Ritual and belief : $b Studies in the history of religion — John Shaqi
Ritual and belief : $b Studies in the history of religionHartland, Edwin Sidney
Religion
Ritual and belief : $b Studies in the history of religion
Hartland, Edwin Sidney
Ethnopsychology; Magic; Religion; Rites and ceremonies
The late Mr Andrew Lang was the first seriously to consider the
questions involved. His answer, given in _The Making of Religion_
(1898), was twofold. On the one hand, he suggested that “the savage
theory of the soul may be based, at least in part, on
experiences”--hypnotism, clairvoyance, hallucination, and so
forth--“which cannot at present be made to fit into any purely
materialistic system of the universe.” On the other hand, he contended
that “the idea of God, in its earliest known shape, need not logically
be derived from the idea of spirit, however that idea itself may have
been attained or {ix} evolved.” In this he was aiming partly at Sir
Edward Tylor’s theory of Animism, as developed in the last of his
famous chapters on that subject, partly at the theory of the ancient
sceptic Euhemerus, revived and championed within recent years by
Herbert Spencer and Grant Allen, that gods had been developed out of
the ghosts of dead men. He sought to draw a broad distinction between
the two concepts, that of a god and that of a spirit of any sort. He
claimed that the idea of God was earlier than that of a spirit, and
that “a relatively Supreme God,” often expressly described as Creator,
existing before death came into the world, and practically eternal,
had everywhere preceded the propitiation of the dead. He did not
commit himself to any definite opinion as to how this idea of a
Supreme God was reached by the rude forefathers of the race. But when
he oracularly observed, “The hypothesis of St Paul seems not the most
unsatisfactory,” it is no wonder that orthodox readers understood by
that expression a primitive revelation, whereas what he meant was the
argument from Design as stated in Rom. i. 19, 20. Though Lang’s book,
therefore, was hailed as a sign that anthropological science was after
all coming round to the support of the old orthodoxy, he himself was
too true a sceptic to fall satisfactorily into line. In fact, he
solved nothing. The “High Gods” of the lowest savages must have had
some origin, must have been evolved out of conceptions lower or more
indefinite.
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