1. The Egyptian and the Aino Types of Sacrament
WE are now perhaps in a position to
understand the ambiguous behaviour of the Aino and
Gilyaks towards the bear. It has been shown that
the sharp line of demarcation which we draw between
mankind and the lower animals does not exist for the
savage. To him many of the other animals appear
as his equals or even his superiors, not merely in
brute force but in intelligence; and if choice or
necessity leads him to take their lives, he feels bound,
out of regard to his own safety, to do it in a way
which will be as inoffensive as possible not merely
to the living animal, but to its departed spirit and
to all the other animals of the same species, which
would resent an affront put upon one of their kind
much as a tribe of savages would revenge an injury
or insult offered to a tribesman. We have seen
that among the many devices by which the savage seeks
to atone for the wrong done by him to his animal victims
one is to show marked deference to a few chosen individuals
of the species, for such behaviour is apparently regarded
as entitling him to exterminate with impunity all
the rest of the species upon which he can lay hands.
This principle perhaps explains the attitude, at first
sight puzzling and contradictory, of the Aino towards
the bear. The flesh and skin of the bear regularly
afford them food and clothing; but since the bear
is an intelligent and powerful animal, it is necessary
to offer some satisfaction or atonement to the bear
species for the loss which it sustains in the death
of so many of its members. This satisfaction or
atonement is made by rearing young bears, treating
them, so long as they live, with respect, and killing
them with extraordinary marks of sorrow and devotion.
So the other bears are appeased, and do not resent
the slaughter of their kind by attacking the slayers
or deserting the country, which would deprive the
Aino of one of their means of subsistence.
Thus the primitive worship of animals
conforms to two types, which are in some respects
the converse of each other. On the one hand,
animals are worshipped, and are therefore neither killed
nor eaten. On the other hand, animals are worshipped
because they are habitually killed and eaten.
In both types of worship the animal is revered on
account of some benefit, positive or negative, which
the savage hopes to receive from it. In the former
worship the benefit comes either in the positive shape
of protection, advice, and help which the animal affords
the man, or in the negative shape of abstinence from
injuries which it is in the power of the animal to
inflict. In the latter worship the benefit takes
the material form of the animal’s flesh and
skin. The two types of worship are in some measure
antithetical: in the one, the animal is not eaten
because it is revered; in the other, it is revered
because it is eaten. But both may be practised
by the same people, as we see in the case of the North
American Indians, who, while they apparently revere
and spare their totem animals, also revere the animals
and fish upon which they subsist. The aborigines
of Australia have totemism in the most primitive form
known to us; but there is no clear evidence that they
attempt, like the North American Indians, to conciliate
the animals which they kill and eat. The means
which the Australians adopt to secure a plentiful
supply of game appear to be primarily based, not on
conciliation, but on sympathetic magic, a principle
to which the North American Indians also resort for
the same purpose. Hence, as the Australians undoubtedly
represent a ruder and earlier stage of human progress
than the American Indians, it would seem that before
hunters think of worshipping the game as a means of
ensuring an abundant supply of it, they seek to attain
the same end by sympathetic magic. This, again,
would show—what there is good reason for
believing—that sympathetic magic is one
of the earliest means by which man endeavours to adapt
the agencies of nature to his needs.
Corresponding to the two distinct
types of animal worship, there are two distinct types
of the custom of killing the animal god. On the
one hand, when the revered animal is habitually spared,
it is nevertheless killed—and sometimes
eaten—on rare and solemn occasions.
Examples of this custom have been already given and
an explanation of them offered. On the other
hand, when the revered animal is habitually killed,
the slaughter of any one of the species involves the
killing of the god, and is atoned for on the spot by
apologies and sacrifices, especially when the animal
is a powerful and dangerous one; and, in addition
to this ordinary and everyday atonement, there is
a special annual atonement, at which a select individual
of the species is slain with extraordinary marks of
respect and devotion. Clearly the two types of
sacramental killing—the Egyptian and the
Aino types, as we may call them for distinction—are
liable to be confounded by an observer; and, before
we can say to which type any particular example belongs,
it is necessary to ascertain whether the animal sacramentally
slain belongs to a species which is habitually spared,
or to one which is habitually killed by the tribe.
In the former case the example belongs to the Egyptian
type of sacrament, in the latter to the Aino type.
The practice of pastoral tribes appears
to furnish examples of both types of sacrament.
“Pastoral tribes,” says Adolf Bastian,
“being sometimes obliged to sell their herds
to strangers who may handle the bones disrespectfully,
seek to avert the danger which such a sacrilege would
entail by consecrating one of the herd as an object
of worship, eating it sacramentally in the family circle
with closed doors, and afterwards treating the bones
with all the ceremonious respect which, strictly speaking,
should be accorded to every head of cattle, but which,
being punctually paid to the representative animal,
is deemed to be paid to all. Such family meals
are found among various peoples, especially those
of the Caucasus. When amongst the Abchases the
shepherds in spring eat their common meal with their
loins girt and their staves in their hands, this may
be looked upon both as a sacrament and as an oath
of mutual help and support. For the strongest
of all oaths is that which is accompanied with the
eating of a sacred substance, since the perjured person
cannot possibly escape the avenging god whom he has
taken into his body and assimilated.” This
kind of sacrament is of the Aino or expiatory type,
since it is meant to atone to the species for the
possible ill-usage of individuals. An expiation,
similar in principle but different in details, is
offered by the Kalmucks to the sheep, whose flesh
is one of their staple foods. Rich Kalmucks are
in the habit of consecrating a white ram under the
title of “the ram of heaven” or “the
ram of the spirit.” The animal is never
shorn and never sold; but when it grows old and its
owner wishes to consecrate a new one, the old ram
must be killed and eaten at a feast to which the neighbours
are invited. On a lucky day, generally in autumn
when the sheep are fat, a sorcerer kills the old ram,
after sprinkling it with milk. Its flesh is eaten;
the skeleton, with a portion of the fat, is burned
on a turf altar; and the skin, with the head and feet,
is hung up.
An example of a sacrament of the Egyptian
type is furnished by the Todas, a pastoral people
of Southern India, who subsist largely upon the milk
of their buffaloes. Amongst them “the buffalo
is to a certain degree held sacred” and “is
treated with great kindness, even with a degree of
adoration, by the people.” They never eat
the flesh of the cow buffalo, and as a rule abstain
from the flesh of the male. But to the latter
rule there is a single exception. Once a year
all the adult males of the village join in the ceremony
of killing and eating a very young male calf—seemingly
under a month old. They take the animal into
the dark recesses of the village wood, where it is
killed with a club made from the sacred tree of the
Todas (the Millingtonia). A sacred fire
having been made by the rubbing of sticks, the flesh
of the calf is roasted on the embers of certain trees,
and is eaten by the men alone, women being excluded
from the assembly. This is the only occasion on
which the Todas eat buffalo flesh. The Madi or
Moru tribe of Central Africa, whose chief wealth is
their cattle, though they also practise agriculture,
appear to kill a lamb sacramentally on certain solemn
occasions. The custom is thus described by Dr.
Felkin: “A remarkable custom is observed
at stated times—once a year, I am led to
believe. I have not been able to ascertain what
exact meaning is attached to it. It appears,
however, to relieve the people’s minds, for
beforehand they evince much sadness, and seem very
joyful when the ceremony is duly accomplished.
The following is what takes place: A large concourse
of people of all ages assemble, and sit down round
a circle of stones, which is erected by the side of
a road (really a narrow path). A very choice
lamb is then fetched by a boy, who leads it four times
round the assembled people. As it passes they
pluck off little bits of its fleece and place them
in their hair, or on to some other part of their body.
The lamb is then led up to the stones, and there killed
by a man belonging to a kind of priestly order, who
takes some of the blood and sprinkles it four times
over the people. He then applies it individually.
On the children he makes a small ring of blood over
the lower end of the breast bone, on women and girls
he makes a mark above the breasts, and the men he
touches on each shoulder. He then proceeds to
explain the ceremony, and to exhort the people to
show kindness. . . . When this discourse, which
is at times of great length, is over, the people rise,
each places a leaf on or by the circle of stones, and
then they depart with signs of great joy. The
lamb’s skull is hung on a tree near the stones,
and its flesh is eaten by the poor. This ceremony
is observed on a small scale at other times. If
a family is in any great trouble, through illness
or bereavement, their friends and neighbours come
together and a lamb is killed; this is thought to
avert further evil. The same custom prevails at
the grave of departed friends, and also on joyful
occasions, such as the return of a son home after
a very prolonged absence.” The sorrow thus
manifested by the people at the annual slaughter of
the lamb seems to show that the lamb slain is a sacred
or divine animal, whose death is mourned by his worshippers,
just as the death of the sacred buzzard was mourned
by the Californians and the death of the Theban ram
by the Egyptians. The smearing each of the worshippers
with the blood of the lamb is a form of communion
with the divinity; the vehicle of the divine life
is applied externally instead of being taken internally,
as when the blood is drunk or the flesh eaten.
2. Processions with Sacred Animals
THE FORM of communion in which the
sacred animal is taken from house to house, that all
may enjoy a share of its divine influence, has been
exemplified by the Gilyak custom of promenading the
bear through the village before it is slain.
A similar form of communion with the sacred snake
is observed by a Snake tribe in the Punjaub.
Once a year in the month of September the snake is
worshipped by all castes and religions for nine days
only. At the end of August the Mirasans, especially
those of the Snake tribe, make a snake of dough which
they paint black and red, and place on a winnowing
basket. This basket they carry round the village,
and on entering any house they say: “God
be with you all! May every ill be far! May
our patron’s (Gugga’s) word thrive!”
Then they present the basket with the snake, saying:
“A small cake of flour: a little bit of
butter: if you obey the snake, you and yours
shall thrive!” Strictly speaking, a cake and
butter should be given, but it is seldom done.
Every one, however, gives something, generally a handful
of dough or some corn. In houses where there
is a new bride or whence a bride has gone, or where
a son has been born, it is usual to give a rupee and
a quarter, or some cloth. Sometimes the bearers
of the snake also sing:
“Give the snake a piece of cloth,
and he will send a lively bride!”
When every house has been thus visited,
the dough snake is buried and a small grave is erected
over it. Thither during the nine days of September
the women come to worship. They bring a basin
of curds, a small portion of which they offer at the
snake’s grave, kneeling on the ground and touching
the earth with their foreheads. Then they go
home and divide the rest of the curds among the children.
Here the dough snake is clearly a substitute for a
real snake. Indeed, in districts where snakes
abound the worship is offered, not at the grave of
the dough snake, but in the jungles where snakes are
known to be. Besides this yearly worship, performed
by all the people, the members of the Snake tribe
worship in the same way every morning after a new
moon. The Snake tribe is not uncommon in the Punjaub.
Members of it will not kill a snake, and they say that
its bite does not hurt them. If they find a dead
snake, they put clothes on it and give it a regular
funeral.
Ceremonies closely analogous to this
Indian worship of the snake have survived in Europe
into recent times, and doubtless date from a very
primitive paganism. The best-known example is
the “hunting of the wren.” By many
European peoples—the ancient Greeks and
Romans, the modern Italians, Spaniards, French, Germans,
Dutch, Danes, Swedes, English, and Welsh—the
wren has been designated the king, the little king,
the king of birds, the hedge king, and so forth, and
has been reckoned amongst those birds which it is extremely
unlucky to kill. In England it is supposed that
if any one kills a wren or harries its nest, he will
infallibly break a bone or meet with some dreadful
misfortune within the year; sometimes it is thought
that the cows will give bloody milk. In Scotland
the wren is called “the Lady of Heaven’s
hen,” and boys say:
“Malisons, malisons,
mair than ten,
That harry the Ladye
of Heaven’s hen!”
At Saint Donan, in Brittany, people
believe that if children touch the young wrens in
the nest, they will suffer from the fire of St. Lawrence,
that is, from pimples on the face, legs, and so on.
In other parts of France it is thought that if a person
kills a wren or harries its nest, his house will be
struck by lightning, or that the fingers with which
he did the deed will shrivel up and drop off, or at
least be maimed, or that his cattle will suffer in
their feet.
Notwithstanding such beliefs, the
custom of annually killing the wren has prevailed
widely both in this country and in France. In
the Isle of Man down to the eighteenth century the
custom was observed on Christmas Eve, or rather Christmas
morning. On the twenty-fourth of December, towards
evening, all the servants got a holiday; they did
not go to bed all night, but rambled about till the
bells rang in all the churches at midnight. When
prayers were over, they went to hunt the wren, and
having found one of these birds they killed it and
fastened it to the top of a long pole with its wings
extended. Thus they carried it in procession
to every house chanting the following rhyme:
“We hunted the wren for Robin
the Bobbin,
We hunted the wren for Jack
of the Can,
We hunted the wren for Robin
the Bobbin,
We hunted the wren for every
one.”
When they had gone from house to house
and collected all the money they could, they laid
the wren on a bier and carried it in procession to
the parish churchyard, where they made a grave and
buried it “with the utmost solemnity, singing
dirges over her in the Manks language, which they
call her knell; after which Christmas begins.”
The burial over, the company outside the churchyard
formed a circle and danced to music.
A writer of the eighteenth century
says that in Ireland the wren “is still hunted
and killed by the peasants on Christmas Day, and on
the following (St. Stephen’s Day) he is carried
about, hung by the leg, in the centre of two hoops,
crossing each other at right angles, and a procession
made in every village, of men, women, and children,
singing an Irish catch, importing him to be the king
of all birds.” Down to the present time
the “hunting of the wren” still takes place
in parts of Leinster and Connaught. On Christmas
Day or St. Stephen’s Day the boys hunt and kill
the wren, fasten it in the middle of a mass of holly
and ivy on the top of a broomstick, and on St. Stephen’s
Day go about with it from house to house, singing:
“The wren, the wren, the king
of all birds,
St. Stephen’s Day was
caught in the furze;
Although he is little, his
family’s great,
I pray you, good landlady,
give us a treat.”
Money or food (bread, butter, eggs,
etc.) were given them, upon which they feasted
in the evening.
In the first half of the nineteenth
century similar customs were still observed in various
parts of the south of France. Thus at Carcassone,
every year on the first Sunday of December the young
people of the street Saint Jean used to go out of the
town armed with sticks, with which they beat the bushes,
looking for wrens. The first to strike down one
of these birds was proclaimed King. Then they
returned to the town in procession, headed by the King,
who carried the wren on a pole. On the evening
of the last day of the year the King and all who had
hunted the wren marched through the streets of the
town to the light of torches, with drums beating and
fifes playing in front of them. At the door of
every house they stopped, and one of them wrote with
chalk on the door vive le roi! with the number
of the year which was about to begin. On the morning
of Twelfth Day the King again marched in procession
with great pomp, wearing a crown and a blue mantle
and carrying a sceptre. In front of him was borne
the wren fastened to the top of a pole, which was
adorned with a verdant wreath of olive, of oak, and
sometimes of mistletoe grown on an oak. After
hearing high mass in the parish church of St. Vincent,
surrounded by his officers and guards, the King visited
the bishop, the mayor, the magistrates, and the chief
inhabitants, collecting money to defray the expenses
of the royal banquet which took place in the evening
and wound up with a dance.
The parallelism between this custom
of “hunting the wren” and some of those
which we have considered, especially the Gilyak procession
with the bear, and the Indian one with the snake, seems
too close to allow us to doubt that they all belong
to the same circle of ideas. The worshipful animal
is killed with special solemnity once a year; and
before or immediately after death he is promenaded
from door to door, that each of his worshippers may
receive a portion of the divine virtues that are supposed
to emanate from the dead or dying god. Religious
processions of this sort must have had a great place
in the ritual of European peoples in prehistoric times,
if we may judge from the numerous traces of them which
have survived in folk-custom. For example, on
the last day of the year, or Hogmanay as it was called,
it used to be customary in the Highlands of Scotland
for a man to dress himself up in a cow’s hide
and thus attired to go from house to house, attended
by young fellows, each of them armed with a staff,
to which a bit of raw hide was tied. Round every
house the hide-clad man used to run thrice deiseal,
that is, according to the course of the sun, so as
to keep the house on his right hand; while the others
pursued him, beating the hide with their staves and
thereby making a loud noise like the beating of a
drum. In this disorderly procession they also
struck the walls of the house. On being admitted,
one of the party, standing within the threshold, pronounced
a blessing on the family in these words: “May
God bless the house and all that belongs to it, cattle,
stones, and timber! In plenty of meat, of bed
and body clothes, and health of men may it ever abound!”
Then each of the party singed in the fire a little
bit of the hide which was tied to his staff; and having
done so he applied the singed hide to the nose of every
person and of every domestic animal belonging to the
house. This was imagined to secure them from
diseases and other misfortunes, particularly from
witchcraft, throughout the ensuing year. The whole
ceremony was called calluinn because of the
great noise made in beating the hide. It was
observed in the Hebrides, including St. Kilda, down
to the second half of the eighteenth century at least,
and it seems to have survived well into the nineteenth
century.