VI.

_Polynesian Traditions._--In Oceania even, and not among the Pelagian

negroes or Papoos,[66] but the Polynesian, racenatives of the

archipelago of Australasia, the diluvian tradition has been traced,

mingled with recollections of sudden rises of the sea, which are one of

the most frequent scourges of those islands. The most noted is that of

Tahiti, which has been specially referred to the primeval tradition.

Here it is as given by M. Gaussin,[67] who has published a translation

of it, as well as the Tahitian text, written by a native named Mare:--

"Two men had gone out to sea to fish with the line, Roo and Teahoroa

by name. They threw their hooks into the sea, which caught in the

hair of the god Ruahatu. They exclaimed, 'A fish!' They drew up the

line and saw that it was a man they had caught. At sight of the god

they bounded to the other end of their bark, and were half dead with

fear. Ruahatu asked them, 'What is this?' The two fishermen replied,

'We came to fish, and we did not know that our hooks would catch

thee.' The god then said, 'Unfasten my hair;' and they did so. Then

Ruahatu asked, 'What are your names?' They replied, 'Roo and

Teahoroa.' Ruahatu next said, 'Return to the shore, and tell men

that the earth will be covered with water, and all the world will

perish. To-morrow morning repair to the islet called Toa-marama; it

will be a place of safety for you and your children.'

"Ruahatu caused the sea to cover the lands. All were covered, and

all men perished except Roo, Teahoroa, and their families."

This story, like all in this part of the world currently referred to the

memory of the Deluge, has assumed the childish character peculiar to

Polynesian legends, and moreover, as M. Maury justly observes, it may be

naturally explained by the recollection of one of those tidal waves so

common in Polynesia. The most essential feature of all traditions

properly called diluvian is wanting here. The island, observes M. Maury,

has no resemblance to the Ark.[68] It is true that one of the versions

of the Tahitian legend states that the two fishermen repaired to

Toa-marama, not only with their families, but with a pig, a dog, and a

couple of fowls, which recalls the entry of the animals into the Ark. On

the other hand, some details of a similar story among the Fijis,

especially one in which, for many years after the event, canoes were

kept ready in case of its repetition, far better fit a local phenomenon,

a tidal wave, than a universal deluge.

However, if all these legends were exclusively related to local

catastrophes, it would be strange that they should appear and be almost

similar in a certain number of localities at a great distance from each

other, and only where the Polynesian race has taken root, or left

indubitable traces of its passage;--this race, indigenous in the Malay

Archipelago, not having migrated thence till about the fourth century of

the Christian era--_i.e._, at a time when, in consequence of the

communication between India and a portion of Malaysia,[69] the

Flood-tradition under its Indian form might well have entered in.

Without, therefore, deciding the question one way or other, we do not

think that that opinion can absolutely be condemned which finds in these

Polynesian legends an echo of the tradition of the Deluge, much

weakened, much changed, and more inextricably confused than anywhere

else with local disasters of recent date.

The result, then, of this long review authorizes us to affirm the story

of the Deluge to be a universal tradition among all branches of the

human race, with the one exception, however, of the black. Now a

recollection thus precise and concordant cannot be a myth voluntarily

invented. No religious or cosmogonic myth presents this character of

universality. It must arise from the reminiscence of a real and terrible

event, so powerfully impressing the imagination of the first ancestors

of our race, as never to have been forgotten by their descendants. This

cataclysm must have occurred near the first cradle of mankind, and

before the dispersion of the families from which the principal races

were to spring; for it would be at once improbable and uncritical to

admit that at as many different points of the globe as we should have to

assume in order to explain the wide spread of these traditions--local

phenomena so exactly alike should have occurred, their memory having

assumed an identical form, and presenting circumstances that need not

necessarily have occurred to the mind in such cases.

Let us observe, however, that probably the diluvian tradition is not

primitive but imported in America; that it undoubtedly wears the aspect

of an importation among the rare populations of the yellow race where it

is found; and lastly, that it is doubtful among the Polynesians of

Oceania. There will still remain three great races to which it is

undoubtedly peculiar, who have not borrowed it from each other, but

among whom the tradition is primitive, and goes back to the most ancient

times; and these three races are precisely the only ones of which the

Bible speaks as being descended from Noah, those of which it gives the

ethnic filiation in the tenth chapter of Genesis. This observation,

which I hold to be undeniable, attaches a singularly historic and exact

value to the tradition as recorded by the Sacred Book, even if, on the

other hand, it may lead to giving it a more limited geographical and

ethnological significance. In another paper I propose to inquire

whether, in the conception of the inspired writers, the Deluge really

was universal, in the sense customarily supposed.

But as the case now stands, we do not hesitate to declare that, far from

being a myth, the Biblical Deluge is a real and historical fact, having,

to say the least, left its impress on the ancestors of three

races--Aryan or Indo-European, Semitic or Syro-Arabian, Chamitic or

Kushite--that is to say, on the three great civilized races of the

ancient world, those which constitute the higher humanity--before the

ancestors of those races had as yet separated, and in the part of Asia

they together inhabited.

The Contemporary Review, Volume 36, November 1879 · 第 26 / 35 题