In Mr. Spencer’s ‘Descriptive Sociology’ the religion of the Bushmen is thus disposed of. ‘Pray to an insect of the caterpillar9 kind for success in the chase.’ That is rather meagre. They make arrow-poison out of caterpillars,2 though Dr. Bleek, perhaps correctly, identifies Cagn with i-kaggen, the insect.
The case of the Andaman Islanders may be especially recommended to believers in the anthropological10 science of religion. For long these natives were the joy of emancipated11 inquirers as the ‘godless Andamanese.’ They only supply Mr. Spencer’s ‘Ecclesiastical Institutions’ with a few instances of the ghost-belief.3 Yet when the Andamanese are scientifically studied in situ by an educated Englishman, Mr. Man, who knows their language, has lived with them for eleven years, and presided over our benevolent12 efforts ‘to reclaim13 them from their savage1 state,’ the Andamanese turn out to be quite embarrassingly rich in the higher elements of faith. They have not only a profoundly philosophical14 religion, but an excessively absurd mythology15, like the Australian blacks, the Greeks, and other peoples. If, on the whole, the student of the Andamanese despairs of the possibility of an ethnological theory of religion, he is hardly to be blamed.
The people are probably Negritos, and probably ‘the original inhabitants, whose occupation dates from prehistoric16 times.’4 They use the bow, they make pots, and are considerably17 above the Australian level. They have second-sighted men, who obtain status ‘by relating an extraordinary dream, the details of which are declared to have been borne out subsequently by some unforeseen event, as, for instance, a sudden death or accident.’ They have to produce fresh evidential dreams from time to time. They see phantasms of the dead, and coincidental hallucinations.5 All this is as we should expect it to be.
Their religion is probably not due to missionaries18, as they always shot all foreigners, and have no traditions of the presence of aliens on the islands before our recent arrival.6 Their God, Puluga, is ‘like fire,’ but invisible. He was never born, and is immortal19. By him were all things created, except the powers of evil. He knows even the thoughts of the heart. He is angered by yubda = sin, or wrong-doing, that is falsehood, theft, grave assault, murder, adultery, bad carving20 of meat, and (as a crime of witchcraft) by burning wax.7 ‘To those in pain or distress21 he is pitiful, and sometimes deigns22 to afford relief.’ He is Judge of Souls, and the dread23 of future punishment ‘to some extent is said to affect their course of action in the present life.’8
This Being could not be evolved out of the ordinary ghost of a second-sighted man, for I do not find that ancestral ghosts are worshipped, nor is there a trace of early missionary24 influence, while Mr. Man consulted elderly and, in native religion, well-instructed Andamanese for his facts.
Yet Puluga lives in a large stone house (clearly derived25 from ours at Port Blair), eats and drinks, foraging26 for himself, and is married to a green shrimp27.9 There is the usual story of a Deluge28 caused by the moral wrath29 of Puluga. The whole theology was scrupulously30 collected from natives unacquainted with other races.
The account of Andamanese religion does not tally32 with the anthropological hypothesis. Foreign influence seems to be more than usually excluded by insular33 conditions and the jealousy34 of the ‘original inhabitants.’ The evidence ought to make us reflect on the extreme obscurity of the whole problem.
Anthropological study of religion has hitherto almost entirely35 overlooked the mysteries of various races, except in so far as they confirm the entry of the young people into the ranks of the adult. Their esoteric moral and religious teaching is nearly unknown to us, save in a few instances. It is certain that the mysteries of Greece were survivals of savage ceremonies, because we know that they included specific savage rites36, such as the use of the rhombos to make a whirring noise, and the custom of ritual daubing with dirt; and the sacred ballets d’action, in which, as Lucian and Qing say, mystic facts are ‘danced out.’10 But, while Greece retained these relics37 of savagery38, there was something taught at Eleusis which filled minds like Plato’s and Pindar’s with a happy religious awe39. Now, similar ‘softening of the heart’ was the result of the teaching in the Australian Bora: the Yao mysteries inculcate the victory over self; and, till we are admitted to the secrets of all other savage mysteries throughout the world, we cannot tell whether, among mummeries, frivolities, and even license40, high ethical41 doctrines43 are not presented under the sanction of religion. The New Life, and perhaps the future life, are undeniably indicated in the Australian mysteries by the simulated Resurrection.
I would therefore no longer say, as in 1887, that the Hellenic genius must have added to ‘an old medicine dance’ all that the Eleusinian mysteries possessed44 of beauty, counsel, and consolation11. These elements, as well as the barbaric factors in the rites, may have been developed out of such savage doctrine42 as softens45 the hearts of Australians and Yaos. That this kind of doctrine receives religious sanction is certain, where we know the secret of savage mysteries. It is therefore quite incorrect, and strangely presumptuous46, to deny, with almost all anthropologists, the alliance of ethics with religion among the most backward races. We must always remember their secrecy47 about their inner religion, their frankness about their mythological48 tales. These we know: the inner religion we ought to begin to recognise that we do not know.
The case of the Andamanese has taught us how vague, even now, is our knowledge, and how obscure is our problem. The example of the Melanesians enforces these lessons. It is hard to bring the Melanesians within any theory. Dr. Codrington has made them the subject of a careful study, and reports that while the European inquirer can communicate pretty freely on common subjects ‘the vocabulary of ordinary life in almost useless when the region of mysteries and superstitions49 is approached.’12 The Banks Islanders are most free from an Asiatic element of population on one side, and a Polynesian element on the other.
The Banks Islanders ‘believe in two orders of intelligent beings different from living men.’ (1) Ghosts of the dead, (2) ‘Beings who were not, and never had been, human.’ This, as we have shown, and will continue to show, is the usual savage doctrine. On the one hand are separable souls of men, surviving the death of the body. On the other are beings, creators, who were before men were, and before death entered the world. It is impossible, logically, to argue that these beings are only ghosts of real remote ancestors, or of ideal ancestors. These higher beings are not safely to be defined as ‘spirits,’ their essence is vague, and, we repeat, the idea of their existence might have been evolved before the ghost theory was attained50 by men. Dr. Codrington says, ‘the conception can hardly be that of a purely51 spiritual being, yet, by whatever name the natives call them, they are such as in English must be called spirits.’
That is our point. ‘God is a spirit,’ these beings are Gods, therefore ‘these are spirits.’ But to their initial conception our idea of ‘spirit’ is lacking. They are beings who existed before death, and still exist.
The beings which never were human, never died, are Vui, the ghosts are Tamate. Dr. Codrington uses ‘ghosts’ for Tamate, ‘spirits’ for Vui. But as to render Vui ‘spirits’ is to yield the essential point, we shall call Vui ‘beings,’ or, simply, Vui. A Vui is not a spirit that has been a ghost; the story may represent him as if a man, ‘but the native will always maintain that he was something different, and deny to him the fleshly body of a man.’13
This distinction, ghost on one side — original being, not a man, not a ghost of a man, on the other — is radical52 and nearly universal in savage religion. Anthropology53, neglecting the essential distinction insisted on, in this case, by Dr. Codrington, confuses both kinds under the style of ‘spirits,’ and derives54 both from ghosts of the dead. Dr. Codrington, it should be said, does not generalise, but confines himself to the savages of whom he has made a special study. But, from the other examples of the same distinction which we have offered, and the rest which we shall offer, we think ourselves justified55 in regarding the distinction between a primeval, eternal, being or beings, on one hand, and ghosts or spirits exalted56 from ghost’s estate, on the other, as common, if not universal.
There are corporeal57 and incorporeal58 Vuis, but the body of the corporeal Vui is ‘not a human body.’14 The chief is Qat, ‘still at hand to help and invoked59 in prayers.’ ‘Qat, Marawa, look down upon me, smooth the sea for us two, that I may go safely over the sea!’ Qat ‘created men and animals,’ though, in a certain district, he is claimed as an ancestor (p. 268). Two strata61 of belief have here been confused.
The myth of Qat is a jungle of facetiae and frolic, with one or two serious incidents, such as the beginning of Death and the coming of Night. His mother was, or became, a stone; stones playing a considerable part in the superstitions.
The incorporeal Vuis, ‘with nothing like a human life, have a much higher place than Qat and his brothers in the religious system.’ They have neither names, nor shapes, nor legends, they receive sacrifice, and are in some uncertain way connected with stones; these stones usually bear a fanciful resemblance to fruits or animals (p. 275). The only sacrifice, in Banks Islands, is that of shell-money. The mischievous62 spirits are Tamate, ghosts of men. There is a belief in mana (magical rapport). Dr. Codrington cannot determine the connection of this belief with that in spirits. Mana is the uncanny, is X, the unknown. A revived impression of sense is nunuai, as when a tired fisher, half asleep at night, feels the ‘draw’ of a salmon63, and automatically strikes.15 The common ghost is a bag of nunuai, as living man, in the opinion of some philosophers, is a bag of ‘sensations.’ Ghosts are only seen as spiritual lights, which so commonly attend hallucinations among the civilised. Except in the prayers to Qat and Marawa, prayer only invokes64 the dead (p. 285). ‘In the western islands the offerings are made to ghosts, and consumed by fire; in the eastern (Banks) isles65 they are made to spirits (beings, Vui), and there is no sacrificial fire.’ Now, the worship of ghosts goes, in these isles, with the higher culture, ‘a more considerable advance in the arts of life;’ the worship of non-ghosts, Vui, goes with the lower material culture.16 This is rather the reverse of what we should expect, in accordance with the anthropological theory. According, however, to our theory, Animism and ghost-worship may be of later development, and belong to a higher level of culture, than worship of a being, or beings, that never were ghosts. In Leper’s Isle66, ‘ghosts do not appear to have prayers or sacrifices offered to them,’ but cause disease, and work magic.17
The belief in the soul, in Melanesia, does not appear to proceed ‘from their dreams or visions in which deceased or absent persons are presented to them, for they do not appear to believe that the soul goes out from the dreamer, or presents itself as an object in his dreams,’ nor does belief in other spirits seem to be founded on ‘the appearance of life or motion in inanimate things.’18
To myself it rather looks as if all impressions had their nunuai, real, bodiless, persistent68, after-images; that the soul is the complex of all of these nunuai; that there is in the universe a kind of magical other, called mana, possessed, in different proportions, by different men, Vui, tamate, and material objects, and that the atai or ataro of a man dead, his ghost, retains its old, and acquires new mana.19 It is an odd kind of metaphysic to find among very backward and isolated69 savages. But the lesson of Melanesia teaches us how very little we really know of the religion of low races, how complex it is, how hardly it can be forced into our theories, if we take it as given in our knowledge, allow for our ignorance, and are not content to select facts which suit our hypothesis, while ignoring the rest. On a higher level of material culture than the Melanesians are the Fijians.
Fijian religion, as far as we understand, resembles the others in drawing an impassable line between ghosts and eternal gods. The word Kalou is applied70 to all supernal71 beings, and mystic or magical things alike. It seems to answer to mana in New Zealand and Melanesia, to wakan in North America, and to fée in old French, as when Perrault says, about Bluebeard’s key, ‘now the key was fée.’ All Gods are Kalou, but all things that are Kalou are not Gods. Gods are Kalou vu; deified ghosts are Kalou yalo. The former are eternal, without beginning of days or end of years; the latter are subject to infirmity and even to death.20
The Supreme Being, if we can apply the term to him, is Ndengei, or Degei, ‘who seems to be an impersonation of the abstract idea of eternal existence.’ This idea is not easily developed out of the conception of a human soul which has died into a ghost and may die again. His myth represents him as a serpent, emblem72 of eternity73, or a body of stone with a serpent’s head. His one manifestation74 is given by eating. So neglected is he that a song exists about his lack of worshippers and gifts. ‘We made men,’ says Ndengei, ‘placed them on earth, and yet they share to us only the under shell.’21 Here is an extreme case of the self-existent creative Eternal, mythically76 lodged77 in a serpent’s body, and reduced to a jest.
It is not easy to see any explanation, if we reject the hypothesis that this is an old, fallen form of faith, ‘with scarcely a temple.’ The other unborn immortals78 are mythical75 warriors79 and adulterers, like the popular deities80 of Greece. Yet Ndengei receives prayers through two sons of his, mediating81 deities. The priests are possessed, or inspired, by spirits and gods. One is not quite clear as to whether Ndengei is an inspiring god or not; but that prayers are made to him is inconsistent with the belief in his eternal inaction. A priest is represented as speaking for Ndengei, probably by inspiration. ‘My own mind departs from me, and then, when it is truly gone, my god speaks by me,’ is the account of this ‘alternating personality’ given by a priest.22
After informing us that Ndengei is starved, Mr. Williams next tells about offerings to him, in earlier days, of hundreds of hogs82.23 He sends rain on earth. Animals, men, stones, may all be Kalou. There is a Hades as fantastic as that in the Egyptian ‘Book of the Dead,’ and second sight flourishes.
The mysteries include the sham83 raising of the dead, and appear to be directed at propitiatory84 ghosts rather than at Ndengei. There are scenes of license; ‘particulars of almost incredible indecency have been privately85 forwarded to Dr. Tylor.’24
Suppose a religious reformer were to arise in one of the many savage tribes who, as we shall show, possess, but neglect, an Eternal Creator. He would do what, in the secular86 sphere, was done by the Mikado of Japan. The Mikado was a political Dendid or Ndengei — an awful, withdrawn87, impotent potentate89. Power was wielded90 by the Tycoon91. A Mikado of genius asserted himself; hence arose modern Japan. In the same way, a religious reformer like Khuen Ahten in Egypt would preach down minor92 gods, ghosts and sacred beasts, and proclaim the primal93 Maker94, Ndengei, Dendid, Mtanga. ‘The king shall hae his ain again.’ Had it not been for the Prophets, Israel, by the time that Greece and Rome knew Israel, would have been worshipping a horde95 of little gods, and even beasts and ghosts, while the Eternal would have become a mere96 name — perhaps, like Ndengei and Atahocan and Unkulunkulu, a jest. The Old Testament97 is the story of the prolonged effort to keep Jehovah in His supreme place. To make and to succeed in that effort was the differentia, of Israel. Other peoples, even the lowest, had, as we prove, the germinal conception of a God — assuredly not demonstrated to be derived from the ghost theory, logically in no need of the ghost theory, everywhere explicitly99 contrasted with the ghost theory. ‘But their foolish heart was darkened.’
It is impossible to prove, historically, which of the two main elements in belief — the idea of an Eternal Being or Beings, or the idea of surviving ghosts — came first into the minds of men. The idea of primeval Eternal Beings, as understood by savages, does not depend on, or require, the ghost theory. But, as we almost always find ghosts and a Supreme Being together, where we find either, among the lowest savages, we have no historical ground for asserting that either is prior to the other. Where we have no evidence to the belief in the Maker, we must not conclude that no such belief exists. Our knowledge is confused and scanty100; often it is derived from men who do not know the native language, or the native sacred language, or have not been trusted with what the savage treasures as his secret. Moreover, if anywhere ghosts are found without gods, it is an inference from the argument that an idea familiar to very low savage tribes, like the Australians, and falling more and more into the background elsewhere, though still extant and traceable, might, in certain cases, be lost and forgotten altogether.
To take an example of half-forgotten deity101. Mr. Im Thurn, a good observer, has written on ‘The Animism of the Indians of British Guiana.’ Mr. Im Thurn justly says: ‘The man who above all others has made this study possible is Mr. Tylor.’ But it is not unfair to remark that Mr. Im Thurn naturally sees most distinctly that which Mr. Tylor has taught him to see — namely, Animism. He has also been persuaded, by Mr. Dorman, that the Great Spirit of North American tribes is ‘almost certainly nothing more than a figure of European origin, reflected and transmitted almost beyond recognition on the mirror of the Indian mind,’ That is not my opinion: I conceive that the Red Indians had their native Eternal, like the Australians, Fijians, Andamanese, Dinkas, Yao, and so forth102, as will be shown later.
Mr. Im Thurn, however, dilates103 on the dream origin of the ghost theory, giving examples from his own knowledge of the difficulty with which Guiana Indians discern the hallucinations of dreams from the facts of waking life. Their waking hallucinations are also so vivid as to be taken for realities.25 Mr. Im Thurn adopts the hypothesis that, from ghosts, ‘a belief has arisen, but very gradually, in higher spirits, and, eventually, in a Highest Spirit; and, keeping pace with the growth of these beliefs, a habit of reverence104 for and worship of spirits.’ On this hypothesis, the spirit latest evolved, and most worshipful, ought, of course, to be the ‘Highest Spirit.’ But the reverse, as usual, is the case. The Guiana Indians believe in the continued, but not in the everlasting105, existence of a man’s ghost.26 They believe in no spirits which were not once tenants106 of material bodies.27
The belief in a Supreme Spirit is only attained ‘in the highest form of religion’ — Andamanese, for instance — as Mr. Im Thurn uses ‘spirit’ where we should say ‘being.’ ‘The Indians of Guiana know no god.’28
‘But it is true that various words have been found in all, or nearly all, the languages of Guiana which have been supposed to be names of a Supreme Being, God, a Great Spirit, in the sense which those phrases bear in the language of the higher religions.’
Being interpreted, these Guiana names mean —
The Ancient One,
The Ancient One in Sky-land,
Our Maker,
Our Father,
Our Great Father.
‘None of those in any way involves the attributes of a god.’
The Ancient of Days, Our Father in Sky-land, Our Maker, do rather convoy107 the sense of God to a European mind. Mr. Im Thurn, however, decides that the beings thus designated were supposed ancestors who came into Guiana from some other country, ‘sometimes said to have been that entirely natural country (?) which is separated from Guiana by the ocean of the air.’29
Mr. Im Thurn casually108 observed (having said nothing about morals in alliance with Animism):
‘The fear of unwittingly offending the countless109 visible and invisible beings . . . kept the Indians very strictly110 within their own rights and from offending against the rights of others.’
This remark dropped out at a discussion of Mr. Im Thurn’s paper, and clearly demonstrated that even a very low creed111 ‘makes for righteousness.’30
Probably few who have followed the facts given here will agree with Mr. Im Thurn’s theory that ‘Our Maker,’ ‘Our Father,’ ‘The Ancient One of the Heaven,’ is merely an idealised human ancestor. He falls naturally into his place with the other high gods of low savages. But we need much more information on the subject than Mr. Im Thurn was able to give.
His evidence is all the better, because he is a loyal follower112 of Mr. Tylor. And Mr. Tylor says: ‘Savage Animism is almost devoid113 of that ethical element which to the educated modern mind is the very mainspring of practical religion.’31 ‘Yet it keeps the Indians very strictly within their own rights and from offending the rights of others.’ Our own religion is rarely so successful.32
In the Indians of Guiana we have an alleged114 case of a people still deep in the animistic or ghost-worshipping case, who, by the hypothesis, have not yet evolved the idea of a god at all.
When the familiar names for God, such as Maker, Father, Ancient of Days, occur in the Indian language, Mr. Im Thurn explains the neglected Being who bears these titles as a remote deified ancestor. Of course, when a Being with similar titles occurs where ancestors are not worshipped, as in Australia and the Andaman Islands, the explanation suggested by Mr. Im Thurn for the problem of religion in Guiana, will not fit the facts.
It is plain that, a priori, another explanation is conceivable. If a people like the Andamanese, or the Australian tribes whom we have studied, had such a conception as that of Puluga, or Baiame, or Mungan-ngaur and then, later, developed ancestor-worship with its propitiatory sacrifices and ceremonies, ancestor-worship, as the newest evolved and infinitely115 the most practical form of cult67, would gradually thrust the belief in a Puluga, or Mungan-ngaur, or Cagn into the shade. The ancestral spirit, to speak quite plainly, can be ‘squared’ by the people in whom he takes a special interest for family reasons. The equal Father of all men cannot be ‘squared,’ and declines (till corrupted116 by the bad example of ancestral ghosts) to make himself useful to one man rather than to another. For these very intelligible117, simple, and practical reasons, if the belief in a Mungan-ngaur came first in evolution, and the belief in a practicable bribable118 family ghost came second, the ghost-cult would inevitably119 crowd out the God-cult.33 The name of the Father and Maker would become a mere survival, nominis umbra, worship and sacrifice going to the ancestral ghost. That explanation would fit the state of religion which Mr. Im Thurn has found, rightly or wrongly, in British Guiana.
But, if the idea of a universal Father and Maker came last in evolution, as a refinement120, then, of course, it ought to be the newest, and therefore the most fashionable and potent88 of Guianese cults121. Precisely122 the reverse is said to be the case. Nor can the belief indicated in such names as Father and Maker be satisfactorily explained as a refinement of ancestor-worship, because, we repeat, it occurs where ancestors are not worshipped.
These considerations, however unpleasant to the devotees of Animism, or the ghost theory, are not, in themselves, illogical, nor contradictory123 of the theory of evolution, which, on the other hand, fits them perfectly124 well. That god thrives best who is most suited to his environment. Whether an easy-going, hungry ghost-god with a liking125 for his family, or a moral Creator not to be bribed126, is better suited to an environment of not especially scrupulous31 savages, any man can decide. Whether a set of not particularly scrupulous savages will readily evolve a moral unbribable Creator, when they have a serviceable family ghost-god eager to oblige, is a question as easily resolved.
Beyond all doubt, savages who find themselves under the watchful127 eye of a moral deity whom they cannot ‘square’ will desert him as soon as they have evolved a practicable ghost-god, useful for family purposes, whom they can square. No less manifestly, savages, who already possess a throng128 of serviceable ghost-gods, will not enthusiastically evolve a moral Being who despises gifts, and only cares for obedience129. ‘There is a great deal of human nature in man,’ and, if Mr. Im Thurn’s description of the Guianese be correct, everything we know of human nature, and of evolution, assures us that the Father, or Maker, or Ancient of Days came first; the ghost-gods, last. What has here been said about the Indians of Guiana (namely, that they are now more ghost and spirit worshippers, with only a name surviving to attest130 a knowledge of a Father and Maker in Heaven) applies equally well to the Zulus. The Zulus are the great standing131 type of an animistic or ghost-worshipping race without a God. But, had they a God (on the Australian pattern) whom they have forgotten, or have they not yet evolved a God out of Animism?
The evidence, collected by Dr. Callaway, is honest, but confused. One native, among others, put forward the very theory here proposed by us as an alternative to that of Mr. Im Thurn. ‘Unkulunkulu’ (the idealised but despised First Ancestor) ‘was not worshipped [by men]. For it is not worship when people see things, as rain, or food, or corn, and say, “Yes, these things were made by Unkulunkulu. . . . Afterwards they [men] had power to change those things, that they might become the Amatongos” [might belong to the ancestral spirits]. They took them away from Unkulunkulu.’34
Animism supplanted132 Theism. Nothing could be more explicit98. But, though we have found an authentic133 Zulu text to suit our provisional theory, the most eminent134 philosophical example must not reduce us into supposing that this text settles the question. Dr. Callaway collected great masses of Zulu answers to his inquiries135, and it is plain that a respondent, like the native theologian whom we have cited, may have adapted his reply to what he had learned of Christian136 doctrine. Having now the Christian notion of a Divine Creator, and knowing, too, that the unworshipped Unkulunkulu is said to have ‘made things,’ while only ancestral spirits, are worshipped, the native may have inferred that worship (by Christians137 given to the Creator) was at some time transferred by the Zulus from Unkulunkulu to the Amatongo. The truth is that both the anthropological theory (spirits first, Gods last), and our theory (Supreme Being first, spirits next) can find warrant in Dr. Callaway’s valuable collections. For that reason, the problem must be solved after a survey of the whole field of savage and barbaric religion; it cannot be settled by the ambiguous case of the Zulus alone.
Unkulunkulu is represented as ‘the First Man, who broke off in the beginning.’ ‘They are ancestor-worshippers,’ says Dr. Callaway, ‘and believe that their first ancestor, the First Man, was the Creator.’35 But they may, like many other peoples, have had a different original tradition, and have altered it, just because they are now such fervent138 ancestor-worshippers. Unkulunkulu was prior to Death, which came among men in the usual mythical way.36 Whether Unkulunkulu still exists, is rather a moot60 question: Dr. Callaway thinks that he does not.37 If not, he is an exception to the rule in Australia, Andaman, among the Bushmen, the Fuegians, and savages in general, who are less advanced in culture than the Zulus. The idea, then, of a Maker of things who has ceased to exist occurs, if at all, not in a relatively139 primitive140, but in a relatively late religion. On the analogy of pottery141, agriculture, the use of iron, villages, hereditary142 kings, and so on, the notion of a dead Maker is late, not early. It occurs where men have iron, cattle, agriculture, kings, houses, a disciplined army, not where men have none of these things. The Zulu godless ancestor-worship, then, by parity143 of reasoning, is, like their material culture, not an early but a late development. The Zulus ‘hear of a King which is above’ — ‘the heavenly King.’38 ‘We did not hear of him first from white men. . . . But he is not like Unkulunkulu, who, we say, made all things.’
Here may be dimly descried144 the ideas of a God, and a subordinate demiurge. ‘The King is above, Unkulunkulu is beneath.’ The King above punishes sin, striking the sinner by lightning. Nor do the Zulus know how they have sinned. ‘There remained only that word about the heaven,’ ‘which,’ says Dr. Callaway, ‘implies that there might have been other words which are now lost.’ There is great confusion of thought. Unkulunkulu made the heaven, where the unknown King reigns145, a hard task for a First Man.39
‘In process of time we have come to worship the Amadhlozi (spirits) only, because we know not what to say about Unkulunkulu.’40 ‘It is on that account, then, that we seek out for ourselves the Amadhlozi (spirits), that we may not always be thinking about Unkulunkulu.’
All this attests146 a faint lingering shadow of a belief too ethereal, too remote, for a practical conquering race, which prefers intelligible serviceable ghosts, with a special regard for their own families.
Ukoto, a very old Zulu, said: ‘When we were children it was said “The Lord is in heaven.” . . . They used to point to the Lord on high; we did not hear his name.’ Unkulunkulu was understood, by this patriarch, to refer to immediate147 ancestors, whose mimes148 and genealogies149 he gave.41 ‘We heard it said that the Creator of the world was the Lord who is above; people used always, when I was growing up, to point towards heaven.’
A very old woman was most reluctant to speak of Unkulunkulu; at last she said, ‘Ah, it is he in fact who is the Creator, who is in heaven, of whom the ancients spoke150.’ Then the old woman began to babble151 humorously of how the white men made all things. Again, Unkulunkulu is said to have been created by Utilexo. Utilexo was invisible, Unkulunkulu was visible, and so got credit not really his due.42 When the heaven is said to be the Chief’s (the chief being a living Zulu) ‘they do not believe what they say,’ the phrase is a mere hyperbolical compliment.43
On this examination of the evidence, it certainly seems as logical to conjecture152 that the Zulus had once such an idea of a Supreme Being as lower races entertain, and then nearly lost it; as to say that Zulus, though a monarchical153 race, have not yet developed a King–God out of the throng of spirits (Amatongo). The Zulus, the Norsemen of the South, so to speak, are a highly practical military race. A Deity at all abstract was not to their liking. Serviceable family spirits, who continually provided an excuse for a dinner of roast beef, were to their liking. The less developed races do not kill their flocks commonly for food. A sacrifice is needed as a pretext154. To the gods of Andamanese, Bushmen, Australians, no sacrifice is offered. To the Supreme Being of most African peoples no sacrifice is offered. There is no festivity in the worship of these Supreme Beings, no feasting, at all events. They are not to be ‘got at’ by gifts or sacrifices. The Amatongo are to be ‘got at,’ are bribable, supply an excuse for a good dinner, and thus the practical Amatongo are honoured, while, in the present generation of Zulus, Unkulunkulu is a joke, and the Lord in Heaven is the shadow of a name. Clearly this does not point to the recent but to the remote development of the higher ideas, now superseded155 by spirit-worship.
We shall next see how this view, the opposite of the anthropological theory, works when applied to other races, especially to other African races.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
savage
|
|
| adj.野蛮的；凶恶的，残暴的；n.未开化的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
savages
|
|
| 未开化的人，野蛮人( savage的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
supreme
|
|
| adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
habitual
|
|
| adj.习惯性的；通常的，惯常的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
portrayed
|
|
| v.画像( portray的过去式和过去分词 )；描述；描绘；描画 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
ethics
|
|
| n.伦理学；伦理观，道德标准 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
initiated
|
|
| n. 创始人 adj. 新加入的 vt. 开始，创始，启蒙，介绍加入 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
rite
|
|
| n.典礼，惯例，习俗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
caterpillar
|
|
| n.毛虫，蝴蝶的幼虫 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
anthropological
|
|
| adj.人类学的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
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： |
|
|
|
|
12
benevolent
|
|
| adj.仁慈的，乐善好施的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
reclaim
|
|
| v.要求归还，收回；开垦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
philosophical
|
|
| adj.哲学家的，哲学上的，达观的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
mythology
|
|
| n.神话，神话学，神话集 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
prehistoric
|
|
| adj.（有记载的）历史以前的，史前的，古老的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
considerably
|
|
| adv.极大地；相当大地；在很大程度上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
missionaries
|
|
| n.传教士( missionary的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
immortal
|
|
| adj.不朽的；永生的，不死的；神的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
carving
|
|
| n.雕刻品，雕花 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
distress
|
|
| n.苦恼，痛苦，不舒适；不幸；vt.使悲痛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
deigns
|
|
| v.屈尊，俯就( deign的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
dread
|
|
| vt.担忧，忧虑；惧怕，不敢；n.担忧，畏惧 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
missionary
|
|
| adj.教会的，传教(士)的；n.传教士 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
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： |
|
|
|
|
26
foraging
|
|
| v.搜寻（食物），尤指动物觅（食）( forage的现在分词 )；（尤指用手）搜寻（东西） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
shrimp
|
|
| n.虾，小虾；矮小的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
deluge
|
|
| n./vt.洪水，暴雨，使泛滥 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
wrath
|
|
| n.愤怒，愤慨，暴怒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
scrupulously
|
|
| adv.一丝不苟地；小心翼翼地，多顾虑地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
scrupulous
|
|
| adj.审慎的，小心翼翼的，完全的，纯粹的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
tally
|
|
| n.计数器，记分，一致，测量；vt.计算，记录，使一致；vi.计算，记分，一致 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
insular
|
|
| adj.岛屿的，心胸狭窄的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
jealousy
|
|
| n.妒忌，嫉妒，猜忌 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
rites
|
|
| 仪式，典礼( rite的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
relics
|
|
| [pl.］n.遗物，遗迹，遗产；遗体，尸骸 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
savagery
|
|
| n.野性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
awe
|
|
| n.敬畏，惊惧；vt.使敬畏，使惊惧 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
license
|
|
| n.执照，许可证，特许；v.许可，特许 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
ethical
|
|
| adj.伦理的，道德的，合乎道德的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
doctrine
|
|
| n.教义；主义；学说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
doctrines
|
|
| n.教条( doctrine的名词复数 )；教义；学说；（政府政策的）正式声明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
softens
|
|
| （使）变软( soften的第三人称单数 )； 缓解打击； 缓和； 安慰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
presumptuous
|
|
| adj.胆大妄为的，放肆的，冒昧的，冒失的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
secrecy
|
|
| n.秘密，保密，隐蔽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
mythological
|
|
| adj.神话的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
superstitions
|
|
| 迷信，迷信行为( superstition的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
attained
|
|
| （通常经过努力）实现( attain的过去式和过去分词 )； 达到； 获得； 达到（某年龄、水平、状况） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
purely
|
|
| adv.纯粹地，完全地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
radical
|
|
| n.激进份子，原子团，根号；adj.根本的，激进的，彻底的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
anthropology
|
|
| n.人类学 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
derives
|
|
| v.得到( derive的第三人称单数 )；（从…中）得到获得；源于；（从…中）提取 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
justified
|
|
| a.正当的，有理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
exalted
|
|
| adj.(地位等)高的，崇高的；尊贵的，高尚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
corporeal
|
|
| adj.肉体的，身体的；物质的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
incorporeal
|
|
| adj.非物质的，精神的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
invoked
|
|
| v.援引( invoke的过去式和过去分词 )；行使（权利等）；祈求救助；恳求 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
moot
|
|
| v.提出；adj.未决议的；n.大会；辩论会 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
strata
|
|
| n.地层（复数）；社会阶层 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
mischievous
|
|
| adj.调皮的，恶作剧的，有害的，伤人的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
salmon
|
|
| n.鲑，大马哈鱼，橙红色的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
invokes
|
|
| v.援引( invoke的第三人称单数 )；行使（权利等）；祈求救助；恳求 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
isles
|
|
| 岛( isle的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
isle
|
|
| n.小岛，岛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
cult
|
|
| n.异教，邪教；时尚，狂热的崇拜 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
persistent
|
|
| adj.坚持不懈的，执意的；持续的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
isolated
|
|
| adj.与世隔绝的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
applied
|
|
| adj.应用的；v.应用，适用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
supernal
|
|
| adj.天堂的，天上的；崇高的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
emblem
|
|
| n.象征，标志；徽章 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
eternity
|
|
| n.不朽，来世；永恒，无穷 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
manifestation
|
|
| n.表现形式；表明；现象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
mythical
|
|
| adj.神话的；虚构的；想像的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
mythically
|
|
| adv.想像地，虚构地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
77
lodged
|
|
| v.存放( lodge的过去式和过去分词 )；暂住；埋入；（权利、权威等）归属 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
immortals
|
|
| 不朽的人物( immortal的名词复数 )； 永生不朽者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
warriors
|
|
| 武士，勇士，战士( warrior的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
deities
|
|
| n.神，女神( deity的名词复数 )；神祗；神灵；神明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
mediating
|
|
| 调停，调解，斡旋( mediate的现在分词 )； 居间促成； 影响…的发生； 使…可能发生 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
hogs
|
|
| n.（尤指喂肥供食用的）猪( hog的名词复数 )；（供食用的）阉公猪；彻底地做某事；自私的或贪婪的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
sham
|
|
| n./adj.假冒(的)，虚伪(的) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
propitiatory
|
|
| adj.劝解的；抚慰的；谋求好感的；哄人息怒的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
privately
|
|
| adv.以私人的身份，悄悄地，私下地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
secular
|
|
| n.牧师，凡人；adj.世俗的，现世的，不朽的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
withdrawn
|
|
| vt.收回；使退出；vi.撤退，退出 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
potent
|
|
| adj.强有力的，有权势的；有效力的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
potentate
|
|
| n.统治者；君主 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
wielded
|
|
| 手持着使用（武器、工具等）( wield的过去式和过去分词 )； 具有； 运用（权力）； 施加（影响） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
tycoon
|
|
| n.有钱有势的企业家，大亨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
minor
|
|
| adj.较小(少)的，较次要的；n.辅修学科；vi.辅修 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
primal
|
|
| adj.原始的；最重要的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
maker
|
|
| n.制造者，制造商 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
horde
|
|
| n.群众，一大群 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
testament
|
|
| n.遗嘱；证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
explicit
|
|
| adj.详述的，明确的；坦率的；显然的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
explicitly
|
|
| ad.明确地，显然地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
scanty
|
|
| adj.缺乏的，仅有的，节省的，狭小的，不够的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
deity
|
|
| n.神，神性；被奉若神明的人(或物) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
forth
|
|
| adv.向前；向外，往外 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
dilates
|
|
| v.（使某物）扩大，膨胀，张大( dilate的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
reverence
|
|
| n.敬畏，尊敬，尊严；Reverence:对某些基督教神职人员的尊称；v.尊敬，敬畏，崇敬 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
everlasting
|
|
| adj.永恒的，持久的，无止境的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
tenants
|
|
| n.房客( tenant的名词复数 )；佃户；占用者；占有者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
convoy
|
|
| vt.护送，护卫，护航；n.护送；护送队 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
casually
|
|
| adv.漠不关心地，无动于衷地，不负责任地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
countless
|
|
| adj.无数的，多得不计其数的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
strictly
|
|
| adv.严厉地，严格地；严密地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
creed
|
|
| n.信条；信念，纲领 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
follower
|
|
| n.跟随者；随员；门徒；信徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
devoid
|
|
| adj.全无的，缺乏的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
alleged
|
|
| a.被指控的，嫌疑的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
infinitely
|
|
| adv.无限地，无穷地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
corrupted
|
|
| （使）败坏( corrupt的过去式和过去分词 )； （使）腐化； 引起（计算机文件等的）错误； 破坏 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
intelligible
|
|
| adj.可理解的，明白易懂的，清楚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
bribable
|
|
| adj.可贿赂的，可收买的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
119
inevitably
|
|
| adv.不可避免地；必然发生地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
refinement
|
|
| n.文雅；高尚；精美；精制；精炼 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
cults
|
|
| n.迷信( cult的名词复数 )；狂热的崇拜；（有极端宗教信仰的）异教团体 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
precisely
|
|
| adv.恰好，正好，精确地，细致地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
contradictory
|
|
| adj.反驳的，反对的，抗辩的；n.正反对，矛盾对立 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
liking
|
|
| n.爱好；嗜好；喜欢 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
bribed
|
|
| v.贿赂( bribe的过去式和过去分词 )；向（某人）行贿，贿赂 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
watchful
|
|
| adj.注意的，警惕的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
throng
|
|
| n.人群，群众；v.拥挤，群集 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
obedience
|
|
| n.服从，顺从 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
attest
|
|
| vt.证明，证实；表明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
supplanted
|
|
| 把…排挤掉，取代( supplant的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
authentic
|
|
| a.真的，真正的；可靠的，可信的，有根据的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
eminent
|
|
| adj.显赫的，杰出的，有名的，优良的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
inquiries
|
|
| n.调查( inquiry的名词复数 )；疑问；探究；打听 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
Christians
|
|
| n.基督教徒( Christian的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
fervent
|
|
| adj.热的，热烈的，热情的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
relatively
|
|
| adv.比较...地，相对地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
primitive
|
|
| adj.原始的；简单的；n.原(始)人，原始事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
pottery
|
|
| n.陶器，陶器场 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
hereditary
|
|
| adj.遗传的，遗传性的，可继承的，世袭的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
parity
|
|
| n.平价，等价，比价，对等 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
descried
|
|
| adj.被注意到的，被发现的，被看到的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
reigns
|
|
| n.君主的统治( reign的名词复数 )；君主统治时期；任期；当政期 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
attests
|
|
| v.证明( attest的第三人称单数 )；证实；声称…属实；使宣誓 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
immediate
|
|
| adj.立即的；直接的，最接近的；紧靠的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
mimes
|
|
| n.指手画脚( mime的名词复数 )；做手势；哑剧；哑剧演员v.指手画脚地表演，用哑剧的形式表演( mime的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
genealogies
|
|
| n.系谱，家系，宗谱( genealogy的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
spoke
|
|
| n.（车轮的）辐条；轮辐；破坏某人的计划；阻挠某人的行动 v.讲，谈（speak的过去式）；说；演说；从某种观点来说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
babble
|
|
| v.含糊不清地说，胡言乱语地说，儿语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
conjecture
|
|
| n./v.推测，猜测 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
monarchical
|
|
| adj. 国王的，帝王的，君主的，拥护君主制的 =monarchic | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
pretext
|
|
| n.借口，托词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
superseded
|
|
| [医]被代替的，废弃的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |