So the savage concludes that there must be a giant living in the cliff,
who threw stones at him, with evil intent; and he concludes in like wise
concerning most other natural phenomena. There is something in them
which will hurt him, and therefore likes to hurt him: and if he cannot
destroy them, and so deliver himself, his fear of them grows quite
boundless. There are hundreds of natural objects on which he learns to
look with the same eyes as the little boys of Teneriffe look on the
useless and poisonous _Euphorbia canariensis_. It is to them--according
to Mr. Piazzi Smyth--a demon who would kill them, if it could only run
after them; but as it cannot, they shout Spanish curses at it, and pelt
it with volleys of stones, "screeching with elfin joy, and using worse
names than ever, when the poisonous milk spurts out from its bruised
stalks."
And if such be the attitude of the uneducated man towards the permanent
terrors of nature, what will it be towards those which are sudden and
seemingly capricious?--towards storms, earthquakes, floods, blights,
pestilences? We know too well what it has been--one of blind, and
therefore often cruel, fear. How could it be otherwise? Was
Theophrastus's superstitious man so very foolish for pouring oil on every
round stone? I think there was a great deal to be said for him. This
worship of Baetyli was rational enough. They were aerolites, fallen from
heaven. Was it not as well to be civil to such messengers from above?--to
testify by homage to them due awe of the being who had thrown them at
men, and who though he had missed his shot that time, might not miss it
the next? I think if we, knowing nothing of either gunpowder, astronomy,
or Christianity, saw an Armstrong bolt fall within five miles of London,
we should be inclined to be very respectful to it indeed. So the
aerolites, or glacial boulders, or polished stone weapons of an extinct
race, which looked like aerolites, were the children of Ouranos the
heaven, and had souls in them. One, by one of those strange
transformations in which the logic of unreason indulges, the image of
Diana of the Ephesians, which fell down from Jupiter; another was the
Ancile, the holy shield which fell from the same place in the days of
Numa Pompilius, and was the guardian genius of Rome; and several more
became notable for ages.
Why not? The uneducated man of genius, unacquainted alike with
metaphysics and with biology, sees, like a child, a personality in every
strange and sharply-defined object. A cloud like an angel may be an
angel; a bit of crooked root like a man may be a man turned into
wood--perhaps to be turned back again at its own will. An erratic block
has arrived where it is by strange unknown means. Is not that an
evidence of its personality? Either it has flown hither itself, or some
one has thrown it. In the former case, it has life, and is
proportionally formidable; in the latter, he who had thrown it is
formidable.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account