J. G. Frazer
Golden bough
UUID: d4f8bf56-d181-11e5-85fa-0f7870795abd
This ebook was created with StreetLib Write (http://write.streetlib.com)by Simplicissimus Book Farm
Table of contents
CHAPTER 1. THE KING OF THE WOOD
CHAPTER 2. PRIESTLY KINGS
CHAPTER 3. SYMPATHETIC MAGIC
CHAPTER 4. MAGIC AND RELIGION
CHAPTER 5. THE MAGICAL CONTROL OF THE WEATHER
CHAPTER 6. MAGICIANS AS KINGS
CHAPTER 7. INCARNATE HUMAN GODS
CHAPTER 8. DEPARTMENTAL KINGS OF NATURE
CHAPTER 9. THE WORSHIP OF TREES
CHAPTER 10. RELICS OF TREE WORSHIP IN MODERN EUROPE
CHAPTER 11. THE INFLUENCE OF THE SEXES ON VEGETATION
CHAPTER 12. THE SACRED MARRIAGE
CHAPTER 13. THE KINGS OF ROME AND ALBA
CHAPTER 14. THE SUCCESSION TO THE KINGDOM IN ANCIENT LATIUM; CHAPTER 15. THE WORSHIP OF THE OAK
CHAPTER 16. DIANUS AND DIANA
CHAPTER 17. THE BURDEN OF ROYALTY
CHAPTER 18. THE PERILS OF THE SOUL
CHAPTER 19. TABOOED ACTS
CHAPTER 20. TABOOED PERSONS
CHAPTER 21. TABOOED THINGS
CHAPTER 22. TABOOED WORDS
CHAPTER 23. OUR DEBT TO THE SAVAGE
CHAPTER 24. THE KILLING OF THE DIVINE KING
CHAPTER 25. TEMPORARY KINGS
CHAPTER 26. SACRIFICE OF THE KING'S SON
CHAPTER 27. SUCCESSION TO THE SOUL
CHAPTER 28. THE KILLING OF THE TREE-SPIRIT
CHAPTER 29. THE MYTH OF ADONIS
CHAPTER 30. ADONIS IN SYRIA
CHAPTER 31. ADONIS IN CYPRUS
CHAPTER 32. THE RITUAL OF ADONIS
CHAPTER 33. THE GARDENS OF ADONIS
CHAPTER 34. THE MYTH AND RITUAL OF ATTIS
CHAPTER 35. ATTIS AS A GOD OF VEGETATION
CHAPTER 36. HUMAN REPRESENTATIVES OF ATTIS
CHAPTER 37. ORIENTAL RELIGIONS IN THE WEST
CHAPTER 38. THE MYTH OF OSIRIS
CHAPTER 39. THE RITUAL OF OSIRIS
CHAPTER 40. THE NATURE OF OSIRIS
CHAPTER 41. ISIS
CHAPTER 42. OSIRIS AND THE SUN
CHAPTER 43. DIONYSUS
CHAPTER 44. DEMETER AND PERSEPHONE
CHAPTER 45. THE CORN-MOTHER AND THE CORN-MAIDEN IN NORTHERN EUROPE
CHAPTER 46. THE CORN-MOTHER IN MANY LANDS
CHAPTER 47. LITYERSES
CHAPTER 48. THE CORN-SPIRIT AS AN ANIMAL
CHAPTER 49. ANCIENT DEITIES OF VEGETATION AS ANIMALS
CHAPTER 50. EATING THE GOD
CHAPTER 51. HOMEOPATHIC MAGIC OF A FLESH DIET
CHAPTER 52. KILLING THE DIVINE ANIMAL
CHAPTER 53. THE PROPITIATION OF WILD ANIMALS BY HUNTERS
CHAPTER 54. TYPES OF ANIMAL SACRAMENT
CHAPTER 55. THE TRANSFERENCE OF EVIL
CHAPTER 56. THE PUBLIC EXPULSION OF EVILS
CHAPTER 57. PUBLIC SCAPEGOATS
CHAPTER 58. HUMAN SCAPEGOATS IN CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY
CHAPTER 59. KILLING THE GOD IN MEXICO
CHAPTER 60. BETWEEN HEAVEN AND EARTH
CHAPTER 61. THE MYTH OF BALDER
CHAPTER 62. THE FIRE-FESTIVALS OF EUROPE
CHAPTER 63. THE INTERPRETATION OF THE FIRE-FESTIVALS
CHAPTER 64. THE BURNING OF HUMAN BEINGS IN THE FIRES
CHAPTER 65. BALDER AND THE MISTLETOE
CHAPTER 66. THE EXTERNAL SOUL IN FOLK-TALES
CHAPTER 67. THE EXTERNAL SOUL IN FOLK-CUSTOM
CHAPTER 68. THE GOLDEN BOUGH
CHAPTER 69. FAREWELL TO NEMI
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. 2
“
“
“
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!
Lesen Sie weiter in der vollständigen Ausgabe!