word is naturally used in accordance with the native conception of the character of all power and influence as supernatural. If a man has been successful in fighting, it has not been his natural strength of arm, quickness of eye or readiness of resource that has won success; he has certainly got the _mana_ of a spirit or of some deceased warrior to empower him, conveyed in an amulet of a stone round his neck, or a tuft of leaves in his belt, in a tooth hung upon a finger of his bow-hand, or in the form of words with which he brings supernatural assistance to his side. If a man’s pigs multiply, and his gardens are productive, it is not because he is industrious and looks after his property, but because of the stones full of _mana_ for pigs and yams that he possesses. Of course a yam naturally grows when planted; that is well known; but it will not be very large unless _mana_ comes into play; a canoe will not be swift unless _mana_ be brought to bear upon it, a net will not catch many fish nor an arrow inflict a mortal wound.” Such a power or influence as this is of course not physical, though it may show itself “in physical force or in any kind of power or excellence which a man possesses.” Finally, “all Melanesian religion consists, in fact, in getting this _mana_ for one’s self, or getting it used for one’s benefit--all religion, that is, as far as religious practices go, prayers and sacrifices.”[50.1] (The very intention that animates the Fiote rites of fetishism.) It is not easy to formulate a clear idea of the original source of _mana_. It is said to be impersonal, to be present in the atmosphere of life and communicable to persons and to things. To that extent it resembles the {51} impersonal power or potentiality we have found elsewhere. But wherever it is manifested it is connected with some personal being who originates and directs it.[51.1] It is not a quality inherent in men of more than ordinary power and skill. “If a man,” writes Bishop Codrington, “has been successful in fighting, … he has certainly got the _mana_ of a spirit or of some deceased ancestor to empower him.” And again: “No man has this power of his own; all that he does is done by the aid of personal beings, ghosts or spirits; he cannot be said, as a spirit can, to be _mana_ himself, using the word to express a quality; he can be said to have _mana_, it may be said to be with him, the word being used as a substantive.”[51.2] It would thus seem as if it were an essential characteristic not of personal beings--even of powerful personal beings--in general, but belonging to the world of spirits, including the spirits of the dead. Yet not to all spirits; for elsewhere we read: “It must not be supposed that every ghost becomes an object of worship,” as a source of _mana_. “A man in danger may call upon his father, his grandfather, or his uncle; his nearness of kin is sufficient ground for it. The ghost who is to be worshipped is the