savage religion mysterious — why this is so — australians in 1688 — sir john lubbock — roskoff — evidence of religion — mr. manning — mr. howitt — supreme beings — mr. tylor’s theory of borrowing — reply — morality sanctioned — its nature — satirical rite —“our father”— mr. ridley on a creator — mr. langloh parker — dr. roth — conclusion — australians’ religious.
the science of anthropology can speak, with some confidence, on many questions of mythology. materials are abundant and practically undisputed, because, as to their myths, savage races have spoken out with freedom. myth represents, now the early scientific, now the early imaginative and humorous faculty, playing freely round all objects of thought: even round the superhuman beings of belief. but, as to his religion, the savage by no means speaks out so freely. religion represents his serious mood of trust, dependence or apprehension.
in certain cases the ideas about superhuman makers and judges are veiled in mysteries, rude sketches of the mysteries of greece, to which the white man is but seldom admitted. in other cases the highest religious conceptions of the people are in a state of obsolescence, are subordinated to the cult of accessible minor deities, and are rarely mentioned. while sacrifice or service again is done to the lower objects of faith (ghosts or gods developed out of ghosts) the supreme being, in a surprising number of instances, is wholly unpropitiated. having all things, he needs nothing (at all events gets nothing) at men’s hands except obedience to his laws; being good, he is not feared; or being obsolescent (superseded, as it seems, by deities who can be bribed) he has shrunk to the shadow of a name. of the gods too good and great to need anything, the ahone of the red men in virginia, or the dendid of the african dinkas, is an example. of the obsolescent god, now but a name, the atahocan of the hurons was, while the “lord in heaven” of the zulus is, an instance. among the relatively supreme beings revealed only in the mysteries, the gods of many australian tribes are deserving of observation.
for all these reasons, mystery, absence of sacrifice or idol, and obsolescence, the religion of savages is a subject much more obscure than their mythology. the truth is that anthropological inquiry is not yet in a position to be dogmatic; has not yet knowledge sufficient for a theory of the origins of religion, and the evolution of belief from its lowest stages and earliest germs. nevertheless such a theory has been framed, and has been already stated.
we formulated the objections to this current hypothesis, and observed that its defenders must take refuge in denying the evidence as to low savage religions, or, if the facts be accepted, must account for them by a theory of degradation, or by a theory of borrowing from christian sources. that the australians are not degenerate we demonstrated, and we must now give reasons for holding that their religious conceptions are not borrowed from europeans.
the australians, when observed by dampier on the north-west coast in 1688, seemed “the miserablest people in the world,” without houses, agriculture, metals, or domesticated animals.1 in this condition they still remain, when not under european influence. dampier, we saw, noted peculiarities: “be it little or much they get, every one has his part, as well the young and tender as the old and feeble, who are not able to go abroad, as the strong and lusty”. this kind of justice or generosity, or unselfishness, is still inculcated in the religious mysteries of some of the race. generosity is certainly one of the native’s leading features. he is always accustomed to give a share of his food, or of what he may possess, to his fellows. it may be, of course, objected to this that in doing so he is only following an old-established custom, the breaking of which would expose him to harsh treatment and to being looked on as a churlish fellow. it will, however, be hardly denied that, as this custom expresses the idea that, in this particular matter, every one is supposed to act in a kindly way towards certain individuals: the very existence of such a custom, even if it be only carried out in the hope of securing at some time a quid pro quo, shows that the native is alive to the fact that an action which benefits some one else is worthy to be performed. . . .
it is with the native a fixed habit to give away part of what he has.”2 the authors of this statement do not say that the duty is inculcated, in central australia, under religious sanction, in the tribal mysteries. this, however, is the case among the kurnai, and some tribes of victoria and new south wales.3 since dampier found the duty practised as early as 1688, it will scarcely be argued that the natives adopted this course of what should be christian conduct from their observations of christian colonists.
the second point which impressed dampier was that men and women, old and young, all lacked the two front upper teeth. among many tribes of the natives of new south wales and victoria, the boys still have their front teeth knocked out, when initiated, but the custom does not prevail (in ritual) where circumcision and another very painful rite are practised, as in central australia and central queensland.
dampier’s evidence shows how little the natives have changed in two hundred years. yet evidence of progress may be detected, perhaps, as we have already shown. but one fact, perhaps of an opposite bearing, must be noted. a singular painting, in a cave, of a person clothed in a robe of red, reaching to the feet, with sleeves, and with a kind of halo (or set of bandages) round the head, remains a mystery, like similar figures with blue halos or bandages, clothed and girdled. none of the figures had mouths; otherwise, in sir george grey’s sketches, they have a remote air of cimabue’s work.4 these designs were by men familiar with clothing, whether their own, or that of strangers observed by them, though in one case an unclothed figure carries a kangaroo. at present the natives draw with much spirit, when provided with european materials, as may be seen in mrs. langloh parker’s two volumes of australian legendary tales. their decorative patterns vary in character in different parts of the continent, but nowhere do they now execute works like those in the caves discovered by sir george grey. the reader must decide for himself how far these monuments alone warrant an inference of great degeneration in australia, or are connected with religion.
such are the australians, men without kings or chiefs, and what do we know of their beliefs?
the most contradictory statements about their religion may be found in works of science mr. huxley declared that “their theology is a mere belief in the existence, powers and dispositions (usually malignant) of ghost-like entities who may be propitiated or scared away; but no cult can be properly said to exist. and in this stage theology is wholly independent of ethics.” this, he adds, is “theology in its simplest condition”.
in a similar sense, sir john lubbock writes: “the australians have no idea of creation, nor do they use prayers; they have no religious forms, ceremonies or worship. they do not believe in the existence of a deity, nor is morality in any way connected with their religion, if it can be so called.”5
this remark must be compared with another in the same work (1882, p. 210). “mr. ridley, indeed, . . . states that they have a traditional belief in one supreme creator, called baiamai, but he admits that most of the witnesses who were examined before the select committee appointed by the legislative council of victoria in 1858 to report on the aborigines, gave it as their opinion that the natives had no religious ideas. it appears, moreover, from a subsequent remark, that baiamai only possessed ‘traces’ of the three attributes of the god of the bible, eternity, omnipotence and goodness”.6
mr. ridley, an accomplished linguist who had lived with wild blacks in 1854-58, in fact, said long ago, that the australian bora, or mystery, “involves the idea of dedication to god “. he asked old billy murri bundur whether men worshipped baiame at the bora? “of course they do,” said billy. mr. ridley, to whose evidence we shall return, was not the only affirmative witness. archdeacon gunther had no doubt that baiame was equivalent to the supreme being, “a remnant of original traditions,” and it was mr. günther, not mr. ridley, who spoke of “traces” of baiame’s eternity, omnipotence and goodness. mr. ridley gave similar reports from evidence collected by the committee of 1858. he found the higher creeds most prominent in the interior, hundreds of miles from the coast.
apparently the reply of gustav roskoff to sir john lubbock (1880) did not alter that writer’s opinion. roskoff pointed out that waitz-gerland, while denying that australian beliefs were derived from any higher culture, denounced the theory that they have no religion as “entirely false”. “belief in a good being is found in south australia, new south wales, and the centre of the south-eastern continent.”7 the opinion of waitz is highly esteemed, and that not merely because, as mr. max müller has pointed out, he has edited greek classical works. avec du grec on nepeut gater rien. mr. oldfield, in addition to bogles and a water-spirit, found biam (baiame) and namba-jundi, who admits souls into his paradise, while warnyura torments the bad under earth.8 mr. eyre, publishing in 1845, gives baiame (on the morrum-bidgee, biam; on the murray, biam-vaitch-y) as a source of songs sung at dances, and a cause of disease. he is deformed, sits cross-legged, or paddles a canoe. on the murray he found a creator, noorele, “all powerful, and of benevolent character,” with three unborn sons, dwelling “up among the clouds”. souls of dead natives join them in the skies. nevertheless “the natives, as far as yet can be ascertained, have no religious belief or ceremonies”; and, though noorele is credited with “the origin of creation,” “he made the earth, trees, water, etc.,” a deity, or great first cause, “can hardly be said to be acknowledged”.9
such are the consistent statements of mr. eyre! roskoff also cites mr. ridley, braim, cunningham, dawson, and other witnesses, as opposed to sir john lubbock, and he includes mr. tylor.10 mr. tylor, later, found baiame, or pei-a-mei, no earlier in literature than about 1840, in mr. hale’s united states exploring expedition11 previous to that date, baiame, it seems, was unknown to mr. threlkeld, whose early works are of 1831-1857. he only speaks of koin, a kind of goblin, and for lack of a native name for god, mr. threlkeld tried to introduce jehova-ka-biruê, and eloi, but failed. mr. tylor, therefore, appears to suppose that the name, baiame, and, at all events, his divine qualities, were introduced by missionaries, apparently between 1831 and 1840.12 to this it must be replied that mr. hale, about 1840, writes that “when the missionaries first came to wellington” (mr. threlkeld’s own district) “baiame was worshipped there with songs”. “these songs or hymns, according to mr. threlkeld, were passed on from a considerable distance. it is notorious that songs and dances are thus passed on, till they reach tribes who do not even know the meaning of the words.”13
in this way baiame songs had reached wellington before the arrival of the missionaries, and for this fact mr. threlkeld (who is supposed not to have known baiame) is mr. hale’s authority. in mr. tylor’s opinion (as i understand it) the word baiame was the missionary translation of our word “creator,” and derived from baia “to make”. now, mr. ridley says that mr. greenway “discovered” this baia to be the root of baiame. but what missionary introduced the word before 1840? not mr. threlkeld, for he (according to mr. tylor), did not know the word, and he tried eloi, and jehova-ka-biru￡, while immanueli was also tried and also failed14 baiame, known in 1840, does not occur in a missionary primer before mr. ridley’s gurre kamilaroi (1856), so the missionary primer did not launch baiame before the missionaries came to wellington. according to mr. hale, the baiame songs were brought by blacks from a distance (we know how greek mysteries were also colportés to new centres), and the yearly rite had, in 1840, been for three years in abeyance. moreover, the etymology, baia “to make” has a competitor in “byamee = big man”.15 thus baiame, as a divine being, preceded the missionaries, and is not a word of missionary manufacture, while sacred words really of missionary manufacture do not find their way into native tradition. mr. hale admits that the ideas about baiame may “possibly” be of european origin, though the great reluctance of the blacks to adopt any opinion from europeans makes against that theory.16
it may be said that, if baiame was premissionary, his higher attributes date after mr. ridley’s labours, abandoned for lack of encouragement in 1858. in 1840, mr. hale found baiame located in an isle of the seas, like circe, living on fish which came to his call. some native theologians attributed creation to his son, burambin, the demiurge, a common savage form of gnosticism.
on the nature of baiame, we have, however, some curious early evidence of 1844-45. mr. james manning, in these years, and earlier, lived “near the outside boundaries of settlers to the south”. a conversation with goethe, when the poet was eighty-five, induced him to study the native beliefs. “no missionaries,” he writes, “ever came to the southern district at any time, and it was not till many years later that they landed in sydney on their way to moreton bay, to attempt, in vain, to christianise the blacks of that locality, before the queensland separation from this colony took place.” mr. manning lost his notes of 1845, but recovered a copy from a set lent to lord audley, and read them, in november, 1882, to the royal society of new south wales. the notes are of an extraordinary character, and mr. manning, perhaps unconsciously, exaggerated their christian analogies, by adopting christian terminology. dean cowper, however, corroborated mr. manning’s general opinion, by referring to evidence of archdeacon gunther, who sent a grammar, with remarks on “bhaime, or bhaiame,” from wellington to mr. max müller. “he received his information, he told me, from some of the oldest blacks, who, he was satisfied, could not have derived their ideas from white men, as they had not then had intercourse with them.” old savages are not apt to be in a hurry to borrow european notions. mr. manning also averred that he obtained his information with the greatest difficulty. “they required such secrecy on my part, and seemed so afraid of being heard even in the most secret places, that, in one or two cases, i have seen them almost tremble in speaking.” one native, after carefully examining doors and windows, “stood in a wooden fireplace, and spoke in a tone little above a whisper, and confirmed what i had before heard”. another stipulated that silence must be observed, otherwise the european hands might question his wife, in which case he would be obliged to kill her. mr. howitt also found that the name of darumulun (in religion) is too sacred to be spoken except almost in whispers, while the total exclusion of women from mysteries and religious knowledge, on pain of death, is admitted to be universal among the tribes.17 such secrecy, so widely diffused, is hardly compatible with humorous imposture by the natives.
there is an element of humour in all things. mr. manning, in 1882, appealed to his friend, mr. mann, to give testimony to the excellency of black andy, the native from whom he derived most of his notes, which were corroborated by other black witnesses. mr. mann arose and replied that “he had never met one aborigine who had any true belief in a supreme being”. on cross-examination, they always said that they had got their information from a missionary or other resident. black andy was not alluded to by mr. mann, who regarded all these native religious ideas as filtrations from european sources. mr. palmer, on the other hand, corroborated mr. manning, who repeated the expression of his convictions.18 such, then, is the perplexed condition of the evidence.
it may be urged that the secrecy and timidity of mr. manning’s informants, corresponding with mr. howitt’s experience, makes for the affirmative side; that, in 1845, when mr. manning made his notes, missionaries were scarce, and that a native “cross-examined” by the sceptical and jovial mr. mann, would probably not contradict. (lubbock, o. of c. p. 4.) confidence is only won by sympathy, and one inquirer will get authentic legends and folklore from a celt, while another of the ordinary english type will totally fail on this point mr. manning says: “sceptics should consider how easy it might be for intelligent men to pass almost a lifetime among the blacks in any quarter of this continent without securing the confidence even of the best of the natives around them, through whom they might possibly become acquainted with their religious secrets, secrets which they dare not reveal to their own women at all, nor to their adult youths until the latter have been sworn to reticence under that terrifying ceremony which my notes describe”. in the same way mrs. langloh parker found that an european neighbour would ask, “but have the blacks any legends?” and we have cited mr. hartt on the difficulty of securing legends on the amazon, while mr. sproat had to live long among, and become very intimate with, the tribes of british columbia, before he could get any information about their beliefs. thus, the present writer is disinclined to believe that the intelligence offered to mr. manning with shy secrecy in 1845 was wholly a native copy of recently acquired hints on religion derived from europeans, especially as mr. howitt, who had lived long among the kurnai, and had written copiously on them, knew nothing of their religion, before, about 1882, he was initiated and admitted to the knowledge like that of mr. manning in 1845 the theory of borrowing is also checked by the closely analogous savage beliefs reported from north america before a single missionary had arrived, and from africa. for the australian, african and american ideas have a common point of contact, not easily to be explained as deduced from christianity. according, then, to mr. manning, the natives believed in a being called boyma, who dwells in heaven, “immovably fixed in a crystal rock, with only the upper half of a supernatural body visible”. now, about 1880, a native described baiame to mr. howitt as “a very great old man with a beard,” and with crystal pillars growing out of his shoulders which prop up a supernal sky. this vision of baiame was seen by the native, apparently as a result of the world-wide practice of crystal-gazing.19 mr. tylor suspects “the old man with the beard” as derived from christian artistic representations, but old men are notoriously the most venerated objects among the aborigines. turning now to mrs. langloh parker’s more australian legendary tales (p. 90), we find byamee “fixed to the crystal rock on which he sat in bullimah” (paradise). are we to suppose that some savage caught at christian teaching, added this feature of the crystal rock from “the glassy sea” of the apocalpyse, or from the great white throne, and succeeded in securing wide acceptance and long persistence for a notion borrowed from europeans? is it likely that the chief opponents of christianity everywhere, the wirreenuns or sorcerers, would catch at the idea, introduce it into the conservative ritual of the mysteries, and conceal it from women and children who are as open as adults to missionary influence? yet from native women and children the belief is certainly concealed.
mr. manning, who prejudices his own case by speaking of boyma as “the almighty,” next introduces us to a “son of god” equal to the father as touching his omniscience, and otherwise but slightly inferior. mr. eyre had already reported on the unborn sons of noorele, “there is no mother”. the son of boyma’s name is grogoragally. he watches over conduct, and takes the good to ballima (bullimah in mrs. langloh parker), the bad to oorooma, the place of fire (gumby). mr. eyre had attested similar ideas of future life of the souls with noorele. (eyre, ii. 357.) in mrs. langloh parker’s book a messenger is called “the all-seeing spirit,” apparently identical with her wallahgooroonbooan, whose voice is heard in the noise of the tundun, or bull-roarer, used in the mysteries.20
grogoragally is unborn of any mother. he is represented by mr. manning as a mediator between boyma and the race of men. here our belief is apt to break down, and most people will think that black andy was a well-instructed christian catechumen. this occurred to mr. manning, who put it plainly to andy. he replied that the existence of names in the native language for the sacred persons and places proved that they were not of european origin. “white fellow no call budgery place (paradise) ‘ballima,’ or other place ‘oorooma,’ nor god ‘boyma,’ nor son ‘grogoragally,’ only we black fellow think and call them that way in our own language, before white fellow came into the country.” a son or deputy of the chief divine being is, in fact, found among the kurnai and in other tribes. he directs the mysteries. here, then, andy is backed by mr. howitt’s aboriginal friends. their deity sanctioned morality “before the white men came to melbourne” (1835) and was called “our father” at the same date.21 several old men insisted on this, as a matter of their own knowledge. they were initiated before the arrival of europeans. archdeacon gunther received the same statements from old aborigines, and mr. palmer, speaking of other notions of tribes of the north, is perfectly satisfied that none of their ideas were derived from the whites.22 in any case, black andy’s intelligence and logic are far beyond what most persons attribute to his race. if we disbelieve him, it must be on the score, i think, that he consciously added european ideas to names of native origin. on the other hand, analogous ideas, not made so startling as in mr. manning’s christian terminology, are found in many parts of australia.
mr. manning next cites moodgeegally, the first man, immortal, a culture hero, and a messenger of boyma’s. there are a kind of rather mediaeval fiends, waramolong, who punish the wicked (murderers, liars and breakers of marriage laws) in gumby. women do not go to ballima, boyma being celibate, and women know nothing of all these mysteries; certainly this secrecy is not an idea of christian origin. if women get at the secret, the whole race must be exterminated, men going mad and slaying each other. this notion we shall see is corroborated. but if missionaries taught the ideas, women must know all about them already. mr. manning’s information was confirmed by a black from 300 miles away, who called grogoragally by the name of boymagela. there are no prayers, except for the dead at burial: corroborated by mrs. langloh parker’s beautiful legend of eerin. “byamee,” the mourners cry, “let in the spirit of eerin to bullimah. save him from eleanbah wundah, abode of the wicked. for eerin was faithful on earth, faithful to the laws you left us!”23 the creed is taught to boys when initiated, with a hymn which mr. manning’s informant dared not to reveal. he said angrily that mr. manning already knew more than any other white man. now, to invent a hymn could not have been beyond the powers of this remarkable savage, black andy. the “sons” of baiame answer, we have seen, to those ascribed to noorele, in mr. eyre’s book. they also correspond to daramulun where he is regarded as the son of baiame, while the culture hero, moodgeegally, founder of the mysteries, answers to tundun, among the kurnai.24 we have, too, in australia, dawed, a subordinate where mangarrah is the maker in the larrakeah tribe.25
in some cases, responsibility for evil, pain, and punishment, are shifted from the good maker on to the shoulders of his subordinate. this is the case, in early virginia, with okeus, the subordinate of the creator, the good ahone.26 we have also, in west africa, the unpropitiated nyankupon, with his active subordinate, who has human sacrifices, bobowissi;27 and mulungu, in central africa, “possesses many powerful servants, but is himself kept a good deal behind the scenes of earthly affairs, like the gods of epicurus”.28 the analogy, as to the son, interpreter of the divine will, in apollo and zeus (certainly not of christian origin!) is worth observing. in the andaman islands, mr. mann, after long and minute inquiry from the previously un-contaminated natives, reports on an only son of puluga, “a sort of archangel,” who alone is permitted to live with his father, whose orders it is his duty to make known to the moro-win, his sisters, ministers of puluga, the angels, that is, inferior ministers of puluga’s will.29
it is for science to determine how far this startling idea of the son is a natural result of a desire to preserve the remote and somewhat inaccessible and otiose dignity of the supreme being from the exertion of activity; and how far it is a savage refraction of missionary teaching, even where it seems to be anterior to missionary influences, which, with these races, have been almost a complete failure. the subject abounds in difficulty, but the sceptic must account for the marvellously rapid acceptance of the european ideas by the most conservative savage class, the doctors or sorcerers; for the admission of the ideas into the most conservative of savage institutions, the mysteries; for the extreme reticence about the ideas in presence of the very europeans from whom they are said to have been derived; and in some cases for the concealment of the ideas from the women, who, one presumes, are as open as the men to missionary teaching. it is very easy to talk of “borrowing,” not so easy to explain these points on the borrowing theory, above all, when evidence is frequent that the ideas preceded the arrival of christian teachers.
on this crucial point, the question of borrowing, i may cite mr. mann as to the andamanese beliefs. mr. mann was for eleven years in the islands, and for four years superintended our efforts to “reclaim” some natives. he is well acquainted with the south andaman dialect, and has made studies of the other forms of the language. this excellent witness writes: “it is extremely improbable that their legends were the result of the teaching of missionaries or others”. they have no tradition of any foreign arrivals, and their reputation (undeserved) as cannibals, with their ferocity to invaders, “precludes the belief” that any one ever settled there to convert or instruct them. “moreover, to regard with suspicion, as some have done, the genuineness of such legends argues ignorance of the fact that numerous other tribes, in equally remote or isolated localities, have, when first discovered, been found to possess similar traditions on the subject under consideration,” further, “i have taken special care not only to obtain my information on each point from those who are considered by their fellow tribesmen as authorities, but [also from those] who, from having had little or no intercourse with other races, were in entire ignorance regarding any save their own legends,” which, “they all agree in stating, were handed down to them by their first parent, to-mo, and his immediate descendants”.30 what mr. mann says concerning the unborrowed character of andaman beliefs applies, of course, to the yet more remote and inaccessible natives of australia.
in what has been, and in what remains to be said, it must be remembered that the higher religious ideas attributed to the australians are not their only ideas in this matter. examples of their wild myths have already been offered, they are totemists, too, and fear, though they do not propitiate, ghosts. vague spirits unattached are also held in dread, and inspire sorcerers and poets,31 as also does the god bunjil.32
turning from early accounts of australian religion, say from 1835 to 1845, we look at the more recent reports. the best evidence is that of mr. howitt, who, with mr. fison, laid the foundations of serious australian anthropology in kamilaroi and kurnai (1881). in 1881, mr. howitt, though long and intimately familiar with the tribes of gippsland, the yarra, the upper murray, the murumbidgee, and other districts, had found no trace of belief in a moral supreme being. he was afterwards, however, initiated, or less formally let into the secret, by two members of brajerak (wild) black fellows, not of the same tribe as the kurnai. the rites of these former aborigines are called kuringal. their supreme being is daramulun “believed in from the sea-coast across to the northern boundary claimed by the wolgal, about yass and gundagai, and from omeo to at least as far as the shoalhaven river. . . . he was not, as it seems to me, everywhere thought to be a malevolent being, but he was dreaded as one who could severely punish the trespasses committed against these tribal ordinances and customs, whose first institution is ascribed to him. . . . it was taught also that daramulun himself watched the youths from the sky, prompt to punish by sickness or death the breach of his ordinances.” these are often mere taboos; an old man said: “i could not eat emu’s eggs. he would be very angry, and perhaps i should die.” it will hardly be argued that the savages have recently borrowed from missionaries this conception of daramulun, as the originator and guardian of tribal taboos. opponents must admit him as of native evolution in that character at least. the creed of daramulun is not communicated to women and children. “it is said that the women among the ngarego and wolgal knew only that a great being lived beyond the sky, and that he was spoken of by them as papang (father). this seemed to me when i first heard it to bear so suspicious a resemblance to a belief derived from the white men, that i thought it necessary to make careful and repeated inquiries. my ngarego and wolgal informants, two of them old men, strenuously maintained that it was so before the white men came.” they themselves only learned the doctrine when initiated, as boys, by the old men of that distant day. the name daramulun, was almost whispered to mr. howitt, and phrases were used such as “he,” “the man,” “the name i told you of”. the same secrecy was preserved by a woi-worung man about bunjil, or pund-jel, “though he did not show so much reluctance when repeating to me the ‘folk-lore’ in which the ‘great spirit’ of the kulin plays a part”. “he” was used, or gesture signs were employed by this witness, who told how his grandfather had warned him that bunjil watched his conduct from a star, “he can see you and all you do down here,”—“before the white men came to melbourne.” (1835).33
are we to believe that this mystic secrecy is kept up, as regards white men, about a being first heard of from white men? and is it credible that the “old men,” the holders of tribal traditions, and the most conservative of mortals, would borrow a new divinity from “the white devils,” conceal the doctrine from the women (as accessible to missionary teaching as themselves), adopt the new being as the founder of the antique mysteries, and introduce him into the central rite? and can the natives have done so steadily, ever since about 1840 at least? to believe all this is to illustrate the credulity of scepticism.
mr. howitt adds facts about tribes “from twofold bay to sydney, and as far west, at least, as hay”. here, too, daramulun instituted the rites; his voice is heard in the noise of the whirling mudji (bull-roarer). “the muttering of thunder is said to be his voice ‘calling to the rain to fall, and make the grass grow up green’.” such are “the very words of umbara, the minstrel of the tribe”.34
at the rites, respect for age, for truth, for unprotected women and married women, and other details of sexual morality, is inculcated partly in obscene dances. a magic ceremony, resembling mesmeric passes, and accompanied by the word “good” (nga) is meant to make the boys acceptable to daramulun. a temporary image of him is made on raised earth (to be destroyed after the rites), his attributes are then explained. “this is the master (biamban) who can go anywhere and do anything.”35 an old man is buried, and rises again. “this ceremony is most impressive.” “the opportunity is taken of impressing on the mind of youth, in an indelible manner, those rules of conduct which form the moral law of the tribe.” “there is clearly a belief in a great spirit, or rather an anthropomorphic supernatural being, the master of all, whose abode is above, the sky, and to whom are attributed powers of omnipotence and omnipresence, or, at any rate, the power to do anything and go anywhere. . . . to his direct ordinance are attributed the social and moral laws of the community.” mr. howitt ends, “i venture to assert that it can no longer be maintained that [the australians] have no belief which can be called religious — that is, in the sense of beliefs which govern tribal and individual morality under a supernatural sanction”.36
among the rites is one which “is said to be intended to teach the boys to speak the straightforward truth, and the kabos (mystagogues) thus explain it to them “.37
it is, perhaps, unfortunate that mr. howitt does not give a full account of what the morality thus sanctioned includes. respect for age, for truth, for unprotected women, and for nature (as regards avoiding certain unnatural vices) are alone spoken of, in addition to taboos which have no relation to developed morality. mr. palmer, in speaking of the morality inculcated in the mysteries of the northern australians, adds to the elements of ethics mentioned by mr. howitt in the south, the lesson “not to be quarrelsome”. to each lad is given, “by one of the elders, advice so kindly, fatherly and impressive, as often to soften the heart, and draw tears from the youth”.38
so far, the morality religiously sanctioned is such as men are likely to evolve, and probably no one will maintain that it must have been borrowed from europeans. it is argued that the morality is only such as the tribes would naturally develop, mainly in the interests of the old (the ruling class) and of social order (hart-land, op. cit. pp. 316-329). what else did any one ever suppose the mores of a people to be, plus whatever may be allowed for the effects of kindliness, or love, which certainly exists? i never hinted at morals divinely and supernormally revealed. all morality had been denied to the australians. yet in the religious rites they are “taught to speak the straightforward truth”! as regards women, there are parts of australia where disgusting laxity prevails, except in cases prohibited by the extremely complex rules of forbidden degrees. such parts are central australia and north-west central queensland.39
another point in mr. howitt’s evidence deserves notice. he at first wrote “the supreme being who is believed in by all the tribes i refer to here, either as a benevolent or more frequently as a malevolent being, it seems to me represents the defunct headman “. we have seen that mr. howitt came to regard “malevolence” as merely the punitive aspect of the “supreme being “. as to the theory that such a being represents a dead headman, no proof is anywhere given that ghosts of headmen are in any way propitiated. even “corpse-feeding” was represented to mr. dawson by intelligent old blacks, as “white fellows’ gammon”.40 mrs. langloh parker writes to me that she, when she began to study the blacks, “had, i must allow, a prejudice in favour of mr. herbert spencer’s theory — it seemed so rational, but, accepting my savages’ evidence, i must discard it”. as to “offerings of food to the dead,” mrs. langloh parker found that nothing was offered except food “which happened to be in the possession of the corpse,” at his decease.
for these reasons it is almost inconceivable that the “supreme being” should “represent a dead headman,” as to dead men of any sort no tribute is paid. mr. howitt himself appears to have abandoned the hypothesis that daramulun represents a dead headman, for he speaks of him as the “great spirit,” or rather an “anthropomorphic supernatural being”,41
a great spirit might, conceivably, be developed out of a little spirit, even out of the ghost of a tribesman. but to the conception of a “supernatural anthropomorphic being,” the idea of “spirit” is not necessary. men might imagine such an entity before they had ever dreamed of a ghost.
having been initiated into the secrets of one set of tribes, mr. howitt was enabled to procure admission to those of another group of “clans,” the kurnai. for twenty-five years the jeraeil, or mystery, had been in abeyance, for they are much in contact with europeans. the old men, however, declared that they exactly reproduced (with one confessed addition) the ancestral ceremonies. they were glad to do it, for their lads “now paid no attention either to the words of the old men, or to those of the missionaries”.42
this is just what usually occurs. when we meet a savage tribe we destroy the old bases of its morality and substitute nothing new of our own. “they pay no attention to the words of the missionaries,” but loaf, drink and gamble like station hands “knocking down a cheque “.
consequently a rite unknown before the arrival of europeans is now introduced at the jeraeil. swift would have been delighted by this ceremony. “it was thought that the boys, having lived so much among the whites, had become selfish and no longer willing to share that which they obtained by their own exertions, or had given to them, with their friends.” the boys were, therefore, placed in a row, and the initiator or mystagogue stooped over the first boy, and, muttering some words which i could not catch, he kneaded the lad’s stomach with his hands. this he did to each one successively, and by it the kurnai supposed the “greediness” [greek] “of the youth would be expelled”.43
so far from unselfishness being a doctrine borrowed by the kurnai from christians, and introduced into their rites, it is (as we saw in the case of the arunta of central australia) part of the traditional morality —“the good old ancestral virtues,” says mr. howitt — of the tribes. a special ceremony is needed before unselfishness can be inspired among blacks who have lived much among adherents of the gospel.
thus “one satiric touch” seems to demonstrate that the native ethics are not of missionary origin.
after overcoming the scruples of the old men by proving that he really was initiated in the kuringal, mr. howitt was admitted to the central rite of the kurnai “showing the grandfather”. the essence of it is that the mystae have their heads shrouded in blankets. these are snatched off, the initiator points solemnly to the sky with his throwing stick (which propels the spears) and then points to the tundun, or bull-roarer. this object [greek] was also used in the mysteries of ancient greece, and is still familiar in the rites of savages in all quarters of the world.
“the ancestral beliefs” are then solemnly revealed. it seems desirable to quote freely the “condensed” version of mr. howitt. “long ago there was a great being called mungan-ngaur.” here a note adds that mungan means “father,” and “ngaur” means “our”.
“he has no other name among the kurnai. in other tribes the great supreme being, besides being called ‘father,’ has a name, for example bunjil, baiame, daramulun.” “this being lived on the earth, and taught the kurnai . . . all the arts they know. he also gave them the names they bear. mungan-gnaur had a son” (the sonship doctrine already noticed by mr. manning) “named tundun (the bull-roarer), who was married, and who is the direct ancestor — the weintwin or father’s father — of the kurnai. mungan-ngaur instituted the jeraeil (mysteries) which was conducted by tundun, who made the instruments” (a large and a small bull-roarer, as also in queensland) “which bear the name of himself and his wife.
“some tribal traitor impiously revealed the secrets of the jeraeil to women, and thereby brought down the anger of mungan upon the kurnai. he sent fire which filled the wide space between earth and sky. men went mad, and speared one another, fathers killing their children, husbands their wives, and brethren each other.” this corroborates black andy. “then the sea rushed over the land, and nearly all mankind were drowned. those who survived became the ancestors of the kurnai. . . . tundun and his wife became porpoises” (as apollo in the homeric hymn became a dolphin), “mungan left the earth, and ascended to the sky, where he still remains.”44
here the son is credited with none of the mediatorial attributes in mr. manning’s version, but universal massacre, as a consequence of revealing the esoteric doctrine, is common to both accounts.
morals are later inculcated.
1. “to listen to and obey the old men.
2. “to share everything they have with their friends.
3. “to live peaceably with their friends.
4. “not to interfere with girls or married women.
5. “to obey the food restrictions until they are released from them by the old men.” [as at eleusis.]
these doctrines, and the whole belief in mungan-ngaur, “the kurnai carefully concealed from me,” says mr. howitt, “until i learned them at the jeraeil”.45 mr. howitt now admits, in so many words, that mungan-ngaur “is rather the beneficent father, and the kindly though severe headman of the whole tribe. . . . than the malevolent wizard”. . . . he considers it “perhaps indicative of great antiquity, that this identical belief forms part of the central mysteries of a tribe so isolated as the kurnai, as well as of those of the tribes which had free communication one with another”.
as the morals sanctioned by mungan-ngaur are simply the extant tribal morals (of which unselfishness is a part, as in central australia), there seems no reason to attribute them to missionaries — who are quite unheeded. this part of the evidence may close with a statement of mr. howitt’s: “beyond the vaulted sky lies the mysterious home of that great and powerful being who is bunjil, baiame, or dara-mulun in different tribal languages, but who in all is known by a name, the equivalent of the only one used by the kurnai, which is mungan-ngaur, our father”.46
other affirmative evidence might be adduced. mr. ridley, who wrote primers in the kamilaroi language as early as in 1856 (using baiame for god), says: “in every part of australia where i have conversed with the aborigines, they have a traditional belief in one supreme creator,” and he wonders, as he well may, at the statement to the contrary in the encyclopedia britannica, which rests solely on the authority, of dr. lang, in queensland. of names for the supreme being, mr. ridley gives baiame, anamba; in queensland, mumbal (thunder) and, at twofold bay, “dhu-rumbulum, which signifies, in the namoi, a sacred staff, originally given by baiame, and is used as the title of deity”.47
by “staff” mr. ridley appears to indicate the tundun, or bull-roarer. this i venture to infer from mr. matthews’ account of the wiradthuri (new south wales) with whom dhuramoolan is an extinct bugbear, not answering to tundun among the kurnai, who is subordinate, as son, to mungan-ngaur, and is associated with the mystic bull-roarer, as is gayandi, the voice of the messenger of baiame, among mrs. langloh parker’s informants.48 in one tribe, dara-mulun used to carry off and eat the initiated boys, till he was stopped and destroyed by baiame. this myth can hardly exist, one may suppose, among such tribes as consider daramulun to preside over the mysteries.
living in contact with the baiame-worshipping kamilaroi, the wiradthuri appear to make a jest of the power of daramulun, who (we have learned) is said to have died, while his “spirit” dwells on high.49 mr. green way also finds turramulan to be subordinate to baiame, who “sees all, and knows all, if not directly, through turramulan, who presides at the bora. . . . turramulan is mediator in all the operations of baiame upon man, and in all man’s transactions with baiame. turramulan means “leg on one side only,” “one-legged”. here the mediatorial aspect corroborates mr. manning’s information.50 i would suggest, periculo meo, that there may have been some syncretism, a baiame-worshipping tribe adopting daramulun as a subordinate and mediator; or baiame may have ousted daramulun, as zeus did cronos.
mr. ridley goes on to observe that about eighteen years ago (that is, in 1854) he asked intelligent blacks “if they knew baiame”. the answer was: “kamil zaia zummi baiame, zaia winuzgulda,” “i have not seen baiame, i have heard or perceived him”. the same identical answer was given in 1872 “by a man to whom i had never before spoken”. “if asked who made the sky, the earth, the animals and man, they always answer ‘baiame’.” varieties of opinion as to a future life exist. all go to baiame, or only the good (the bad dying eternally), or they change into birds!51
turning to north-west central queensland we find dr. roth (who knows the language and is partly initiated) giving mul-ka-ri as “a benevolent, omnipresent, supernatural being. anything incomprehensible.” he offers a sentence: “mulkari tikkara ena” = “lord (who dwellest) among the sky”. again: “mulkari is the supernatural power who makes everything which the blacks cannot otherwise account for; he is a good, beneficent person, and never kills any one”. he initiates medicine men. his home is in the skies. he once lived on earth, and there was a culture-hero, inventing magic and spells. that mulkari is an ancestral ghost as well as a beneficent maker i deem unlikely, as no honours are paid to the dead. “not in any way to refer to the dead appears to be an universal rule among all these tribes.”52 mulkari has a malignant opposite or counterpart.
nothing is said by dr. roth as to inculcation of these doctrines at the mysteries, nor do messrs. spencer and gillen allude to any such being in their accounts of central australian rites, if we except the “self-existing” “out of nothing” ungambikula, sky-dwellers.
one rite “is supposed to make the men who pass through it more kindly,” we are not told why.53 we have also an allusion to “the great spirit twangirika,” whose voice (the women are told) is heard in the noise of the bull-roarer.54
“the belief is fundamentally the same as that found in all australian tribes,” write the authors, in a note citing tundun and daramulun. but they do not tell us whether the arunta belief includes the sanction, by twangirika, of morality. if it does not, have the central australians never developed the idea, or have they lost it? they have had quite as much experience of white men (or rather much more) than the believers in baiame or bunjil, “before the white men came to melbourne,” and, if one set of tribes borrowed ideas from whites, why did not the other?
the evidence here collected is not exhaustive. we might refer to pirnmeheal, a good being, whom the blacks loved before they were taught by missionaries to fear him.55
mr. dawson took all conceivable pains to get authentic information, and to ascertain whether the belief in pirnmeheal was pre-european. he thinks it was original. the idea of “god-borrowing” is repudiated by manning, gunther, ridley, green-way, palmer, mrs. langloh parker and others, speaking for trained observers and (in several cases) for linguists, studying the natives on the spot, since 1845. it is thought highly improbable by mr. hale (1840). it is rejected by waitz-gerland, speaking for studious science in europe. mr. howitt, beginning with distrust, seems now to regard the beliefs described as of native origin. on the other hand we have mr. mann, who has been cited, and the great authority of mr. e. b. tylor, who, however, has still to reply to the arguments in favour of the native origin of the beliefs which i have ventured to offer. such arguments are the occurrence of baiame before the arrival of missionaries; the secrecy, as regards europeans, about ideas derived (mr. tylor thinks) from europeans; the ignorance of the women on these heads; the notorious conservatism of the “doctors” who promulgate the creed as to ritual and dogma, and the other considerations which have been fully stated. in the meanwhile i venture to think, subject to correction, that, while black andy may have exaggerated, or mr. manning may have coloured his evidence by christian terminology, and while mythical accretions on a religious belief are numerous, yet the lowest known human race has attained a religious conception very far above what savages are usually credited with, and has not done so by way of the “ghost-theory” of the anthropologists. in this creed sacrifice and ghost-worship are absent.56
it has seemed worth while to devote space and attention to the australian beliefs, because the vast continent contains the most archaic and backward of existing races. we may not yet have a sufficient collection of facts microscopically criticised, but the evidence here presented seems deserving of attention. about the still more archaic but extinct tasmanians and their religion, evidence is too scanty, too casual, and too conflicting for our purpose.
