Handbook of American Indians north of Mexico / edited by Frederick Webb Hodge.

Date:
1907-1910
Catalogue details

Licence: In copyright

Credit: Handbook of American Indians north of Mexico / edited by Frederick Webb Hodge. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    985/1000 (page 967)
    belief in spiritual beings,’’ and as “the deep-lying doctrine of spiritual beings, which embodies the very essence of spiritualistic as opposed to materialistic philosophy”; and, linally, he says, “animism is, in fact, the groundwork of the philosophy of religion, from that of savages up to that of civilized nien.” He further makes the belief in spiritual beings “the minimum delinition _ of religion.” Hence, with Tylor, animism is broadly synonymous with religion. But, strict definition shows that a belief in spiritual beings, as such, did not, docs not, and can not form the sole material out of which primitive thought has developed its gods and deities. To this extent, therefore, animism does not fur- nish the key to an accurate and valid explanation of mythojogy and religion. Brinton (1S96) denies that there is any special religious activity taking the form of what Tvlor calls “animism,” and declares that the helief that inanimate objects possess souls or spirits is common to all religions and many philosophies, ami that it is not a trait characteristic of primitive faiths, but merely a sec()ndary phenomenon of the religious sentiment. Further, he insists that “the acceptance of the doctrine of ‘animism’ as a sufficient explanation of early cults has led to the neglect, in English-speaking lands, of their profounder analysis.” So far as is definitely known, no sup- port is found in the mythologies of North America for the doctrine of ancestor- worship. This doctrine seeks to show that savage men had evolved real gods from the shades of their own dead chiefs and great men. It is more than doubt- ful that such a thing has ever been done by man. (,'ompetent data and trained experience with the Indians of North America show that the dominant ideas of early savage thought precluded such a thing.' One of the most fundamental and characteristic beliefs of savage thought is the utter helplessness of man unaided by the magic power of some favoring being against the bodies and elements of his environment. The deities, the masters and controllers—-the gods of later times— differed greatly in strength of body and in the potency of the magic imwer exer- cised by them, in knowledge and in astuteness of mind; hut each in his own sphere and jurisdiction was generally sujtremeand incomprehensilrle. Human shades, or ghosts, did not or could not attain to these godlike gifts. To change, transform, create by metamori)hosis, or to govern, some body or element in nature, is at once the prerogative an<l the function of a master—a controller— humanly s{)eaking, a god. The attribution of power to do things magically, that is, to perform a func- tion in a mysterious and incomprehen- sible manner, was the fundamental pos- tulate of savage mind to account for the abilitv of the gods, the fictitious person- ages of its mythology, to perform the acts which are in fact the operations oi the forces of nature. To define one such man-being or jiersonage, the explanation, to be satisfactory, must be more than the mere statement of the imputation of life, mind, and the human form and attri- butes to an objective thing. There must also be stated the fact of the concomitant possession along with these of oreiida, or magic ])Ower, differing from individual to individual in efficacy, function, and scope of action. While linguistics may greatly aid in comprehending myths, it is nevertheless not always safe for determining the sub- stance of the thought, the concept; and the student must eschew the habit of giv- ing only an etymology rather than a defi- nition of the things having the names of the mythic persons, which ^ may be the subject of investigation. Fkymology may aid, hut without corroborative testi- mony it may mislead. Many are the causes which bring about the decline and disintegration of a myth or a cycle of myths of a definite people. The migration or violent disruption of the people, the attrition or the superposition of diverse alien cultures, or the change or reformation of the religion of the ]ieople based on a recasting of opinions and like causes, all tend to the decline and dis- memberment and the final loss of a myth or a mythology. All tribes of common blooil and speech are bound together by a common my- thology and by a religion founded on the teachings of that mythology. These doctrines deal with a vast body of all kinds of knowledge, arts, institutions, and customs. It is the creed of such a people that all their knowledge and wis- dom, all their rites and ceremonies, and all that they possess and all that they are socially and politically, have come to them through direct revelation from their gods, through the beneficence of the rul- ers of the bodies and elements of their environment. The social and iiolitical bonds of every known tribe are founded essentially on real or fictitious blood kinship, and the religious bonds that hold a people to its gods are founiled on faith in the truth of the teachings of their myths. No stronger homls than these are known to savage men. The disiaijttion of the.«e, by what- ever cause, results in the destruction of the people.