1.1Prim. Cul., i. 378sqq.
2.1Anantha Krishna, i. 29.
2.2Tylor,Prim. Cul., i. 382.
3.1Kolben, 91.
3.2Alexander, i. 170sqq.Similar answers were more recently given to a missionary by one of the neighbouring Bergdamara, a people mainly of Bantu blood (Globus, xcvi. 173).
4.1Kidd, 65. Amusing illustrations of the Kaffir’s cleverness at the game are given.
4.2Andersson, 200.Cf.Pogge on the Bashilange,Mittheil. d. Afrik. Gesellsch., iv. 254.
4.3Rev. J. S. Gale,F. L., xi. 325.
5.1S. H. C. Hawtry,J. A. I., xxxi. 290.Cf.Grubb, 114. Similar statements are made concerning other South American tribes (J. A. I., xiii. 209, 253).
5.2Batchelor, 357.
6.1Neuhauss, iii. 448 note.Cf.Introduction and pp. 154, 507.
6.2Marillier, reviewing Miss Kingsley’sTravels;Rev. Hist. Rel., xxxix. 137.
7.1Spencer and Gillen,C. T., 139 note.
7.2Rev. J. Macdonald,J. A. I., xx. 120.Cf.Junod,S. A. Tribe, ii. 278. Dr Theal says that it is only since European ideas have been disseminated among these peoples that the question of the place of the dead has arisen; and he points to the similarity in mental condition between them and the peasantry of Europe (Yellow and Dark-skinned People, 185).
8.1Journ. Am. F. L., xxi. 233, 236.
9.1Wilson,Peasant Life, 6.
11.1Sproat, 120.
11.2Boas,Mind, 111.
12.1Boas, Sixth Report on the North-western Tribes of Canada,Rep. Brit. Ass., 1890, 582.
13.1Rev. Father J. Jetté, S.J.,Anthropos, vi. 242, 95.
14.1R. C. Phillips,J. A. I., xvii. 220.
15.1Jaussen, 287, 294, 332, 334.Cf.Hanauer, 234.
16.1J. A. I., x. 262.
18.1Bull. Soc. Neuch. Géog., ix. 96.
19.1J. Smith, 77, 373.
20.1J. A. I., xii. 163 note.
22.1Similar classifications of nouns have now been discovered among the Negroes, seeR. E. S., iii. 241.
26.1Tylor,Prim. Cul., i. 385.
31.1Kingsley,Trav., 493.
32.1Spencer and Gillen,N. T., 175, 358 n., 530.
32.2F. L. Journ., iv. 30.
32.3I have collected the evidence inThe Legend of Perseus, vol. i., and in some directions more fully inPrimitive Paternity, vol. i.
33.1Farnell,Cults, i. 195.
37.1J. N. B. Hewitt,Amer. Anthr., N.S., iv. 38.
41.1W. Jones,Journ. Am. F. L., xviii. 183sqq.As used by Dr Jones here, the word Algonkin only includes the Sauk, Fox, and Kickapoo tribes.
41.2Amer. Anthr., N.S., iv. 36;cf.33.
42.1R. B. E., xxvii. 134.Wakondain its various forms is pronounced with annsomewhat like the French nasal.
43.1R. B. E., xxvii. 597sqq.
44.1Fletcher,Am. Anthr., xiv. 106; J. O. Dorsey,R. B. E., xi. 366; Riggs,Contrib. N. Am. Ethnol., vii. 507sqq.
45.1Swanson,R. B. E., xxvi. 451 n., 452sqq.
48.1The analysis of the philosophy (if it may be so called) of the Bafiote which I have tried to summarize above is by Dr Pechuël-Loesche, the most acute and profound of enquirers into the civilization and mentality of the peoples of Loango, and will be found in hisVolksk., chaps. iii. and iv.
48.2De Groot,Rel. Syst., iv. chap. i.
48.3Giran, 21sqq.
48.4Batchelor,Encyc. Rel., i. 239, 240 (cf. Id.,Ainu F. L., 580); Aston,Shinto, 7sqq.
50.1Codrington, 118sqq.
51.1Is this really the original belief? Dr Marett cites Dr Seligmann’s (verbal?) authority for the statement that in New Guinea (among the tribes of Melanesian culture and descent?) “a yam-stone would be held capable of making the yams grow miraculously, quite apart from the agency of spirits†(Arch. Rel., xii. 190).
51.2Codrington, 120, 191.
51.3Codrington, 124-5. Father Joseph Meier denies that the Melanesian population of the Gazelle Peninsula of New Britain possesses the concept ofmanain the sense of a universal impersonal, magical power. Yet he goes on to say: “The sorcerer (Zauberer) himself derives the inherent power of his spells (Zauber-mitteln) from two different sources of energy. First, he relies on the might of the spirits to whom he is indebted for his spells, or on the might of his forefathers who have practised magic before him, and have handed down to him their spells. In his incantation therefore the magician (Hexenmeister) will always name a spirit, or the name of a deceased sorcerer, or at least silently presume his assistance. A second source of energy for the sorcerer is his own soul. By associating this with natural objects he enhances their powers. Everything the sorcerer does he conceives under the aspect of these two sources of energy. The originator of an enchantment (Zauberei)—be it an unembodied spirit, or the ghost of a deceased person, or a spirit residing in a living being (for example, a bird)—operates in his spell and makes it always and everywhere effective. Or else only the sorcerer’s own soul is considered for magical purposes. Beyond this there is no other power†(Anthropos, viii. 8, 9). This seems to resemble the concept ofmana, as set forth by Dr Codrington. Later Father Meier remarks: “The enquiry into the witchcraft (Zauberwesen) of the coast-dwellers of the Gazelle Peninsula is not yet closed. So far we only know a small fragment of all their enchantments†(ibid., 11). Our knowledge of the social elements and cultural history of Melanesia as a whole, and of New Britain in particular, is still very imperfect.
54.1E. Tregear,The Maori-Polynesian Comparative Dictionary, Wellington, N.Z., 1891, 203-6,s.vv.Cf.Marett,Trans. Oxford Cong., i. 48sqq.It is perhaps worth while to note “that the Samoan New Testament was translated from the Greek and usesmanaas the equivalent of the Greek δÏναμις, whilstpuleis used for the Greek á¼Î¾Î¿Ï…σία†(Haddon,Torres Str. Rep., v. 329, quoting communication from S. H. Ray).
55.1Ellis,Polyn. Res., iii. 108. A specimen of the girdle was sent by John Williams, the missionary afterwards killed at Eramanga, to England, probably to the London Missionary Society. See hisMiss. Enterprises, 144.
56.1Ellis,op. cit., i. 338.
57.1Taylor, 164sqq.
58.1De Acosta, 378.
58.2Sébillot,F. L. France, ii. 235.
58.3Ploss,Weib, i. 504, quoting Bonnemère, but as usual without the exact reference.
59.1Seligmann,Veddas, 207.
60.1Tozer, i. 216.
60.2Dr M. Hoefler,Am Urquell, ii. 101.
60.3Rev. H. E. Mabille,Journ. Afr. Soc., v. 352.
62.1Van Gennep,Tabou, 184.
62.2Turner,Samoa, 186. Compare a number of similar taboos on the previous and subsequent pages.
62.3Codrington, 215.
63.1W. Bogoras,Amer. Anthr., N.S., iii. 97.
64.1SeeGolden Bough3,passim, especially the volume on Taboo. It is needless to say that Professor Frazer does not write from the point of view here adopted, and that his interpretations frequently diverge from those which I should be inclined to.
65.1F. L., xii. 186. Elsewhere Mr Weeks says: “No stigma attaches to the man who is proved guilty [of witchcraft] by the ordeal, for ‘one can have witchcraft without knowing it’†(Cannibals, 189). Presumablylikunduis here included under the general term of witchcraft. In another place he says: “The general belief is that only one in the family can bewitch a member of the family†(ibid., 311). Hence the evil influence of the possessor oflikunduextends no further.
67.1Jevons,Introd., 178, 7, 390sqq.
67.2Tylor,Prim. Cul., i. 383.
67.3Avebury,Marriage, 142. I cannot find that he commits himself to a definition of religion, though his view may perhaps be inferred from the above quotation (cf.hisOrigin of Civilization, 205sqq.).
68.1Frazer,Magic Art, i. 222, 223.
68.2Durkheim,Formes Élémentaires, 65. M. Salomon Reinach in a recent brilliant work on the history of religions proposes as a definition: “An assemblage (ensemble) of scruples which stand in the way of the free exercise of our faculties.†This reduces religion to a system of taboos. But he subsequently qualifies it by saying: “Animism on one side, taboos on the other, these are the essential factors of religions†(Orpheus, 4, 10). Thus qualified, however, it excludes Buddhism; and with or without the qualification it does not express the social side of religion. M. Reinach is quite conscious of these omissions. They are an illustration of the extreme difficulty found by the most able and learned enquirers in formulating an adequate definition of religion, a definition at once all-embracing and exact.
69.1Durkheim, 323.
69.2Frazer,Magic Art, i. 220.
70.1Frazer,op. cit., 52.
70.2Ibid., 221, 237sqq.
70.3Ibid., 233. Frazer has worked out the theory more completely than anyone else; but it has been more or less anticipated, or shared, by others, such as Sir Edward Tylor, Sir Alfred Lyall, and Professor Jevons.
72.1The above is a brief summary (partly borrowed from my review inF. L., xv. 359) of a portion of the argument elaborated by MM. Hubert and Mauss in their “Esquisse d’une Théorie Générale de la Magie,â€L’Année Soc., vii. 1-146.
76.1Durkheim,op. cit., 61.
77.1Spencer and Gillen,C. T., 549, 476.
77.2Ante,p. 50.
77.3Codrington, 133. Another example is cited subsequently, p. 144, from Borneo.
78.1Weeks, 189; seeante,p. 65note.
78.2Junod,S. A. Tribe, ii. 467; i. 441.
78.3Durkheim,op. cit., 63 note.
79.1All this indictment holds good in a lesser degree of the witch-hunts of Europe and New England.
80.1Gregor, 197.
80.2This, however, is not exactly what Marillier says. “A ‘natural’ act (and that is its sole difference from a magical act) only reaches bodies, or at least it only reaches the soul through the object it animates. A magical practice, which may, however, be a purely material act, acts in some way from within outwards (agit en quelque sorte du dedans au dehors); it only kills or fecundates the man, animal, or plant to which it is applied, by exercising first of all its beneficent or calamitous action on the soul, which, like that of the sorcerer, is the principle of his life†(Rev. Hist. Rel., xxxvi. 343).
80.3Doutté, 328, 330.
81.1Doutté, 340, 334, 343, 338. Compare what the schoolboy called their “conjuring tricks,†performed before Pharaoh by Moses and Aaron, and by the magicians (Ex. vii. 8sqq.).
82.1Marett,Anthrop., 209. Dr Marett might have omitted the words “of evil†after “supernormal powers.†They do not strengthen his argument. In savage communities a hard and fast line is not usually drawn between supernormal powers of evil and supernormal powers of good.
82.2Ibid., 210.
83.1Marett,Anthrop., 211.
84.1P. E. Goddard,Univ. Cal. Pub., i. 87.
84.2Marett,Anthrop., 213.
84.3Westermarck,Ceremonies, 67 note, quoting Destaing.
85.1Reference may be made here to Mr Ernest Crawley, who writes like Professor Jevons from a distinctly theological standpoint. I can find no formal definition of religion in his book on the subject. He says: “The vital instinct, the feeling of life, the will to live, the instinct to preserve it, is the source of, or rather is identical with, the religious impulse, and is the origin of religion†(Tree of Life, 214). But, as Professor Leuba has rightly observed, “the love and lust of life is the source of all human conduct and not of religion alone†(Psychol. Study, 48). Elsewhere Mr Crawley observes that religion is not a department, like law or science, having a special subject-matter; it is “a tone or spirit.†It “chiefly concerns itself with elemental interests—life and death, birth and marriage are typical cases†(op. cit., 204sq.). Nor can I find any definition of magic, though he maintains in opposition to Professor Frazer that “it seems impossible to separate magic and religion in their early forms.†“Indeed,†he adds, “the practical meaning of magic, when worked in connection with religion, is control of the supernatural, which is thus not superior to man†(186). What is magic when not “worked in connection with religion� He identifiesmanawith the force “which underlies magical processes generally,†but apparently not religious processes. A religious process he defines as “that of making a thing sacred†(231sq.). He opposes magic to sacredness. “Sacredness is a result of the application of religious impulse and of nothing else†(208sq.). Compare Professor Durkheim’s definition of religion (supra,p. 68). Mr Crawley takes insufficient account of the social aspect of religion.
87.1Southey,The Curse of Kehama, preface.
87.2Augustine,Civ. Dei, x. 11, citing Porphyry.
91.1Marett,Threshold, 44sqq.
92.1J. M. M. van der Burgt, 55.
92.2Hewitt,Am. Anthr., N.S., iv., 40.
93.1E. H. Man,J. A. I., xii. 161, 163, 353, etc.
95.1Codrington, 192.
98.1The primary authority on the Arunta and neighbouring tribes is Messrs Spencer and Gillen,C. T.andN. T., andRep. Horn Exped., but Strehlow’s researches (Aranda- und Loritja-stämme) are important. The results of the latter are divergent to some extent from those of the former, but in most respects are not irreconcilable. See,e.g., Professor Durkheim’s valuable discussion of the different versions of reincarnation,op. cit., 357sqq.I have stated above in a summary manner what seems to be the result of the criticism of both authorities.
99.1Spencer and Gillen,N. T., 498; Strehlow, ii. 1.Cf.Rep. Horn Exped., iv. 183.
99.2Strehlow, i. 1.
100.1Spencer and Gillen,N. T., 227, 232, 238.
100.2Ibid., 227.
100.3Ibid., 252.
101.1For the Mongolian practice seeAmer. Anthr., N.S., xv. 370. The Pueblo Indian practice has been recorded by every scientific enquirer among the tribes.
102.1Spencer and Gillen,C. T., 249. Note also the threat which follows.
102.2M. Durkheim contends, and I think with justice, that the association of thechuringawith individual ancestors, and therefore with their descendants, or rather reincarnations, is secondary (op. cit., 173). Butcf.Spencer and Gillen,N. T., 281.
102.3Strehlow, ii. 78. He resisted the temptation and avoided the mistake made so often by missionaries of translating by native words Christian terms of fundamentally different content.
103.1Spencer and Gillen,N. T., 259sqq.
103.2Ibid., 293.
104.1Spencer and Gillen,C. T., chaps. v. and vi.passim;N. T., chap. viii.passim; Strehlow, ii. 75sqq.
105.1Strehlow, iii. 6.
105.2Spencer and Gillen,C. T., chap. xvi.;N. T., chap. xv.;Rep. Horn Exped., 180.
106.1Spencer and Gillen,C. T., 534, 553.Cf.480, 538.
107.1Arch. Rel., viii. 463, 467. Compare the account of the initiation by the Devil of a Lapp wizard quoted from Tornæus, Scheffer, 136.
107.2Jesup. Exped., vi. 47.
109.1Junod,S. A. Tribe, ii. 450, 471, 473. M. Junod’s work is concerned with the Thonga, but it is true in general terms of other tribes.
109.2Merensky, 135; Shooter, 191; Callaway,Rel. Syst., 259sqq.
109.3Johnston,Grenfell, ii. 659 note, quoting Rev. W. H. Stapleton. He is obviously reporting a statement by a native.
110.1Jones,Ojebway, 269.
110.2A. L. Kroeber,Univ. Cal. Pub., iv. 328.
110.3G. A. Dorsey,Trad. Skidi Pawnee, 185, 189, 194, 199, 206, 210, 219, 221, 231.
110.4Roth,Sarawak, i. 266.
111.1Skeat,Magic, 60.
113.1Seligmann,Veddas, 128sqq., 190sqq., 207. Seesupra,p. 59.
114.1E. H. Man,J. A. I., xii. 96.
115.1Kolben, 97.
116.1Dorsey,Wichita, 99.
116.2R. B. E., xxvii. 197.
117.1There appears to be no detailed account of the Buffalo Dance of the Pawnees. See Dorsey,Skidi Pawnees, xxi. 46; Grinnell, 369. The latest stage, perhaps contaminated with European notions, is in part described,Id., 270.
121.1W. J. M‘Gee,R. B. E., xvii. 168*sqq.
121.2Durkheim, 295.
124.1Durkheim, 305.
124.2Ibid., 134, 135.
124.3Ibid., 343, 355, 378.
125.1Seligmann, 30, 126, 130, 170sqq., 149.
126.1Cens. Ind. Rep., 1901, iii. 62.Cf.the papers by E. H. Man,J. A. I., xii.
127.1Koch-Grünberg,passim; von den Steinen,passim, especially 350sqq.
130.1Westermarck,Moral Ideas, ii. 585.
132.1Marten,Ind. Cens. Rep., 1911, x. 80.
132.2Laws of Manu,Sac. Bks., xxv. 5. I am indebted for this reference and the further explanation above to my friend Mr William Crooke.
132.3Supra,p. 62.
132.4Dr Frazer,Psyche’s Task, 25sqq., has made a collection of these rites and signs. See also Westermarck,Moral Ideas, ii. 63sqq.
133.1F. B. Jevons,Oxford Cong. Rep., ii. 131;Id., Græco-Italian Magic,Anthrop. Class., 106. See also Rouse,Greek V. O., 337.
133.2I described one such leaden tablet, found at Dymock, Gloucestershire, inReliquary, N.S., iii. 140. Another was subsequently found at Lincoln’s Inn, and reported on by Mr W. Paley Baildon to the Society of Antiquaries (Proc. Soc. Anti., 2nd ser., xviii. 141). Others have also been found elsewhere, among them two on Gatherley Moor in Yorkshire. If the identification of the persons against whom the tablets on Gatherley Moor and at Lincoln’s Inn were directed be conclusively established, they antedate by more than half a century the translation above referred to of Agrippa’s book. This of course is by no means impossible, or indeed improbable, for the practitioners of occult science in the reign of Queen Elizabeth were frequently men of learning.
134.1Fasc. Malay, ii. 41.
135.1Alan H. Gardiner,Oxford Cong. Rep., i. 210.
135.2Budge,Archæologia, lii. 421sqq., transliterating, translating, and commenting on a papyrus in the British Museum, which belonged to a priest of Ra about the year B.C. 305, and contains the ritual for the purpose.
135.3Wiedemann, 94.
136.1Wiedemann, 279.
136.2Ibid., 99.
136.3Budge,Archæologia, lii. 425, 440, 539sqq.The Egyptian gods merged into one another like the dissolving pictures of a lantern. This was probably in part the result of the union in one kingdom of a number of petty states, which were centres of worship of disparate though cognate divinities, and the consequent effort to synthesize these divinities and their worship, and in part the issue of philosophical speculation, itself doubtless influenced by political events.
136.4Wiedemann, 54; Budge,Egypt. Magic, 137. Dr Frazer’s version,Taboo, 387, is formed on a comparison of these and other texts.
137.1Wiedemann, 273. More personal threats are often employed. See, for examples,Arch. Rel., xvi. 85.
137.2Plato,Rep., ii. 364.
137.3There are of course plenty of magical Greek texts, but they are much later. The papyri unearthed in such numbers during recent years contain many; and they often imply that the deity invoked is compelled to perform his votary’s wishes. He is addressed in terms of command, adjured by names of power and bidden to be quick about his work. Such spells, however, are not purely Greek. They are produced under foreign influence, and the gods or demons invoked bear alien names. The texts are frequentlydefixiones. Simaitha’s incantation in the second idyll of Theocritus, so far as it is addressed to the Moon, to Hecate or Artemis, is not couched in terms of command. The goddesses, if they grant the damsel’s desires, are accomplices who cannot pleadvis major. Yet threats and insults to the gods were, it seems, sometimes made use of, probably in the hope of driving them by taunts to do what was wanted (see below,p. 190). The dividing line here is very thin.
139.1Hodson,Naga, 139, 141;cf.102, 164.
139.2Parker,Tales, i. 97.
140.1Brett,Ind. Tribes, 401.
140.2Anthropos, viii. 3. For the belief in and cult of the Kaya, seeibid., iii. 1005; and of the Inal,ibid., v. 95.
140.3Shakespear,Lushai, 109 (cf.61).
141.1W. G. Aston,F. L., xxiii. 187sq.
141.2Wiedemann, 227. On Thoth as magician and the words of power which he uttered and wrote down compare Budge,Egypt. Magic, 128sqq.
142.1Morris,Heimskringla, i. 18, 19.
143.1Levit. xvi. 8. On the Scapegoat in general see Dr Frazer’s volume bearing that title.
144.1Hose, ii. 29 note.
145.1Hose, 56, 117.
146.1Rivers,Todas, 257, 450. For an alternative translation of the third clause of the spell, see pp. 195, 271. For another form of the spell, see p. 259.
147.1J. H. Weeks,J. A. I., xl. 377, 378.
148.1J. H. Weeks,J. A. I., xl. 383. Surely in the face of these examples Mr Weeks’ statement—“Nor did we find any form of prayer among them, no worship and no sacrifices†(ibid., 376)—needs some qualification. As to themongoli, seeibid., 368.
149.1Werner, 56, 76.
151.1A. M. Tozzer,Putnam Vol., 304.Cf.Matthews,Navaho Leg., 40.
151.2Tozzer,op. cit., 303. On the rites and beliefs of the Dene, see Father Jetté,J. A. I., xxxvii. 157sqq.
154.1Exod. xxii. 18.
154.2Deut. xviii. 9sqq.
154.3Num. v. 11sqq.
155.1Hos. iii. 4, 5.Cf.T. W. Davies,Magic, 36; andEncyc. Bibl.,s.v.
159.1Weeks 177.
161.1Ælian,Var. Hist., xii. 23. Philo (Dreams, ii. 17) attributes the same practice to the Germans.
161.2O’Grady, ii. 518. Professor Whitley Stokes also gives it,F. L., iv. 488, from an Edinburgh MS. I quote his translation, which is to the same effect as Mr O’Grady’s.
162.1Skeat,Magic, 10.
163.1Vinson, 20. According to this story there were two cabin-boys, one of whom overheard the plot and the other struck the blow, but this appears to be a literary embellishment.
163.2Strackerjan, i. 324, 325; Hansen, 38. The Norse tale (by Asbjoernsen) is referred to,Mélusine, ii. 201. I have not seen it. Analogous tale in Ireland,Ant., xlv. 371.
163.3Tylor Essays, 138. Roscher (Ephialtes, 38) thinks it was “a quite obvious nightmare.â€
164.1Gregor, 66.
164.2Gregor,loc. cit.
166.1Thorpe,N. Myth., ii. 78.
167.1Hibbert,A Description of the Shetland Islands(Edinburgh, 1822), 569;Zeits. des Ver., ii. 15, 17; Rogers, 218; Lehmann-Filhés, ii. 16; Maurer, 173.
168.1Natesa Sastri, 148.
168.2Bibl. Trad. Pop. Espan., i. 187
168.3Castrén, 172.
168.4Boas,Ind. Sagen, 86.
169.1Miller,Scenes and Leg., 287.
170.1Shakespear,Lushei, 66.
170.2Grimm,Teut. Myth., iii. 924.
171.1Ovid,Fasti, iii. 285.
171.2Pausanias, i. 4, 5; Ovid,Metam., xi. 90; Herod., viii. 138; Ælian,Var. Hist., iii. 18.
171.3Iliad, v. 370sqq.
172.1R. E. E. S., i. 338.
172.2As an example the Nattu Malayans of Cochin in the south of India may be cited. “When questioned as to their ideas of gods, they say that they are like men themselves, but invisible, yet all-powerful†(Anantha Krishna, i. 34).
173.1Herod., ii. 122. Gods, like men, were addicted to gambling. According to Plutarch (De Iside), Hermes in Egyptian legend played with the moon and won the seventieth part of each of her light periods, wherewith he made the last five days of the year and added them to the calendar.
173.2Herod., vii. 35.
173.3Bérenger-Feraud,Superst., i. 473. The author has collected in the chapter from which this is cited numerous other instances of the punishment of the recalcitrant god.
173.4Herod., ii. 111.
174.1Williams,Burmah, 91.
174.2Ind. Cens. Rep., 1911, x. 61.
174.3Herod., iv. 94. Rohde (Psyche, ii. 28 note) suggests that the personage against whom the arrows and threats were aimed was not strictly a god, but an evil spirit or a magician. This, however, does not follow. Philo (l.c.) states that Xerxes, when his bridge across the Hellespont was destroyed, aimed his arrows at the sun, and regards the action with pious horror as a symptom of insanity.
175.1Herod., iv. 184.
175.2J. A. I., xxxvi. 51.
175.3Moffat, 261, 265.
175.4Chapman, i. 213. The word translated by Chapman as “God†is doubtless Morimo.Cf.ibid., 46, “All Bechuanas believe in God (Morimo), whom they laud or execrate as good or bad luck attends them.â€
176.1Callaway,Rel. Syst., 404.
176.2Hahn, 46, 51, 59, 94.Cf.99, where the practice of the Urjangkut, a tribe of Black Tartars, to scold the thunder and lightning is cited from Bastian.
177.1Lloyd, 397. According to another account, “when it thunders the Bushmen are very angry and curse bitterly, thinking that the storm is occasioned by some evil being†(Thunberg, ii., 163).
177.2Hollis,Nandi, 9, 99.
177.3J. A. I., xliii. 49.
177.4Jes. Rel., xii. 25.
177.5J. A. Mason,Univ. Cal. Pub., x. 185.
178.1Lozano,Desc. Chorographica del Gran Chaco(1733), 71, quoted Payne, i. 391 note.
178.2Payne,l.c.
178.3Int. Arch., Suppl., xiii. 88.
179.1Neuhauss, iii. 157. I may refer also to the account of a young Kayan brave in Borneo taking his arms and sallying forth to fight the Thunder-god (Int. Arch., xxi. 139). But further examples are unnecessary.
180.1Frazer,Magic Art, i. 327sqq.
180.2Von Alpenburg, 262, 365. Many such knives are to be found in peasants’ houses in the Lower Inn valley. In the Netherlands these whirlwinds are held to be “the Travailing Mother,†who seems to be a woman dead in childbirth unconfessed of mortal sin. She cannot be received into heaven. She is equally denied a place in hell, since her sufferings and death have already provided a sufficient penance. Hence she wanders about, seeking an abiding-place (Wolf,Niederl. Sag., 616). Women who die in childbirth are commonly considered very dangerous ghosts. See below,p. 213.
181.1Farnell,Evol., 43.Cf.Miss Harrison,Prolegomena, 101.
181.2I have discussed similar practices,Prim. Pat., i. 102. See also Mannhardt,Myth. Forsch., 113sqq.; Frazer,Scapegoat, 255. These contain a large collection of examples, which put the magical and purificatory purpose beyond doubt.
182.1Mélusine, ii. 187, quoting the passage.
182.2Journ. Am. F. L., xxiii. 416, 418.
182.3Lumholtz, ii. 342, 422.
183.1Rev. Trad. Pop., xi. 663. Vâlmiki, the Indian epic poet, author of theRámáyana, is said to have owed his birth to a similar blunder by a saint who was the object of prayers by two sisters-in-law, and mistook the maiden for the married woman (Harikishan Kaul,Ind. Cens. Rep., 1911, xiv. 131, citing Vaman Shiva Ram Apte’sSanskrit Dictionary).
184.1Turner,R. B. E., xi. 194.
184.2M. Friedrich,Anthropos, ii. 101.
185.1Anthropos, vii. 74.
185.2Thurston,Castes, vi. 85.
186.1Dr H. ten Kate,Anthropos, vii. 396.Cf.Aston,Shinto, 189.
186.2Wiedemann,op. cit., 178. Bérenger-Feraud,Superst., i. 451sqq., gives a long list of examples of punishments inflicted on the obdurate divinity. See also Frazer,Magic Art, i. 296; Tylor,Prim. Cul., ii. 155-7, and the numerous authorities there referred to; Grimm,Teut. Myth., ii. 767 note.
187.1F. L., viii. 349.
187.2Weeks, 271.
187.3Frazer,Scapegoat,passim.
188.1Morris,Ere, 151.
190.1Junod,S. A. Tribe, ii. 368, 384. If Lactantius and the other writers of antiquity who have mentioned the sacrifice to Hercules referred to by Dr Frazer (Magic Art, i. 281) had given us the exact words and occasion of the rite, we might perhaps find a similar explanation for it. Both that and the rite addressed at Cranganore in Southern India (ibid., 280) to the goddess Bhagavati are at present very obscure.
191.1Anantha Krishna, i. 53, 76.
191.2Temple,Leg. Panj., ii. 425.Cf.F. L., x. 406.
191.3Grimm,Teut. Myth., i. 20, where other instances are also cited.
192.1Rev. J. H. Weeks,J. A. I., xxxix. 134, reproduced in the same author’sCongo Cannibals, 176.
194.1Plutarch,De Iside. Wiedemann (213) suggests that the Greeks misunderstood the myth. But the text of the hymn which he quotes appears to prove the accuracy of Plutarch’s interpretation. This is in effect the view taken by Dr Wallis Budge (Gods, i. 487). Harpocrates (Heru-p-khart) is Horus the younger.
195.1De Groot,Rel. Syst., iv. 429, 421, 342; Giles, ii. 276.
196.1Dalton, 232.
197.1N. Ind. N. and Q., iii. 97, par. 205.
197.2Jülg, 96 (Story No. 9). Compare children’s tales from various parts of India, where the hero or heroine’s life is dependent on a necklace which is stolen. The owner of the necklace dies when it is worn by the thief, and revives when it is taken off. The birth of a child follows visits by the other spouse. By the child’s help the necklace is recovered, and permanent life is thus restored to the half-dead, half-living hero or heroine (Frere, 230 (Story No. 20); Day, 1 (Story No. 1); Steel and Temple, 85).
197.3Kruijt, 398, 509;cf.230.
198.1Petitot, 262.
199.1Von Wlislocki,Volksdicht., 283.
199.2Maurer, 300 (cf.192). A Protestant version is given, Lehmann-Filhés, i. 132.
200.1Le Braz, 321, Story No. 60.
201.1Boas,Ind. Sag., 267. Compare a curious Tlingit story of a girl who married a dead man (ghost), who in consequence came to life again (Swanton,Tlingit Myths, 247).
202.1The ghostly visitant might be of either sex, though the masculine was perhaps more common. The visit was generally attended in either case with fatal effects. See below as toLamiæ.
203.1Herodotus, vi. 68, 69.
203.2Augustine,Civ. Dei, xv. 23.
203.3Malleolus, De Credul. Dæmon. adhibenda,Malleus Maleficarum(Frankfurt, 1582), 428. See also Bodin,De Magorum Dæmonomania(Frankfurt, 1603), ii. 7. By this time, however, there began to be sceptics.Cf.Wierus,De Præstigiis Dæmonum(Basel, 1577), 358; Ulr. Molitor, De Pythonicis Mulieribus,Malleus Mal., 83. The extensive information possessed for many centuries by these learned men was not limited to theincubus. There were also corresponding female demons commonly known asSuccubi, orLamiæ, whose ravages were almost equally great. Awful tales were related by way of warning against their temptation. Compare theputianaof the Moluccas, cited below. See also Lecky,Rationalism, i. 26 note. Among the ancient Assyrians and the modern Arabs the possibility of cohabitation by a man with a spirit or non-human supernatural being, who may even bear him children, was and is believed. But they are very jealous (Encyc. Rel., iv. 571;F. L., xi. 388).
204.1Strausz, 454.
204.2Bartels, quoting Wladimir Bugiel,Zeit. des Vereins, x. 121. Apparently the throwing of the poppy-seed imposed on the ghostly visitant the necessity of counting the grains before proceeding to his attack. See Andree, i. 81; Wilken, iii. 226 note, citing Mannhardt.
205.1Scott goes on to refer to the old Scottish ballad of Sweet William’s Ghost, founded, like that of Bürger’s poem, on the same superstition. It is reprinted, with an account of the literature on the subject, in Child,Ballads, ii. 199sqq., 226sqq.; v. 293, 294.