Golden bough
Golden boughCHAPTER 1. THE KING OF THE WOODCHAPTER 2. PRIESTLY KINGSCHAPTER 3. SYMPATHETIC MAGICCHAPTER 4. MAGIC AND RELIGIONCHAPTER 5. THE MAGICAL CONTROL OF THE WEATHERCHAPTER 6. MAGICIANS AS KINGSCHAPTER 7. INCARNATE HUMAN GODSCHAPTER 8. DEPARTMENTAL KINGS OF NATURECHAPTER 9. THE WORSHIP OF TREESCHAPTER 10. RELICS OF TREE WORSHIP IN MODERN EUROPECHAPTER 11. THE INFLUENCE OF THE SEXES ON VEGETATIONCHAPTER 12. THE SACRED MARRIAGECHAPTER 13. THE KINGS OF ROME AND ALBACHAPTER 14. THE SUCCESSION TO THE KINGDOM IN ANCIENT LATIUM; CHAPTER 15. THE WORSHIP OF THE OAKCHAPTER 16. DIANUS AND DIANACHAPTER 17. THE BURDEN OF ROYALTYCHAPTER 18. THE PERILS OF THE SOULCHAPTER 19. TABOOED ACTSCHAPTER 20. TABOOED PERSONSCHAPTER 21. TABOOED THINGSCHAPTER 22. TABOOED WORDSCHAPTER 23. OUR DEBT TO THE SAVAGECHAPTER 24. THE KILLING OF THE DIVINE KINGCHAPTER 25. TEMPORARY KINGSCHAPTER 26. SACRIFICE OF THE KING'S SONCHAPTER 27. SUCCESSION TO THE SOULCHAPTER 28. THE KILLING OF THE TREE-SPIRITCHAPTER 29. THE MYTH OF ADONISCHAPTER 30. ADONIS IN SYRIACHAPTER 31. ADONIS IN CYPRUSCHAPTER 32. THE RITUAL OF ADONISCHAPTER 33. THE GARDENS OF ADONISCHAPTER 34. THE MYTH AND RITUAL OF ATTISCHAPTER 35. ATTIS AS A GOD OF VEGETATIONCHAPTER 36. HUMAN REPRESENTATIVES OF ATTISCHAPTER 37. ORIENTAL RELIGIONS IN THE WESTCHAPTER 38. THE MYTH OF OSIRISCHAPTER 39. THE RITUAL OF OSIRISCHAPTER 40. THE NATURE OF OSIRISCHAPTER 41. ISISCHAPTER 42. OSIRIS AND THE SUNCHAPTER 43. DIONYSUSCHAPTER 44. DEMETER AND PERSEPHONECHAPTER 45. THE CORN-MOTHER AND THE CORN-MAIDEN IN NORTHERN EUROPECHAPTER 46. THE CORN-MOTHER IN MANY LANDSCHAPTER 47. LITYERSESCHAPTER 48. THE CORN-SPIRIT AS AN ANIMALCHAPTER 49. ANCIENT DEITIES OF VEGETATION AS ANIMALSCHAPTER 50. EATING THE GODCHAPTER 51. HOMEOPATHIC MAGIC OF A FLESH DIETCHAPTER 52. KILLING THE DIVINE ANIMALCHAPTER 53. THE PROPITIATION OF WILD ANIMALS BY HUNTERSCHAPTER 54. TYPES OF ANIMAL SACRAMENTCHAPTER 55. THE TRANSFERENCE OF EVILCHAPTER 56. THE PUBLIC EXPULSION OF EVILSCHAPTER 57. PUBLIC SCAPEGOATSCHAPTER 58. HUMAN SCAPEGOATS IN CLASSICAL ANTIQUITYCHAPTER 59. KILLING THE GOD IN MEXICOCHAPTER 60. BETWEEN HEAVEN AND EARTHCHAPTER 61. THE MYTH OF BALDERCHAPTER 62. THE FIRE-FESTIVALS OF EUROPECHAPTER 63. THE INTERPRETATION OF THE FIRE-FESTIVALSCHAPTER 64. THE BURNING OF HUMAN BEINGS IN THE FIRESCHAPTER 65. BALDER AND THE MISTLETOECHAPTER 66. THE EXTERNAL SOUL IN FOLK-TALESCHAPTER 67. THE EXTERNAL SOUL IN FOLK-CUSTOMCHAPTER 68. THE GOLDEN BOUGHCHAPTER 69. FAREWELL TO NEMICopyright
Golden bough
J. G. Frazer
CHAPTER 1. THE KING OF THE WOOD
Section 1. Diana and Virbius.WHO does not know Turner’s picture of the Golden Bough? The
scene, suffused with the golden glow of imagination in which the
divine mind of Turner steeped and transfigured even the fairest
natural landscape, is a dream-like vision of the little woodland
lake of Nemi— “Diana’s Mirror,” as it was called by the ancients.
No one who has seen that calm water, lapped in a green hollow of
the Alban hills, can ever forget it. The two characteristic Italian
villages which slumber on its banks, and the equally Italian palace
whose terraced gardens descend steeply to the lake, hardly break
the stillness and even the solitariness of the scene. Diana herself
might still linger by this lonely shore, still haunt these
woodlands wild. 1In antiquity this sylvan landscape was the scene
of a strange and recurring tragedy. On the northern shore of the
lake, right under the precipitous cliffs on which the modern
village of Nemi is perched, stood the sacred grove and sanctuary of
Diana Nemorensis, or Diana of the Wood. The lake and the grove were
sometimes known as the lake and grove of Aricia. But the town of
Aricia (the modern La Riccia) was situated about three miles off,
at the foot of the Alban Mount, and separated by a steep descent
from the lake, which lies in a small crater-like hollow on the
mountain side. In this sacred grove there grew a certain tree round
which at any time of the day, and probably far into the night, a
grim figure might be seen to prowl. In his hand he carried a drawn
sword, and he kept peering warily about him as if at every instant
he expected to be set upon by an enemy. He was a priest and a
murderer; and the man for whom he looked was sooner or later to
murder him and hold the priesthood in his stead. Such was the rule
of the sanctuary. A candidate for the priesthood could only succeed
to office by slaying the priest, and having slain him, he retained
office till he was himself slain by a stronger or a
craftier. 2The post which he held by this precarious tenure
carried with it the title of king; but surely no crowned head ever
lay uneasier, or was visited by more evil dreams, than his. For
year in, year out, in summer and winter, in fair weather and in
foul, he had to keep his lonely watch, and whenever he snatched a
troubled slumber it was at the peril of his life. The least
relaxation of his vigilance, the smallest abatement of his strength
of limb or skill of fence, put him in jeopardy; grey hairs might
seal his death-warrant. To gentle and pious pilgrims at the shrine
the sight of him might well seem to darken the fair landscape, as
when a cloud suddenly blots the sun on a bright day. The dreamy
blue of Italian skies, the dappled shade of summer woods, and the
sparkle of waves in the sun, can have accorded but ill with that
stern and sinister figure. Rather we picture to ourselves the scene
as it may have been witnessed by a belated wayfarer on one of those
wild autumn nights when the dead leaves are falling thick, and the
winds seem to sing the dirge of the dying year. It is a sombre
picture, set to melancholy music—the background of forest showing
black and jagged against a lowering and stormy sky, the sighing of
the wind in the branches, the rustle of the withered leaves under
foot, the lapping of the cold water on the shore, and in the
foreground, pacing to and fro, now in twilight and now in gloom, a
dark figure with a glitter of steel at the shoulder whenever the
pale moon, riding clear of the cloud-rack, peers down at him
through the matted boughs. 3The strange rule of this priesthood has no
parallel in classical antiquity, and cannot be explained from it.
To find an explanation we must go farther afield. No one will
probably deny that such a custom savours of a barbarous age, and,
surviving into imperial times, stands out in striking isolation
from the polished Italian society of the day, like a primaeval rock
rising from a smooth-shaven lawn. It is the very rudeness and
barbarity of the custom which allow us a hope of explaining it. For
recent researches into the early history of man have revealed the
essential similarity with which, under many superficial
differences, the human mind has elaborated its first crude
philosophy of life. Accordingly, if we can show that a barbarous
custom, like that of the priesthood of Nemi, has existed elsewhere;
if we can detect the motives which led to its institution; if we
can prove that these motives have operated widely, perhaps
universally, in human society, producing in varied circumstances a
variety of institutions specifically different but generically
alike; if we can show, lastly, that these very motives, with some
of their derivative institutions, were actually at work in
classical antiquity; then we may fairly infer that at a remoter age
the same motives gave birth to the priesthood of Nemi. Such an
inference, in default of direct evidence as to how the priesthood
did actually arise, can never amount to demonstration. But it will
be more or less probable according to the degree of completeness
with which it fulfils the conditions I have indicated. The object
of this book is, by meeting these conditions, to offer a fairly
probable explanation of the priesthood of
Nemi. 4I begin by setting forth the few facts and
legends which have come down to us on the subject. According to one
story the worship of Diana at Nemi was instituted by Orestes, who,
after killing Thoas, King of the Tauric Chersonese (the Crimea),
fled with his sister to Italy, bringing with him the image of the
Tauric Diana hidden in a faggot of sticks. After his death his
bones were transported from Aricia to Rome and buried in front of
the temple of Saturn, on the Capitoline slope, beside the temple of
Concord. The bloody ritual which legend ascribed to the Tauric
Diana is familiar to classical readers; it is said that every
stranger who landed on the shore was sacrificed on her altar. But
transported to Italy, the rite assumed a milder form. Within the
sanctuary at Nemi grew a certain tree of which no branch might be
broken. Only a runaway slave was allowed to break off, if he could,
one of its boughs. Success in the attempt entitled him to fight the
priest in single combat, and if he slew him he reigned in his stead
with the title of King of the Wood (Rex Nemorensis). According to
the public opinion of the ancients the fateful branch was that
Golden Bough which, at the Sibyl’s bidding, Aeneas plucked before
he essayed the perilous journey to the world of the dead. The
flight of the slave represented, it was said, the flight of
Orestes; his combat with the priest was a reminiscence of the human
sacrifices once offered to the Tauric Diana. This rule of
succession by the sword was observed down to imperial times; for
amongst his other freaks Caligula, thinking that the priest of Nemi
had held office too long, hired a more stalwart ruffian to slay
him; and a Greek traveller, who visited Italy in the age of the
Antonines, remarks that down to his time the priesthood was still
the prize of victory in a single
combat. 5Of the worship of Diana at Nemi some leading
features can still be made out. From the votive offerings which
have been found on the site, it appears that she was conceived of
especially as a huntress, and further as blessing men and women
with offspring, and granting expectant mothers an easy delivery.
Again, fire seems to have played a foremost part in her ritual. For
during her annual festival, held on the thirteenth of August, at
the hottest time of the year, her grove shone with a multitude of
torches, whose ruddy glare was reflected by the lake; and
throughout the length and breadth of Italy the day was kept with
holy rites at every domestic hearth. Bronze statuettes found in her
precinct represent the goddess herself holding a torch in her
raised right hand; and women whose prayers had been heard by her
came crowned with wreaths and bearing lighted torches to the
sanctuary in fulfilment of their vows. Some one unknown dedicated a
perpetually burning lamp in a little shrine at Nemi for the safety
of the Emperor Claudius and his family. The terra-cotta lamps which
have been discovered in the grove may perhaps have served a like
purpose for humbler persons. If so, the analogy of the custom to
the Catholic practice of dedicating holy candles in churches would
be obvious. Further, the title of Vesta borne by Diana at Nemi
points clearly to the maintenance of a perpetual holy fire in her
sanctuary. A large circular basement at the north-east corner of
the temple, raised on three steps and bearing traces of a mosaic
pavement, probably supported a round temple of Diana in her
character of Vesta, like the round temple of Vesta in the Roman
Forum. Here the sacred fire would seem to have been tended by
Vestal Virgins, for the head of a Vestal in terra-cotta was found
on the spot, and the worship of a perpetual fire, cared for by holy
maidens, appears to have been common in Latium from the earliest to
the latest times. Further, at the annual festival of the goddess,
hunting dogs were crowned and wild beasts were not molested; young
people went through a purificatory ceremony in her honour; wine was
brought forth, and the feast consisted of a kid cakes served piping
hot on plates of leaves, and apples still hanging in clusters on
the boughs. 6But Diana did not reign alone in her grove at
Nemi. Two lesser divinities shared her forest sanctuary. One was
Egeria, the nymph of the clear water which, bubbling from the
basaltic rocks, used to fall in graceful cascades into the lake at
the place called Le Mole, because here were established the mills
of the modern village of Nemi. The purling of the stream as it ran
over the pebbles is mentioned by Ovid, who tells us that he had
often drunk of its water. Women with child used to sacrifice to
Egeria, because she was believed, like Diana, to be able to grant
them an easy delivery. Tradition ran that the nymph had been the
wife or mistress of the wise king Numa, that he had consorted with
her in the secrecy of the sacred grove, and that the laws which he
gave the Romans had been inspired by communion with her divinity.
Plutarch compares the legend with other tales of the loves of
goddesses for mortal men, such as the love of Cybele and the Moon
for the fair youths Attis and Endymion. According to some, the
trysting-place of the lovers was not in the woods of Nemi but in a
grove outside the dripping Porta Capena at Rome, where another
sacred spring of Egeria gushed from a dark cavern. Every day the
Roman Vestals fetched water from this spring to wash the temple of
Vesta, carrying it in earthenware pitchers on their heads. In
Juvenal’s time the natural rock had been encased in marble, and the
hallowed spot was profaned by gangs of poor Jews, who were suffered
to squat, like gypsies, in the grove. We may suppose that the
spring which fell into the lake of Nemi was the true original
Egeria, and that when the first settlers moved down from the Alban
hills to the banks of the Tiber they brought the nymph with them
and found a new home for her in a grove outside the gates. The
remains of baths which have been discovered within the sacred
precinct, together with many terra-cotta models of various parts of
the human body, suggest that the waters of Egeria were used to heal
the sick, who may have signified their hopes or testified their
gratitude by dedicating likenesses of the diseased members to the
goddess, in accordance with a custom which is still observed in
many parts of Europe. To this day it would seem that the spring
retains medicinal virtues. 7The other of the minor deities at Nemi was
Virbius. Legend had it that Virbius was the young Greek hero
Hippolytus, chaste and fair, who learned the art of venery from the
centaur Chiron, and spent all his days in the greenwood chasing
wild beasts with the virgin huntress Artemis (the Greek counterpart
of Diana) for his only comrade. Proud of her divine society, he
spurned the love of women, and this proved his bane. For Aphrodite,
stung by his scorn, inspired his stepmother Phaedra with love of
him; and when he disdained her wicked advances she falsely accused
him to his father Theseus. The slander was believed, and Theseus
prayed to his sire Poseidon to avenge the imagined wrong. So while
Hippolytus drove in a chariot by the shore of the Saronic Gulf, the
sea-god sent a fierce bull forth from the waves. The terrified
horses bolted, threw Hippolytus from the chariot, and dragged him
at their hoofs to death. But Diana, for the love she bore
Hippolytus, persuaded the leech Aesculapius to bring her fair young
hunter back to life by his simples. Jupiter, indignant that a
mortal man should return from the gates of death, thrust down the
meddling leech himself to Hades. But Diana hid her favourite from
the angry god in a thick cloud, disguised his features by adding
years to his life, and then bore him far away to the dells of Nemi,
where she entrusted him to the nymph Egeria, to live there, unknown
and solitary, under the name of Virbius, in the depth of the
Italian forest. There he reigned a king, and there he dedicated a
precinct to Diana. He had a comely son, Virbius, who, undaunted by
his father’s fate, drove a team of fiery steeds to join the Latins
in the war against Aeneas and the Trojans. Virbius was worshipped
as a god not only at Nemi but elsewhere; for in Campania we hear of
a special priest devoted to his service. Horses were excluded from
the Arician grove and sanctuary because horses had killed
Hippolytus. It was unlawful to touch his image. Some thought that
he was the sun. “But the truth is,” says Servius, “that he is a
deity associated with Diana, as Attis is associated with the Mother
of the Gods, and Erichthonius with Minerva, and Adonis with Venus.”
What the nature of that association was we shall enquire presently.
Here it is worth observing that in his long and chequered career
this mythical personage has displayed a remarkable tenacity of
life. For we can hardly doubt that the Saint Hippolytus of the
Roman calendar, who was dragged by horses to death on the
thirteenth of August, Diana’s own day, is no other than the Greek
hero of the same name, who, after dying twice over as a heathen
sinner, has been happily resuscitated as a Christian
saint. 8It needs no elaborate demonstration to convince
us that the stories told to account for Diana’s worship at Nemi are
unhistorical. Clearly they belong to that large class of myths
which are made up to explain the origin of a religious ritual and
have no other foundation than the resemblance, real or imaginary,
which may be traced between it and some foreign ritual. The
incongruity of these Nemi myths is indeed transparent, since the
foundation of the worship is traced now to Orestes and now to
Hippolytus, according as this or that feature of the ritual has to
be accounted for. The real value of such tales is that they serve
to illustrate the nature of the worship by providing a standard
with which to compare it; and further, that they bear witness
indirectly to its venerable age by showing that the true origin was
lost in the mists of a fabulous antiquity. In the latter respect
these Nemi legends are probably more to be trusted than the
apparently historical tradition, vouched for by Cato the Elder,
that the sacred grove was dedicated to Diana by a certain Egerius
Baebius or Laevius of Tusculum, a Latin dictator, on behalf of the
peoples of Tusculum, Aricia, Lanuvium, Laurentum, Cora, Tibur,
Pometia, and Ardea. This tradition indeed speaks for the great age
of the sanctuary, since it seems to date its foundation sometime
before 495 B.C., the year in which Pometia was sacked by the Romans
and disappears from history. But we cannot suppose that so
barbarous a rule as that of the Arician priesthood was deliberately
instituted by a league of civilised communities, such as the Latin
cities undoubtedly were. It must have been handed down from a time
beyond the memory of man, when Italy was still in a far ruder state
than any known to us in the historical period. The credit of the
tradition is rather shaken than confirmed by another story which
ascribes the foundation of the sanctuary to a certain Manius
Egerius, who gave rise to the saying, “There are many Manii at
Aricia.” This proverb some explained by alleging that Manius
Egerius was the ancestor of a long and distinguished line, whereas
others thought it meant that there were many ugly and deformed
people at Aricia, and they derived the name Manius from Mania, a
bogey or bugbear to frighten children. A Roman satirist uses the
name Manius as typical of the beggars who lay in wait for pilgrims
on the Arician slopes. These differences of opinion, together with
the discrepancy between Manius Egerius of Aricia and Egerius
Laevius of Tusculum, as well as the resemblance of both names to
the mythical Egeria, excite our suspicion. Yet the tradition
recorded by Cato seems too circumstantial, and its sponsor too
respectable, to allow us to dismiss it as an idle fiction. Rather
we may suppose that it refers to some ancient restoration or
reconstruction of the sanctuary, which was actually carried out by
the confederate states. At any rate it testifies to a belief that
the grove had been from early times a common place of worship for
many of the oldest cities of the country, if not for the whole
Latin confederacy. 9Section 2. Artemis and
Hippolytus.I HAVE said that the Arician legends of Orestes and
Hippolytus, though worthless as history, have a certain value in so
far as they may help us to understand the worship at Nemi better by
comparing it with the ritual and myths of other sanctuaries. We
must ask ourselves, Why did the author of these legends pitch upon
Orestes and Hippolytus in order to explain Virbius and the King of
the Wood? In regard to Orestes, the answer is obvious. He and the
image of the Tauric Diana, which could only be appeased with human
blood, were dragged in to render intelligible the murderous rule of
succession to the Arician priesthood. In regard to Hippolytus the
case is not so plain. The manner of his death suggests readily
enough a reason for the exclusion of horses from the grove; but
this by itself seems hardly enough to account for the
identification. We must try to probe deeper by examining the
worship as well as the legend or myth of
Hippolytus. 1He had a famous sanctuary at his ancestral home
of Troezen, situated on that beautiful, almost landlocked bay,
where groves of oranges and lemons, with tall cypresses soaring
like dark spires above the garden of Hesperides, now clothe the
strip of fertile shore at the foot of the rugged mountains. Across
the blue water of the tranquil bay, which it shelters from the open
sea, rises Poseidon’s sacred island, its peaks veiled in the sombre
green of the pines. On this fair coast Hippolytus was worshipped.
Within his sanctuary stood a temple with an ancient image. His
service was performed by a priest who held office for life; every
year a sacrificial festival was held in his honour; and his
untimely fate was yearly mourned, with weeping and doleful chants,
by unwedded maids. Youths and maidens dedicated locks of their hair
in his temple before marriage. His grave existed at Troezen, though
the people would not show it. It has been suggested, with great
plausibility, that in the handsome Hippolytus, beloved of Artemis,
cut off in his youthful prime, and yearly mourned by damsels, we
have one of those mortal lovers of a goddess who appear so often in
ancient religion, and of whom Adonis is the most familiar type. The
rivalry of Artemis and Phaedra for the affection of Hippolytus
reproduces, it is said, under different names, the rivalry of
Aphrodite and Proserpine for the love of Adonis, for Phaedra is
merely a double of Aphrodite. The theory probably does no injustice
either to Hippolytus or to Artemis. For Artemis was originally a
great goddess of fertility, and, on the principles of early
religion, she who fertilises nature must herself be fertile, and to
be that she must necessarily have a male consort. On this view,
Hippolytus was the consort of Artemis at Troezen, and the shorn
tresses offered to him by the Troezenian youths and maidens before
marriage were designed to strengthen his union with the goddess,
and so to promote the fruitfulness of the earth, of cattle, and of
mankind. It is some confirmation of this view that within the
precinct of Hippolytus at Troezen there were worshipped two female
powers named Damia and Auxesia, whose connexion with the fertility
of the ground is unquestionable. When Epidaurus suffered from a
dearth, the people, in obedience to an oracle, carved images of
Damia and Auxesia out of sacred olive wood, and no sooner had they
done so and set them up than the earth bore fruit again. Moreover,
at Troezen itself, and apparently within the precinct of
Hippolytus, a curious festival of stone-throwing was held in honour
of these maidens, as the Troezenians called them; and it is easy to
show that similar customs have been practised in many lands for the
express purpose of ensuring good crops. In the story of the tragic
death of the youthful Hippolytus we may discern an analogy with
similar tales of other fair but mortal youths who paid with their
lives for the brief rapture of the love of an immortal goddess.
These hapless lovers were probably not always mere myths, and the
legends which traced their spilt blood in the purple bloom of the
violet, the scarlet stain of the anemone, or the crimson flush of
the rose were no idle poetic emblems of youth and beauty fleeting
as the summer flowers. Such fables contain a deeper philosophy of
the relation of the life of man to the life of nature—a sad
philosophy which gave birth to a tragic practice. What that
philosophy and that practice were, we shall learn later
on. 2Section 3. Recapitulation.WE can now perhaps understand why the ancients identified
Hippolytus, the consort of Artemis, with Virbius, who, according to
Servius, stood to Diana as Adonis to Venus, or Attis to the Mother
of the Gods. For Diana, like Artemis, was a goddess of fertility in
general, and of childbirth in particular. As such she, like her
Greek counterpart, needed a male partner. That partner, if Servius
is right, was Virbius. In his character of the founder of the
sacred grove and first king of Nemi, Virbius is clearly the
mythical predecessor or archetype of the line of priests who served
Diana under the title of Kings of the Wood, and who came, like him,
one after the other, to a violent end. It is natural, therefore, to
conjecture that they stood to the goddess of the grove in the same
relation in which Virbius stood to her; in short, that the mortal
King of the Wood had for his queen the woodland Diana herself. If
the sacred tree which he guarded with his life was supposed, as
seems probable, to be her special embodiment, her priest may not
only have worshipped it as his goddess but embraced it as his wife.
There is at least nothing absurd in the supposition, since even in
the time of Pliny a noble Roman used thus to treat a beautiful
beech-tree in another sacred grove of Diana on the Alban hills. He
embraced it, he kissed it, he lay under its shadow, he poured wine
on its trunk. Apparently he took the tree for the goddess. The
custom of physically marrying men and women to trees is still
practised in India and other parts of the East. Why should it not
have obtained in ancient Latium? 1Reviewing the evidence as a whole, we may
conclude that the worship of Diana in her sacred grove at Nemi was
of great importance and immemorial antiquity; that she was revered
as the goddess of woodlands and of wild creatures, probably also of
domestic cattle and of the fruits of the earth; that she was
believed to bless men and women with offspring and to aid mothers
in childbed; that her holy fire, tended by chaste virgins, burned
perpetually in a round temple within the precinct; that associated
with her was a water-nymph Egeria who discharged one of Diana’s own
functions by succouring women in travail, and who was popularly
supposed to have mated with an old Roman king in the sacred grove;
further, that Diana of the Wood herself had a male companion
Virbius by name, who was to her what Adonis was to Venus, or Attis
to Cybele; and, lastly, that this mythical Virbius was represented
in historical times by a line of priests known as Kings of the
Wood, who regularly perished by the swords of their successors, and
whose lives were in a manner bound up with a certain tree in the
grove, because so long as that tree was uninjured they were safe
from attack. 2Clearly these conclusions do not of themselves
suffice to explain the peculiar rule of succession to the
priesthood. But perhaps the survey of a wider field may lead us to
think that they contain in germ the solution of the problem. To
that wider survey we must now address ourselves. It will be long
and laborious, but may possess something of the interest and charm
of a voyage of discovery, in which we shall visit many strange
foreign lands, with strange foreign peoples, and still stranger
customs. The wind is in the shrouds: we shake out our sails to it,
and leave the coast of Italy behind us for a
time. 3
CHAPTER 2. PRIESTLY KINGS
THE questions which we have set ourselves to answer are
mainly two: first, why had Diana’s priest at Nemi, the King of the
Wood, to slay his predecessor? second, why before doing so had he
to pluck the branch of a certain tree which the public opinion of
the ancients identified with Virgil’s Golden
Bough? 1The first point on which we fasten is the
priest’s title. Why was he called the King of the Wood? Why was his
office spoken of as a kingdom? 2The union of a royal title with priestly duties
was common in ancient Italy and Greece. At Rome and in other cities
of Latium there was a priest called the Sacrificial King or King of
the Sacred Rites, and his wife bore the title of Queen of the
Sacred Rites. In republican Athens the second annual magistrate of
the state was called the King, and his wife the Queen; the
functions of both were religious. Many other Greek democracies had
titular kings, whose duties, so far as they are known, seem to have
been priestly, and to have centered round the Common Hearth of the
state. Some Greek states had several of these titular kings, who
held office simultaneously. At Rome the tradition was that the
Sacrificial King had been appointed after the abolition of the
monarchy in order to offer the sacrifices which before had been
offered by the kings. A similar view as to the origin of the
priestly kings appears to have prevailed in Greece. In itself the
opinion is not improbable, and it is borne out by the example of
Sparta, almost the only purely Greek state which retained the
kingly form of government in historical times. For in Sparta all
state sacrifices were offered by the kings as descendants of the
god. One of the two Spartan kings held the priesthood of Zeus
Lacedaemon, the other the priesthood of Heavenly
Zeus. 3This combination of priestly functions with royal
authority is familiar to every one. Asia Minor, for example, was
the seat of various great religious capitals peopled by thousands
of sacred slaves, and ruled by pontiffs who wielded at once
temporal and spiritual authority, like the popes of mediaeval Rome.
Such priest-ridden cities were Zela and Pessinus. Teutonic kings,
again, in the old heathen days seem to have stood in the position,
and to have exercised the powers, of high priests. The Emperors of
China offered public sacrifices, the details of which were
regulated by the ritual books. The King of Madagascar was
high-priest of the realm. At the great festival of the new year,
when a bullock was sacrificed for the good of the kingdom, the king
stood over the sacrifice to offer prayer and thanksgiving, while
his attendants slaughtered the animal. In the monarchical states
which still maintain their independence among the Gallas of Eastern
Africa, the king sacrifices on the mountain tops and regulates the
immolation of human victims; and the dim light of tradition reveals
a similar union of temporal and spiritual power, of royal and
priestly duties, in the kings of that delightful region of Central
America whose ancient capital, now buried under the rank growth of
the tropical forest, is marked by the stately and mysterious ruins
of Palenque. 4When we have said that the ancient kings were
commonly priests also, we are far from having exhausted the
religious aspect of their office. In those days the divinity that
hedges a king was no empty form of speech, but the expression of a
sober belief. Kings were revered, in many cases not merely as
priests, that is, as intercessors between man and god, but as
themselves gods, able to bestow upon their subjects and worshippers
those blessings which are commonly supposed to be beyond the reach
of mortals, and are sought, if at all, only by prayer and sacrifice
offered to superhuman and invisible beings. Thus kings are often
expected to give rain and sunshine in due season, to make the crops
grow, and so on. Strange as this expectation appears to us, it is
quite of a piece with early modes of thought. A savage hardly
conceives the distinction commonly drawn by more advanced peoples
between the natural and the supernatural. To him the world is to a
great extent worked by supernatural agents, that is, by personal
beings acting on impulses and motives like his own, liable like him
to be moved by appeals to their pity, their hopes, and their fears.
In a world so conceived he sees no limit to his power of
influencing the course of nature to his own advantage. Prayers,
promises, or threats may secure him fine weather and an abundant
crop from the gods; and if a god should happen, as he sometimes
believes, to become incarnate in his own person, then he need
appeal to no higher being; he, the savage, possesses in himself all
the powers necessary to further his own well-being and that of his
fellow-men. 5This is one way in which the idea of a man-god is
reached. But there is another. Along with the view of the world as
pervaded by spiritual forces, savage man has a different, and
probably still older, conception in which we may detect a germ of
the modern notion of natural law or the view of nature as a series
of events occurring in an invariable order without the intervention
of personal agency. The germ of which I speak is involved in that
sympathetic magic, as it may be called, which plays a large part in
most systems of superstition. In early society the king is
frequently a magician as well as a priest; indeed he appears to
have often attained to power by virtue of his supposed proficiency
in the black or white art. Hence in order to understand the
evolution of the kingship and the sacred character with which the
office has commonly been invested in the eyes of savage or
barbarous peoples, it is essential to have some acquaintance with
the principles of magic and to form some conception of the
extraordinary hold which that ancient system of superstition has
had on the human mind in all ages and all countries. Accordingly I
propose to consider the subject in some
detail. 6
CHAPTER 3. SYMPATHETIC MAGIC
Section 1. The Principles of
Magic.IF we analyse the principles of thought on which magic is
based, they will probably be found to resolve themselves into two:
first, that like produces like, or that an effect resembles its
cause; and, second, that things which have once been in contact
with each other continue to act on each other at a distance after
the physical contact has been severed. The former principle may be
called the Law of Similarity, the latter the Law of Contact or
Contagion. From the first of these principles, namely the Law of
Similarity, the magician infers that he can produce any effect he
desires merely by imitating it: from the second he infers that
whatever he does to a material object will affect equally the
person with whom the object was once in contact, whether it formed
part of his body or not. Charms based on the Law of Similarity may
be called Homoeopathic or Imitative Magic. Charms based on the Law
of Contact or Contagion may be called Contagious Magic. To denote
the first of these branches of magic the term Homoeopathic is
perhaps preferable, for the alternative term Imitative or Mimetic
suggests, if it does not imply, a conscious agent who imitates,
thereby limiting the scope of magic too narrowly. For the same
principles which the magician applies in the practice of his art
are implicitly believed by him to regulate the operations of
inanimate nature; in other words, he tacitly assumes that the Laws
of Similarity and Contact are of universal application and are not
limited to human actions. In short, magic is a spurious system of
natural law as well as a fallacious guide of conduct; it is a false
science as well as an abortive art. Regarded as a system of natural
law, that is, as a statement of the rules which determine the
sequence of events throughout the world, it may be called
Theoretical Magic: regarded as a set of precepts which human beings
observe in order to compass their ends, it may be called Practical
Magic. At the same time it is to be borne in mind that the
primitive magician knows magic only on its practical side; he never
analyses the mental processes on which his practice is based, never
reflects on the abstract principles involved in his actions. With
him, as with the vast majority of men, logic is implicit, not
explicit: he reasons just as he digests his food in complete
ignorance of the intellectual and physiological processes which are
essential to the one operation and to the other. In short, to him
magic is always an art, never a science; the very idea of science
is lacking in his undeveloped mind. It is for the philosophic
student to trace the train of thought which underlies the
magician’s practice; to draw out the few simple threads of which
the tangled skein is composed; to disengage the abstract principles
from their concrete applications; in short, to discern the spurious
science behind the bastard art. 1If my analysis of the magician’s logic is
correct, its two great principles turn out to be merely two
different misapplications of the association of ideas. Homoeopathic
magic is founded on the association of ideas by similarity:
contagious magic is founded on the association of ideas by
contiguity. Homoeopathic magic commits the mistake of assuming that
things which resemble each other are the same: contagious magic
commits the mistake of assuming that things which have once been in
contact with each other are always in contact. But in practice the
two branches are often combined; or, to be more exact, while
homoeopathic or imitative magic may be practised by itself,
contagious magic will generally be found to involve an application
of the homoeopathic or imitative principle. Thus generally stated
the two things may be a little difficult to grasp, but they will
readily become intelligible when they are illustrated by particular
examples. Both trains of thought are in fact extremely simple and
elementary. It could hardly be otherwise, since they are familiar
in the concrete, though certainly not in the abstract, to the crude
intelligence not only of the savage, but of ignorant and
dull-witted people everywhere. Both branches of magic, the
homoeopathic and the contagious, may conveniently be comprehended
under the general name of Sympathetic Magic, since both assume that
things act on each other at a distance through a secret sympathy,
the impulse being transmitted from one to the other by means of
what we may conceive as a kind of invisible ether, not unlike that
which is postulated by modern science for a precisely similar
purpose, namely, to explain how things can physically affect each
other through a space which appears to be
empty. 2It may be convenient to tabulate as follows the
branches of magic according to the laws of thought which underlie
them: 3I will now illustrate these two great branches of
sympathetic magic by examples, beginning with homoeopathic
magic. 4Section 2. Homoeopathic or Imitative
Magic.PERHAPS the most familiar application of the principle that
like produces like is the attempt which has been made by many
peoples in many ages to injure or destroy an enemy by injuring or
destroying an image of him, in the belief that, just as the image
suffers, so does the man, and that when it perishes he must die. A
few instances out of many may be given to prove at once the wide
diffusion of the practice over the world and its remarkable
persistence through the ages. For thousands of years ago it was
known to the sorcerers of ancient India, Babylon, and Egypt, as
well as of Greece and Rome, and at this day it is still resorted to
by cunning and malignant savages in Australia, Africa, and
Scotland. Thus the North American Indians, we are told, believe
that by drawing the figure of a person in sand, ashes, or clay, or
by considering any object as his body, and then pricking it with a
sharp stick or doing it any other injury, they inflict a
corresponding injury on the person represented. For example, when
an Ojebway Indian desires to work evil on any one, he makes a
little wooden image of his enemy and runs a needle into its head or
heart, or he shoots an arrow into it, believing that wherever the
needle pierces or the arrow strikes the image, his foe will the
same instant be seized with a sharp pain in the corresponding part
of his body; but if he intends to kill the person outright, he
burns or buries the puppet, uttering certain magic words as he does
so. The Peruvian Indians moulded images of fat mixed with grain to
imitate the persons whom they disliked or feared, and then burned
the effigy on the road where the intended victim was to pass. This
they called burning his soul. 1A Malay charm of the same sort is as follows.
Take parings of nails, hair, eyebrows, spittle, and so forth of
your intended victim, enough to represent every part of his person,
and then make them up into his likeness with wax from a deserted
bees’ comb. Scorch the figure slowly by holding it over a lamp
every night for seven nights, and say:
“It is not wax that I am scorching,It is the liver, heart, and spleen of So-and-so that I
scorch.” After the seventh time burn the figure, and your victim will
die. This charm obviously combines the principles of homoeopathic
and contagious magic; since the image which is made in the likeness
of an enemy contains things which once were in contact with him,
namely, his nails, hair, and spittle. Another form of the Malay
charm, which resembles the Ojebway practice still more closely, is
to make a corpse of wax from an empty bees’ comb and of the length
of a footstep; then pierce the eye of the image, and your enemy is
blind; pierce the stomach, and he is sick; pierce the head, and his
head aches; pierce the breast, and his breast will suffer. If you
would kill him outright, transfix the image from the head
downwards; enshroud it as you would a corpse; pray over it as if
you were praying over the dead; then bury it in the middle of a
path where your victim will be sure to step over it. In order that
his blood may not be on your head, you should say:
“It is not I who am burying him,It is Gabriel who is burying him.” Thus the guilt of the murder will be laid on the shoulders of
the archangel Gabriel, who is a great deal better able to bear it
than you are. 2If homoeopathic or imitative magic, working by
means of images, has commonly been practised for the spiteful
purpose of putting obnoxious people out of the world, it has also,
though far more rarely, been employed with the benevolent intention
of helping others into it. In other words, it has been used to
facilitate childbirth and to procure offspring for barren women.
Thus among the Bataks of Sumatra a barren woman, who would become a
mother, will make a wooden image of a child and hold it in her lap,
believing that this will lead to the fulfilment of her wish. In the
Babar Archipelago, when a woman desires to have a child, she
invites a man who is himself the father of a large family to pray
on her behalf to Upulero, the spirit of the sun. A doll is made of
red cotton, which the woman clasps in her arms, as if she would
suckle it. Then the father of many children takes a fowl and holds
it by the legs to the woman’s head, saying, “O Upulero, make use of
the fowl; let fall, let descend a child, I beseech you, I entreat
you, let a child fall and descend into my hands and on my lap.”
Then he asks the woman, “Has the child come?” and she answers,
“Yes, it is sucking already.” After that the man holds the fowl on
the husband’s head, and mumbles some form of words. Lastly, the
bird is killed and laid, together with some betel, on the domestic
place of sacrifice. When the ceremony is over, word goes about in
the village that the woman has been brought to bed, and her friends
come and congratulate her. Here the pretence that a child has been
born is a purely magical rite designed to secure, by means of
imitation or mimicry, that a child really shall be born; but an
attempt is made to add to the efficacy of the rite by means of
prayer and sacrifice. To put it otherwise, magic is here blent with
and reinforced by religion. 3Among some of the Dyaks of Borneo, when a woman
is in hard labour, a wizard is called in, who essays to facilitate
the delivery in a rational manner by manipulating the body of the
sufferer. Meantime another wizard outside the room exerts himself
to attain the same end by means which we should regard as wholly
irrational. He, in fact, pretends to be the expectant mother; a
large stone attached to his stomach by a cloth wrapt round his body
represents the child in the womb, and, following the directions
shouted to him by his colleague on the real scene of operations, he
moves this make-believe baby about on his body in exact imitation
of the movements of the real baby till the infant is
born. 4The same principle of make-believe, so dear to
children, has led other peoples to employ a simulation of birth as
a form of adoption, and even as a mode of restoring a supposed dead
person to life. If you pretend to give birth to a boy, or even to a
great bearded man who has not a drop of your blood in his veins,
then, in the eyes of primitive law and philosophy, that boy or man
is really your son to all intents and purposes. Thus Diodorus tells
us that when Zeus persuaded his jealous wife Hera to adopt
Hercules, the goddess got into bed, and clasping the burly hero to
her bosom, pushed him through her robes and let him fall to the
ground in imitation of a real birth; and the historian adds that in
his own day the same mode of adopting children was practised by the
barbarians. At the present time it is said to be still in use in
Bulgaria and among the Bosnian Turks. A woman will take a boy whom
she intends to adopt and push or pull him through her clothes; ever
afterwards he is regarded as her very son, and inherits the whole
property of his adoptive parents. Among the Berawans of Sarawak,
when a woman desires to adopt a grownup man or woman, a great many
people assemble and have a feast. The adopting mother, seated in
public on a raised and covered seat, allows the adopted person to
crawl from behind between her legs. As soon as he appears in front
he is stroked with the sweet-scented blossoms of the areca palm and
tied to a woman. Then the adopting mother and the adopted son or
daughter, thus bound together, waddle to the end of the house and
back again in front of all the spectators. The tie established
between the two by this graphic imitation of childbirth is very
strict; an offence committed against an adopted child is reckoned
more heinous than one committed against a real child. In ancient
Greece any man who had been supposed erroneously to be dead, and
for whom in his absence funeral rites had been performed, was
treated as dead to society till he had gone through the form of
being born again. He was passed through a woman’s lap, then washed,
dressed in swaddling-clothes, and put out to nurse. Not until this
ceremony had been punctually performed might he mix freely with
living folk. In ancient India, under similar circumstances, the
supposed dead man had to pass the first night after his return in a
tub filled with a mixture of fat and water; there he sat with
doubled-up fists and without uttering a syllable, like a child in
the womb, while over him were performed all the sacraments that
were wont to be celebrated over a pregnant woman. Next morning he
got out of the tub and went through once more all the other
sacraments he had formerly partaken of from his youth up; in
particular, he married a wife or espoused his old one over again
with due solemnity. 5Another beneficent use of homoeopathic magic is
to heal or prevent sickness. The ancient Hindoos performed an
elaborate ceremony, based on homoeopathic magic, for the cure of
jaundice. Its main drift was to banish the yellow colour to yellow
creatures and yellow things, such as the sun, to which it properly
belongs, and to procure for the patient a healthy red colour from a
living, vigorous source, namely, a red bull. With this intention, a
priest recited the following spell: “Up to the sun shall go thy
heart-ache and thy jaundice: in the colour of the red bull do we
envelop thee! We envelop thee in red tints, unto long life. May
this person go unscathed and be free of yellow colour! The cows
whose divinity is Rohini, they who, moreover, are themselves red
(rohinih)—in their every form and every strength we do envelop
thee. Into the parrots, into the thrush, do we put thy jaundice,
and, furthermore, into the yellow wagtail do we put thy jaundice.”
While he uttered these words, the priest, in order to infuse the
rosy hue of health into the sallow patient, gave him water to sip
which was mixed with the hair of a red bull; he poured water over
the animal’s back and made the sick man drink it; he seated him on
the skin of a red bull and tied a piece of the skin to him. Then in
order to improve his colour by thoroughly eradicating the yellow
taint, he proceeded thus. He first daubed him from head to foot
with a yellow porridge made of tumeric or curcuma (a yellow plant),
set him on a bed, tied three yellow birds, to wit, a parrot, a
thrush, and a yellow wagtail, by means of a yellow string to the
foot of the bed; then pouring water over the patient, he washed off
the yellow porridge, and with it no doubt the jaundice, from him to
the birds. After that, by way of giving a final bloom to his
complexion, he took some hairs of a red bull, wrapt them in gold
leaf, and glued them to the patient’s skin. The ancients held that
if a person suffering from jaundice looked sharply at a
stone-curlew, and the bird looked steadily at him, he was cured of
the disease. “Such is the nature,” says Plutarch, “and such the
temperament of the creature that it draws out and receives the
malady which issues, like a stream, through the eyesight.” So well
recognised among birdfanciers was this valuable property of the
stone-curlew that when they had one of these birds for sale they
kept it carefully covered, lest a jaundiced person should look at
it and be cured for nothing. The virtue of the bird lay not in its
colour but in its large golden eye, which naturally drew out the
yellow jaundice. Pliny tells of another, or perhaps the same, bird,
to which the Greeks gave their name for jaundice, because if a
jaundiced man saw it, the disease left him and slew the bird. He
mentions also a stone which was supposed to cure jaundice because
its hue resembled that of a jaundiced
skin. 6One of the great merits of homoeopathic magic is
that it enables the cure to be performed on the person of the
doctor instead of on that of his victim, who is thus relieved of
all trouble and inconvenience, while he sees his medical man writhe
in anguish before him. For example, the peasants of Perche, in
France, labour under the impression that a prolonged fit of
vomiting is brought about by the patient’s stomach becoming
unhooked, as they call it, and so falling down. Accordingly, a
practitioner is called in to restore the organ to its proper place.
After hearing the symptoms he at once throws himself into the most
horrible contortions, for the purpose of unhooking his own stomach.
Having succeeded in the effort, he next hooks it up again in
another series of contortions and grimaces, while the patient
experiences a corresponding relief. Fee five francs. In like manner
a Dyak medicine-man, who has been fetched in a case of illness,
will lie down and pretend to be dead. He is accordingly treated
like a corpse, is bound up in mats, taken out of the house, and
deposited on the ground. After about an hour the other medicine-men
loose the pretended dead man and bring him to life; and as he
recovers, the sick person is supposed to recover too. A cure for a
tumour, based on the principle of homoeopathic magic, is prescribed
by Marcellus of Bordeaux, court physician to Theodosius the First,
in his curious work on medicine. It is as follows. Take a root of
vervain, cut it across, and hang one end of it round the patient’s
neck, and the other in the smoke of the fire. As the vervain dries
up in the smoke, so the tumour will also dry up and disappear. If
the patient should afterwards prove ungrateful to the good
physician, the man of skill can avenge himself very easily by
throwing the vervain into water; for as the root absorbs the
moisture once more, the tumour will return. The same sapient writer
recommends you, if you are troubled with pimples, to watch for a
falling star, and then instantly, while the star is still shooting
from the sky, to wipe the pimples with a cloth or anything that
comes to hand. Just as the star falls from the sky, so the pimples
will fall from your body; only you must be very careful not to wipe
them with your bare hand, or the pimples will be transferred to
it. 7Further, homoeopathic and in general sympathetic
magic plays a great part in the measures taken by the rude hunter
or fisherman to secure an abundant supply of food. On the principle
that like produces like, many things are done by him and his
friends in deliberate imitation of the result which he seeks to
attain; and, on the other hand, many things are scrupulously
avoided because they bear some more or less fanciful resemblance to
others which would really be
disastrous. 8Nowhere is the theory of sympathetic magic more
systematically carried into practice for the maintenance of the
food supply than in the barren regions of Central Australia. Here
the tribes are divided into a number of totem clans, each of which
is charged with the duty of multiplying their totem for the good of
the community by means of magical ceremonies. Most of the totems
are edible animals and plants, and the general result supposed to
be accomplished by these ceremonies is that of supplying the tribe
with food and other necessaries. Often the rites consist of an
imitation of the effect which the people desire to produce; in
other words, their magic is homoeopathic or imitative. Thus among
the Warramunga the headman of the white cockatoo totem seeks to
multiply white cockatoos by holding an effigy of the bird and
mimicking its harsh cry. Among the Arunta the men of the witchetty
grub totem perform ceremonies for multiplying the grub which the
other members of the tribe use as food. One of the ceremonies is a
pantomime representing the fully-developed insect in the act of
emerging from the chrysalis. A long narrow structure of branches is
set up to imitate the chrysalis case of the grub. In this structure
a number of men, who have the grub for their totem, sit and sing of
the creature in its various stages. Then they shuffle out of it in
a squatting posture, and as they do so they sing of the insect
emerging from the chrysalis. This is supposed to multiply the
numbers of the grubs. Again, in order to multiply emus, which are
an important article of food, the men of the emu totem paint on the
ground the sacred design of their totem, especially the parts of
the emu which they like best to eat, namely, the fat and the eggs.
Round this painting the men sit and sing. Afterwards performers,
wearing head-dresses to represent the long neck and small head of
the emu, mimic the appearance of the bird as it stands aimlessly
peering about in all directions. 9The Indians of British Columbia live largely upon
the fish which abound in their seas and rivers. If the fish do not
come in due season, and the Indians are hungry, a Nootka wizard
will make an image of a swimming fish and put it into the water in
the direction from which the fish generally appear. This ceremony,
accompanied by a prayer to the fish to come, will cause them to
arrive at once. The islanders of Torres Straits use models of
dugong and turtles to charm dugong and turtle to their destruction.
The Toradjas of Central Celebes believe that things of the same
sort attract each other by means of their indwelling spirits or
vital ether. Hence they hang up the jawbones of deer and wild pigs
in their houses, in order that the spirits which animate these
bones may draw the living creatures of the same kind into the path
of the hunter. In the island of Nias, when a wild pig has fallen
into the pit prepared for it, the animal is taken out and its back
is rubbed with nine fallen leaves, in the belief that this will
make nine more wild pigs fall into the pit, just as the nine leaves
fell from the tree. In the East Indian islands of Saparoea,
Haroekoe, and Noessa Laut, when a fisherman is about to set a trap
for fish in the sea, he looks out for a tree, of which the fruit
has been much pecked at by birds. From such a tree he cuts a stout
branch and makes of it the principal post in his fish-trap; for he
believes that, just as the tree lured many birds to its fruit, so
the branch cut from that tree will lure many fish to the
trap. 10The western tribes of British New Guinea employ a
charm to aid the hunter in spearing dugong or turtle. A small
beetle, which haunts coco-nut trees, is placed in the hole of the
spear-haft into which the spear-head fits. This is supposed to make
the spear-head stick fast in the dugong or turtle, just as the
beetle sticks fast to a man’s skin when it bites him. When a
Cambodian hunter has set his nets and taken nothing, he strips
himself naked, goes some way off, then strolls up to the net as if
he did not see it, lets himself be caught in it, and cries, “Hillo!
what’s this? I’m afraid I’m caught.” After that the net is sure to
catch game. A pantomime of the same sort has been acted within the
living memory in our Scottish Highlands. The Rev. James Macdonald,
now of Reay in Caithness, tells us that in his boyhood when he was
fishing with companions about Loch Aline and they had had no bites
for a long time, they used to make a pretence of throwing one of
their fellows overboard and hauling him out of the water, as if he
were a fish; after that the trout or silloch would begin to nibble,
according as the boat was on fresh or salt water. Before a Carrier
Indian goes out to snare martens, he sleeps by himself for about
ten nights beside the fire with a little stick pressed down on his
neck. This naturally causes the fall-stick of his trap to drop down
on the neck of the marten. Among the Galelareese, who inhabit a
district in the northern part of Halmahera, a large island to the
west of New Guinea, it is a maxim that when you are loading your
gun to go out shooting, you should always put the bullet in your
mouth before you insert it in the gun; for by so doing you
practically eat the game that is to be hit by the bullet, which
therefore cannot possibly miss the mark. A Malay who has baited a
trap for crocodiles, and is awaiting results, is careful in eating
his curry always to begin by swallowing three lumps of rice
successively; for this helps the bait to slide more easily down the
crocodile’s throat. He is equally scrupulous not to take any bones
out of his curry; for, if he did, it seems clear that the
sharp-pointed stick on which the bait is skewered would similarly
work itself loose, and the crocodile would get off with the bait.
Hence in these circumstances it is prudent for the hunter, before
he begins his meal, to get somebody else to take the bones out of
his curry, otherwise he may at any moment have to choose between
swallowing a bone and losing the
crocodile. 11