must form, and the volitional hypothesis satisfied him, as it does still the larger part of the human race, both civilised and uncivilised. Civilised man, as the existence of Theologism proves, still finds the hypothesis needful. Indeed, the learned even now explain by it what is unusual in their experience, as Comte has shown. Science, as we all know, is ceaselessly widening its area, and encroaching upon that dominated by theological fictions; but it will not completely absorb them until it supplies-what still constitutes their main strength-a religious synthesis, satisfying all man's moral and intellectual needs. Fetichism did this, and indeed still does this, as may be easily verified, especially for uncivilised man.

We shall never rightly understand Fetichism if we encumber ourselves with a learned theory to explain it. It is one, and not the least serious, of the disadvantages we labour under in interpreting the beliefs of primitive man that we bring monotheistic notions to the Fetich worshipper and nascent polytheist. He never brings them to us. The notion of a great Spirit is simply inconceivable to him, as to us. "A friend of Mr. Lang's" (" The Aborigines of Australia," p. 31) "tried long and patiently to make a very intelligent docile Australian black understand his existence without a body, but the black never could keep his countenance, and generally made an excuse to get away. One day the teacher watched, and found that he went to have a hearty fit of laughter at the absurdity of the idea of a man living and going about without arms, legs, or mouth to eat. For a long time he could not believe that the gentleman was serious; and when he did realise it, the more serious the teacher was the more ludicrous the whole affair appeared to the black." In this as in other matters "the eye only brings with it that which it has the power of seeing." To represent the notions of the less civilised of mankind, travellers and missionaries should empty themselves of all their own preconceived notions, and free themselves from their bias to interpret them after a later theological development. The books of such persons are worth little, because they do not do so; indeed, many of them are worse than worthless-they are misleading. What is wanted is a reflex, so far as it is attainable, of the mind of a savage, not a reflex of the mind of a missionary or traveller through the medium of that of a savage. Of the prejudices of travellers or missionaries we have enough usque ad nauseam.

It is in the most primitive condition of the Theological stage-the Fetichist-lie the root ideas of all mythologies. The hypothesis of Fetichism explained such facts as pressed disagreeably upon man's attention, and these were numerous enough, for he found himself in a world so inimical that the animal and vegetable kingdoms constantly threatened his very existence, unless he obtained the mastery over either or both of them. We suppose it nearly impossible for us to conceive how numerous his enemies were. Turn where he would, he found foes. The elements showed him no pity, the night brought no quiet or repose, while the day renewed his life struggle. Ever had he to be on the alert, for nature in its thousand forms seemed conspiring to his destruction. Hunger and thirst, terrible but beneficent instincts, led him to conquer his native indolence, and roused him to keen activity. Was it strange that his theory of the Cosmos should be a painful one? The beneficence which some persons in these days pretend to discover in the order of Nature, who are protected by the products of civilisation against her many unkindnesses, could hardly be recognised by primitive man, whose inexperienced wit had constantly to be exercised to stand her rude buffetings. All seasons were alike inclement to him; and he had not learned, what all civilised persons are supposed to have learned, that what may be bad for himself may, nevertheless, be good for the earth, which is his home. Constant warfare with his milieu was not likely to impress him favourably with that milieu; and, as he referred everything to himself, his judgments naturally reflected his feelings. A civilised man in a similar case might think and act differently. However harsh his milieu, he might be satisfied that it formed part of the general well-being. Such acquiescence was far enough from primitive man. He submitted to something stronger than himself, because he did not care to be made more miserable than he was. Can we wonder at his mental and moral attitude towards nature, or at his prefigurements of it as something to be feared and appeased? The bewildered awe with which he came to regard its ordinary phenomena found fitting expression in concrete representations, unlovely and forbidding. They imaged his feelings. As yet thought and feeling did not act and re-act upon each other to their mutual enlargement and correction. This process came later; the process was unwelcome because it demanded intellectual activity;

and, of all modes of activity, this is the least natural, or the least agreeable, to man, for it tasked his powers most, while it did not bring to him, like the other activities, a corresponding material advantage. It is no libel to assert that he did not willingly exert his mental powers for a good that he could not foresee; there are a large number of persons, considerably advanced in civilisation, of whom the same thing may be said. Bichat said the life of nutrition precedes the life of relation, and primitive man was hardly likely to trouble himself much by thinking of remote contingencies which awaited himself or others, especially as such contingencies might be foreclosed by a catastrophe abruptly ending his existence. Such catastrophes were commoner then than now, and there were not then, as now, alleviations to the misery of life. In our own time little value is set upon human life in Fetichist communities, such as those on the West Coast of Africa; and the Fetich worshipper yields it up not unwillingly at the bidding of his chief or king. His pleasures are mainly sensuous, and these satiate him. Supply his few necessities, and existence becomes tolerable. Like his civilised counterpart, he is not capable of "much study." Indeed, long-sustained reflection is possible to but few minds. An Aristotle, a Newton, a Descartes, or a Comte may live, move, and have his being in serene heights where ordinary thinkers could not. Their "souls are like stars, and dwell apart."

The reflective powers of man are those latest and least developed. There may come a time when the intellectual powers will be stronger than they now are, and capable of sustaining not only longer but higher flights. When we become so capable, we shall also be familiar with a moral discipline to which we are now, comparatively speaking, strangers. As Animality becomes dominated by Humanity, Egoism by Altruism, this fine possibility tends to grow into near probability. That this is no vain hope the history of the human race assures us; for great as may be its victories over the external world, those victories have been greater and nobler which it has gained over itself.

Bearing in mind what has been said of man's outlook in Fetichistic times, we shall apprehend why so many of the genii, demons, or gods of the mythological pantheon, are representations of beings who excite terror, awe and fear, rather than their opposites. Fetichism explains why it is that the world is so peopled with fairies-uncanny folk

ready to do man harm, unless he exercise all possible caution in his relation with them, and never speaks of them, unless at imminent peril, save as the "good people." The folk lore of all countries bears testimony to this widespread feeling, and it is as old as widespread.

In Hindoo mythology, perhaps the oldest in the world, and that from which all the other mythologies may possibly be derived, every natural object is personified. The Hindoo Pantheon contains, Ward says,* 330,000,000 of divinities, and these divinities, like the 30,000 divinities of the Greek Pantheon, are simply Fetiches transformed. Not only are gods and goddesses of the sun, moon, sky, planets, hades, love, death, and of all the unseen powers and forces worshipped under every possible aspect or relation; not only are the extraordinary phenomena of the various seasons, as well as the ordinary phenomena of daily life-nature's unusual as well as usual aspects-personified and worshipped; but to these have been added the worship of beasts, birds, trees, rivers, fish, books, stones, wood, and everything, in fine, which has helped or hindered man. The gentler and nobler virtues were rarely personified, being almost unknown to primitive man, while what we regard as the vices are over-represented. Even in Greece, Elios, the personification of pity and mercy, was worshipped in Athens only-a sadly suggestive fact. The personifying spirit could hardly be carried to greater lengths than by the Hindoos, who, like the Egyptians, placed a god or genius in every separate limb and function of the human organism. The Nerbudda itself is worshipped, Colonel Sleeman says, by the Hindoo-not the god of the river, but the river itself. Primitive man does not worship abstractions or symbols, as he does not know what abstractions and symbols are. He worships the things themselves.

A remarkable modern instance of the personifying tendency of the human mind has been furnished by the Hindoos in their worship of Ola-bebee.t

Man has paid, and still pays, homage to both the

Ward on "The Religion, Mythology, and History of the Hindoos." Third edition, 1817.

+ This goddess has been created within these four years. She is indebted for her origin to the prevalence of the cholera morbus.-Vide "Essays Relative to the Habits, Character, etc., of the Hindoos," published in 1823.