Section 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. 1
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. 2
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. 3
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. 4
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. 5
