The Making of Religion | Page 7

never dreamed of supposing that this reaction (which extends
beyond the limit of the tribe or group) had a 'supernatural' origin! It has been argued that

'tribal morality' is only a set of regulations based on the convenience of the elders of the
tribe: is, in fact, as the Platonic Thrasymachus says, 'the interest of the strongest.' That
does not appear to me to be demonstrated; but this is no place for a discussion of the
origin of morals. 'The interest of the strongest,' and of the nomadic group, would be to
knock elderly invalids on the head. But Dampier says, of the Australians, in 1688, 'Be it
little, or be it much they get, every one has his part, as well the young and tender, and the
old and feeble, who are not able to go abroad, as the strong and lusty.' The origin of this
fair and generous dealing may be obscure, but it is precisely the kind of dealing on which,
according to Mr. Howitt, the religion of the Kurnai insists (chapter x.). Thus the Being
concerned does 'make for righteousness.'
With these explanations I trust that my rhetorical use of such phrases as 'eternal,'
'creative,' 'omniscient,' 'omnipotent,' 'omnipresent,' and 'moral,' may not be found to
mislead, or covertly to import modern or Christian ideas into my account of the religious
conceptions of savages.
As to the evidence throughout, a learned historian has informed me that 'no
anthropological evidence is of any value.' If so, there can be no anthropology (in the
realm of institutions). But the evidence that I adduce is from such sources as
anthropologists, at least, accept, and employ in the construction of theories from which,
in some points, I venture to dissent.
A.L.
[Footnote 1: Macmillans, 1899.]
[Footnote 2: Op. cit. p. 246, note.]
[Footnote 3: See the new edition of _Myth, Ritual, and Religion_, especially the new
Introduction.]
[Footnote 4: See Introductions to my Homeric Hymns. Allen. 1899.]
[Footnote 5: _Journal S.P.R._, December 1890, p. 147.]
[Footnote 6: _Native Tribes of Central Australia_, p. 388.]

PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION
'The only begetter' of this work is Monsieur Lefébure, author of 'Les Yeux d'Horus,' and
other studies in Egyptology. He suggested the writing of the book, but is in no way
responsible for the opinions expressed.
The author cannot omit the opportunity of thanking Mr. Frederic Myers for his kindness
in reading the proof sheets of the earlier chapters and suggesting some corrections of
statement. Mr. Myers, however, is probably not in agreement with the author on certain
points; for example, in the chapter on 'Possession.' As the second part of the book differs
considerably from the opinions which have recommended themselves to most
anthropological writers on early Religion, the author most say here, as he says later, that
no harm can come of trying how facts look from a new point of view, and that he
certainly did not expect them to fall into the shape which he now presents for criticism.
ST. ANDREWS: _April 3, 1898._

CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTORY
CHAPTER II

. SCIENCE AND 'MIRACLES'
III. ANTHROPOLOGY AND RELIGION IV. 'OPENING THE GATES OF
DISTANCE' V. CRYSTAL VISIONS, SAVAGE AND CIVILISED VI.
ANTHROPOLOGY AND HALLUCINATIONS VII. DEMONIACAL POSSESSION
VIII. FETISHISM AND SPIRITUALISM IX. EVOLUTION OF THE IDEA OF GOD X.
HIGH GODS OF LOW RACES XI. SUPREME GODS NOT NECESSARILY
DEVELOPED OUT OF 'SPIRITS' XII. SAVAGE SUPREME BEINGS XIII. MORE
SAVAGE SUPREME BEINGS XIV. AHONE. TI-RA-WÁ. NÀ-PI. PACHACAMAC.
TUI LAGA. TAA-ROA XV. THE OLD DEGENERATION THEORY XVI. THEORIES
OF JEHOVAH XVII. CONCLUSION
APPENDICES.
A. OPPOSITIONS OF SCIENCE B. THE POLTERGEIST AND HIS EXPLAINERS C.
CRYSTAL-GAZING D. CHIEFS IN AUSTRALIA
INDEX
* * * * *
THE MAKING OF RELIGION
I
INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER The modern Science of the History of Religion has
attained conclusions which already possess an air of being firmly established. These
conclusions may be briefly stated thus: Man derived the conception of 'spirit' or 'soul'
from his reflections on the phenomena of sleep, dreams, death, shadow, and from the
experiences of trance and hallucination. Worshipping first the departed souls of his
kindred, man later extended the doctrine of spiritual beings in many directions. Ghosts, or
other spiritual existences fashioned on the same lines, prospered till they became gods.
Finally, as the result of a variety of processes, one of these gods became supreme, and, at
last, was regarded as the one only God. Meanwhile man retained his belief in the
existence of his own soul, surviving after the death of the body, and so reached the
conception of immortality. Thus the ideas of God and of the soul are the result of early
fallacious reasonings about misunderstood experiences.
It may seem almost wanton to suggest the desirableness of revising a system at once so
simple, so logical, and