Can the conceptions of sorcery and magic be separated? It can be done if
we are willing on our own authority to put ourselves above the vagaries
of linguistic usage. Then sorcery is essentially the art of influencing
spirits by treating them like people under the same circumstances, that
is to say by appeasing them, reconciling them, making them more
favourably disposed to one, by intimidating them, by depriving them of
their power and by making them subject to one’s will; all that is
accomplished through the same methods that have been found effective
with living people. Magic, however, is something else; it does not
essentially concern itself with spirits, and uses special means, not
the ordinary psychological method. We can easily guess that magic is the
earlier and the more important part of animistic technique, for among
the means with which spirits are to be treated there are also found the
magic kind[98], and magic is also applied where spiritualization of
nature has not yet, as it seems to us, been accomplished.
Magic must serve the most varied purposes. It must subject the processes
of nature to the will of man, protect the individual against enemies and
dangers, and give him the power to injure his enemies. But the
principles on whose assumptions the magic activity is based, or rather
the principle of magic, is so evident that it was recognized by all
authors. If we may take the opinion of E. B. Tylor at its face value it
can be most tersely expressed in his words: “mistaking an ideal
connection for a real one”. We shall explain this characteristic in the
case of two groups of magic acts.
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