It appears, then, if our general suggestion meets with any acceptance, that what occurred in the development of Hebrew religion was precisely what the Bible tells us did occur. This must necessarily seem highly paradoxical to our generation; but the whole trend of our provisional system makes in favour of the paradox. If savage nomadic Israel had the higher religious conceptions proved to exist among several of the lowest known races, these conceptions might be revived by a leader of genius.
They might, in a crisis of tribal fortunes, become the rallying point of a new national sentiment. Obscured, in some degree, by acquaintance with "the idols of Egypt," and restricted and localised by the very national sentiment which they fostered, these conceptions were purified and widened far beyond any local, tribal, or national restrictions--widened far as the _flammantia moenia mundi_--by the historically unique genius of the Prophets. Blended with the doctrine of our Lord, and recommended by the addition of Animism in its pure and priceless form--the reward of faith, hope, and charity in eternal life--the faith of Israel enlightened the world.
All this is precisely what occurred, according to the Old and New Testaments. All this is just what, on our hypothesis, might be expected to occur if, out of the many races which, in their most backward culture, had a rude conception of a Moral Creative Being, relatively supreme, one race endured the education of Israel, showed the comparative indifference of Israel to Animism and ghost-G.o.ds, listened to the Prophets of Israel, and gave birth to a greater than Moses and the Prophets.
To this result the Logos, as Socrates says, has led us, by the path of anthropology.
[Footnote 1: _Science and Hebrew Tradition_.]
[Footnote 2: Op. cit. p. 361.]
[Footnote 3:_ Science and Hebrew Tradition_. p. 308.]
[Footnote 4: _Prin. Soc_. p. 306.]
[Footnote 5: _The Tshi-speaking Races_, p. 183.]
[Footnote 6: Some Australian tribes have cemeteries, and I have found one native witness, King Billy, to the celebration of the mysteries near one of these burying-places. I have not discovered other evidence to this effect, though I have looked for it. The spot selected is usually "near the camp,"
and the place for so large a camp in chosen, naturally, where the supply of food is adequate.]
[Footnote 7: Cf. the Aryans, _Principles of Sociology_, p. 314.]
[Footnote 8: _Principles_, p. 316.]
[Footnote 9: Ibid. p. 317.]
[Footnote 10: Jeremiah xvi. 6, 7.]
[Footnote 11: Leviticus xix. 28.]
[Footnote 12: Deuteronomy x.x.xiv. 6.]
[Footnote 13: _Short Introduction to History of Ancient Israel_, pp.
83, 84.]
[Footnote 14: Stade i 403.]
[Footnote 15: Stade, i. 406.]
[Footnote 16: Wellhausen, _History of Israel_, p. 437. Mr. Oxford"s book is only noticed here because it is meant for a popular manual. As Mr.
Henry Foker says, "it seems a pity that the clergy should interfere in these matters."]
[Footnote 17: _Science and Hebrew Tradition_, p. 299.]
[Footnote 18: II. 127.]
[Footnote 19: _Science and Hebrew Tradition_, p. 331.]
[Footnote 20: Mariner, ii. 205.]
[Footnote 21: Op. cit. p. 335.]
[Footnote 22: Of course, it in understood that Israel (in the dark backward and abysm of time) may also have been totemistic, like the Australians, as texts pointed out by Mr. Robertson Smith seem to hint.
There was also worship of teraphim, respect paid to stones and trees, and so forth.]
[Footnote 23: _Science and Hebrew Tradition_, p. 349.]
[Footnote 24: P. 351.]
[Footnote 25: _History of Israel_, p. 443 note.]
[Footnote 26: _Religion of Semites_.]
[Footnote 27: _Geschichte des Volkes Israel_, i. 180.]
[Footnote 28: _Histoire du Peuple d"Israel_, citing Schrader, p. 23.]
[Footnote 29: Op. cit. p. 85]
[Footnote 30: See Professor Robertson"s _Early Religion of Israel_ for a list of these conjectures, and, generally, for criticisms of the occasional vagaries of critics.]
XVII
CONCLUSION
We may now glance backward at the path which we have tried to cut through the jungles of early religions. It is not a highway, but the track of a solitary explorer; and this essay pretends to be no more than a sketch--not an exhaustive survey of creeds. Its limitations are obvious, but may here be stated. The higher and even the lower polytheisms are only alluded to in pa.s.sing, our object being to keep well in view the conception of a Supreme, or practically Supreme, Being, from the lowest stages of human culture up to Christianity. In polytheism that conception is necessarily obscured, showing itself dimly either in the _Prytanis_, or President of the Immortals, such as Zeus; or in Fate, behind and above the Immortals; or in Mr. Max Muller"s _Henotheism_, where the G.o.d addressed--Indra, or Soma, or Agni--is, for the moment, envisaged as supreme, and is adored in something like a monotheistic spirit; or, finally, in the etherealised deity of advanced philosophic speculation.
It has not been necessary, for our purpose, to dwell on these civilised religions. Granting our hypothesis of an early Supreme Being among savages, obscured later by ancestor-worship and ghost-G.o.ds, but not often absolutely lost to religious tradition, the barbaric and the civilised polytheisms easily take their position in line, and are easily intelligible. s.p.a.ce forbids a discussion of all known religions; only typical specimens have been selected. Thus, nothing has been said of the religion of the great Chinese empire. It appears to consist, on its higher plane, of the worship of Heaven as a great fetish-G.o.d--a worship which may well have begun in days, as Dr. Brinton says, "long ere man had asked himself, "Are the heavens material and G.o.d spiritual?""--perhaps, for all we know, before the idea of "spirit" had been evolved. Thus, if it contains nothing more august, the Chinese religion is, so far, beneath that of the Zunis, or the creed in Taa-roa, in Beings who are eternal, who were before earth was or sky was. The Chinese religion of Heaven is also coloured by Chinese political conditions; Heaven (Tien) corresponds to the Emperor, and tends to be confounded with Shang-ti, the Emperor above. "Dr.
Legge charges Confucius," says Mr. Tylor, "with an inclination to subst.i.tute, in his religious teaching, the name of Tien, Heaven, for that known to more ancient religion, and used in more ancient books--Shang-ti, the personal ruling deity." If so, China too has its ancient Supreme Being, who is not a divinised aspect of nature.
But Mr. Tylor"s reading, in harmony with his general theory, is different:
"It seems, rather, that the sage was, in fact, upholding the tradition of the ancient faith, thus acting according to the character on which he prided himself--that of a transmitter, not a maker, a preserver of old knowledge, not a new revealer."[1]
This, of course, is purely a question of evidence, to be settled by Sinologists. If the personal Supreme Being, Shang-ti, occupies in older doc.u.ments the situation held by Tien (Heaven) in Confucius"s later system, why are we to say that Confucius, by putting forward Heaven in place of Shang-ti, was restoring an older conception? Mr. Tylor"s affection for his theory leads him, perhaps, to that opinion; while my affection for my theory leads me to prefer doc.u.mentary evidence in its favour.
The question can only be settled by specialists. As matters stand, it seems to me probable that ancient China possessed a Supreme Personal Being, more remote and original than Heaven, just as the Zunis do. On the lower plane, Chinese religion is overrun, as everyone knows, by Animism and ancestor-worship. This is so powerful that it has given rise to a native theory of Euhemerism. The departmental deities of Chinese polytheism are explained by the Chinese on Euhemeristic principles:
"According to legend, the War G.o.d, or Military Sage, was once, in human life, a distinguished soldier; the Swine G.o.d was a hog-breeder who lost his pigs and died of sorrow; the G.o.d of Gamblers was _un decave_."[2]
These are not statements of fact, but of Chinese Euhemeristic theory. On that hypothesis, Confucius should now be a G.o.d; but of course he is not; his spirit is merely localised in his temple, where the Emperor worships him twice a year as ancestral spirits are worshipped.
Every theorist will force facts into harmony with his system, but I do not see that the Chinese facts are contrary to mine. On the highest plane is either a personal Supreme Being, Shang-ti, or there is Tien, Heaven (with Earth, parent of men), neither of them necessarily owing, in origin, anything to Animism. Then there is the political reflection of the Emperor on Religion (which cannot exist where there is no Emperor, King, or Chief, and therefore must be late), there is the animistic rabble of spirits ancestral or not, and there is departmental polytheism. The spirits are, of course, fed and furnished by men in the usual symbolical way. Nothing shows or hints that Shang-ti is merely an imaginary idealised first ancestor. Indeed, about all such explanations of the Supreme Being (say among the Kurnai) as an idealised imaginary first ancestor, M. Reville justly observes as follows: "Not only have we seen that, in wide regions of the uncivilised world, the worship of ancestors has invaded a domain previously occupied by "Naturism" and Animism properly so called, that it is, therefore, posterior to these; but, farther, we do not understand, in Mr. Spencer"s system, why, in so many places, the first ancestor is the Maker, if not the Creator of the world, Master of life and death, and possessor of divine powers, not held by any of his descendants. This proves that it was not the first ancestor who became G.o.d, in the belief of his descendants, but much rather the Divine Maker and Beginner of all, who, in the creed of his adorers, became the first ancestor."[3]
Our task has been limited, in this way, mainly to examination of the religion of some of the very lowest races, and of the highest world-religions, such as Judaism. The historical aspect of Christianity, as arising in the Life, Death, and Resurrection of our Lord, would demand a separate treatise. This would, in part, be concerned with the attempts to find in the narratives concerning our Lord, a large admixture of the mythology and ritual connected with the sacrificed _Rex Nemorensis_, and whatever else survives in peasant folk-lore of spring and harvest.[4]
After these apologies for the limitations of this essay, we may survey the backward track. We began by showing that savages may stumble, and have stumbled, on theories not inconsistent with science, but not till recently discovered by science. The electric origin of the Aurora Borealis (whether absolutely certain or not) was an example; another was the efficacy of "suggestion," especially for curative purposes. It was, therefore, hinted that, if savages blundered (if you please) into a belief in G.o.d and the Soul, however obscurely envisaged, these beliefs were not therefore necessarily and essentially false. We then stated our purpose of examining the alleged supernormal phenomena, savage or civilised, which, on Mr. Tylor"s hypothesis, help to originate the conception of "spirits."