 46: When the natives of Cooksland, in North-Eastern Australia, rob a wild bees' hive they generally leave a little of the honey for Buddai, the supernatural ancestor of their race (Lang, Cooksland, p. 460; Idem, Queensland, p. 380). Mrs. Langloh Parker (op. cit. pp. 8, 9, 79, 89) was told that in the Euahlayi tribe prayers are addressed to Byamee at funerals for the souls of the dead, and that at some initiatory rites the oldest medicine-man present addresses a prayer to him asking him to give the people long life as they have kept his law; but they do not profess to pray or to have prayed to Byamee on any other occasions (cf. Manning, loc. cit. p. 164). The natives inhabiting the neighbourhood of Lake Boga in Victoria have to placate Pei-a-mei by dances (Missions-Blatt aus der Brüdergemeine, xvi. 143). Of the South-Eastern Australian Daramulun Mr. Howitt says (op. cit. p. 507 sq.) that, although there is no worship of him, "the dances round the figure of clay and the invocating of his name by the medicine-men certainly might have led up to it."]

[Footnote 47: Manning, loc. cit. p. 165; Ridley, op. cit. pp. 141, 155; Langloh Parker, op. cit. p. 7 (Boyma, Baiame, Byamee). Howitt, op. cit. p. 495 (Daramulun). M'Kinlay, quoted ibid. p. 496. Mr. Threlkeld says (op. cit. p. 47) that Koin, an imaginary male being who has the appearance of a black, is supposed to precede the coming of the natives from distant parts when they assemble to celebrate certain of their ceremonies.]

[Footnote 48: Howitt, op. cit. p. 489 (Nurelli of the Wiimbaio). M'Kinlay, quoted ibid. p. 496.]

[Footnote 49: Taplin, in Woods, op. cit. p. 55.]

[Footnote 50: Langloh Parker, op. cit. p. 7 sq.]

[Footnote 51: Howitt, op. cit. p. 491.]

[Footnote 52: Ibid. p. 495.]

[Footnote 53: Brough Smyth, op. cit. i. 423.]

[Footnote 54: Howitt, op. cit. p. 495.]

[Footnote 55: Ibid. p. 499.]

[Footnote 56: Howitt, op. cit. p. 498.]

[Footnote 57: Curr, op. cit. ii. 475.]

[Footnote 58: Parker, Aborigines of Australia, p. 24.]

[Footnote 59: Ridley, op. cit. p. 137.]

[Footnote 60: Ibid. p. 137.]

[Footnote 61: Cameron, in Jour. Anthr. Inst. xiv. 364 sq.]

[Footnote 62: Günther, quoted by Thomas, in Man, 1905, p. 51.]

[Footnote 63: Ridley, op. cit. pp. 135, 136, 140. Langloh Parker, op. cit. p. 70.]

[Footnote 64: Manning, loc. cit. p. 159 sqq.]

It seems probable that these statements represent a mixture of Christian ideas and genuine aboriginal beliefs. There is reason to believe that the Australian notion of an "All-father" is not in the first instance due to missionary influence;[65] we have records of it from a comparatively early date, it is spread over a wide area, it has been found among natives who live in a state of great isolation, and the multitude of different names by which the "All-father" is called in different tribes does not suggest a recent origin from a common source. He may very well be a mythical ancestor. Mr. Howitt observes that the master in the sky-country represents the Australian idea of a headman--"a man who is skilful in the use of weapons of offence and defence, all-powerful in magic, but generous and liberal to his people, who does no injury or violence to any one, yet treats with severity any breaches of custom or morality."[66] But he may also be a personification of supernatural force in general, or a being who has been invented to account for all kinds of marvellous phenomena. The word altjira, by which the Arunta call their great god, is apparently not a proper name; according to Kempe, it is applied to five gods, whose names he gives, as also to the sun, moon, and remarkable things generally.[67] And Mulkari, who figures in the beliefs of some Queensland tribes, is described not only as "a benevolent, omnipresent, supernatural being," but as "anything incomprehensible," as {674} the supernatural power who makes everything which the blacks cannot otherwise account for.[68] On the other hand, it is hardly possible to doubt that in various instances Christian conceptions have been infused into the aboriginal belief either by the natives themselves or by our informants.[69] Biblical traits are conspicuous in some of the legends. Bishop Salvado tells us that, according to West Australian beliefs, the Creator, Motogon, "employa ces paroles: 'Terre, parais dehors': et il souffla, et la terre fut créée. 'Eau, parais dehors'; et il souffla, et l'eau fut créée."[70] The believers in Nourelle give the following account of the origin of death:--The first created man and woman were told not to go near a certain tree in which a bat was living, as the bat was not to be disturbed. But one day the woman, while gathering firewood, went near the forbidden tree; the bat flew away and after that came death.[71] And the same natives also believe that Nourelle created a great serpent, to which he gave power over all created things.[72] So also the doctrine of a hell with everlasting fire has almost certainly a foreign origin; and in some other points the genuineness of the Australian theories of retribution is at least open to doubt, even though the function of a judge cannot be regarded as incompatible with the notion of a mythical headman in the sky. Messrs. Spencer and Gillen observe that it would be a very easy matter indeed to form, as the result of a general statement such as might be made by any individual native in reply to a question, a perfectly wrong impression with regard to the native's idea as to the existence of anything like a supreme being inculcating moral rules.[73] Of the Central Australian aborigines they say:--"Any such idea as that of a future life of happiness or the reverse, as a reward for meritorious or as a punishment for blameworthy conduct, is quite foreign to them. . . . We know of no tribe in which there is a belief of any kind in a supreme being who rewards or punishes the individual according to his moral behaviour, using the word moral in the native sense."[74] So far as the Arunta are concerned, this statement is confirmed by Mr. Strehlow. He writes that their god Altjira, who lives in the sky and shows himself to man in the lightning, is a {675} good god who never inflicts any punishments on human beings.[75]

[Footnote 65: See especially Howitt, op. cit. p. 504 sqq.; Lang, Magic and Religion, p. 25 sqq.; Thomas, in Man, p. 50 sqq.; von Leonhardi, in Globus, xci. 287.]

[Footnote 66: Howitt, op. cit. p. 507. See also ibid. p. 501.]

[Footnote 67: Thomas, in Folk-Lore, xvi. 431.]

[Footnote 68: Roth, op. cit. pp. 36, 153.]

[Footnote 69: Mr. J. D. Lang (Queensland, p. 379 sq.; Cooksland, p. 459 sq.) even suspects Asiatic influence in the case of Buddai, or Budjah, the mythical ancestor of certain Queensland aborigines. Not only does his name remind of Buddha, but a story told of him is remarkably similar to an Eastern legend.]

[Footnote 70: Salvado, op. cit. p. 258.]

[Footnote 71: Brough Smyth, op. cit. i. 428.]

[Footnote 72: Ibid. i. 423.]

[Footnote 73: Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes of Central Australia, p. 492 sqq.]

[Footnote 74: Ibid. p. 491.]

[Footnote 75: Strehlow, quoted by Thomas, in Folk-Lore, xvi. 429 sq. Idem, quoted by von Leonhardi, in Globus, xci. 287.]

From various Polynesian and Melanesian islands we hear of a supreme being--called Io by the Maoris,[76] Tangaroa by the Samoans,[77] Taaroa by the Society Islanders,[78] and so forth[79]--who has made everything, but who is too remote and indistinct to be an object of worship and takes no interest in the morals of men. In some instances at least he seems to be a very shadowy deification of the forces of nature. Thus Io is described as "the great originator, the All-Father, who pervades space, has no residence, and cannot be localised"; and the conception of Tangaroa is equally abstract.[80] Mr. Guppy learned that the natives of Treasury Island and the Shortlands, in the Solomon Group, believe in a Good Spirit who lives in a pleasant land, whither all men who have led good lives go after death; whereas all bad people are transported to the crater of Bagana, the burning volcano of Bougainville, which is the home of the Evil Spirit and his companion spirits.[81] But this belief savours too much of a Christian hell to be accepted as genuine without further evidence.

[Footnote 76: Gudgeon, 'Maori Religion,' in _Jour. Polynesian Soc._ xiv. 108 sq.]

[Footnote 77: Ibid. p. 108 sq.]

[Footnote 78: Ellis, Polynesian Researches, i. 323 sqq.]

[Footnote 79: Tylor, op. cit. ii. 344 sqq. Hoffmann, La notion de l'Être suprême chez les peuples non civilisés, p. 70 sqq.]

[Footnote 80: Gudgeon, in Jour. Polynesian Soc. xiv. 108.]

[Footnote 81: Guppy, Solomon Islands, p. 53.]

The Sea Dyaks of Borneo have a great good god called Batara, or Petara, who created the world and rules over it, and is the cause of every blessing. He is not susceptible to human influence, and therefore receives no worship. But he approves of industry, honesty, purity of speech, and skill in word and work. He punishes theft, injustice, disrespect for old persons, and adultery; and immorality among the unmarried is supposed to bring a plague of rain upon the earth as a punishment inflicted by Petara. In general, says Mr. Perham, he is against man's sin; but over and above moral offences many sins have been invented which are simply the infringement of pemate, or tabu.[82] Like many other great gods of savages, Petara is lacking in individuality. He is at all events not now supposed to be one supreme god, but the general belief is that there are many Petaras--in fact as many Petaras as men. Each man, the people say, has his own peculiar Petara, his own tutelary deity, and if a {676} person is miserable it is because his Petara is miserable.[83] This account, however, loses much of its interest when we find that the name Batara or Petara has obviously been borrowed from Sanscrit, where the word bha[t.][t.]âra means "lord" or "master."[84] The great gods of some other peoples in the Malay Archipelago, again, have names which are derived from Arabic--Lahatala, Latala, or Hatalla, from Allah ta[(]âla. Hence when the Alfura of Bura are heard to say that their highest god, Opo-geba-snulat or Lahatala, writes down in a book the actions of men so as to be able to reward the virtuous and punish the wicked as they deserve, there is every reason to think of influence from Muhammedanism.[85]

[Footnote 82: Perham, 'Petara,' in Jour. Straits Branch Roy. Asiatic Soc. no. 8, p. 149 sq. St. John, Life in the Forests of the Far East, i. 69 sq. Selenka, op. cit. p. 97 sqq.]

[Footnote 83: Perham, in Jour. Straits Branch Roy. Asiatic Soc. no. 8, p. 134 sq.]

[Footnote 84: Ibid. p. 133. Wilken, Het Animisme, p. 162.]

[Footnote 85: Wilken, op. cit. pp. 162, 240 sq.]

The Andaman Islanders are reported to believe in a supreme being, P[=u]luga, who was never born and is immortal, who has created the world and all its objects, who is omniscient when it is day, knowing even the thoughts of their hearts. Whilst pitiful to those in distress, he is angered by the commission of certain sins--falsehood, theft, grave assault, murder, adultery, and burning wax. He is the judge from whom each soul receives its sentence after death. The "spirits" of the departed are sent by him to a place comprising the whole area under the earth, to await the resurrection. The "souls" of the departed, again, pass either into paradise or to another place which might be described as purgatory, a place of punishment for those who have been guilty of heinous sins, such as murder. At the resurrection the soul (from which evil emanates) and the spirit (from which all good emanates) will be reunited and will henceforth live permanently on the new earth, since the souls of the wicked will then have been reformed by the punishments inflicted on them during their residence in the "purgatory."[86] Mr. Man, who has given us this account, thinks it is extremely improbable that the legends about P[=u]luga, about the powers of good and evil, and about a world beyond the grave, are the result of the teaching of missionaries or others.[87] But his assumption that they are indigenous seems hardly justified by the very scanty knowledge we possess of the past history of these islanders. Considering their low state of culture, the metaphysical subtlety in some of the notions recorded by Mr. Man would certainly be more astonishing if India were not so near.

[Footnote 86: Man, 'Aboriginal Inhabitants of the Andaman Islands,' in Jour. Anthr. Inst. xii. 112, 157, 158, 161 sq.]

[Footnote 87: Ibid. p. 156.]

{677}Among the Karens of Burma the belief is held that Hades has a king or judge who stands at the door to admit or reject those who apply for admission into his kingdom. He decides the future of each. Those who have performed meritorious works are sent to the regions of happiness above; those who have done wickedness, such as striking father or mother, are delivered over to the king of hell who is in waiting; whilst those who have neither performed deeds of merit nor are guilty of great crimes are allotted a place in Hades.[88] At the same time the Karens' ideas of a future state are described as confused, indefinite, and contradictory. Mr. Mason writes:--"They seem to be a melee of different systems. That which appears to me indigenous Karen . . . represents the future world as a counterpart of this, located under the earth, where the inhabitants are employed precisely as they are here."[89] The Pahárias of the Rájmahal Hills believe that the souls of those who have been disobedient to the commands of Bedo Gosain will be condemned either to inhabit some portion of the vegetable kingdom for a certain number of years, or to be cast into a pit of fire, where the offender will suffer eternal punishment or be regenerated in the shape of a dog or a cat. Those who have led a good life, on the other hand, will be rewarded, first by enjoying a short but happy residence with Bedo Gosain in heaven, and subsequently by being born a second time on earth of women and being exalted to posts of great honour, as also by possessing an abundance of worldly goods.[90] In these notions our chief informant, Lieutenant Shaw, sees traces of Hinduism.[91] Lack of detailed information makes it impossible to decide whether the belief in a creator and heavenly judge which has been found in some other uncivilised tribes in India might be traced to a similar influence. The Munda Kols in Central Bengal maintain that the good and almighty Singbonga, who lives in the sky and is connected with the sun, has made everything. Being so far away he occupies himself very little with earthly matters, and is only in exceptional cases an object of worship; but he sees everything which happens, and is said to punish theft and insincerity.[92] So also the Kukis recognise a benevolent and all-powerful god {678} and creator, called Puthén, who is the judge of all mortals and awards punishments to the wicked both in this world and in the next.[93]

[Footnote 88: Mason, in Jour. Asiatic Soc. Bengal, xxxiv. 196.]

[Footnote 89: Ibid. p. 195.]

[Footnote 90: Shaw, 'Inhabitants of the Hills near Rájamahall,' in Asiatick Researches, iv. 48 sqq. Sherwill, 'Tour through the Rájmahal Hills,' in Jour. Asiatic Soc. Bengal, xx. 556.]

[Footnote 91: Shaw, in Asiatick Researches, iv. 46.]

[Footnote 92: Jellinghaus, 'Sagen, Sitten und Gebräuche der Munda-Kolhs in Chota Nagpore,' in Zeitschr. f. Ethnologie, iii. 330 sq.]

[Footnote 93: Stewart, 'Northern Cachar,' in Jour. Asiatic Soc. Bengal, xxiv. 628.]

The Ainu of Japan believe in a great god or creator who bestows blessings upon the good and visits the bad with disease, unless they repent. They also say that good people go after death to the "island of the Great Spirit," or to the "kingdom of God," to lead a happy life; whereas bad people go to the "bad island," or to the "wet underground world," in which they suffer discomfort or, according to some, are burned in everlasting fires.[94] Of the pagan Samoyedes we are told that they regard the great Num as the creator of the universe, as an all-powerful and omniscient being, who protects the innocent, rewards the virtuous, and punishes the wicked.[95] But the primitive Num, who was simply the sky, was too far removed from the nomads who wandered across the frozen plain, to interfere to prevent catastrophe or accomplish their well-being; and in the provident actions and overseeing which some of the Samoyedes now ascribe to him, "we can clearly enough trace the influence of the missionary and the suggestion of the Christian faith."[96]

[Footnote 94: von Siebold, Die Aino auf der Insel Yesso, p. 24. Batchelor, Ainu of Japan, pp. 199, 235 sqq. Howard, Life with Trans-Siberian Savages, p. 193.]

[Footnote 95: Castrén, op. cit. iii. 14.]

[Footnote 96: Jackson, in Jour. Anthr. Inst. xxiv. 398. See also Castrén, op. cit. iii. 14-16, 182 sqq.]

Dr. Rink asserts that the Greenlanders considered Tornarsuk as the supreme being on whom they were dependent for any supernatural aid, and in whose abodes in the depth of the earth all such persons as had striven and suffered for the benefit of their fellow men should find a happy existence after death.[97] Dr. Nansen, however, is of opinion that Tornarsuk owes a great deal to missionary influence.[98] That he was not so superior a being as is commonly stated is evident from Captain Holm's description of the Angmagsaliks in Eastern Greenland, where he is represented as a monster living in the sea, of about the same length as a big seal, but thicker.[99] And to judge from Egede's description dating from the earlier part of the eighteenth century, Tornarsuk's notions of justice, if he had any, must in olden times have been very limited, as he took to his subterranean paradise only women that died in labour and men that perished at sea.[100]

[Footnote 97: Rink, Greenland, p. 141.]

[Footnote 98: Nansen, Eskimo Life, p. 242.]

[Footnote 99: Holm, 'Ethnologisk Skizze af Angmagsalikerne,' in Meddelelser om Grönland, x. 115.]

[Footnote 100: Egede, Description of Greenland, p. 197.]

{679} The "Great Spirit" so often referred to in accounts of North American Indians, is described as a being too elevated and remote to take much interest in the destinies and actions of men and too benevolent by nature to require propitiation or worship. Schoolcraft asserts that in their oral traditions there is no attempt "to make man accountable to him, here or hereafter, for aberrations from virtue, good will, truth, or any form of moral right. With benevolence and pity as prime attributes the Great Transcendental Spirit of the Indian does not take upon himself a righteous administration of the world's affairs, but, on the contrary, leaves it to be filled, and its affairs, in reality, governed, by demons and fiends in human form."[101] Yet there are instances in which he is represented in a different light. The most essential moral precepts of the Iroquois "were taught as the will of the Great Spirit, and obedience to their requirements as acceptable in his sight";[102] but whilst highly gratified with their virtues, he detested their vices, and punished them for their bad conduct not only in this world but in a future state of existence.[103] The Potawatomis considered that rape was visited by the anger of the Great Spirit.[104] Ti-ra'-wa, the supreme being of the Pawnees, applauds valour, abhors theft, and punishes the wicked by annihilation, whilst the good dwell with him in his heavenly home.[105] The Indians of Alabama told Bossu that those who behave themselves foolishly and disregard the supreme being will after death go to a barren land full of thorns and briars, with no hunting and no wives, whereas those who neither rob nor kill nor take other men's wives will occupy a very fertile country and live there a happy life.[106] Keating states that, according to the beliefs of the Dacotahs, men go to the residence of the Great Spirit if they have been good and peaceable, or if they died by the hand of their enemy, but that their souls are doomed to the residence of the Evil Spirit if they perish in a broil with their own countrymen.[107] This statement, however, is not supported by other authorities. Prescott writes of the same Indians:--"They have very little notion of punishment for crime hereafter in eternity: indeed, they know very little about whether the Great Spirit has anything to do with their affairs, present or future."[108] {680} And among the Omaha and Ponka, who are branches of the same people, the old men used to say to their fellow tribesmen, "If you are good, you will go to the good ghosts; if you are bad you will go to the bad ghosts." But nothing was ever said of going to dwell with Wakanda, or with demons.[109] As regards the origin of the North American notion of the Great Spirit different opinions have been expressed. On the one hand we are told that it is essentially only "the Indian's conception of the white man's god," which belongs not to the untutored but to the tutored mind of the savage.[110] On the other hand it is argued that the belief in the Great Spirit must be a native product, since it is reported to have occurred already before the arrival of the earliest Jesuit missionaries.[111] Unfortunately, however, we cannot be sure that our informants have accurately interpreted the beliefs of the Indians. Mr. Dorsey has pointed out that a fruitful source of error has been a misunderstanding of their terms and phrases.[112] The Dacotah word wakanda, which has been rendered into "Great Spirit," simply means "mystery," or "mysterious," and signifies rather a quality than a definite entity. Among many tribes the sun is wakanda, among the same tribes the moon is wakanda, and so are thunder, lightning, the stars, the winds, as also various animals, trees, and inanimate objects or places of a striking character; even a man, especially a medicine-man, may be considered wakanda.[113] So, too, the Menomini term mashä' ma' nid[=o], or "great unknown," is not to be understood as implying a belief in one supreme being; there are several manidos, each supreme in his own realm, as well as many lesser mysteries, or deities, or spirits.[114] Mr. Dorsey also observes that in many cases Indians have been quick to adopt the phrases of civilisation in communicating with white people, whilst in speaking to one another they use their own terms.[115] At the same time it seems to me that if the notion of a Great Spirit had altogether a Christian origin we might expect to find an idea of moral retribution more commonly associated with it than the {681} statements imply. It may be that among the North American Indians also, as among some other peoples, a vague conception of something like a supreme being has arisen through a personification of the mysteries in nature.[116] But if this be the case the interest which the Great Spirit in rare instances takes in human conduct may all the same be due to missionary influence. It is certainly not an original characteristic of his nature. Among the Iroquois and Pawnees, who attribute to their great god the function of a moral judge, he also receives offerings--[117] a circumstance which indicates that he cannot be regarded as a typical representative of his class.

[Footnote 101: Schoolcraft, op. cit. i. 35.]

[Footnote 102: Morgan, League of the Iroquois, p. 172.]

[Footnote 103: Seaver, Narrative of the Life of Mrs. Jemison, p. 155.]

[Footnote 104: Keating, Expedition to the Source of St. Peter's River, i. 127.]

[Footnote 105: Grinnell, Pawnee Hero Stories, p. 355. Lang, Making of Religion, p. 257.]

[Footnote 106: Bossu, Travels through Louisiana, i. 256 sq.]

[Footnote 107: Keating, op. cit. i. 393 sq.]

[Footnote 108: Schoolcraft, op. cit. ii. 195. Cf. ibid. iii. 229.]

[Footnote 109: Dorsey, 'Siouan Cults,' in Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn. xi. 419.]

[Footnote 110: Smith, 'Myths of the Iroquois,' in _Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn._ ii. 112. Tylor, 'Limits of Savage Religion,' in _Jour. Anthr. Inst._ xxi. 284. Boyle, 'Paganism of the Civilised Iroquois,' ibid. xxx. 266.]

[Footnote 111: Lang, Making of Religion, p. 251 sqq. Idem, Magic and Religion, p. 19 sqq. Hoffmann, op. cit. p. 86 sq.]

[Footnote 112: Dorsey, in Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn. xi. 365 sq.]

[Footnote 113: Ibid. p. 366. McGee, in Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn. xv. 181 sqq. Cf. James, Expedition to the Rocky Mountains, i. 268; Tylor, op. cit. ii. 343.]

[Footnote 114: Hoffman, 'Menomini Indians,' in Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn. xiv. 39, n. 1. Cf. Parkman, Jesuits in North America, p. lxxix.]

[Footnote 115: Dorsey, in Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn. xi. 365. See also Smith, ibid. ii. 112.]

[Footnote 116: The Great Spirit is represented by Schoolcraft (op. cit. i. 15) as a "Soul of the Universe which inhabits and animates every thing," and is supposed to exist under every possible form in the world, animate and inanimate. Of Ti-ra'-wa it is said that he "is in and of everything" (supra, i. 448).]

[Footnote 117: Seaver, op. cit. p. 155. Supra i. 448.]

In South America, too, several tribes have been found to believe in a benevolent Great Spirit, who is indifferent to men's behaviour and is not worshipped by them.[118] Of the Passés, however, we are told by a Portuguese official who travelled in Brazil in 1774-75 that they have the idea of a creator who rewards good people by allowing their souls to stay with him and punishes the wicked by turning their souls into evil spirits.[119] But according to Mr. Bates "these notions are so far in advance of the ideas of all other tribes of Indians . . . that we must suppose them to have been derived by the docile Passés from some early missionary or traveller."[120] Of the Fuegians, again, Admiral Fitzroy writes:--"A great black man is supposed to be always wandering about the woods and mountains, who is certain of knowing every word and every action; who cannot be escaped, and who influences the weather according to men's conduct." Of this influence our informant gives the following instance. A native related a story of his brother who once killed a man--one of those very wild men who wander about in the woods supporting themselves by theft--because he stole from him a bird. Afterwards he was very sorry for what he had done, particularly when it began to blow hard. In telling the story, the brother said:--"Rain come down--snow come down--hail come down--wind blow--blow--very much blow. Very bad to kill man. Big man in woods no like it, he very angry." The same native also reproached the surgeon {682} of the Beagle for shooting some young ducks with the old bird:--"Very bad to shoot little duck--come wind--come rain--blow--very much blow."[121] In the latter case, however, no mention was made of the black man in the woods. From Admiral Fitzroy's account Mr. Andrew Lang draws the conclusion that the Fuegians have evolved the idea of a high deity, an ethical judge, who "makes for righteousness," who searches the heart, who almost literally "marks the sparrow's fall," and whose morality is so much above the ordinary savage standard that he regards the slaying of a stranger and an enemy, caught redhanded in robbery, as a sin.[122] This statement may serve as a specimen of the spirit in which its author deals with the subject of supreme beings in savage beliefs. There is after all some difference between a high moral god and a mythical weather doctor who lives in the woods and sends bad weather if a wild man, who also lives in the woods, is killed. Mr. Bridges, our most trustworthy authority on the Fuegians, says nothing of the black man, but states that nearly all the old men among the Fuegians are medicine-men, and that these wizards make frequent incantations in which they seem to address themselves to a mysterious being called Aïapakal. And they also believe in another spirit, named Hoakils, from whom they pretend to obtain a supernatural power over life and death.[123]

[Footnote 118: Bernau, Missionary Labours in British Guiana, p. 49. Hoffmann, op. cit. p. 90 sqq.]

[Footnote 119: Ribeiro de Sampaio, Diario da viagem, p. 79.]

[Footnote 120: Bates, The Naturalist on the River Amazons, ii. 244. Cf. ibid. ii. 162; Dobrizhofter, _Account of the Abipones_, ii. 57 sq.; Müller, _Geschichte der Amerikanischen Urreligionen_, p. 289.]

[Footnote 121: King and Fitzroy, Voyages of the "Adventure" and "Beagle," ii. 180.]

[Footnote 122: Lang, Making of Religion, pp. 188, 198. The same description of the Fuegian black man is repeated by M. Hoffmann (op. cit. p. 40).]

[Footnote 123: Bridges, quoted by Hyades and Deniker, Mission scientifique du Cap Horn, vii. 256.]

The South African Bushmans, another very backward people, are likewise represented by Mr. Lang and M. Hoffmann as believers in a supreme being.[124] A native said to Mr. Orpen that Cagn made all things, and that the people prayed to him:--"O Cagn! O Cagn! are we not your children, do you not see our hunger? Give us food." And he gave them what they asked for both hands full. But although he was at first very good and nice, he afterwards "got spoilt through fighting so many things."[125] However, according to another statement, made by a person who from childhood had much intercourse with Bushmans and knew their language, they did not believe in a God or the great father of men, but in a devil who made everything with his left hand.[126] The Hottentots spoke of Tsui-goab as "the giver of all blessings, the Father on high, All-father, the {683} avenger, who fought daily the battle for his people." They thus identified him with the ancestor of the tribe, but Tsui-goab was also the name by which they called the Infinite.[127] Among the pagans of Africa there is, in fact, a very widespread belief in a benevolent supreme deity, a creator or maker of things, who lives in or above the sky, who generally takes no concern whatever in the affairs of mankind, who mostly receives no worship, and is, as a rule, totally indifferent to good or evil.[128] In some rare instances only he is described as a judge of human conduct. Thus some of the Bechuanas believe that a being who is vaguely called by the name of Lord and Master of things, Mongalinto, punishes thieves by striking them with the lightning.[129] According to an old writer, Father Santos, the natives of Sofala in South-Eastern Africa acknowledge a god, called Molungo, "who both in this and the world to come they fancy measures retribution for the good and evil done in this." They believe in the existence of twenty-seven paradises, where everyone enjoys a pleasure proportionate to the merits of his life; while those who have passed their lives in wickedness are supposed to be condemned to a privation from the sight of the holy presence of Molungo, and to suffer torments in one of the thirteen hells they assume to exist, each according to the evil he has done.[130] The Baluba, a Bantu people of Equatorial Africa, have the notion of a creator, named Fidi-Mukullu, who punishes the souls of the wicked before they are reborn on earth, whereas the good return to life again, in the shape of chiefs or other important persons, immediately after they have died.[131] The Awemba, {684} another Bantu people, who inhabit the stretch of country lying between Lake Tanganyika and Lake Bangweolo, acknowledge a supreme being, Leza, who "is the Judge of the dead, and condemns thieves, adulterers and murderers to the state of Vibanda, or Viwa (evil spirits), exalting the good to the rank of mipashi, or benevolent spirits."[132] Other natives in the neighbourhood of Lake Tanganyika recognise a creator called Kabesa, who lives in the sky and admits to his abode the souls of good people after death, but turns away the souls of the wicked.[133] The Akikuyu of British East Africa recognise three gods all of whom are called Ngai. One of them, however, is considered the supreme deity. "If a man is good this Ngai can give him much property. If he does wrong the same power can strike him down with disease and cause his livestock to dwindle away. . . . The sudden death of a man, for instance by lightning, is ascribed to some evil act of his life being punished by Ngai."[134] Proyart tells us that the Negroes of Loango believed in a supreme being, Zambi, who had created all that is good in the world, who was himself good and loved justice in others, and who severely punished fraud and perjury.[135] It is of course impossible to say exactly how far the statements referring to African supreme beings represent unadulterated native beliefs. In criticising Kolb's account of the supreme and perfect god of the Hottentots, Bishop Callaway observes, "Nothing is more easy than to enquire of heathen savages the character of their creed, and during the conversation to impart to them . . . ideas which they never heard before, and presently to have these come back again as articles of their own original faith, when in reality they are but the echoes of one's own thoughts."[136] With reference to the West African native Miss Kingsley likewise remarks that he has a wonderful power of assimilating foreign forms of belief, and that when he once has got hold of a new idea it remains in his mind long after the missionaries who put it there have passed away.[137] And besides the teaching of missionaries there are in Africa several factors which for centuries have tended to introduce foreign conceptions, namely, intercourse with European settlers, the operations of the slave trade, and the influence of Muhammedanism.[138] But at the same {685} time it seems exceedingly probable that the African belief in a supreme being has a native substratum. In many cases he is apparently the heaven god;[139] but he may also be a mythical ancestor, as the Hottentot god Tsui-goab and the Zulu god Unkulunkulu; or a personification of the supernatural, as is suggested by such names as the Masai Ng[)a]i, the Monbuttu Kilima, and the Malagasy Andriamanitra;[140] or the assumed cause of anything which particularly fills the savage mind with wonder or awe. Among the natives of Northern Guinea, according to Mr. Wilson, "every thing which transpires in the natural world beyond the power of man, or of spirits, who are supposed to occupy a place somewhat higher than man, is at once and spontaneously ascribed to the agency of God."[141] Nay, for reasons which will be stated immediately, I am even of opinion that the function of a moral judge, occasionally attributed to the great god of African pagans, has in some instances an independent origin.

[Footnote 124: Lang, Making of Religion, p. 210. Hoffmann, op. cit. p. 40 sq.]

[Footnote 125: Orpen, 'Glimpse into the Mythology of the Maluti Bushmen,' in The Cape Monthly Magazine, N.S. ix. 2.]

[Footnote 126: Campbell, Second Journey in the Interior of South Africa, i. 29.]

[Footnote 127: Hahn, The Supreme Being of the Khoi-Khoi, pp. 122, 126 sq.]

[Footnote 128: Livingstone, Missionary Travels, p. 641 (tribes of the Zambesi). Rattray, Stories and Songs in Chinyanja, p. 198 (natives of Central Angoniland). Stigand, 'Natives of Nyassaland,' in Jour. Roy. Anthr. Inst. xxxvii. 130. Roscoe, 'Bahima,' ibid. xxxvii. 108 sq. Wilson and Felkin, Uganda, i. 206. Beltrame, Il Fiume Bianco e i Dénka, pp. 191, 192, 276 sq. Kingsley, 'Fetish View of the Human Soul,' in Folk-Lore, viii. 142 sq.; Idem, Travels in West Africa, pp. 442, 508. Parkinson, 'Asaba People of the Niger,' in Jour. Anthr. Inst. xxxvi. 312. Bosman, Description of the Coast of Guinea, pp. 121 sq. (Gold Coast natives), 348 (Slave Coast natives). Cruickshank, Eighteen Years on the Gold Coast, ii. 126 sq. Ellis, Tshi-speaking Peoples of the Gold Coast, p. 26 sqq. Idem, E[(w]e-speaking Peoples of the Slave Coast, p. 33 sq. Winterbottom, Native Africans in the Neighbourhood of Sierra Leone, i. 222. Wilson, Western Africa, p. 209 (natives of Northern Guinea). Rowley, Religion of the Africans, pp. 15, 16, 54. Tylor, op. cit. ii. 347 sqq. Lang, Making of Religion, p. 230 sqq. Hoffmann, op. cit. p. 45 sqq.]

[Footnote 129: Arbousset and Daumas, Exploratory Tour to the North-East of the Colony of Good Hope, p. 322 sq.]

[Footnote 130: Santos, 'History of Eastern Ethiopia,' in Pinkerton, Collection of Voyages and Travels, xvi. 687.]

[Footnote 131: Wissmann, Wolf, &c., Im Innern Afrikas, p. 158. Wissmann, Quer durch Afrika, p. 379.]

[Footnote 132: Sheane, 'Awemba Religion,' in Jour. Anthr. Inst. xxxvi. 150 sq. ]

[Footnote 133: Schneider, Die Religion der afrikanischen Naturvölker, p. 84.]

[Footnote 134: Tate, 'Kikuyu Tribe,' in Jour. Anthr. Inst. xxxiv. 263.]

[Footnote 135: Proyart, 'History of Loango,' in Pinkerton, Collection of Voyages and Travels, xvi. 594.]

[Footnote 136: Callaway, Religious System of the Amazulu, p. 105 sq.]

[Footnote 137: Kingsley, in Folk-Lore, viii. 150.]

[Footnote 138: Cf. Rowley, Religion of the Africans, pp. 28, 90; Wilson, Western Africa, p. 229 sq.; Cruickshank, op. cit. ii. 126.]

[Footnote 139: See Tylor, op. cit. ii. 347 sqq.]

[Footnote 140: See supra, ii. 586 sq.]

[Footnote 141: Wilson, op. cit. p. 209. See also Livingstone, Expedition to the Zambesi, p. 521 sq., quoted supra, ii. 594.]

Generally speaking, then, it seems that the All-father, supreme being, or high god of savage belief may be traced to several different sources. When not a "loan-god" of foreign extraction, he may be a mythical ancestor or headman; or a deification of the sky or some large and remote object of nature, like the sun; or a personification or personified cause of the mysteries or forces of nature. The argument that the belief in such a being is "irreducible" because it prevails among savages who worship neither ancestors nor nature,[142] can carry no weight in consideration of the fact that he himself, as a general rule, is no object of worship. In various instances we have reason to suppose that even though the notion of a supreme being is fundamentally of native origin, foreign conceptions have been engrafted upon it; and to these belongs in particular the idea of a heavenly judge who in the after-life punishes the wicked and rewards the good. But we are not entitled to assume that the idea of moral retribution as a function of the great god has in every case been adopted {686} from people of a higher culture. A mythical ancestor or headman may of his own accord approve of virtue and disapprove of vice; and, besides, justice readily becomes the attribute of a god who is habitually appealed to in curses or oaths. That the supreme being of savages is thus invoked, is in some cases directly stated by our authorities. In making solemn treatises, the Hurons called on Oki, the heaven god.[143] The Negroes of Loango, who believed that Zambi, the supreme being, punished fraud and perjury, took his name in testimony of the truth.[144] Among the Awemba the supreme god Leza, who is believed to reward the good and to punish thieves, adulterers, and murderers, is invoked both in blessings and curses, the injured man praying that Leza will send a lion to devour the evildoer.[145] In the E[(w]e-speaking Ho tribe on the Slave Coast the great god Mawu, who is said to inflict punishment on the wicked, is frequently appealed to in law-cases, by the judge as well as by the plaintiff and the accused.[146] In Northern Guinea the name of the supreme being is solemnly called on three times at the ratification of an important treaty, or when a person is condemned to undergo the "red-water ordeal."[147] Of the Mpongwe we are told that "when a covenant is about to be formed among the different tribes, Mwetyi [the supreme being] is always invoked as a witness, and is commissioned with the duty of visiting vengeance upon the party who shall violate the engagement. Without this their national treaties would have little or no force. When a law is passed which the people wish to be especially binding, they invoke the vengeance of Mwetyi upon every transgressor, and this, as a general thing, is ample guarantee for its observance."[148] Among the East African Wakamba, when the supposed criminal is to undergo the ordeal of the hatchet, a magician makes him repeat the following words:--"If I have stolen the property of so and so, or committed this crime, let {687} Mulungu respond for me; but if I have not stolen, nor done this wickedness, may he save me." The magician then passes the red-hot iron four times over the flat hand of the accused; and the people believe that if he is guilty, his hand will be burned, but that, if innocent, he will suffer no injury.[149] Among the Masai a person who is accused of cattle-lifting and on that account subjected to the ordeal of drinking a mixture of blood and milk, has first to swear, "O God, I drink this blood, if I have stolen the cattle this blood will kill me." Should he not die within a fortnight he is considered innocent.[150] The Madi of Central Africa have various means of trial by ordeal, through which it is believed that the guilt of a suspected individual can be detected; and "before any of these trials the men look up and solemnly invoke some invisible being to punish him if guilty, or help him if innocent."[151] Of the natives of the Zambesi, all of whom have an idea of a supreme being, Livingstone states that, when undergoing an ordeal, "they hold up their hands to the Ruler of Heaven, as if appealing to him to assert their innocence."[152]

[Footnote 142: Lang, Magic and Religion, p. 42. Hoffmann, op. cit. pp. 122, 126, 131.]

[Footnote 143: Tylor, op. cit. ii. 342.]

[Footnote 144: Proyart, loc. cit. p. 594.]

[Footnote 145: Sheane, in Jour. Anthr. Inst. xxxvi. 151.]

[Footnote 146: Spieth, Die E[(w]e-Stämme, p. 415.]

[Footnote 147: Wilson, Western Africa, p. 210.]

[Footnote 148: Ibid. p. 392.]

[Footnote 149: Krapf, Travels in Eastern Africa, p. 173.]

[Footnote 150: Marker, Die Masai, p. 211.]

[Footnote 151: Felkin, 'Notes on the Madi,' in _Proceed. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh_, xii. 334.]

[Footnote 152: Livingstone, Missionary Travels, p. 641 sq.]

It has often been said that the oath and ordeal involve a belief in the gods as vindicators of truth and justice, that they are "appeals to the moral nature of the Divinity."[153] If this were true, moral retribution would certainly be an exceedingly common function of savage gods. But, as we have noticed before,[154] the efficacy ascribed to an oath is originally of a magic character, and if it contains an appeal to a god he is, according to primitive notions, a mere tool in the hand of the person invoking him. So also the ordeal is essentially a magical ceremony. In many cases at least, it contains a curse or an oath which has reference to the guilt or innocence of a suspected person, and the {688} proper object of the ordeal is then to give reality to the imprecation for the purpose of establishing the validity or invalidity of the suspicion.

[Footnote 153: Tiele, Elements of the Science of Religion, i. 86. Réville, Les religions des peuples non-civilisés, i. 103. Brinton, Religions of Primitive Peoples, p. 225. Schneider, Religion der afrikanischen Naturvölker, p. 255. Hodgson, Miscellaneous Essays, i. 126. Dahn, Bausteine, ii. 21, 24. Gummere, Germanic Origins, p. 183.]

[Footnote 154: Supra, ii. 118 sqq.]

Thus in West Africa the common ordeal which consists in drinking a certain draught or "eating the fetish" is regularly accompanied by an oath or a curse.[155] In the Calabar the accused person, before swallowing the ju-ju drink mbiam, which is made of filth and blood, recites an oath beginning with the words, "If I have been guilty of this crime," and ending with the words, "Then, Mbiam, Thou deal with me!" And whenever this ordeal is used the greatest care is taken that the oath shall be recited in full.[156] Of the Negroes of the Gold Coast Bosman states that "if any person is suspected of thievery, and the indictment is not clearly made out, he is obliged to clear himself by drinking the oath-draught, and to use the imprecation, that the Fetiche may kill him if he be guilty of thievery."[157] In Ashantee, "when any one denies a theft, an aggry bead is placed in a small vessel, with some water, the person holding it puts his right foot against the right foot of the accused, who invokes the power of the bead to kill him if he is guilty, and then takes it into his mouth with a little of the water."[158] Among the Negroes of Northern Guinea, in the case of the "red-water ordeal," the accused "invokes the name of God three times, and imprecates his wrath in case he is guilty of the particular crime laid to his charge." He then steps forward and drinks freely of the "red water"--that is, a decoction made from the inner bark of a tree of the mimosa family. If it nauseates and makes him vomit freely, he is at once pronounced innocent, whereas, if it causes vertigo and he loses self-control, it is regarded as evidence of guilt.[159] According to an old account, the Negroes of Sierra Leone have a "water of cursing," boiled of barks and herbs. The witch-doctor puts his divining-staff into the pot and drops or presses the water out of it upon the arm or leg of the suspected person, muttering over it these words:--"Is he guilty of this, or hath he done this or that; if yea, then let it scald or burn him, till the very skin come off." If the person remains unhurt they hold him innocent, and proceed to {689} the trial of another, till the guilty is discovered.[160] Among the Wadshagga of Eastern Africa the medicine-man gives to the accused a poisonous draught with the words, "If you fall down, you have committed the crime and told a lie, if you remain standing we recognise that you have spoken the truth."[161]

[Footnote 155: See, besides the references below, Monrad, Skildring af Guinea-Kysten, p. 35 sq. (Negroes of Accra); Beecham, Ashantee, p. 215 sqq.; Ratzel, op. cit. iii. 130.]

[Footnote 156: Kingsley, Travels in West Africa, p. 465.]

[Footnote 157: Bosman, op. cit. p. 125.]

[Footnote 158: Bowdich, Mission to Ashantee, p. 267.]

[Footnote 159: Wilson, Western Africa, p. 225 sq.]

[Footnote 160: Dapper, Africa, p. 405.]

[Footnote 161: Volkens, Der Kilimandscharo, p. 249.]

Among the Hawaiians, in the ordeal called wai haalulu, "prayer was offered by the priest" while a large dish of water was placed before the culprit, who was required to hold his hands over the fluid; and if it shook, his fate was sealed.[162] Among the Tinguianes in the district of El Abra in Luzon, if a man is accused of a crime and denies it, the headman of the village, who is also the judge, causes a handful of straw to be burned in his presence. The accused then holds up an earthern pot and says, "May my belly be changed to a pot like this if I am guilty of the crime of which I am accused." If he remains unchanged in body, the judge declares him innocent.[163] The following ordeal is in use among the Tunguses of Siberia. A fire is made and a scaffold erected near the hut of the accused. A dog's throat is then cut and the blood received in a vessel. The body is put on the wood of the fire, but in such a position that it does not burn. The accused passes over the fire, and drinks two mouthfuls of the blood, the rest whereof is thrown into the fire; and the body of the dog is placed on the scaffold. Then the accused says:--"As the dog's blood burns in the fire, so may what I have drunk burn in my body; and as the dog put on the scaffold will be consumed, so may I be consumed at the same time if I be guilty."[164]

[Footnote 162: Jarves, History of the Hawaiian Islands, p. 20.]

[Footnote 163: Lala, Philippine Islands, p. 100.]

[Footnote 164: Hartland, Legend of Perseus, ii. 85 sq.]

The "trial of jealousy" mentioned in the Old Testament involved a curse pronounced by the priest to the effect that the holy water which the woman suspected of adultery had to drink should cause her belly to swell and her thigh to rot.[165] In India the ordeal was expressly regarded as a form of the oath, the same word, [s.]apatha, being used to denote both.[166] We have seen above that in the Middle Ages every judicial combat was necessarily preceded by an oath, which essentially decided the issue of the fight and the question of guilt.[167] So also at the moment when the hot iron was raised and the accused took {690} it into his hand, the Deity was invoked to manifest the truth.[168] The ordeal of the Eucharist involved the following formula recited by the victim:--"Et si aliter est quam dixi et juravi, tunc hoc Domini nostri Jesu Christi corpus non pertranseat gutur meum, sed hæreat in faucibus meis, strangulet me suffocet me ac interficiat me statim in momento."[169]

[Footnote 165: Numbers, v. 20 sqq.]

[Footnote 166: Jolly, 'Beiträge zur indischen Rechtsgeschichte,' in Zeitschr. d. Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellsch. xliv. 346. Oldenberg, Die Religion des Veda, p. 510, n. 1. See also Patetta, Le ordalie, p. 14.]

[Footnote 167: Supra, i. 505.]

[Footnote 168: Beames, in his Translation of Glanville, p. 351 sq.]

[Footnote 169: Dahn, op. cit. ii. 16.]

To the list of ordeals which contain an oath or a curse as their governing element many other instances might probably be added in which no imprecation has been expressly mentioned by our authorities in their short descriptions of the ceremonies. This is all the more likely to be the case as magical practices often imply imprecations which are not formally expressed.[170] But there may also be ordeals which have a different origin. Thus the custom of swimming witches seems to have arisen from the notion that everything unholy is repelled by water and unable to sink into its depths;[171] and the ordeal of touching the corpse of a murdered person no doubt originated in the belief that the soul of such a person lingered about the body until appeased by the shedding of the murderer's blood and that "by the murderer's approach, and especially by his polluted touch, the soul was excited to an instant manifestation of its indignation, by appearing in the form in which it was supposed to subsist, viz. in that of blood."[172] However, even though all ordeals have not the same foundation, it seems highly improbable that any people, in the first instance, resorted to this method of discovering innocence and guilt from a belief in a god who is by his nature a guardian of truth and justice.

[Footnote 170: See, for instance, Westermarck, 'L-[(]âr, or the Transference of Conditional Curses in Morocco,' in Anthropological Essays presented to E. B. Tylor, p. 361 sqq.]

[Footnote 171: Binsfeldius, Tractatus de confessionibus maleficorum et sagarum, p. 315. In the North-East of Scotland it was believed that, if a person committed suicide by drowning, the body did not sink, but floated on the surface (Gregor, Folk-Lore of the North-East of Scotland, p. 208).]

[Footnote 172: Pitcairn, Criminal Trials in Scotland, iii. 187.]

Nor must we make any inference as to the moral character of gods from the mere prevalence of a belief in {691} a future world where men are in some way or other punished or rewarded for their conduct during their life. Such a belief is said to be fairly common among uncivilised races;[173] and, although in several cases it is undoubtedly due to Christian or other foreign influence,[174] I agree with Dr. Steinmetz that we are not entitled to {692} assume that it is so in all.[175] It seems that the savage mind may by itself, in various ways, come to the idea of some kind of moral retribution after death. First, the condition of the dead man is often supposed to depend upon the attentions bestowed on him by the survivors. Mr. Turner was told that, in the belief of the St. Augustine Islanders in Polynesia, the souls of the departed "if good" went to a land of brightness and clear weather in the heavens, but "if bad" were sent to mud and darkness; and the answer to his next question informed him that in this case "goodness" meant that the friends of the deceased had given him a good funeral feast, and that "badness" meant that his stingy friends had provided nothing at all.[176] Although Mr. Turner sees no moral distinction in these terms, there may be one nevertheless. Speaking of the Efatese, in the New Hebrides, Mr. Macdonald observes:--"A man's condition in the future would be, to some extent, happy or miserable according to his life here. Supposing he were a worthless fellow, very scanty worship would be rendered to him at his death and few animals slain to accompany him to the spirit world; and thus he would occupy an inferior position there corresponding to his social worthlessness here. This belief," our informant adds, "has undoubtedly great influence in making men strive to live so as to obtain the good opinion of their fellows, and leave an honourable memory behind them at death."[177] The Bushmans, who maintain that the dead will ultimately go to a land abounding in excellent food, put a spear by the side of a departed friend in order that, when he arises, he may have something to defend himself with and procure a living; but, if they hate the person, they deposit no spear, so that on his resurrection he may either be murdered or starved.[178] The dead may also have to suffer from the curses of those whom they injured while alive. At Motlav, in the {693} Banks Islands, relatives "watch the grave of a man whose life was bad, lest some man wronged by him should come at night and beat with a stone upon the grave, cursing him."[179] At Gaua, in the same group, "when a great man died his friends would not make it known, lest those whom he had oppressed should come and spit at him after his death, or govgov him, stand bickering at him with crooked fingers and drawing in the lips, by way of curse."[180] The Maoris were careful to prevent the bones of their dead relatives from falling into the hands of their enemies, "who would dreadfully desecrate and ill-use them, with many bitter jeers and curses."[181] A person may, moreover, himself during his lifetime directly provide for his comfort in the life to come, and if the act by which he does so is apt to call forth approval its result is easily interpreted as its reward. Thus the Kukis of India believe that all enemies whom a person has killed will in his future abode be in attendance on him as slaves;[182] and this belief probably accounts for their opinion that nothing more certainly ensures future happiness than destroying a number of enemies.[183] We have further to notice the common idea that a person's character after his death remains more or less as it was during his life. Hence the souls of bad people are supposed to reappear in the shape of obnoxious animals[184] or become evil spirits,[185] and this may lead to the notion that they have to do so as a punishment for their wickedness.[186] And as the revengeful feelings of men likewise are believed to last beyond death, offenders may in the {694} other world have to suffer from the hands of those whom they injured in this.[187] Some of the Nagas of Central India maintain that "a murdered man's soul receives that of his murderer in the spirit world and makes him his slave."[188] The Chippewas think that in the land of the dead "the souls of bad men are haunted by the phantoms of the persons or things they have injured."[189] In Aurora, in the New Hebrides, the belief prevails that the ghosts of those whom a man has wronged in this world take a full revenge upon him after death.[190] According to the Banks Islanders, if a person has killed a good man without cause, the good man's ghost withstands his murderer, when the latter after death wants to enter into Panoi, the good place; but if one man has killed another in fair fight he will not be withstood by the person whom he slew.[191] And not only the offended party but the other dead as well may, from dislike or fear, be anxious to refuse the souls of bad people admittance to their company. In the belief of the Pentecost Islanders, when the soul of a murdered man comes to the land of ghosts with the instrument of death upon him, he tells who killed him, and when the murderer arrives the ghostly people will not receive him, but he has to stay apart with other murderers.[192] The Iroquois allot separate villages even to the souls of those who have died in war and of those who have committed suicide, because the other dead are afraid of their presence.[193] Among the Negroes of Northern Guinea, according to Mr. Wilson, "the only idea of a future state of retribution is implied in the use of a separate burial-place for those who have died 'by the red-water ordeal' or who have been guilty of grossly wicked deeds";[194] and if a person's body is buried apart, his soul will naturally remain equally isolated.[195] That the frequent idea of the bad being separated {695} from the good after death is largely due to the assumed unwillingness of the latter to associate with dangerous or disreputable souls, seems probable from the fact that, in the beliefs of the lower races, paradise generally plays a much more prominent part than hell, the lot of the wicked being to suffer want rather than to be subjected to torments.[196] But, finally, it must also be remembered that the other world is a creation of men's fancy, and may therefore be formed in accordance with their hopes and wishes. Beyond the gloom of death they imagine a paradise where life is much happier than here on earth.[197] Why, then, might not their moral feelings, only too often ungratified in the reality of the present, occasionally seek satisfaction in the dreams of the future?

[Footnote 173: Thomson, Savage Island, p. 94. Percy Smith, 'Futuna,' in Jour. Polynesian Soc. i. 39. Seemann, Viti, p. 400; Williams and Calvert, Fiji, p. 208. Codrington, Melanesians, p. 274 sq. (Banks' Islanders). Inglis, _New Hebrides_, p. 31; Turner, Samoa, p. 326 (people of Aneiteum). Campbell, A Year in the New Hebrides, p. 169 (people of Tana). Schwaner, Borneo, i. 183 (natives of the Barito district). Selenka, op. cit. pp. 88, 94, 112 (Dyaks). von Brenner, _op. cit._ p. 240 (Bataks of Sumatra), de Mas, _Informe sobre el estado de las Islas Filipinas_, 'Orijen, &c.' p. 14. Best, 'Prehistoric Civilisation in the Philippines,' in _Jour. Polynesian Soc._ i. 200 (Tagalo-Bisaya tribes). Worcester, Philippine Islands, p. 110 (Tagbanuas of Palawan). Smeaton, Loyal Karens of Burma, p. 186 sq. Anderson, _Mandalay to Momien_, p. 146 (Kakhyens). Lewin, _Wild Races of South-Eastern India_, p. 243 sq. (Pankhos and Bunjogees). Hunter, _Rural Bengal_, i. 210 (Santals). Macrae, 'Account of the Kookies,' in Asiatick Researches, vii. 195; Butler, Travels in Assam, p. 88 (Kukis). Stewart, 'Notes on Northern Cachar,' in _Jour. Asiatic Soc. Bengal_, xxiv. 620 (Old Kukis), 632 (Nagas). Macpherson, Memorials of Service in India, p. 92 sqq. (Kandhs). Thurston, 'Todas of the Nilgiris,' in the Madras Government Museum's Bulletin, i. 166 sq. Breeks, _Tribes and Monuments of the N[=i]lagiris_, p. 28 (Todas and Badagas). Radloff, op. cit. p. 11 sq. (Turkish tribes of the Altai). Georgi, Russia, i. 106 (Chuvashes). Cranz, _History of Greenland_, i. 186. Hall, _Arctic Researches among the Esquimaux_, p. 571 sq. Lyon, Private Journal, p. 372 sqq. (Eskimo of Igloolik). Boas, 'Central Eskimo,' in _Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn._ vi. 590. Nelson, 'Eskimo about Bering Strait,' ibid. xviii. 423. Douglas, quoted by Petroff, Report on Alaska, p. 177 (Thlinkets). Harrison, 'Religion and Family among the Haidas,' in Jour. Anthr. Inst. xxi. 17 sqq. Duncan, quoted by Mayne, Four Years in British Columbia, p. 293 sq. (Coast Indians of British Columbia). Mackenzie, _Voyages to the Frozen and Pacific Oceans_, p. cxix. (Chippewyans). Morgan, _League of the Iroquois_, p. 168 sqq. Harmon, _Journal of Voyages in the Interior of North America_, p. 364 sq. (Indians on the East side of the Rocky Mountains). Keating, op. cit. i. 110 sq. (Potawatomis); ii. 158 sq. (Chippewas). Say, quoted by Dorsey, 'Siouan Cults,' in Ann. Rep. Bur. Ethn. xi. 422 (Kansas). Stevenson, 'Sia,' ibid. xi. 145 sq. Bartram, in _Trans. American Ethn. Soc._ iii. pt. i. 27 (Creek and Cherokee Indians). Powers, Tribes of California, pp. 34, 58, 59, 91, 110, 144, 155, 161. Buchanan, North American Indians, p. 235 sqq.; Heriot, Travels through the Canadas, pp. 362, 536; Catlin, North American Indians, i. 156, and ii. 243; Domenech, _Great Deserts of North America_, ii. 380 (various Indian tribes of North America), von Martius, _Beiträge zur Ethnographie Amerika's_, i. 247 (Guatós). von den Steinen, _Unter den Naturvölkern Zentral-Brasiliens_, p. 435 (Paressi). de Azara, Voyages dans l'Amérique méridionale, ii. 138 (Payaguás). Bosman, op. cit. p. 424 (people of Benin). Wilson, _Western Africa_, p. 217 (Negroes of Northern Guinea). Reade, _Savage Africa_, p. 539 (Ibos). Mungo Park, _Travels in the Interior of Africa_, p. 250 (Mandingoes). Tylor, op. cit. ii. 83 sqq. Marillier, _La survivance de l'âme et l'idée de justice chez les peuples non civilisés_, p. 33 sqq. Steinmetz, _Ethnologische Studien zur ersten Entwicklung der Strafe_, ii. 368 sqq.]

[Footnote 174: Cf. Tylor, op. cit. ii. 84, 91 sqq.; Marillier, loc. cit. p. 32 sq.]

[Footnote 175: Steinmetz, Studien, ii. 366 sqq. Idem, 'Continuität oder Lohn und Strafe im Jenseits der Wilden,' in Archiv f. Anthropologie, xxiv. 577 sqq.]

[Footnote 176: Turner, Samoa, p. 292 sq.]

[Footnote 177: Macdonald, Oceania, p. 209.]

[Footnote 178: Campbell, Second Journey in the Interior of South Africa, i. 29.]

[Footnote 179: Codrington, op. cit. p. 269.]

[Footnote 180: Ibid. p. 269.]

[Footnote 181: Colenso, Maori Races, p. 28.]

[Footnote 182: Dalton, Ethnology of Bengal, p. 46.]

[Footnote 183: Macrae, 'Account of the Kookies,' in Asiatick Researches, vii. 195.]

[Footnote 184: Hill and Thornton, Aborigines of New South Wales, p. 4. Ratzel, op. cit. i. 317 (Solomon Islanders). Junghuhn, Die Battaländer auf Sumatra, ii. 338 (natives of Bali and Lombok). Cross, quoted by Mac Mahon, Far Cathay and Farther India, p. 203 (Karens). Waitz, Anthropologie der Naturvölker, ii. 419 (Maravi). Southey, History of Brazil, iii. 392 (Guaycurus). Powers, Tribes of California, pp. 144 (Tatu), 155 (Kato Pomo).]

[Footnote 185: Bailey, 'Wild Tribes of the Veddahs,' in Trans. Ethn. Soc. N.S. ii. 302, n. [double dagger] (Sinhalese), von den Steinen, Unter den Naturvölkern Zentral-Brasiliens, p. 349 (Bakaïri).]

[Footnote 186: See Steinmetz, Studien, ii. 376; Idem, in Archiv für Anthropologie, xxiv. 603 sq.]

[Footnote 187: Cf. Marillier, loc. cit. p. 44 sq.]

[Footnote 188: Fytche, Burma, i. 354.]

[Footnote 189: Keating, op. cit. ii. 158 sq.]

[Footnote 190: Codrington, op. cit. p. 279 sq.]

[Footnote 191: Ibid. p. 274.]

[Footnote 192: Ibid. p. 288.]

[Footnote 193: Brebeuf, 'Relation de ce qui s'est passé dans le pays des Hurons,' in Relations des Jésuites, 1636, p. 104 sq. Hewitt, 'The Iroquoian Concept of the Soul,' in Jour. of American Folk-Lore, viii. 109.]

[Footnote 194: Wilson, Western Africa, p. 210.]

[Footnote 195: See supra, ii. 236 sqq.]

[Footnote 196: This is especially the case among the Indians of North America (cf. Brinton, Myths of the New World, p. 242 sq.; Dorman, op. cit. p. 33; Steinmetz, in _Archiv f. Anthrop._ xxiv. 591). See also Codrington, op. cit. p. 274 sq. (Banks' Islanders).]

[Footnote 197: Dove, 'Aborigines of Tasmania.' in Tasmanian Jour. Natural Science, i. 253. Polack, Manners and Customs (of the New Zealanders, i. 254; Dieffenbach, Travels in New Zealand, ii. 118. Percy Smith, 'Futuna,' in Jour. Polynesian Soc. i. 39. Batchelor, Ainu of Japan, p. 225. Steller, op. cit. p. 269 (Kamchadales). Cranz, op. cit. i. 186 (Greenlanders). Robertson, History of America, ii. 202. Arbousset and Daumas, op. cit. p. 343 (Bechuanas).]

The belief in a moral retribution after death may thus originate in various ways, quite independently of any notion of a god who acts as a judge of human conduct. When such a belief is said to prevail among a savage people it is by no means the rule that the rewards or punishments are associated with the activity of a divine being. And when, as is sometimes the case, the fate of the dead is supposed to depend upon the will of a high god, the notions held about the other world, and especially about the place reserved for the wicked, in several instances suggest influence from a more advanced religion. But on the other hand it is not an idea which seems incompatible with genuine savage thought that, in cases where the souls of men are believed to go to live with gods, the latter select their companions and, like the human inhabitants of the other world, refuse admittance to undesirable individuals.

Religious ideas have no doubt already at the savage {696} stage begun to influence the moral consciousness even in points which have no direct bearing upon the personal interests of gods; but this influence is not known to have been so great as it has often been represented to be. I can find no solid foundation for the statements made by recent writers, that "the historical beginning of all morality is to be found in religion";[198] that even in the earliest period of human history "religion and morality are necessary correlates of each other";[199] that "all moral commandments originally have the character of religious commandments";[200] that in ancient society "all morality--as morality was then understood--was consecrated and enforced by religious motives and sanctions";[201] that the clan-god was the guardian of the tribal morality.[202] From various facts stated in this and earlier chapters I have been led to the conclusion that among uncivilised races the moral ideas relating to men's conduct towards one another have been much more influenced by the belief in magic forces which may be utilised by man, than by the belief in the free activity of gods.

[Footnote 198: Pfleiderer, _Philosophy and Development of Religion_, iv. 230.]

[Footnote 199: Caird, Evolution of Religion, i. 237.]

[Footnote 200: Wundt, Ethik, p. 99.]

[Footnote 201: Robertson Smith, Religion of the Semites, p. 267. Cf. ibid. p. 53.]

[Footnote 202: Jevons, Introduction to the History of Religion, pp. 112. 177.]