Religion, however, has one element within it still older, more fundamental, and more persistent6 than any mere7 belief in a god or gods—nay, even than the custom or practice of supplicating8 and appeasing9 ghosts or gods by gifts and observances. That element is the conception of the Life of the Dead. On the primitive10 belief in such life, all religion ultimately bases itself. The belief is in fact the earliest thing to appear in religion, for there are savage11 tribes who have nothing worth calling gods, but have still a religion or cult12 of their dead relatives. It is also the latest thing to survive in religion; for many modern spiritualists, who have ceased to be theists, or to accept any other form of the supernatural, nevertheless go on believing in the continued existence of the dead, and in the possibility of intercommunication between them and the living. This, therefore, which is the earliest manifestation13 of religious thought, 043and which persists throughout as one of its most salient and irrepressible features, must engage our attention for a little time before we pass on to the genesis of polytheism.
But the belief in continued life itself, like all other human ideas, has naturally undergone various stages of evolution. The stages glide14 imperceptibly into one another, of course; but I think we can on the whole distinguish with tolerable accuracy between three main layers or strata15 of opinion with regard to the continued existence of the dead. In the first or lowest stratum16, the difference between life and death themselves is but ill or inadequately17 perceived; the dead are thought of as yet bodily living. In the second stratum, death is recognised as a physical fact, but is regarded as only temporary; at this stage, men look forward to the Resurrection of the Body, and expect the Life of the World to Come. In the third stratum, the soul is regarded as a distinct entity19 from the body; it survives it in a separate and somewhat shadowy form: so that the opinion as to the future proper to this stage is not a belief in the Resurrection of the Body, but a belief in the Immortality21 of the Soul. These two concepts have often been confounded together by loose and semi-philosophical Christian3 thinkers; but in their essence they are wholly distinct and irreconcilable22.
I shall examine each of these three strata separately.
And first as to that early savage level of thought where the ideas of life and death are very ill demarcated. To us at the present day it seems a curious notion that people should not possess the conception of death as a necessary event in every individual human history. But that is because we cannot easily unread all our previous thinking, cannot throw ourselves frankly23 back into the state of the savage. We are accustomed to living in large and populous24 communities, where deaths are frequent, and where natural death in particular is an every-day occurrence. We have behind us a vast and long history of previous ages; and 044we know that historical time was occupied by the lives of many successive generations, all of which are now dead, and none of which on the average exceeded a certain fixed25 limit of seventy or eighty odd years. To us, the conception of human life as a relatively26 short period, bounded by a known duration, and naturally terminating at a relatively fixed end, is a common and familiar one.
We forget, however, that to the savage all this is quite otherwise. He lives in a small and scattered27 community, where deaths are rare, and where natural death in particular is comparatively infrequent. Most of his people are killed in war, or devoured28 by wild beasts, or destroyed by accidents in the chase, or by thirst or starvation. Some are drowned in rapid rivers; some crushed by falling trees or stones; some poisoned by deadly fruits, or bitten by venomous snakes; some massacred by chiefs, or murdered in quarrels with their own tribesmen. In a large majority of instances, there is some open and obvious cause of death; and this cause is generally due either to the hand of man or to some other animal; or failing that, to some apparently29 active effort of external nature, such as flood, or lightning, or forest fires, or landslip and earthquake. Death by disease is comparatively rare; death by natural decay almost unknown or unrecognised.
Nor has the savage a great historic past behind him. He knows few but his tribesmen, and little of their ancestors save those whom his parents can remember before them. His perspective of the past is extremely limited. Nothing enables him to form that wide idea of the necessity and invariability of death which to us is so familiar. That “all men are mortal” is to civilised man a truism; to very early savages30 it would necessarily have seemed a startling paradox31. No man ever dies within his own experience; ever since he can remember, he has continued to exist as a permanent part of all his adventures. Most of the savage’s family have gone on continuously living with him. A death has been a rare and startling occurrence. 045Thus the notion of death as an inevitable32 end never arises at all; the notion of death as due to natural causes seems quite untenable. When a savage dies, the first question that arises is “Who has killed him?” If he is slain33 in war, or devoured by a tiger, or ripped up by an elephant, or drowned by a stream in spate34, or murdered by a tribesman, the cause is obvious. If none of these, then the death is usually set down to witchcraft35.
Furthermore, the mere fact of death is much less certain among primitive or savage men than in civilised communities. We know as a rule with almost absolute certainty whether at a given moment a sick or wounded man is dead or living. Nevertheless, even among ourselves, cases of doubt not infrequently occur. At times we hesitate whether a man or woman is dead or has fainted. If the heart continues to beat, we consider them still living; if not the slightest flutter of the pulse can be perceived, we consider them dead. Even our advanced medical science, however, is often perplexed36 in very obscure cases of catalepsy; and mistakes have occurred from time to time, resulting in occasional premature37 burials. The discrimination of true from apparent death is not always easy. Vesalius, the eminent38 anatomist, opened a supposed corpse39 in which the heart was seen to be still beating; and the Abb茅 Pr茅vost, who had been struck by apoplexy, was regarded as dead, but recovered consciousness once more under the surgeon’s scalpel. Naturally, among savages, such cases of doubt are far more likely to occur than among civilised people; or rather, to put it as the savage would think of it, there is often no knowing when a person who is lying stiff and lifeless may happen to get up again and resume his usual activity. The savage is accustomed to seeing his fellows stunned40 or rendered unconscious by blows, wounds, and other accidents, inflicted41 either by the enemy, by wild beasts, by natural agencies, or by the wrath42 of his tribesmen; and he never knows how soon the effect of such accidents may pass away, and the man may recover his 046ordinary vitality43. As a rule, he keeps and tends the bodies of his friends as long as any chance remains44 of their ultimate recovery, and often (as we shall see in the sequel) much longer.
Again, in order to understand this attitude of early man towards his wounded, his stricken, and his dead, we must glance aside for a moment at the primitive psychology45. Very early indeed in the history of the human mind, I believe, some vague adumbration46 of the notion of a soul began to pervade47 humanity. We now know that consciousness is a function of the brain; that it is intermitted during sleep, when the brain rests, and also during times of grave derangement48 of the nervous or circulatory systems, as when we faint or assume the comatose49 condition, or are stunned by a blow, or fall into catalepsy or epilepsy. We also know that consciousness ceases altogether at death, when the brain no longer functions; and that the possibility of its further continuance is absolutely cut off by the fact of decomposition50. But these truths, still imperfectly understood or rashly rejected by many among ourselves, were wholly unknown to early men. They had to frame for themselves as best they could some vague working hypothesis of the human mind, from data which suggested themselves in the ordinary course of life; and the hypothesis which they framed was more or less roughly that of the soul or spirit, still implicitly51 accepted by a large majority of the human species.
According to this hypothesis every man consists of two halves or parts, one material or bodily, the other immaterial or spiritual. The first half, called the body, is visible and tangible52; the second half, called the soul, dwells within it, and is more or less invisible or shadowy. It is to a large extent identified with the breath; and like the breath it is often believed to quit the body at death, and even to go off in a free form and live its own life elsewhere. As this supposed independence of the soul from the body lies at the very basis of all ghosts and gods, and therefore of 047religion itself, I may be excused for going at some length into the question of its origin.
Actually, so far as we know by direct and trustworthy evidence, the existence of a mind, consciousness, or “soul,” apart from a body, has never yet been satisfactorily demonstrated. But the savage derived53 the belief, apparently, from a large number of concurrent54 hints and suggestions, of which such a hypothesis seemed to him the inevitable result. During the daytime he was awake; at night he slept; yet even in his sleep, while his body lay curled on the ground beside the camp-fire, he seemed to hunt or to fight, to make love or to feast, in some other region. What was this part of him that wandered from the body in dreams?—what, if not the soul or breath which he naturally regarded as something distinct and separate? And when a man died, did not the soul or breath go from him? When he was badly wounded, did it not disappear for a time, and then return again? In fainting fits, in catalepsy, and in other abnormal states, did it not leave the body, or even play strange tricks with it? I need not pursue this line of thought, already fully56 worked out by Mr. Herbert Spencer and Dr. Tylor. It is enough to say that from a very early date, primitive man began to regard the soul or life as something bound up with the breath, something which could go away from the body at will and return to it again, something separable and distinct, yet essential to the person, very vaguely57 conceived as immaterial or shadowy, but more so at a later than at an earlier period. *
* The question of the Separate Soul has recently received
very full treatment from Mr. Frazer in The Golden Bough58, and
Mr. Sidney Hartland in The Legend of Perseus.
Moreover, these souls or spirits (which quitted the body in sleep or trance) outlived death, and appeared again to survivors59. In dreams, we often see the shapes of living men; but we also see with peculiar60 vividness the images of the departed. Everybody is familiar with the frequent reappearance 048in sleep of intimate friends or relations lately deceased. These appearances, I fancy, are especially frequent during the first few months of bereavement62, and gradually weaken in frequency and vividness as time goes on. The reason for both sets of phenomena63 I take to be this: the nervous structures, accustomed to be stimulated64 in particular combinations by intercourse65 with the dead friend, miss automatically their wonted stimulation67; and being therefore in a highly nourished and unstable68 state, are peculiarly ready to undergo ideal stimulation in sleep, as we know to be the case with other well-nurtured and underworked nerve-centres. Or, to put it less materially, the brain falls readily into a familiar rhythm. But in course of time the channels atrophy69 by disuse; the habit is lost; and the dream-appearances of the dead friend grow more and more infrequent. The savage, however, accepts the dream-world as almost equally real with the world of sense-presentation. As he envisages70 the matter to himself, his soul has been away on its travels without its body, and there has met and conversed71 with the souls of dead friends or relations.
We must remember also that in savage life occasions for trance, for fainting, and for other abnormal or comatose nervous conditions occur far more frequently than in civilised life. The savage is often wounded and fails from loss of blood; he cuts his foot against a stone, or is half killed by a wild beast; he fasts long and often, perforce, or is reduced to the very verge72 of starvation; and he is therefore familiar, both in his own case and in the case of others, with every variety of unconsciousness and of delirium73 or delusion74. All these facts figure themselves to his mind as absences of the soul from the body, which is thus to him a familiar and almost every-day experience.
Moreover, it will hence result that the savage can hardly gain any clear conception of Death, and especially of death from natural causes. When a tribesman is brought home severely75 wounded and unconscious, the spectator’s immediate76 049idea must necessarily be that the soul has gone away and deserted77 the body. For how long it has gone, he cannot tell; but his first attempts are directed towards inducing or compelling it to return again. For this purpose, he often addresses it with prayers and adjurations, or begs it to come back with loud cries and persuasions78. And he cannot possibly discriminate79 between its temporary absence and its final departure. As Mr. Herbert Spencer well says, the consequences of blows or wounds merge80 into death by imperceptible stages. “Now the injured man shortly ‘returned to himself,’ and did not go away again; and now, returning to himself only after a long absence, he presently deserted his body for an indefinite time. Lastly, instead of these temporary returns, followed by final absence, there sometimes occurred cases in which a violent blow caused continuous absence from the very first; the other self never came back at all.”
In point of fact, during these earlier stages, the idea of Death as we know it did not and does not occur in any form. There are still savages who do not seem to recognise the universality and necessity of death—who regard it on the contrary as something strange and unatural, something due to the machination of enemies or of witchcraft. With the earliest men, it is a foregone conclusion, psychologically speaking, that they should so regard it; they could not form any other concept without far more extended knowledge than they have the means of possessing. To them, a Dead Man must always have seemed a man whose soul or breath or other self had left him, but might possibly return again to the body at any time.
Each of the three stages of thought above discriminated82 has its appropriate mode of disposing of its dead. The appropriate mode for this earliest stage is Preservation83 of the Corpse, which eventuates at last in Mummification.
The simplest form of this mode of disposal of the corpse consists in keeping it in the hut or cave where the family dwell, together with the living. A New Guinea woman thus 050kept her husband’s body in her hut till it dried up of itself, and she kissed it and offered it food every day, as though it were living. Many similar cases are reported from elsewhere. Hut preservation is common in the very lowest races. More frequently, however, owing to the obvious discomfort84 of living in too close proximity85 to a dead body, the corpse at this stage of thought is exposed openly in a tree or on a platform or under some other circumstances where no harm can come to it. Among the Australians and Andaman Islanders, who, like the Negritoes of New Guinea, preserve for us a very early type of human customs, the corpse is often exposed on a rough raised scaffold. Some of the Polynesian and Melanesian peoples follow the same practice. The Dyaks and Kyans expose their dead in trees. “But it is in America,” says Mr. Herbert Spencer, “that exposure on raised stages is commonest. The Dakotahs adopt this method; at one time it was the practice of the Iroquois; Catlin, describing the Mandans as having scaffolds on which ‘their dead live as they term it,’ remarks that they are thus kept out of the way of wolves and dogs; and Schoolcraft says the same of the Chippewas.” Generally speaking, at the lowest grades of culture, savages preserve the actual bodies of their dead above ground, either in the home itself, or in close proximity to it. We shall recur86 later on to this singular practice.
A slight variant87 on this method, peculiar to a very maritime88 race, is that described by Mr. H. O. Forbes among the natives of Timurlaut:
“The dead body is placed in a portion of a prau fitted to the length of the individual, or within strips of gaba-gaba, or stems of the sago-palm pinned together. If it is a person of some consequence, such as an Orang Kaya, an ornate and decorated prau-shaped coffin89 is specially61 made. This is then enveloped90 in calico, and placed either on the top of a rock by the margin91 of the sea at a short distance from the village, or on a high pile-platform erected92 on the shore 051about low-tide mark. On the top of the coffin-lid are erected tall flags, and the figures of men playing gongs, shooting guns, and gesticulating wildly to frighten away evil influences from the sleeper93. Sometimes the platform is erected on the shore above high-water mark, and near it is stuck in the ground a tall bamboo full of palm-wine; and suspended over a bamboo rail are bunches of sweet potatoes for the use of the dead man’s Nitu. When the body is quite decomposed94, his son or one of the family disinters the skull95 and deposits it on a little platform in his house, in the gable opposite the fireplace, while to ward18 off evil from himself he carries about with him the atlas96 and axis97 bones of its neck in his luon, or siri-holder.”
This interesting account is full of implications whose fuller meaning we will perceive hereafter. The use of the skull and of the talisman98 bone should especially be noted99 for their later importance. For skulls100 are fundamental in the history of religion.
Cases like these readily pass into the practice of Mummifying, more especially in dry or desert climates. Even in so damp a tropical country as New Guinea, however, D’Albertis found in a shed on the banks of the Fly River two mummies, artificially prepared, as he thought, by removal of the flesh, the bones alone being preserved with the skin to cover them. Here we have evidently a clear conception of death as a serious change, of a different character from a mere temporary absence. So, too, Mr. Chalmers says of the Koiari people in the same island, “They treat their dead after this fashion. A fire is kept burning day and night at the head and feet for months. The entire skin is removed by means of the thumb and forefinger101, and the juices plastered all over the face and body of the operator (parent, husband, or wife of the deceased). The fire gradually desiccates the flesh, so that little more than the skeleton is left.” But mummification for the most part is confined to drier climates, where it is artificially performed 052down to a very evolved stage of civilisation102, as we know well in Peru and Egypt.
One word must be said in passing as to the frequent habit of specially preserving, and even carrying about the person, the head or hand of a deceased relative. This has been already mentioned in the case of Timurlaut; and it occurs frequently elsewhere. Thus Mr. Chalmers says of a New Guinea baby: “It will be covered with two inches of soil, the friends watching beside the grave; but eventually the skull and smaller bones will be preserved and worn by the mother.” Similarly, in the Andaman Islands, where we touch perhaps the lowest existing stratum of savage feeling, “widows may be seen with the skulls of their deceased partners suspended round their necks.” The special preservation of the head, even when the rest of the body is eaten or buried, will engage our attention at a later period: heads so preserved are usually resorted to as oracles103, and are often treated as the home of the spirit. Mr. Herbert Spencer has collected many similar instances, such as that of the Tasmanians who wore a bone from the skull or arm of a dead relation. He rightly notes, too, that throughout the New World “the primitive conception of death as a long-suspended animation104 seems to have been especially vivid;” and we find accordingly that customs of this character are particularly frequent among American savages. Thus, to draw once more from his great storehouse, the Cr茅茅s carried bones and hair of dead relations about for three years; while the Caribs and several Guiana tribes distributed the clean bones among the kinsmen105 of the deceased. In the Sandwich Islands, also, bones of kings and chiefs were carried about by their descendants, under the impression that the dead exercised guardianship106 over them.
At this stage of thought, it seems to me, it is the actual corpse that is still thought to be alive; the actual corpse that appears in dreams; and the actual corpse that is fed and worshipped and propitiated107 with presents.
Ceremonial 053cannibalism, which will be more fully considered hereafter, appears in this stratum, and survives from it into higher levels. The body is eaten entire, and the bones preserved; or the flesh and fat are removed, and the skin left; or a portion only is sacramentally and reverently108 eaten by the surviving relations. These processes also will be more minutely described in the sequel.
The first stage merges109 by gradual degrees into the second, which is that of Burial or its equivalent. Cave-burial of mummies or of corpses110 forms the transitional link. Indeed, inasmuch as many races of primitive men lived habitually111 in caves, the placing or leaving the corpse in a cave seems much the same thing as the placing or leaving it in a shed, hut, or shelter. The cave-dwelling Veddahs simply left the dead man in the cave where he died, and themselves migrated to some other cavern112. Still, cave-burial lingered on late with many tribes or nations which had for ages outlived the habit of cave-dwelling. Among the South American Indians, cave-burial was common; and in Peru it assumed high developments of mummification. The making of an artificial cave or vault113 for the dead is but a slight variant on this custom; it was frequent in Egypt, the other dry country where the making of mummies was carried to a high pitch of perfection. The Tombs of the Kings at Thebes are splendid instances of such artificial caves, elaborated into stately palaces with painted walls, where the dead monarchs114 might pass their underground life in state and dignity. Cave-tombs, natural or artificial, are also common in Asia Minor115, Italy, and elsewhere.
During the first stage, it may be noted, the attitude of man towards his dead is chiefly one of affectionate regard. The corpse is kept at home, and fed or tended; the skull is carried about as a beloved object. But in the second stage, which induces the practice of burial, a certain Fear of the Dead becomes more obviously apparent. Men dread116 the return of the corpse or the ghost, and strive to keep 054it within prescribed limits. In this stage, the belief in the Resurrection of the Body is the appropriate creed117; and though at first the actual corpse is regarded as likely to return to plague survivors, that idea gives place a little later, I believe, to the conception of a less material double or spirit.
And here let us begin by discriminating118 carefully between the Resurrection of the Body and the Immortality of the Soul.
The idea of Resurrection arose from and is closely bound up with the practice of burial, the second and simpler mode of disposing of the remains of the dead. The idea of Immortality arose from and is closely bound up with the practice of burning, a later and better innovation, invented at the third stage of human culture. During the early historical period all the most advanced and cultivated nations burnt their dead, and, in consequence, accepted the more ideal and refined notion of Immortality. But modern European nations bury their dead, and, in consequence, accept, nominally119 at least, the cruder and grosser notion of Resurrection. Nominally, I say, because, in spite of creeds120 and formularies, the influence of Plato and other ancient thinkers, as well as of surviving ancestral ideas, has made most educated Europeans really believe in Immortality, even when they imagine themselves to be believing in Resurrection. Nevertheless, the belief in Resurrection is the avowed121 and authoritative122 belief of the Christian world, which thus proclaims itself as on a lower level in this respect than the civilised peoples of antiquity123.
The earliest of these two ways of disposing of the bodies of the dead is certainly by burial. As this fact has recently been called in question, I will venture to enlarge a little upon the evidence in its favour. In point of time, burial goes back with certainty to the neolithic124 age, and with some probability to the palaeolithic. Several true interments in caves have been attributed by competent geologists125 to the earlier of these two periods, the first for which we 055have any sure warranty126 of man’s existence on earth. But, as I do not desire to introduce controversial matter of any sort into this exposition, I will waive127 the evidence for burial in the palaeolithic age as doubtful, and will merely mention that in the Mentone caves, according to Mr. Arthur Evans, a most competent authority, we have a case of true burial accompanied by neolithic remains of a grade of culture earlier and simpler than any known to us elsewhere. In other words, from the very earliest beginning of the neolithic age men buried their dead; and they continued to bury them, in caves or tumuli, down to the end of neolithic culture. They buried them in the Long Barrows in England; they buried them in the Ohio mounds128; they buried them in the shadowy forests of New Zealand; they buried them in the heart of darkest Africa. I know of no case of burning or any means of disposal of the dead, otherwise than by burial or its earlier equivalent, mummification, among people in the stone age of culture in Europe. It is only when bronze and other metals are introduced that races advance to the third stage, the stage of cremation130. In America, however, the Mexicans we*re cremationists.
The wide diffusal of burial over the globe is also a strong argument for its relatively primitive origin. In all parts of the world men now bury their dead, or did once bury them. From the Tombs of the Kings at Pekin to the Pyramids of Memphis; from the Peruvian caves to the Samoyed graveyards131, we find most early peoples, most savage peoples, most primitive peoples, once or still engaged in one or other form of burying. Burial is the common and universal mode; burning, exposure, throwing into a sacred river, and so forth132, are sporadic133 and exceptional, and in many cases, as among the Hindus, are demonstrably of late origin, and connected with certain relatively modern refinements134 of religion.
Once more, in many or most cases, we have positive evidence that where a race now burns its dead, it used once 056to bury them. Burial preceded burning in preheroic Greece, as it also did in Etruria and in early Latium. The people of the Long Barrows, in Western Europe generally, buried their dead; the people of the Round Barrows who succeeded them, and who possessed135 a far higher grade of culture, almost always cremated136. It has been assumed that burning is primordial137 in India; but Mr. William Simpson, the well-known artist of the Illustrated139 London News, calls my attention to the fact that the Vedas speak with great clearness of burial as the usual mode of disposing of the corpse, and even allude140 to the tumulus, the circle of stones around it, and the sacred temenos which they enclose. According to Rajendralala Mitra, whose high authority on the subject is universally acknowledged, burial was the rule in India till about the thirteenth or fourteenth century before the Christian era; then came in cremation, with burial of the ashes, and this continued till about the time of Christ, when burial was dispensed141 with, and the ashes were thrown into some sacred river. I think, therefore, until some more positive evidence is adduced on the other side, we may rest content with our general conclusion that burial is the oldest, most universal, and most savage mode of disposing of the remains of the dead among humanity after the general recognition of death as a positive condition. It probably took its rise in an early period, while mankind was still one homogeneous species; and it has been dispersed142, accordingly, over the whole world, even to the most remote oceanic islands.
What is the origin of this barbaric and disgusting custom, so repugnant to all the more delicate sentiments of human nature? I think Mr. Frazer is right in attributing it to the terror felt by the living for the ghosts (or, rather, at first the corpses) of the dead, and the fear that they may return to plague or alarm their surviving fellow tribesmen.
In his admirable paper on “Certain Burial Customs as Illustrative of the Primitive Theory of the Soul,” Mr. Frazer points out that certain tribes of early men paid great 057attention to the dead, not so much from affection as from selfish terror. Ghosts or bodies of the dead haunt the earth everywhere, unless artificially confined to bounds, and make themselves exceedingly disagreeable to their surviving relatives. To prevent this, simple primitive philosophy in its second stage has hit upon many devices. The most universal is to bury the dead—that is to say, to put them in a deep-dug hole, and to cover them with a mighty143 mound129 of earth, which has now sadly degenerated144 in civilised countries into a mere formal heap, but which had originally the size and dignity of a tumulus. The object of piling up this great heap of earth was to confine the ghost (or corpse), who could not easily move so large a superincumbent mass of matter. In point of fact, men buried their dead in order to get well rid of them, and to effectually prevent their return to light to disturb the survivors.
For the same reason heavy stones were often piled on the top of the dead. In one form, these became at last the cairn; and, as the ghosts of murderers and their victims tend to be especially restless, everybody who passes their graves in Arabia, Germany, and Spain is bound to add a stone to the growing pile in order to confine them. In another form, that of the single big stone rolled just on top of the body to keep it down by its mass, the makeweight has developed into the modern tombstone. In our own times, indeed, the tombstone has grown into a mere posthumous145 politeness, and is generally made to do duty as a record of the name and incomparable virtues146 of the deceased (concerning whom, nil147 nisi bonum); but in origin it was nothing more than the big, heavy boulder148, meant to confine the ghost, and was anything but honorific in intention and function.
Again, certain nations go further still in their endeavours to keep the ghost (or corpse) from roaming. The corpse of a Damara, says Galton, having been sewn up in an old ox-hide is buried in a hole, and the spectators jump backwards149 058and forwards over the grave to keep the deceased from rising out of it. In America, the Tupis tied fast all the limbs of the corpse, “that the dead man might not be able to get up, and infest150 his friends with his visits.” You may even divert a river from its course, as Mr. Frazer notes, bury your dead man securely in its bed, and then allow the stream to return to its channel. It was thus that Alaric was kept in his grave from further plaguing humanity; and thus Captain Cameron found a tribe of Central Africans compelled their deceased chiefs to “cease from troubling.” Sometimes, again, the grave is enclosed by a fence too high for the dead man to clear even with a running jump; and sometimes the survivors take the prudent151 precaution of nailing the body securely to the coffin, or of breaking their friend’s spine152, or even—but this is an extreme case—of hacking154 him to pieces. In Christian England the poor wretch155 whom misery156 had driven to suicide was prevented from roaming about to the discomfort of the lieges by being buried with a stake driven barbarously through him. The Australians, in like manner, used to cut off the thumb of a slain enemy that he might be unable to draw the bow; and the Greeks were wont66 to hack153 off the extremities157 of their victims in order to incapacitate them for further fighting. These cases will be seen to be very luminiferous when we come to examine the origin and meaning of cremation.
Burial, then, I take it, is simply by origin a means adopted by the living to protect themselves against the vagrant158 tendencies of the actual dead. For some occult reason, the vast majority of men in all ages have been foolishly afraid of meeting with the spirits of the departed. Their great desire has been, not to see, but to avoid seeing these singular visitants; and for that purpose they invented, first of all, burial, and afterwards cremation.
The common modern conception of the ghost is certainly that of an immaterial or shadowy form, which can be seen but not touched, and which preserves an outer semblance159 059of the human figure. But that idea itself, which has been imported into all our descriptions and reasonings about the ghost-beliefs of primitive man, is, I incline to think, very far from primitive, and has been largely influenced by quite late conceptions derived from the cremational rather than the burial level of religious philosophy. In other words, though, in accordance with universal usage and Mr. Frazer’s precedent160, I have used the word “ghost” above in referring to these superstitious161 terrors of early man, I believe it is far less the spirit than the actual corpse itself that early men even in this second stage were really afraid of. It is the corpse that may come back and do harm to survivors. It is the corpse that must be kept down by physical means, that must be covered with earth, pressed flat beneath a big and ponderous162 stone, deprived of its thumbs, its hands, its eyes, its members. True, I believe the savage also thinks of the ghost or double as returning to earth; but his psychology, I fancy, is not so definite as to distinguish very accurately163 between corpse and spirit. The accurate differentiation164 of the two belongs rather, it seems to me, to the post-cremational and more spiritual philosophy than to the primary or preservative165, and the secondary or inhumational.
Anybody who looks at the evidence collected by Mr. Frazer will see for himself that precautions are taken rather against the return of the actual physical body than against the return of the ghost or spirit. Or perhaps, to be more precise, the two are hardly thought of at this early stage in separation or antithesis166.
If we look at the means taken to preserve the body after death among the majority of primitive peoples, above the Tasmanian level, this truth of the corpse being itself immortal20 becomes clearer and clearer. We are still, in fact, at a level where ghost and dead man are insufficiently167 differentiated168. In all these cases it is believed that the dead body continues to live in the grave the same sort of life that it led above ground; and for this purpose it is provided 060with weapons, implements169, utensils170, food, vessels171, and all the necessaries of life for its new mansion172. Continued sentient173 existence of the body after death is the keynote of the earliest level of psychical174 philosophy. First, the corpse lives in the hut with its family: later, it lives in the grave with its forefathers175.
But side by side with this na茂ve belief in the continued existence of the body after death, which survives into the inhumational stage of evolution, goes another and apparently irreconcilable belief in a future resurrection. Strictly176 speaking, of course, if the body is still alive, there is no need for any such special revivification. But religious thought, as we all know, does not always pride itself upon the temporal virtues of logic81 or consistency177; and the savage in particular is not in the least staggered at being asked to conceive of one and the same subject in two opposite and contradictory178 manners. He does not bring the two incongruities179 into thought together; he thinks them alternately, sometimes one, sometimes the other. Even Christian systematists are quite accustomed to combine the incongruous beliefs in a future resurrection and in the continued existence of the soul after death, by supposing that the soul remains meanwhile in some nondescript limbo180, apart from its body—some uncertain Sheol, some dim hades or purgatory181 or “place of departed spirits.” The savage is scarcely likely to be more exacting182 in this matter than our doctors of divinity.
It is the common belief of the second or inhumational stage, then, that there will be at some time or other a “General Resurrection.” No doubt this General Resurrection has been slowly developed out of the belief in and expectation of many partial resurrections. It is understood that each individual corpse will, or may, resurge at some time: therefore it is believed that all corpses together will resurge at a single particular moment. So long as burial persists, the belief in the Resurrection persists beside it, 061and forms a main feature in the current conception of the future life among the people who practise it.
How, then, do we progress from this second or inhumational stage to the third stage with its practice of burning, and its correlated dogma of the Immortality of the Soul?
In this way, as it seems to me. Besides keeping down the ghost (or corpse) with clods and stones, it was usual in many cases to adopt other still stronger persuasives and dissuasives in the same direction. Sometimes the persuasives were of the gentlest type; for example, the dead man was often politely requested and adjured183 to remain quiet in the grave and to give no trouble. But sometimes they were less bland184; the corpse was often pelted185 with sticks, stones, and hot coals, in order to show him that his visits at home would not in future be appreciated. The ordinary stake and mutilation treatment goes, it is clear, upon the same principle; if the man has no feet or legs of his own, he cannot very well walk back again. But further developments of the like crude idea are to cut off the head, to tear out the heart, to hack the body in pieces, to pour boiling water and vinegar over the dangerous place where the corpse lies buried. Now burning, I take it, belonged originally to the same category of strong measures against refractory186 ghosts or corpses; and this is the more probable owing to the fact that it is mentioned by Mr. Frazer among the remedies recommended for use in the extreme case of vampires187. Its original object was, no doubt, to prevent the corpse from returning in any way to the homes of the living.
Once any people adopted burning as a regular custom, however, the chances are that, coteris paribus, it would continue and spread. For the practice of cremation is so much more wholesome188 and sanitary189 than the practice of burial that it would give a double advantage in the struggle for existence to any race that adopted it, in peace and in war. Hence it is quite natural that when at a certain grade of culture certain races happened to light upon it 062in this superstitious way, those races would be likely to thrive and to take the lead in culture as long as no adverse190 circumstances counteracted191 the advantage.
But the superstitions192 and the false psychology which gave rise at first to the notion of a continued life after death would not, of course, disappear with the introduction of burning. The primitive cremationists may have hoped, by reducing to ashes the bodies of their dead, to prevent the recurrence193 of the corpse to the presence of the living; but they could not prevent the recurrence of the ghost in the dreams of the survivors; they could not prevent the wind that sighed about the dead man’s grave, the bats that flitted, the vague noises that terrified, the abiding194 sense of the corpse’s presence. All the factors that go to make up the ghost or the revenant (to use a safe word less liable to misinterpretation) still remained as active as ever. Hence, I believe, with the introduction of cremation the conception of the ghost merely suffered an airy change. He grew more shadowy, more immaterial, more light, more spiritual. In one word, he became, strictly speaking, a ghost as we now understand the word, not a returning dead man. This conception of the ghost as essentially195 a shade or shadow belongs peculiarly, it seems to me, to the cremating196 peoples. I can answer for it that among negroes, for example, the “duppy” is conceived as quite a material object. It is classical literature, the literature of the cremating Greeks and Romans, that has familiarised us most with the idea of the ghost as shadowy and intangible. Burying races have more solid doubles. When Peter escaped from prison in Jerusalem, the assembled brethren were of opinion that it must be “his angel.” The white woman who lived for years in a native Australian tribe was always spoken of by her hosts as a ghost. In one word, at a low stage of culture the revenant is conceived of as material and earthly; at a higher stage, he is conceived of as immaterial and shadowy.
Now 063when people take to burning their dead, it is clear they will no longer be able to believe in the Resurrection of the Body. Indeed, if I am right in the theory here set forth, it is just in order to prevent the Resurrection of the Body at inconvenient197 moments that they take to burning. To be sure, civilised nations, with their developed power of believing in miracles, are capable of supposing, not only that the sea will yield up its dead, but also that burnt, mangled198, or dispersed bodies will be collected from all parts to be put together again at the Resurrection. This, however, is not the na茂ve belief of simple and natural men. To them, when you have burnt a body you have utterly199 destroyed it, here and hereafter; and we know that mutilation and burning were employed for this very purpose in the case of vampires and other corpses whose total suppression was desirable. Sepoys were blown from the guns in the Indian mutiny for the express reason that, according to the Hindu belief, that method of disposing of them destroyed not only the body but the soul as well—got rid of them entirely200. The ordinary human idea is that when you burn a body you simply annihilate201 it; and on that very account early Christians202 preferred burial to cremation, because they thought they stood thereby203 a better chance at the Resurrection. It is true they allowed that the divine omnipotence204 could make new bodies for the martyrs205 who were burnt; but for themselves, they seem to have preferred on the average to go on afresh with their old familiar ones.
Naturally, therefore, among cremating peoples, the doctrine206 of the Resurrection of the Body tended to go out, and what replaced it was the doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul. You may burn the body, but the spirit still survives; and the survival gives origin to a new philosophy of ghosts and revenants, a new idea of the inner nature of ghosthood. Gradually the spirit gets to be conceived as diviner essence, entangled207 and imprisoned208, as it were, in the meshes209 of the flesh, and only to be set free by means 064of fire, which thus becomes envisaged210 at last as friendly rather than destructive in its action on the dead body. What was at first a precaution against the return of the corpse becomes in the end a pious211 duty; just as burial itself, originally a selfish precaution against the pranks212 and tricks of returning corpses, becomes in the end so sacred and imperative213 that unburied ghosts are conceived as wandering about, Archytas-wise, begging for the favour of a handful of sand to prevent them from homeless vagabondage for ever. Nations who burn come to regard the act of burning as the appointed means for freeing the ghost from the confining meshes of the body, and regard it rather as a solemn duty to the dead than as a personal precaution.
Not only so, but there arises among them a vague and fanciful conception of the world of shades very different indeed from the definite and material conception of the two earlier stages. The mummy was looked upon as inhabiting the tomb, which was furnished and decorated for its reception like a house; and it was provided with every needful article for use and comfort. Even the buried body was supplied with tools and implements for the ghost. The necessities of the shade are quite different and more shadowy. He has no need of earthly tools or implements. The objects found in the Long Barrows of the burying folk and the Round Barrows of the cremationists well illustrate138 this primordial and far-reaching difference. The Long Barrows of the Stone Age people are piled above an interment; they contain a chambered tomb, which is really the subterranean214 home or palace of the body buried in it. The wives and slaves of the deceased were killed and interred215 with him to keep him company in his new life in the grave; and implements, weapons, drinking-cups, games, trinkets, and ornaments216 were buried with their owners. The life in the grave was all as material and real as this one; the same objects that served the warrior217 in this world would equally serve him in the same form in the next. 065It is quite different with the Round Barrows of the Bronze Age cremationists. These barrows are piled round an urn55., which determines the shape of the tumulus, as the chambered tomb and the corpse determine the shape of the earlier Stone Age interments. They contain ashes alone; and the implements and weapons placed in them are all broken or charred218 with fire. Why? Because the ghost, immaterial as he has now become, can no longer make use of solid earthly weapons or utensils. It is only their ghosts or shadows that can be of any use to the ghostly possessor in the land of shades. Hence everything he needs is burnt or broken, in order that its ghost may be released and liberated219; and all material objects are now conceived as possessing such ghosts, which can be utilised accordingly in the world of spirits.
Note also that with this advance from the surviving or revivable Corpse to the immortal Soul or Spirit, there goes almost naturally and necessarily a correlative advance from continued but solitary220 life in the tomb to a freer and wider life in an underground world of shades and spirits. The ghost gets greatly liberated and emancipated221. He has more freedom of movement, and becomes a citizen of an organised community, often envisaged as ruled over by a King of the Dead, and as divided into places of reward and punishment. But while we modern Europeans pretend to be resurrectionists, it is a fact that our current ghostly and eschatological conceptions (I speak of the world at large, not of mere scholastic222 theologians) have been largely influenced by ideas derived from this opposite doctrine—a doctrine once held by many or most of our own ancestors, and familiarised to us from childhood in classical literature. In fact, while most Englishmen of the present day believe they believe in the Resurrection of the Body, what they really believe in is the Immortality of the Soul..
It might seem at first sight as though a grave discrepancy223 existed between the two incongruous ideas, first of burying 066or burning your dead so that they may not be able to return or to molest224 you, and second of worshipping at their graves or making offerings to their disembodied spirits. But to the savage mind these two conceptions are by no means irreconcilable. While he jumps upon the corpse of his friend or his father to keep it in the narrow pit he has digged for it, he yet brings it presents of food and drink, or slays225 animals at the tomb, that the ghost may be refreshed by the blood that trickles226 down to it. Indeed, several intermediate customs occur, which help us to bridge over the apparent gulf227 between reverential preservation of the mummified body, and the coarse precautions of burial or burning. Thus, in many cases, some of which we shall examine in the next chapter, after the body has been for some time buried, the head is disinterred, and treasured with care in the family oratory228, where it is worshipped and tended, and where it often gives oracles to the members of the household. A ceremonial washing is almost always a feature in this reception of the head; it recurs229 again and again in various cases, down to the enshrinement of the head of Hoseyn at Cairo, and that of St. Denis at the abbey of the same name, to both of which we shall allude once more at a far later stage of our enquiry. For the present, it must suffice to say that the ceremonial and oracular preservation of the head—the part which sees, and speaks, and eats, and drinks, and listens—is a common feature in all religious usages; that it gives rise apparently to the collections of family skulls which adorn230 so many savage huts and oratories231; that it may be answerable ultimately for the Roman busts232 and many other imitative images of the dead, in which the head alone is represented; and that when transferred to the sacred human or animal victim (himself, as we shall hereafter see, a slain god), it seems to account for the human heads hung up by the Dyaks and other savages about their houses, as also for the skulls of oxen and other sacred animals habitually displayed on the front of places of 067worship, whose last relic233 is the sculptured oxen’s heads which fill the metopes in some Greek and most Roman temples. Much of this, I admit, will be little comprehensible to the reader at the present stage of our argument: but I beg him to bear in mind provisionally this oracular and representative value of the head or skull from this point forth; he will find, as he proceeds, its meaning will become clearer and ever clearer at each successive stage of our exposition.
I ought also to add that between complete preservation of the corpse and the practice of burial there seems to have gone another intermediate stage, now comparatively rare, but once very general, if we may judge from the traces it has left behind it—a stage when all the body or part of it was sacramentally eaten by the survivors as an act of devotion. We will consider this curious and revolting practice more fully when we reach the abstruse234 problem of sacrifice and sacrament; for the present it will suffice to say that in many instances, in Australia, South America, and elsewhere, the body is eaten, while only the bones are burned or buried. Among these savages, again, it usually happens that the head is cleaned of its flesh by cooking, while the skull is ceremonially washed, and preserved as an object of household veneration235 and an oracular deity. Instances will be quoted in succeeding chapters.
Thus, between the care taken to prevent returns of the corpse, and the worship paid to the ghost or shade, primitive races feel no such sense of discrepancy or incongruity236 as would instantly occur to civilised people.
The three stages in human ideas with which this chapter deals may be shortly summed up as corpse-worship, ghost-worship, and shade-worship.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
supreme
|
|
| adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
deity
|
|
| n.神，神性；被奉若神明的人(或物) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
enquire
|
|
| v.打听，询问；调查，查问 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
supersession
|
|
| 取代，废弃； 代谢 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
persistent
|
|
| adj.坚持不懈的，执意的；持续的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
supplicating
|
|
| v.祈求，哀求，恳求( supplicate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
appeasing
|
|
| 安抚，抚慰( appease的现在分词 )； 绥靖（满足另一国的要求以避免战争） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
primitive
|
|
| adj.原始的；简单的；n.原(始)人，原始事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
savage
|
|
| adj.野蛮的；凶恶的，残暴的；n.未开化的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
cult
|
|
| n.异教，邪教；时尚，狂热的崇拜 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
manifestation
|
|
| n.表现形式；表明；现象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
glide
|
|
| n./v.溜，滑行；(时间)消逝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
strata
|
|
| n.地层（复数）；社会阶层 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
stratum
|
|
| n.地层，社会阶层 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
inadequately
|
|
| ad.不够地；不够好地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
ward
|
|
| n.守卫，监护，病房，行政区，由监护人或法院保护的人（尤指儿童）；vt.守护，躲开 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
entity
|
|
| n.实体，独立存在体，实际存在物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
immortal
|
|
| adj.不朽的；永生的，不死的；神的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
immortality
|
|
| n.不死，不朽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
irreconcilable
|
|
| adj.（指人）难和解的，势不两立的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
frankly
|
|
| adv.坦白地，直率地；坦率地说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
populous
|
|
| adj.人口稠密的，人口众多的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
fixed
|
|
| adj.固定的，不变的，准备好的；(计算机)固定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
relatively
|
|
| adv.比较...地，相对地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
scattered
|
|
| adj.分散的，稀疏的；散步的；疏疏落落的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
devoured
|
|
| 吞没( devour的过去式和过去分词 )； 耗尽； 津津有味地看； 狼吞虎咽地吃光 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
apparently
|
|
| adv.显然地；表面上，似乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
savages
|
|
| 未开化的人，野蛮人( savage的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
paradox
|
|
| n.似乎矛盾却正确的说法；自相矛盾的人(物) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
inevitable
|
|
| adj.不可避免的，必然发生的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
slain
|
|
| 杀死，宰杀，杀戮( slay的过去分词 )； (slay的过去分词) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
spate
|
|
| n.泛滥，洪水，突然的一阵 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
witchcraft
|
|
| n.魔法，巫术 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
perplexed
|
|
| adj.不知所措的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
premature
|
|
| adj.比预期时间早的；不成熟的，仓促的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
eminent
|
|
| adj.显赫的，杰出的，有名的，优良的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
corpse
|
|
| n.尸体，死尸 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
stunned
|
|
| adj. 震惊的，惊讶的 动词stun的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
inflicted
|
|
| 把…强加给，使承受，遭受( inflict的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
wrath
|
|
| n.愤怒，愤慨，暴怒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
vitality
|
|
| n.活力，生命力，效力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
psychology
|
|
| n.心理，心理学，心理状态 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
adumbration
|
|
| n.预示，预兆 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
47
pervade
|
|
| v.弥漫，遍及，充满，渗透，漫延 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
derangement
|
|
| n.精神错乱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
comatose
|
|
| adj.昏睡的，昏迷不醒的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
decomposition
|
|
| n. 分解, 腐烂, 崩溃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
implicitly
|
|
| adv. 含蓄地, 暗中地, 毫不保留地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
tangible
|
|
| adj.有形的，可触摸的，确凿的，实际的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
derived
|
|
| vi.起源；由来；衍生；导出v.得到( derive的过去式和过去分词 )；（从…中）得到获得；源于；（从…中）提取 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
concurrent
|
|
| adj.同时发生的，一致的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
urn
|
|
| n.（有座脚的）瓮；坟墓；骨灰瓮 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
fully
|
|
| adv.完全地，全部地，彻底地；充分地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
vaguely
|
|
| adv.含糊地，暖昧地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
bough
|
|
| n.大树枝，主枝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
survivors
|
|
| 幸存者，残存者，生还者( survivor的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
specially
|
|
| adv.特定地；特殊地；明确地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
bereavement
|
|
| n.亲人丧亡，丧失亲人，丧亲之痛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
phenomena
|
|
| n.现象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
stimulated
|
|
| a.刺激的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
intercourse
|
|
| n.性交；交流，交往，交际 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
wont
|
|
| adj.习惯于；v.习惯；n.习惯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
stimulation
|
|
| n.刺激，激励，鼓舞 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
unstable
|
|
| adj.不稳定的，易变的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
atrophy
|
|
| n./v.萎缩，虚脱，衰退 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
envisages
|
|
| 想像，设想( envisage的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
conversed
|
|
| v.交谈，谈话( converse的过去式 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
verge
|
|
| n.边，边缘；v.接近，濒临 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
delirium
|
|
| n. 神智昏迷,说胡话;极度兴奋 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
delusion
|
|
| n.谬见，欺骗，幻觉，迷惑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
severely
|
|
| adv.严格地；严厉地；非常恶劣地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
immediate
|
|
| adj.立即的；直接的，最接近的；紧靠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
deserted
|
|
| adj.荒芜的，荒废的，无人的，被遗弃的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
persuasions
|
|
| n.劝说，说服（力）( persuasion的名词复数 )；信仰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
discriminate
|
|
| v.区别，辨别，区分；有区别地对待 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
merge
|
|
| v.(使)结合，(使)合并，(使)合为一体 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
logic
|
|
| n.逻辑(学)；逻辑性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
discriminated
|
|
| 分别，辨别，区分( discriminate的过去式和过去分词 )； 歧视，有差别地对待 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
preservation
|
|
| n.保护，维护，保存，保留，保持 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
discomfort
|
|
| n.不舒服，不安，难过，困难，不方便 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
proximity
|
|
| n.接近，邻近 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
recur
|
|
| vi.复发，重现，再发生 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
variant
|
|
| adj.不同的，变异的；n.变体，异体 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
maritime
|
|
| adj.海的，海事的，航海的，近海的，沿海的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
coffin
|
|
| n.棺材，灵柩 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
enveloped
|
|
| v.包围，笼罩，包住( envelop的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
margin
|
|
| n.页边空白；差额；余地，余裕；边，边缘 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
ERECTED
|
|
| adj. 直立的，竖立的，笔直的 vt. 使 ... 直立，建立 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
sleeper
|
|
| n.睡眠者，卧车，卧铺 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
decomposed
|
|
| 已分解的，已腐烂的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
skull
|
|
| n.头骨；颅骨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
atlas
|
|
| n.地图册，图表集 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
axis
|
|
| n.轴，轴线，中心线；坐标轴，基准线 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
talisman
|
|
| n.避邪物，护身符 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
noted
|
|
| adj.著名的，知名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
skulls
|
|
| 颅骨( skull的名词复数 )； 脑袋； 脑子； 脑瓜 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
forefinger
|
|
| n.食指 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
civilisation
|
|
| n.文明，文化，开化，教化 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
oracles
|
|
| 神示所( oracle的名词复数 )； 神谕； 圣贤； 哲人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
animation
|
|
| n.活泼，兴奋，卡通片／动画片的制作 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
kinsmen
|
|
| n.家属，亲属( kinsman的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
guardianship
|
|
| n. 监护, 保护, 守护 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
propitiated
|
|
| v.劝解，抚慰，使息怒( propitiate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
108
reverently
|
|
| adv.虔诚地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
merges
|
|
| （使）混合( merge的第三人称单数 )； 相融； 融入； 渐渐消失在某物中 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
corpses
|
|
| n.死尸，尸体( corpse的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
habitually
|
|
| ad.习惯地，通常地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
cavern
|
|
| n.洞穴，大山洞 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
vault
|
|
| n.拱形圆顶，地窖，地下室 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
monarchs
|
|
| 君主，帝王( monarch的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
minor
|
|
| adj.较小(少)的，较次要的；n.辅修学科；vi.辅修 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
dread
|
|
| vt.担忧，忧虑；惧怕，不敢；n.担忧，畏惧 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
creed
|
|
| n.信条；信念，纲领 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
discriminating
|
|
| a.有辨别能力的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
nominally
|
|
| 在名义上，表面地； 应名儿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
creeds
|
|
| （尤指宗教）信条，教条( creed的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
avowed
|
|
| adj.公开声明的，承认的v.公开声明，承认( avow的过去式和过去分词) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
authoritative
|
|
| adj.有权威的，可相信的；命令式的；官方的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
antiquity
|
|
| n.古老；高龄；古物，古迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
neolithic
|
|
| adj.新石器时代的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
geologists
|
|
| 地质学家，地质学者( geologist的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
warranty
|
|
| n.担保书，证书，保单 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
waive
|
|
| vt.放弃，不坚持(规定、要求、权力等) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
mounds
|
|
| 土堆，土丘( mound的名词复数 )； 一大堆 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
mound
|
|
| n.土墩，堤，小山；v.筑堤，用土堆防卫 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
cremation
|
|
| n.火葬，火化 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
graveyards
|
|
| 墓地( graveyard的名词复数 )； 垃圾场； 废物堆积处； 收容所 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
forth
|
|
| adv.向前；向外，往外 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
sporadic
|
|
| adj.偶尔发生的 [反]regular；分散的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
refinements
|
|
| n.（生活）风雅；精炼( refinement的名词复数 )；改良品；细微的改良；优雅或高贵的动作 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
cremated
|
|
| v.火葬，火化（尸体）( cremate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
primordial
|
|
| adj.原始的；最初的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
illustrate
|
|
| v.举例说明，阐明；图解，加插图 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
illustrated
|
|
| adj. 有插图的，列举的 动词illustrate的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
allude
|
|
| v.提及，暗指 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
dispensed
|
|
| v.分配( dispense的过去式和过去分词 )；施与；配（药） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
dispersed
|
|
| adj. 被驱散的, 被分散的, 散布的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
mighty
|
|
| adj.强有力的；巨大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
degenerated
|
|
| 衰退，堕落，退化( degenerate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
posthumous
|
|
| adj.遗腹的；父亡后出生的；死后的，身后的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
virtues
|
|
| 美德( virtue的名词复数 )； 德行； 优点； 长处 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
nil
|
|
| n.无，全无，零 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
boulder
|
|
| n.巨砾；卵石，圆石 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
backwards
|
|
| adv.往回地，向原处，倒，相反，前后倒置地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
infest
|
|
| v.大批出没于；侵扰；寄生于 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
prudent
|
|
| adj.谨慎的，有远见的，精打细算的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
spine
|
|
| n.脊柱，脊椎；(动植物的)刺；书脊 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
hack
|
|
| n.劈，砍，出租马车；v.劈，砍，干咳 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
hacking
|
|
| n.非法访问计算机系统和数据库的活动 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
wretch
|
|
| n.可怜的人，不幸的人；卑鄙的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
156
misery
|
|
| n.痛苦，苦恼，苦难；悲惨的境遇，贫苦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
157
extremities
|
|
| n.端点( extremity的名词复数 )；尽头；手和足；极窘迫的境地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
158
vagrant
|
|
| n.流浪者，游民；adj.流浪的，漂泊不定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
159
semblance
|
|
| n.外貌，外表 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
160
precedent
|
|
| n.先例，前例；惯例；adj.在前的，在先的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
161
superstitious
|
|
| adj.迷信的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
162
ponderous
|
|
| adj.沉重的，笨重的，(文章)冗长的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
163
accurately
|
|
| adv.准确地，精确地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
164
differentiation
|
|
| n.区别，区分 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
165
preservative
|
|
| n.防腐剂；防腐料；保护料；预防药 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
166
antithesis
|
|
| n.对立；相对 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
167
insufficiently
|
|
| adv.不够地，不能胜任地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
168
differentiated
|
|
| 区分，区别，辨别( differentiate的过去式和过去分词 )； 区别对待； 表明…间的差别，构成…间差别的特征 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
169
implements
|
|
| n.工具( implement的名词复数 )；家具；手段；[法律]履行（契约等）v.实现( implement的第三人称单数 )；执行；贯彻；使生效 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
170
utensils
|
|
| 器具，用具，器皿( utensil的名词复数 )； 器物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
171
vessels
|
|
| n.血管( vessel的名词复数 )；船；容器；（具有特殊品质或接受特殊品质的）人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
172
mansion
|
|
| n.大厦，大楼；宅第 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
173
sentient
|
|
| adj.有知觉的，知悉的；adv.有感觉能力地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
174
psychical
|
|
| adj.有关特异功能现象的；有关特异功能官能的；灵魂的；心灵的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
175
forefathers
|
|
| n.祖先，先人；祖先，祖宗( forefather的名词复数 )；列祖列宗；前人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
176
strictly
|
|
| adv.严厉地，严格地；严密地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
177
consistency
|
|
| n.一贯性，前后一致，稳定性；(液体的)浓度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
178
contradictory
|
|
| adj.反驳的，反对的，抗辩的；n.正反对，矛盾对立 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
179
incongruities
|
|
| n.不协调( incongruity的名词复数 )；不一致；不适合；不协调的东西 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
180
limbo
|
|
| n.地狱的边缘；监狱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
181
purgatory
|
|
| n.炼狱；苦难；adj.净化的，清洗的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
182
exacting
|
|
| adj.苛求的，要求严格的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
183
adjured
|
|
| v.（以起誓或诅咒等形式）命令要求( adjure的过去式和过去分词 )；祈求；恳求 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
184
bland
|
|
| adj.淡而无味的，温和的，无刺激性的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
185
pelted
|
|
| （连续地）投掷( pelt的过去式和过去分词 )； 连续抨击； 攻击； 剥去…的皮 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
186
refractory
|
|
| adj.倔强的，难驾驭的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
187
vampires
|
|
| n.吸血鬼( vampire的名词复数 )；吸血蝠；高利贷者；（舞台上的）活板门 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
188
wholesome
|
|
| adj.适合；卫生的；有益健康的；显示身心健康的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
189
sanitary
|
|
| adj.卫生方面的，卫生的，清洁的，卫生的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
190
adverse
|
|
| adj.不利的；有害的；敌对的，不友好的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
191
counteracted
|
|
| 对抗，抵消( counteract的过去式 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
192
superstitions
|
|
| 迷信，迷信行为( superstition的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
193
recurrence
|
|
| n.复发，反复，重现 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
194
abiding
|
|
| adj.永久的，持久的，不变的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
195
essentially
|
|
| adv.本质上，实质上，基本上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
196
cremating
|
|
| v.火葬，火化（尸体）( cremate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
197
inconvenient
|
|
| adj.不方便的，令人感到麻烦的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
198
mangled
|
|
| vt.乱砍（mangle的过去式与过去分词形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
199
utterly
|
|
| adv.完全地，绝对地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
200
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
201
annihilate
|
|
| v.使无效；毁灭；取消 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
202
Christians
|
|
| n.基督教徒( Christian的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
203
thereby
|
|
| adv.因此，从而 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
204
omnipotence
|
|
| n.全能，万能，无限威力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
205
martyrs
|
|
| n.martyr的复数形式；烈士( martyr的名词复数 )；殉道者；殉教者；乞怜者（向人诉苦以博取同情） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
206
doctrine
|
|
| n.教义；主义；学说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
207
entangled
|
|
| adj.卷入的；陷入的；被缠住的；缠在一起的v.使某人（某物/自己）缠绕，纠缠于（某物中），使某人（自己）陷入（困难或复杂的环境中）( entangle的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
208
imprisoned
|
|
| 下狱，监禁( imprison的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
209
meshes
|
|
| 网孔( mesh的名词复数 )； 网状物； 陷阱； 困境 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
210
envisaged
|
|
| 想像，设想( envisage的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
211
pious
|
|
| adj.虔诚的；道貌岸然的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
212
pranks
|
|
| n.玩笑，恶作剧( prank的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
213
imperative
|
|
| n.命令，需要；规则；祈使语气；adj.强制的；紧急的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
214
subterranean
|
|
| adj.地下的，地表下的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
215
interred
|
|
| v.埋，葬( inter的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
216
ornaments
|
|
| n.装饰( ornament的名词复数 )；点缀；装饰品；首饰v.装饰，点缀，美化( ornament的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
217
warrior
|
|
| n.勇士，武士，斗士 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
218
charred
|
|
| v.把…烧成炭( char的过去式)；烧焦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
219
liberated
|
|
| a.无拘束的，放纵的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
220
solitary
|
|
| adj.孤独的，独立的，荒凉的；n.隐士 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
221
emancipated
|
|
| adj.被解放的，不受约束的v.解放某人（尤指摆脱政治、法律或社会的束缚）( emancipate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
222
scholastic
|
|
| adj.学校的，学院的，学术上的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
223
discrepancy
|
|
| n.不同；不符；差异；矛盾 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
224
molest
|
|
| vt.骚扰，干扰，调戏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
225
slays
|
|
| 杀死，宰杀，杀戮( slay的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
226
trickles
|
|
| n.细流( trickle的名词复数 )；稀稀疏疏缓慢来往的东西v.滴( trickle的第三人称单数 )；淌；使)慢慢走；缓慢移动 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
227
gulf
|
|
| n.海湾；深渊，鸿沟；分歧，隔阂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
228
oratory
|
|
| n.演讲术；词藻华丽的言辞 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
229
recurs
|
|
| 再发生，复发( recur的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
230
adorn
|
|
| vt.使美化，装饰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
231
oratories
|
|
| n.演讲术( oratory的名词复数 )；（用长词或正式词语的）词藻华丽的言辞 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
232
busts
|
|
| 半身雕塑像( bust的名词复数 )； 妇女的胸部； 胸围； 突击搜捕 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
233
relic
|
|
| n.神圣的遗物，遗迹，纪念物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
234
abstruse
|
|
| adj.深奥的，难解的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
235
veneration
|
|
| n.尊敬，崇拜 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
236
incongruity
|
|
| n.不协调，不一致 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |