Religions of Primitive PeoplesBrinton, Daniel G. (Daniel Garrison)
Religion
Religions of Primitive Peoples
Brinton, Daniel G. (Daniel Garrison)
Mythology; Religion; Religions -- History
This expression, universal in primitive conditions, is called fetishism,
polytheism, and idolatry, the worship of stocks and stones. But I wish to
impress upon you that nowhere in the world did man ever worship a stock
or a stone, as such. Every fetish, be it a rag-baby or a pebble from the
road-side, is adored, not as itself, but as possessing some mysterious,
transcendental power, by which it can influence the future. In some
obscure way it is the medium or agent of that supernatural Will, the
recognition of which is at the basis of every religion.
The relation of the fetish to the spiritual power behind it, though
everywhere recognised, was not easy to define. The Melanesians believe
that the souls of the dead act through bones; while the independent
spirits (_vui_) choose stones as their mediums; and they say that
these objects are, as it were, limbs or members of these incorporeal
powers.[152]
That the fetish itself is something else than the mere object, and is
certainly not identified with it (as writers have often asserted), is
evident from the words and actions of fetish worshippers. A South African
negro offered food to a tree in the presence of an European traveller.
The latter observed that a tree cannot eat. “Oh,” replied the negro,
“tree not fetish. Fetish spirit; not seen; live in tree.”[153]
If a fetish does not bring good luck, it is thrown away, burned, or
broken, as having lost its virtue, ceased to be the abode of power. One
of efficacy, on the other hand, will bring a good price, and such are
often sold and bought. Among the Papuans of New Guinea the fetishes are
small wooden dolls dressed in coloured rags. They are believed to be the
media through which the ancestral spirits operate. But if a man has bad
luck, he will beat, or break, or cast away, as of no account, such an
impotent object.[154]
These and scores of other examples which could be adduced disprove the
assertion that man, even in his lowest phases of religious life, ever
worshipped an object as an object. Even then, his intellectual insight
penetrated to the recognition of something higher than phenomena in
the world about him. As has been well said by a German writer, what
is really worshipped in the object anywhere is not itself but “a
transcendental _x_,” within and beyond it.[155]
It has been abundantly shown that amid the tribes of the West Coast of
Africa, to whose gods the term fetish, _feitiço_, was first applied
by the Portuguese, the recognition and worship of tribal and national
divinities and even of a Supreme Being, ruler and creator of the world,
are clearly displayed.[156]
The house of cards therefore, erected by Auguste Comte, to represent the
religious progress of the race, the first floor of which was fetishism,
the second polytheism, and the third monotheism, falls helplessly to the
ground.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account