By Thomas Henry Huxley

I conceive that the origin, the growth, the decline, and the fall

of those speculations respecting the existence, the powers, and the

dispositions of beings analogous to men, but more or less devoid of

corporeal qualities, which may be broadly included under the head of

theology, are phenomena the study of which legitimately falls within

the province of the anthropologist. And it is purely as a question of

anthropology (a department of biology to which, at various times, I have

given a good deal of attention) that I propose to treat of the evolution

of theology in the following pages.

With theology as a code of dogmas which are to be believed, or at any

rate repeated, under penalty of present or future punishment, or as a

storehouse of anaesthetics for those who find the pains of life too

hard to bear, I have nothing to do; and, so far as it may be possible,

I shall avoid the expression of any opinion as to the objective truth or

falsehood of the systems of theological speculation of which I may find

occasion to speak. From my present point of view, theology is regarded

as a natural product of the operations of the human mind, under the

conditions of its existence, just as any other branch of science, or

the arts of architecture, or music, or painting are such products. Like

them, theology has a history. Like them also, it is to be met with in

certain simple and rudimentary forms; and these can be connected by a

multitude of gradations, which exist or have existed, among people of

various ages and races, with the most highly developed theologies of

past and present times. It is not my object to interfere, even in the

slightest degree, with beliefs which anybody holds sacred; or to alter

the conviction of any one who is of opinion that, in dealing with

theology, we ought to be guided by considerations different from those

which would be thought appropriate if the problem lay in the province

of chemistry or of mineralogy. And if people of these ways of thinking

choose to read beyond the present paragraph, the responsibility for

meeting with anything they may dislike rests with them and not with me.

We are all likely to be more familiar with the theological history of

the Israelites than with that of any other nation. We may therefore

fitly make it the first object of our studies; and it will be convenient

to commence with that period which lies between the invasion of Canaan

and the early days of the monarchy, and answers to the eleventh and

twelfth centuries B.C. or thereabouts. The evidence on which any

conclusion as to the nature of Israelitic theology in those days must be

based is wholly contained in the Hebrew Scriptures--an agglomeration

of documents which certainly belong to very different ages, but of the

exact dates and authorship of any one of which (except perhaps a few

of the prophetical writings) there is no evidence, either internal or

external, so far as I can discover, of such a nature as to justify more

than a confession of ignorance, or, at most, an approximate conclusion.

In this venerable record of ancient life, miscalled a book, when it

is really a library comparable to a selection of works from English

literature between the times of Beda and those of Milton, we have the

stratified deposits (often confused and even with their natural order

inverted) left by the stream of the intellectual and moral life of

Israel during many centuries. And, embedded in these strata, there are

numerous remains of forms of thought which once lived, and which,

though often unfortunately mere fragments, are of priceless value to

the anthropologist. Our task is to rescue these from their relatively

unimportant surroundings, and by careful comparison with existing forms

of theology to make the dead world which they record live again. In

other words, our problem is palaeontological, and the method pursued

must be the same as that employed in dealing with other fossil remains.

Among the richest of the fossiliferous strata to which I have alluded

are the books of Judges and Samuel. [1] It has often been observed that

these writings stand out, in marked relief from those which precede and

follow them, in virtue of a certain archaic freshness and of a greater

freedom from traces of late interpolation and editorial trimming.

Jephthah, Gideon and Samson are men of old heroic stamp, who would

look as much in place in a Norse Saga as where they are; and if the

varnish-brush of later respectability has passed over these memoirs of

the mighty men of a wild age, here and there, it has not succeeded in

effacing, or even in seriously obscuring, the essential characteristics

of the theology traditionally ascribed to their epoch.

There is nothing that I have met with in the results of Biblical

criticism inconsistent with the conviction that these books give us a

fairly trustworthy account of Israelitic life and thought in the times

which they cover; and, as such, apart from the great literary merit of

many of their episodes, they possess the interest of being, perhaps, the

oldest genuine history, as apart from mere chronicles on the one hand

and mere legends on the other, at present accessible to us.

But it is often said with exultation by writers of one party, and often

admitted, more or less unwillingly, by their opponents, that these

books are untrustworthy, by reason of being full of obviously unhistoric

tales. And, as a notable example, the narrative of Saul's visit to the

so-called "witch of Endor" is often cited. As I have already intimated,

I have nothing to do with theological partisanship, either heterodox or

orthodox, nor, for my present purpose, does it matter very much whether

the story is historically true, or whether it merely shows what the

writer believed; but, looking at the matter solely from the point of

view of an anthropologist, I beg leave to express the opinion that

the account of Saul's necromantic expedition is quite consistent with

probability. That is to say, I see no reason whatever to doubt, firstly,

that Saul made such a visit; and, secondly, that he and all who were

present, including the wise woman of Endor herself, would have given,

with entire sincerity, very much the same account of the business as

that which we now read in the twenty-eighth chapter of the first book of

Samuel; and I am further of opinion that this story is one of the most

important of those fossils, to which I have referred, in the material

which it offers for the reconstruction of the theology of the time. Let

us therefore study it attentively--not merely as a narrative which, in

the dramatic force of its gruesome simplicity, is not surpassed, if it

is equalled, by the witch scenes in Macbeth--but as a piece of evidence

bearing on an important anthropological problem.

We are told (1 Sam. xxviii.) that Saul, encamped at Gilboa, became

alarmed by the strength of the Philistine army gathered at Shunem. He

therefore "inquired of Jahveh," but "Jahveh answered him not, neither

by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets." [2] Thus deserted by Jahveh,

Saul, in his extremity, bethought him of "those that had familiar

spirits, and the wizards," whom he is said, at some previous time, to

have "put out of the land"; but who seem, nevertheless, to have been

very imperfectly banished, since Saul's servants, in answer to his

command to seek him a woman "that hath a familiar spirit," reply without

a sign of hesitation or of fear, "Behold, there is a woman that hath

a familiar spirit at Endor"; just as, in some parts of England, a

countryman might tell any one who did not look like a magistrate or a

policeman, where a "wise woman" was to be met with. Saul goes to this

woman, who, after being assured of immunity, asks, "Whom shall I bring

up to thee?" whereupon Saul says, "Bring me up Samuel." The woman

immediately sees an apparition. But to Saul nothing is visible, for he

asks, "What seest thou?" And the woman replies, "I see Elohim coming up

out of the earth." Still the spectre remains invisible to Saul, for he

asks, "What form is he of?" And she replies, "An old man cometh up,

and he is covered with a robe." So far, therefore, the wise woman

unquestionably plays the part of a "medium," and Saul is dependent upon

her version of what happens.

The Evolution of Theology: an Anthropological Study Essay #8 from "Science and Hebrew Tradition" · 第 4 / 7 题