HOTTENTOT MYTHOLOGY.

'What makes mythology mythological, in the true sense of the word, is

what is utterly unintelligible, absurd, strange, or miraculous.' So says

Mr. Max Muller in the January number of the Nineteenth Century for 1882.

Men's attention would never have been surprised into the perpetual study

and questioning of mythology if it had been intelligible and dignified,

and if its report had been in accordance with the reason of civilised and

cultivated races. What mythologists wish to discover is the origin of

the countless disgusting, amazing, and incongruous legends which occur in

the myths of all known peoples. According to Mr. Muller--

There are only two systems possible in which the irrational element in

mythology can be accounted for. One school takes the irrational as a

matter of fact; and if we read that Daphne fled before Phoebus, and

was changed into a laurel tree, that school would say that there

probably was a young lady called Aurora, like, for instance, Aurora

Konigsmark; that a young man called Robin, or possibly a man with red

hair, pursued her, and that she hid behind a laurel tree that happened

to be there. This was the theory of Euhemeros, re-established by the

famous Abbe Bernier [Mr. Muller doubtless means Banier], and not quite

extinct even now. According to another school, the irrational element

in mythology is inevitable, and due to the influence of language on

thought, so that many of the legends of gods and heroes may be

rendered intelligible if only we can discover the original meaning of

their proper names. The followers of this school try to show that

Daphne, the laurel tree, was an old name for the dawn, and that

Phoibos was one of the many names of the sun, who pursued the dawn

till she vanished before his rays. Of these two schools, the former

has always appealed to the mythologies of savage nations, as showing

that gods and heroes were originally human beings, worshipped after

their death as ancestors and as gods, while the latter has confined

itself chiefly to an etymological analysis of mythological names in

Greek, Latin, and Sanskrit, and other languages, such as had been

sufficiently studied to admit of a scientific, grammatical, and

etymological treatment.

This is a long text for our remarks on Hottentot mythology; but it is

necessary to prove that there are not two schools only of mythologists:

that there are inquirers who neither follow the path of the Abbe Banier,

nor of the philologists, but a third way, unknown to, or ignored by Mr.

Muller. We certainly were quite unaware that Banier and Euhemeros were

very specially concerned, as Mr. Muller thinks, with savage mythology;

but it is by aid of savage myths that the school unknown to Mr. Muller

examines the myths of civilised peoples like the Greeks. The disciples

of Mr. Muller interpret all the absurdities of Greek myth, the gods who

are beasts on occasion, the stars who were men, the men who become

serpents or deer, the deities who are cannibals and parricides and

adulterers, as the result of the influence of Aryan speech upon Aryan

thought. Men, in Mr. Muller's opinion, had originally pure ideas about

the gods, and expressed them in language which we should call figurative.

The figures remained, when their meaning was lost; the names were then

supposed to be gods, the nomina became numina, and out of the

inextricable confusion of thought which followed, the belief in cannibal,

bestial, adulterous, and incestuous gods was evolved. That is Mr.

Muller's hypothesis; with him the evolution, a result of a disease of

language, has been from early comparative purity to later religious

abominations. Opposed to him is what may be called the school of Mr.

Herbert Spencer: the modern Euhemerism, which recognises an element of

historical truth in myths, as if the characters had been real characters,

and which, in most gods, beholds ancestral ghosts raised to a higher

power.

There remains a third system of mythical interpretation, though Mr.

Muller says only two methods are possible. The method, in this third

case, is to see whether the irrational features and elements of civilised

Greek myth occur also in the myths of savages who speak languages quite

unlike those from whose diseases Mr. Muller derives the corruption of

religion. If the same features recur, are they as much in harmony with

the mental habits of savages, such as Bushmen and Hottentots, as they are

out of accord with the mental habits of civilised Greeks? If this

question can be answered in the affirmative, then it may be provisionally

assumed that the irrational elements of savage myth are the legacy of

savage modes of thought, and have survived in the religion of Greece from

a time when the ancestors of the Greeks were savages. But inquirers who

use this method do not in the least believe that either Greek or savage

gods were, for the more part, originally real men. Both Greeks and

savages have worshipped the ghosts of the dead. Both Greeks and savages

assign to their gods the miraculous powers of transformation and magic,

which savages also attribute to their conjurers or shamans. The mantle

(if he had a mantle) of the medicine-man has fallen on the god; but Zeus,

or Indra, was not once a real medicine-man. A number of factors combine

in the conception of Indra, or Zeus, as either god appears in Sanskrit or

Greek literature, of earlier or later date. Our school does not hold

anything so absurd as that Daphne was a real girl pursued by a young man.

But it has been observed that, among most savage races, metamorphoses

like that of Daphne not only exist in mythology, but are believed to

occur very frequently in actual life. Men and women are supposed to be

capable of turning into plants (as the bamboo in Sarawak), into animals,

and stones, and stars, and those metamorphoses happen as contemporary

events--for example, in Samoa. {200}

When Mr. Lane was living at Cairo, and translating the 'Arabian Nights,'

he found that the people still believed in metamorphosis. Any day, just

as in the 'Arabian Nights,' a man might find himself turned by an

enchanter into a pig or a horse. Similar beliefs, not derived from

language, supply the matter of the senseless incidents in Greek myths.

Savage mythology is also full of metamorphoses. Therefore the

mythologists whose case we are stating, when they find identical

metamorphoses in the classical mythologies, conjecture that these were

first invented when the ancestors of the Aryans were in the imaginative

condition in which a score of rude races are to-day. This explanation

they apply to many other irrational elements in mythology. They do not

say, 'Something like the events narrated in these stories once occurred,'

nor 'A disease of language caused the belief in such events,' but 'These

stories were invented when men were capable of believing in their

occurrence as a not unusual sort of incident'

Philologists attempt to explain the metamorphoses as the result of some

oblivion and confusion of language. Apollo, they say, was called the

'wolf-god' (Lukeios) by accident: his name really meant the 'god of

light.' A similar confusion made the 'seven shiners' into the 'seven

bears.' {201} These explanations are distrusted, partly because the area

to be covered by them is so vast. There is scarcely a star, tree, or

beast, but it has been a man or woman once, if we believe civilised and

savage myth. Two or three possible examples of myths originating in

forgetfulness of the meaning of words, even if admitted, do not explain

the incalculable crowd of metamorphoses. We account for these by saying

that, to the savage mind, which draws no hard and fast line between man

and nature, all such things are possible; possible enough, at least, to

be used as incidents in story. Again, as has elsewhere been shown, the

laxity of philological reasoning is often quite extraordinary; while,

lastly, philologists of the highest repute flatly contradict each other

about the meaning of the names and roots on which they agree in founding

their theory. {202a}

By way of an example of the philological method as applied to savage

mythology, we choose a book in many ways admirable, Dr. Hahn's 'Tsuni

Goam, the Supreme Being of the Khoi Khoi.' {202b} This book is sometimes

appealed to as a crushing argument against the mythologists who adopt the

method we have just explained. Let us see if the blow be so very

crushing. To put the case in a nutshell, the Hottentots have commonly

been described as a race which worshipped a dead chief, or conjurer--Tsui

Goab his name is, meaning Wounded Knee, a not unlikely name for a savage.

Dr. Hahn, on the other hand, labours to show that the Hottentots

originally worshipped no dead chief, but (as a symbol of the Infinite)

the Red Dawn. The meaning of the name Red Dawn, he says, was lost; the

words which meant Red Dawn were erroneously supposed to mean Wounded

Knee, and thus arose the adoration and the myths of a dead chief, or

wizard, Tsui Goab, Wounded Knee. Clearly, if this can be proved, it is

an excellent case for the philological school, an admirable example of a

myth produced by forgetfulness of the meaning of words. Our own opinion

is that, even if Tsui Goab originally meant Red Dawn, the being, as now

conceived of by his adorers, is bedizened in the trappings of the dead

medicine-man, and is worshipped just as ghosts of the dead are

worshipped. Thus, whatever his origin, his myth is freely coloured by

the savage fancy and by savage ideas, and we ask no more than this

colouring to explain the wildest Greek myths. What truly 'primitive'

religion was, we make no pretence to know. We only say that, whether

Greek religion arose from a pure fountain or not, its stream had flowed

through and been tinged by the soil of savage thought, before it widens

into our view in historical times. But it will be shown that the logic

which connects Tsui Goab with the Red Dawn is far indeed from being

cogent.

Tsui Goab is thought by the Hottentots themselves to be a dead man, and

it is admitted that among the Hottentots dead men are adored. 'Cairns

are still objects of worship,' {203a} and Tsui Goab lies beneath several

cairns. Again, soothsayers are believed in (p. 24), and Tsui Goab is

regarded as a deceased soothsayer. As early as 1655, a witness quoted by

Hahn saw women worshipping at one of the cairns of Heitsi Eibib, another

supposed ancestral being. Kolb, the old Dutch traveller, found that the

Hottentots, like the Bushmen, revered the mantis insect. This creature

they called Gaunab. They also had some moon myths, practised adoration

of the moon, and danced at dawn. Thunberg (1792) saw the cairn-worship,

and, on asking its meaning, was told that a Hottentot lay buried there.

{203b} Thunberg also heard of the worship of the mantis, or grey

grasshopper. In 1803 Liechtenstein noted the cairn-worship, and was told

that a renowned Hottentot doctor of old times rested under the cairn.

Appleyard's account of 'the name God in Khoi Khoi, or Hottentot,'

deserves quoting in full:--

Hottentot: Tsoei'koap.

Namaqua: Tsoei'koap.

Koranna: Tshu'koab, and the author adds: 'This is the word from which

the Kafirs have probably derived their u-Tixo, a term which they have

universally applied, like the Hottentots, to designate the Divine

Being, since the introduction of Christianity. Its derivation is

curious. It consists of two words, which together mean the "wounded

knee." It is said to have been originally applied to a doctor or

sorcerer of considerable notoriety and skill amongst the Hottentots or

Namaquas some generations back, in consequence of his having received

some injury in his knee. Having been held in high repute for

extraordinary powers during life, he appeared to be invoked even after

death, as one who could still relieve and protect; and hence, in

process of time, he became nearest in idea to their first conceptions

of God.'

Other missionaries make old Wounded Knee a good sort of being on the

whole, who fights Gaunab, a bad being. Dr. Moffat heard that 'Tsui Kuap'

was 'a notable warrior,' who once received a wound in the knee. Sir

James Alexander {204} found that the Namaquas believed their 'great

father' lay below the cairns on which they flung boughs. This great

father was Heitsi Eibib, and, like other medicine-men, 'he could take

many forms.' Like Tsui Goab, he died several times and rose again. Hahn

gives (p. 61) a long account of the Wounded Knee from an old chief, and a

story of the battle between Tsui Goab, who 'lives in a beautiful heaven,'

and Gaunab, who 'lives in a dark heaven.' As this chief had dwelt among

missionaries very long, we may perhaps discount his remarks on 'heaven'

as borrowed. Hahn thinks they refer to the red sky in which Tsui Goab

lived, and to the black sky which was the home of Gaunab. The two

characters in this crude religious dualism thus inhabit light and

darkness respectively.

* * * * *

As far as we have gone, Tsui Goab, like Heitsi Eibib among the Namas, is

a dead sorcerer, whose graves are worshipped, while, with a common

inconsistency, he is also thought of as dwelling in the sky. Even

Christians often speak of the dead with similar inconsistency. Tsui

Goab's worship is intelligible enough among a people so credulous that

they took Hahn himself for a conjurer (p. 81), and so given to ancestor-

worship that Hahn has seen them worship their own fathers' graves, and

expect help from men recently dead (pp. 112, 113). But, while the Khoi

Khoi think that Tsui Goab was once a real man, we need not share their

Euhemerism. More probably, like Unkulunkulu among the Zulus, Tsui Goab

is an ideal, imaginary ancestral sorcerer and god. No one man requires

many graves, and Tsui Goab has more than Osiris possessed in Egypt. {205}

If the Egyptians in some immeasurably distant past were once on the level

of Namas and Hottentots, they would worship Osiris at as many barrows as

Heitsi Eibib and Tsui Goab are adored. In later times the numerous

graves of one being would require explanation, and explanations would be

furnished by the myth that the body of Osiris was torn to pieces and each

fragment buried in a separate tomb.

Again, lame gods occur in Greek, Australian, and Brazilian creeds, and

the very coincidence of Tsui Goab's lameness makes us sceptical about his

claims to be a real dead man. On the other hand, when Hahn tells us that

epical myths are now sung in the dances in honour of warriors lately

slain (p. 103), and that similar dances and songs were performed in the

past to honour Tsui Goab, this looks more as if Tsui Goab had been an

actual person. Against this we must set (p. 105) the belief that Tsui

Goab made the first man and woman, and was the Prometheus of the

Hottentots.

* * * * *

So far Dr. Hahn has given us facts which entirely fit in with our theory

that an ancestor-worshipping people, believing in metamorphosis and

sorcery, adores a god who is supposed to be a deceased ancestral sorcerer

with the power of magic and metamorphosis. But now Dr. Hahn offers his

own explanation. According to the philological method, he will 'study

the names of the persons, until we arrive at the naked root and original

meanings of the words.' Starting then with Tsui Goab, whom all evidence

declares to be a dead lame conjurer and warrior, Dr. Hahn avers that

'Tsui Goab, originally Tsuni Goam, was the name by which the Red Men

called the Infinite.' As the Frenchman said of the derivation of jour

from _dies_, we may hint that the Infinite thus transformed into a lame

Hottentot 'bush-doctor' is diablement change en route. To a dead lame

sorcerer from the Infinite is a fall indeed. The process of the decline

is thus described. Tsui Goab is composed of two roots, tsu and goa. Goa

means 'to go on,' 'to come on.' In Khoi Khoi goa-b means 'the coming on

one,' the dawn, and goa-b also means 'the knee.' Dr. Hahn next writes

(making a logical leap of extraordinary width), 'it is now obvious that,

//goab in Tsui Goab cannot be translated with knee,'--why not?--'but we

have to adopt the other metaphorical meaning, the _approaching_ day, i.e.

the dawn.' Where is the necessity? In ordinary philology, we should

here demand a number of attested examples of goab, in the sense of dawn,

but in Khoi Khoi we cannot expect such evidence, as there are probably no

texts. Next, after arbitrarily deciding that all Khoi Khois

misunderstand their own tongue (for that is what the rendering here of

goab by 'dawn' comes to), Dr. Hahn examines tsu, in Tsui. Tsu means

'sore,' 'wounded,' 'painful,' as in 'wounded knee'--Tsui Goab. This does

not help Dr Hahn, for 'wounded dawn' means nothing. But he reflects that

a wound is red, tsu means wounded: therefore tsu means red, therefore

Tsui Goab is the Red Dawn. Q.E.D.

This kind of reasoning is obviously fallacious. Dr. Hahn's point could

only be made by bringing forward examples in which tsu is employed to

mean red in Khoi Khoi. Of this use of the word tsu he does not give one

single instance, though on this point his argument depends. His

etymology is not strengthened by the fact that Tsui Goab has once been

said to live in the red sky. A red house is not necessarily tenanted by

a red man. Still less is the theory supported by the hymn which says

Tsui Goab paints himself with red ochre. Most idols, from those of the

Samoyeds to the Greek images of Dionysus, are and have been daubed with

red. By such reasoning is Tsui Goab proved to be the Red Dawn, while his

gifts of prophecy (which he shares with all soothsayers) are accounted

for as attributes of dawn, of the Vedic Saranyu.

Turning from Tsui Goab to his old enemy Gaunab, we learn that his name is

derived from //gau, 'to destroy,' and, according to old Hottentot ideas,

'no one was the destroyer but the night' (p. 126). There is no apparent

reason why the destroyer should be the night, and the night alone, any

more than why 'a lame broken knee' should be 'red' (p. 126). Besides (p.

85), Gaunab is elsewhere explained, not as the night, but as the

malevolent ghost which is thought to kill people who die what we call a

'natural' death. Unburied men change into this sort of vampire, just as

Elpenor, in the Odyssey, threatens, if unburied, to become mischievous.

There is another Gaunab, the mantis insect, which is worshipped by

Hottentots and Bushmen (p. 92). It appears that the two Gaunabs are

differently pronounced. However that may be, a race which worships an

insect might well worship a dead medicine-man.

* * * * *

The conclusion, then, to be drawn from an examination of Hottentot

mythology is merely this, that the ideas of a people will be reflected in

their myths. A people which worships the dead, believes in sorcerers and

in prophets, and in metamorphosis, will have for its god (if he can be

called a god) a being who is looked on as a dead prophet and sorcerer. He

will be worshipped with such rites as dead men receive; he will be mixed

up in such battles as living men wage, and will be credited with the

skill which living sorcerers claim. All these things meet in the legend

of Tsui Goab, the so-called 'supreme being' of the Hottentots. His

connection with the dawn is not supported by convincing argument or

evidence. The relation of the dawn to the Infinite again rests on

nothing but a theory of Mr. Max Muller's. {209} His adversary, though

recognised as the night, is elsewhere admitted to have been, originally,

a common vampire. Finally, the Hottentots, a people not much removed

from savagery, have a mythology full of savage and even disgusting

elements. And this is just what we expect from Hottentots. The puzzle

is when we find myths as low as the story of the incest of Heitsi Eibib

among the Greeks. The reason for this coincidence is that, in Dr. Hahn's

words, 'the same objects and the same phenomena in nature will give rise

to the same ideas, whether social or mythical, among different races of

mankind,' especially when these races are in the same well-defined state

of savage fancy and savage credulity.

Dr. Hahn's book has been regarded as a kind of triumph over inquirers who

believe that ancestor-worship enters into myth, and that the purer

element in myth is the later. But where is the triumph? Even on Dr.

Hahn's own showing, ancestor-worship among the Hottentots has swamped the

adoration of the Infinite. It may be said that Dr. Hahn has at least

proved the adoration of the Infinite to be earlier than ancestor-worship.

But it has been shown that his attempt to establish a middle stage, to

demonstrate that the worshipped ancestor was really the Red Dawn, is not

logical nor convincing. Even if that middle stage were established, it

is a far cry from the worship of Dawn (supposed by the Australians to be

a woman of bad character in a cloak of red' possum-skin) to the adoration

of the Infinite. Our own argument has been successful if we have shown

that there are not only two possible schools of mythological

interpretation--the Euhemeristic, led by Mr. Spencer, and the

Philological, led by Mr. Max Muller. We have seen that it is possible to

explain the legend of Tsui Goab without either believing him to have been

a real historical person (as Mr. Spencer may perhaps believe), or his

myth to have been the result of a 'disease of language' as Mr. Muller

supposes. We have explained the legend and worship of a supposed dead

conjurer as natural to a race which believes in conjurers and worships

dead men. Whether he was merely an ideal ancestor and warrior, or

whether an actual man has been invested with what divine qualities Tsui

Goab enjoys, it is impossible to say; but, if he ever lived, he has long

been adorned with ideal qualities and virtues which he never possessed.

The conception of the powerful ancestral ghost has been heightened and

adorned with some novel attributes of power: the conception of the

Infinite has not been degraded, by forgetfulness of language, to the

estate of an ancestral ghost with a game leg.

* * * * *

If this view be correct, myth is the result of thought, far more than of

a disease of language. The comparative importance of language and

thought was settled long ago, in our sense, by no less a person than

Pragapati, the Sanskrit Master of Life.

'Now a dispute once took place between Mind and Speech, as to which was

the better of the two. Both Mind and Speech said, "I am excellent!" Mind

said, "Surely I am better than thou, for thou dost not speak anything

that is not understood by me; and since thou art only an imitator of what

is done by me and a follower in my wake, I am surely better than thou!"

Speech said, "Surely I am better than thou, for what thou knowest I make

known, I communicate." They went to appeal to Pragapati for his

decision. He (Pragapati) decided in favour of Mind, saying (to Speech),

"Mind is indeed better than thou, for thou art an imitator of its deeds,

and a follower in its wake; and inferior, surely, is he who imitates his

better's deeds, and follows in his wake."'

Custom and Myth · 第 14 / 20 题