diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/65720-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/65720-0.txt | 11425 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 11425 deletions
diff --git a/old/65720-0.txt b/old/65720-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 0fad9bd..0000000 --- a/old/65720-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,11425 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook, The Place of Animals in Human Thought, by -Contessa Evelyn Lilian Hazeldine Carrington Martinengo-Cesaresco - - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most -other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of -the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - - - - -Title: The Place of Animals in Human Thought - - -Author: Contessa Evelyn Lilian Hazeldine Carrington Martinengo-Cesaresco - - - -Release Date: June 29, 2021 [eBook #65720] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - - -***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE PLACE OF ANIMALS IN HUMAN -THOUGHT*** - - -E-text prepared by Turgut Dincer, Barry Abrahamsen, and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team (http://www.pgdp.net) from page images -generously made available by Internet Archive (https://archive.org) - - - -Note: Project Gutenberg also has an HTML version of this - file which includes the original illustrations. - See 65720-h.htm or 65720-h.zip: - (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/65720/65720-h/65720-h.htm) - or - (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/65720/65720-h.zip) - - - Images of the original pages are available through - Internet Archive. See - https://archive.org/details/cu31924028931629 - - -Transcriber’s note: - - Text that was in italics is enclosed by underscores (_italics_). - - - - - -THE PLACE OF ANIMALS IN HUMAN THOUGHT - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - -[Illustration: - - THE EMPEROR AKBAR personally directing the tying up of a wild - Elephant. - Tempera painting by Abu’l Fazl. (1597-98.) - Photographed for this work from the original in the India Museum.] - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -THE PLACE OF ANIMALS IN HUMAN THOUGHT - -by - -THE COUNTESS EVELYN MARTINENGO CESARESCO - - - “On ne connait rien que par bribes.”—M. BERTHELOT - - - - - - -New York -Charles Scribner’S Sons -153-157 Fifth Avenue -1909 - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - “C’est l’éternel secret qui veut être gardé.” - - - - - (_All rights reserved._) - - - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - PREFACE - - -AT the Congress held at Oxford in September, 1908, those who heard Count -Goblet d’Alviella’s address on the “Method and Scope of the History of -Religions” must have felt the thrill which announces the stirring of new -ideas, when, in a memorable passage, the speaker asked “whether the -psychology of animals has not equally some relation to the science of -religions?” At any rate, these words came to me as a confirmation of the -belief that the study which has engaged my attention for several years, -is rapidly advancing towards recognition as a branch of the inquiry into -what man is himself. The following chapters on the different answers -given to this question when extended from man to animals, were intended, -from the first, to form a whole, not complete, indeed, but perhaps -fairly comprehensive. I offer them now to the public with my warmest -acknowledgments to the scholars whose published works and, in some -cases, private hints have made my task possible. I also wish to thank -the Editor of the _Contemporary Review_ for his kindness in allowing me -to reprint the part of this book which appeared first in that -periodical. - -Some chapters refer rather to practice than to psychology, and others to -myths and fancies rather than to conscious speculation, but all these -subjects are so closely connected that it would be difficult to divide -their treatment by a hard-and-fast line. - -With regard to the illustrations, I am glad to bear grateful testimony -to the facilities afforded me by the Directors of the British Museum, -the Victoria and Albert Museum, the Hague Gallery, the National Museum -at Copenhagen, the Egypt Exploration Fund, and by the Secretary of State -for India. H.E. Monsieur Camille Barrère, French Ambassador at Rome, has -allowed me to include a photograph of his remarkably fine specimen of a -bronze cat; and I have obtained the sanction of Monsieur Marcel -Dieulafoy for the reproduction of one of Madame Dieulafoy’s photographs -which appeared in his magnificent work on “L’Art Antique de la Perse.” -Messrs. Macmillan & Co., Limited, and Messrs. Chapman and Hall, Limited, -have permitted photographs to be taken of two plates in books published -by them. Finally, Dr. C. Waldstein and Mr. E. B. Havell have been most -kind in helping me to give the correct description of some of the -plates. - -SALÒ, LAGO DI GARDA. - - _February 15, 1909._ - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - CONTENTS - - - I - - PAGE - SOUL-WANDERING AS IT CONCERNS ANIMALS 11 - - - II - - THE GREEK CONCEPTION OF ANIMALS 22 - - - III - - ANIMALS AT ROME 44 - - - IV - - PLUTARCH THE HUMANE 62 - - - V - - MAN AND HIS BROTHER 84 - - - VI - - THE FAITH OF IRAN 113 - - - VII - - ZOROASTRIAN ZOOLOGY 141 - - - VIII - - A RELIGION OF RUTH 166 - - - IX - - LINES FROM THE ADI GRANTH 201 - - - X - - THE HEBREW CONCEPTION OF ANIMALS 205 - - - XI - - “A PEOPLE LIKE UNTO YOU” 221 - - - XII - - THE FRIEND OF THE CREATURE 245 - - - XIII - - VERSIPELLES 265 - - - XIV - - THE HORSE AS HERO 281 - - - XV - - ANIMALS IN EASTERN FICTION 306 - - - XVI - - THE GROWTH OF MODERN IDEAS ABOUT ANIMALS 336 - - INDEX 367 - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - ILLUSTRATIONS - - - THE EMPEROR AKBAR PERSONALLY DIRECTING THE _Frontispiece_ - TYING UP OF A WILD ELEPHANT. Tempera painting - in the “Akbar Namah,” by Abu’l Fazl (1597-98). - India Museum. _Photographed for this work._ - - DEER WORSHIPPING THE WHEEL OF THE LAW. Tope of Sanchi, drawn 11 - by Lieut.-Col. Maisey - _From Fergusson’s “Tree and Serpent Worship.” By - permission of the India Office._ - - THE BUDDHISTIC TIGER 21 - _From a painting on silk by Ko-Tō in the British Museum. - Photographed for this work. - In Japanese Buddhism the Tiger is the type of Wisdom._ - - ORPHEUS 32 - _Fresco found at Pompeii._ (_Sommer._) - - STELE WITH CAT AND BIRD 40 - _Athens Museum._ - - CAPITOLINE SHE-WOLF 44 - (_Bruckmann._) Bronze statue. Early Etruscan style. - The twins are modern. - - LION BEING LED FROM THE ARENA BY A SLAVE 47 - _From the mosaic pavement of a Roman villa at Nennig._ - - BACCHUS RIDING ON A PANTHER 74 - _Mosaic found at Pompeii._ (_Sommer._) - - BRONZE STATUE OF AN EGYPTIAN CAT 82 - _From the Collection of H.E. Monsieur Camille Barrère, - French Ambassador at Rome_ - - REINDEER BROWSING. OLDER STONE AGE 86 - _Found in a cave at Thayngen in Switzerland._ - - HORSE DRAWING DISC OF THE SUN. OLDER BRONZE AGE 86 - _National Museum at Copenhagen._ - - HATHOR COW 102 - _Found in 1906 by Dr. Édouard Naville at Deir-el-bahari. - By permission of the Egypt Exploration Fund._ - - WILD GOATS AND YOUNG 108 - _Assyrian Relief. British Museum._ (_Mansell._) - - ASSYRIAN GOD CARRYING ANTELOPE AND WHEAT-EAR 116 - _British Museum._ (_Mansell._) - - COUNTING CATTLE 128 - _Egyptian Fresco. British Museum._ (_Mansell._) - - KING FIGHTING GRIFFIN (“BAD ANIMAL”) 142 - _Relief in Palace of Darius at Persepolis. Photographed - by Jane Dieulafoy. From “L’Art Antique de la Perse.” By - permission of M. Marcel Dieulafoy._ - - THE REAL DOG OF IRAN 152 - _Bronze Statuette found at Susa. Louvre. From Perrot’s - “History of Art in Ancient Persia.” By permission of - Messrs. Chapman & Hall, Ltd._ - - BUDDHA PACIFYING AN INTOXICATED ELEPHANT WHICH HAD BEEN SENT 188 - TO DESTROY HIM. THE ELEPHANT STOOPS IN ADORATION - Græco-Buddhist sculpture from a ruined monastery at - Takt-i-Bahi. _India Museum. Photographed for this work._ - - RECLINING BULL 192 - _Ancient Southern Indian sculpture. From a photograph in - the India Museum._ - - WILD BULLS AND TAMED BULLS 201 - _Reliefs on two gold cups found in a tomb at Vapheio near - Amyclae. Fifteenth century B.C. (possibly earlier). From - Schuckhardt’s “Schliemann’s Excavations.” By permission of - Messrs. Macmillan & Co., Ltd._ - - THE GARDEN OF EDEN 208 - _By Rubens. Hague Gallery._ (_Bruckmann._) - - GENESIS VIII. 212 - _Loggie di Raffaello. In the Vatican. Drawn by N. - Consoni._ - - DANIEL AND THE LIONS 216 - _From an early Christian Sarcophagus in S. Vitale, - Ravenna._ (_Alinari._) - - “AN INDIAN ORPHEUS” 222 - _Inlaid marble work panel originally surmounting a doorway - in the Great Hall of Audience in the Mogul Palace at Delhi - (about 1650). Photographed for this work from a painting - by a native artist in the India Museum. Imitated from a - painting by Raphael._ - - MOSLEM BEGGAR FEEDING DOGS AT CONSTANTINOPLE 226 - _From life._ - - ST. JEROME EXTRACTING A THORN FROM THE PAW OF A LION 253 - _By Hubert van Eyck. Naples Museum._ (_Anderson._) - - ST. EUSTACE (OR ST. HUBERT) AND THE STAG 256 - _By Vittore Pisano. National Gallery._ (_Hanfstängl._) - - “LE MENEUR DES LOUPS” 276 - _Designed and drawn by Maurice Sand._ - - THE ASSYRIAN HORSE 284 - _From a relief in the British Museum._ (_Mansell._) - - ARABIAN HORSE OF THE SAHARA 288 - _From life._ - - THE BANYAN DEER 328 - _From “Stûpa of Bharhut.” By General Cunningham. By - permission of the India Office._ (_Griggs._) - - EGYPTIAN OFFICIAL, WITH HIS WIFE, ENGAGED IN FOWLING IN THE 330 - PAPYRUS SWAMP. HIS HUNTING CAT HAS SEIZED THREE BIRDS. - _Mural painting in British Museum._ (_Mansell._) - - ASSYRIAN LION AND LIONESS IN PARADISE PARK 336 - _British Museum._ (_Mansell._) The King’s reservations - for big game were called “paradises.” - - LAMBS 338 - _Relief on a fifth century tomb at Ravenna._ (_Alinari._) - - “IL BUON PASTORE” 346 - _Mosaic in the Mausoleum of Galla Placidia at Ravenna._ - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -[Illustration: - - LT COL. MAISEY DEL. W. BRIGGS, LITH. - DEER WORSHIPPING THE WHEEL OF THE LAW. - Tope of Sanchi.] - - - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - The Place of Animals in Human Thought - - - - - I - - SOUL-WANDERING AS IT CONCERNS ANIMALS - - -IN one of these enigmatic sayings which launch the mind on boundless -seas, Cardinal Newman remarked that we know less of animals than of -angels. A large part of the human race explains the mystery by what is -called transmigration, metempsychosis, _Samsara_, _Seelenwanderung_; the -last a word so compact and picturesque that it is a pity not to imitate -it in English. The intelligibility of ideas depends much on whether -words touch the spring of the picture-making wheel of the brain; -“Soul-wandering” does this. - -Ancient as the theory is, we ought to remember what is commonly -forgotten—that somewhere in the distance we catch sight of a time when -it was unknown, at least in the sense of a procession of the soul from -death to life through animal forms. Traces of it are to be found in the -Sutras and it is thoroughly developed in the Upanishads, but if the -Sutras belong to the thirteenth century and the Upanishads to about the -year 700 before Christ, a long road still remains to the Vedas with -their fabulous antiquity. - -In the Vedas it is stated that the soul may wander, even during sleep, -and that it will surely have a further existence after death, but there -is nothing to show that in this further existence it will take the form -of an animal. Man will be substantially man, able to feel the same -pleasures as his prototype on earth; but if he goes to a good place, -exempt from the same pains. What, then, was the Vedic opinion of -animals? On the whole, it is safe to assume that the authors of the -Vedic chants believed that animals, like men, entered a soul-world in -which they preserved their identity. The idea of funeral sacrifices, as -exemplified in these earliest records, was that of sending some one -before. The horse and the goat that were immolated at a Vedic funeral -were intended to go and announce the coming of the man’s soul. Wherever -victims were sacrificed at funerals, they were originally meant to do -something in the after-life; hence they must have had souls. The origin -of the Suttee was the wish that the wife should accompany her husband, -and among primitive peoples animals were sacrificed because the dead man -might have need of them. Not very long ago an old Irish woman, on being -remonstrated with for having killed her dead husband’s horse, replied -with the words, “Do you think I would let my man go on foot in the next -world?” On visiting that wonderfully emotion-awakening relic, the Viking -ship at Christiania, I was interested to see the bones of the Chief’s -horses and dogs as well as his own. Did the Norsemen, passionately -devoted to the sea as they were, suppose, that not only the animals, but -also the vessel in which they buried their leader, would have a ghostly -second existence? I have no doubt that they did. Apart from what hints -may be gleaned from the Vedas, there is an inherent probability against -the early Aryans, any more than the modern Hindu, believing that the -soul of man or beast comes suddenly to a full stop. To destroy spirit -seems to the Asiatic mind as impossible as to destroy matter seems to -the biologist. - -Leaving the Vedas and coming down to the Sutras and Upanishads, we -discover the transmigration of souls at first suggested and then clearly -defined. Whence came it? Was it the belief of those less civilised -nations whom the Aryans conquered, and did they, in accepting it from -them, give it a moral complexion by investing it with the highly ethical -significance of an upward or downward progress occasioned by the merits -or demerits of the soul in a previous state of being? - -A large portion of mankind finds it as difficult to conceive a sudden -beginning as a sudden end of spirit. We forget difficulties which we -are not in the habit of facing; those who have tried to face this one -have generally stumbled over it. Even Dante with his subtle -psychophysiological reasoning hardly persuades. The ramifications of a -life before stretched far: “Whosoever believes in the fabled prior -existence of souls, let him be anathema,” thundered the Council of -Constantinople, A.D. 543. Which shows that many Christians shared -Origen’s views on this subject. - -From the moment that soul-wandering became, in India, a well-established -doctrine, some three thousand years ago, the conception of the status of -animals was perfectly clear. “Wise people,” says the Bhagavad Gita, “see -the same soul (Atman) in the Brahman, in worms and insects, in the -outcasts, in the dog and the elephant, in beasts, cows, gadflies, and -gnats.” Here we have the doctrine succinctly expounded, and in spite of -subtleties introduced by later philosophers (such as that of the -outstanding self) the exposition holds good to this day as a statement -of the faith of India. It also described the doctrine of Pythagoras, -which ancient traditions asserted that he brought from Egypt, where no -such doctrine ever existed. Pythagoras is still commonly supposed to -have borrowed from Egypt; but it is strange that a single person should -continue to hold an opinion against which so much evidence has been -produced; especially as it is surely very easy to explain the tradition -by interpreting Egypt to have stood for “the East” in common parlance, -exactly as in Europe a tribe of low caste Indians came to be called -gypsies or Egyptians. Pythagoras believed that he had been one of the -Trojan heroes, whose shield he knew at a glance in the Temple of Juno -where it was hung up. After him, Empedocles thought that he had passed -through many forms, amongst others those of a bird and a fish. -Pythagoras and his fire-spent disciple belong to times which seem almost -near if judged by Indian computations: yet they are nebulous figures; -they seem to us, and perhaps they seemed to men who lived soon after -them, more like mysterious, half Divine bearers of a word than men of -flesh and blood. But Plato, who is real to us and who has influenced so -profoundly modern thought, Plato took their theory and displayed it to -the Western world as the most logical explanation of the mystery of -being. - -The theory of transmigration did not commend itself to Roman thinkers, -though it was admirably stated by a Roman poet:— - - “Omnia mutantur: nihil interit. Errat, et illinc - Huc venit, hinc illuc, et quoslibet occupat artus - Spiritus, eque feris, humana in corpora transit, - Inque feras noster, nec tempore deperit ullo. - Utque novis facilis signatur cera figuris, - Nec manet ut fuerat, nec formas servat easdem, - Sed tamen ipsa eadem est: animam sic semper eandem - Esse.” - -This description is as accurate as it is elegant; but it remains a -question whether Ovid had anything deeper than a folk-lorist’s interest -in transmigration joined to a certain sympathy which it often inspires -in those who are fond of animals. The enthusiastic folk-lorist finds -himself believing in all sorts of things at odd times. Lucian’s admirers -at Rome doubtless enjoyed his ridiculous story of a Pythagorean cock -which had been a man, a woman, a prince, a subject, a fish, a horse and -a frog, and which summed up its varied experience in the judgment that -man was the most wretched and deplorable of all creatures, all others -patiently grazing within the enclosures of Nature while man alone breaks -out and strays beyond those safe limits. This story was retold with -great gusto by Erasmus. The Romans were a people with inclusive -prejudices, and they were not likely to welcome a narrowing of the gulf -between themselves and the beasts of the field. Cicero’s dictum that, -while man looks before and after, analysing the past and forecasting the -future, animals have only the perception of the present, does not go to -the excess of those later theorists who, like Descartes, reduced animals -to automata, but it goes farther than scientific writers on the subject -would now allow to be justified. - -It is worth while asking, what was it that so powerfully attracted Plato -in the theory of transmigration? I think that Plato, who made a science -of the moral training of the mind, was attracted by soul-wandering as a -scheme of soul-evolution. Instead of looking at it as a matter of fact -which presupposed an ethical root (which is the Indian view), he looked -upon it as an ethical root which presupposed a matter of fact. He was -influenced a little, no doubt, by the desire to get rid of Hades, “an -unpleasant place,” as he says, “and not true,” for which he felt a -peculiar antipathy, but he was influenced far more by seeing in -soul-wandering a rational theory of the ascent of the soul, a Darwinism -of the spirit. “We are plants,” he said, “not of earth but of heaven,” -but it takes the plants of heaven a long time to grow. - -We ought to admire the Indian mind, which first seized the idea of time -in relation to development and soared out of the cage of history -(veritable or imaginary) into liberal æons to account for one perfect -soul, one plant that had accomplished its heavenly destiny. But though -the Indian seer argues with Plato that virtue has its own reward (not so -much an outward reward of improved environment as an inward reward of -approximation to perfection), he disagrees with the Greek philosopher -with regard to the practical result of all this as it affects any of us -personally. Plato found the theory of transmigration entirely consoling; -the Indian finds it entirely the reverse. Can the reason be that Plato -took the theory as a beautiful symbol while the Indian takes it as a -dire reality? - -The Hindu is as much convinced that the soul is re-born in different -animals as we are that children are born of women. He is convinced of -it, but he is not consoled by it. Let us reflect a little: does not one -life give us time to get somewhat tired of it; how should we feel after -fifteen hundred lives? The wandering Jew has never been thought an -object of envy, but the wandering soul has a wearier lot; it knows the -sorrows of all creation. - - “How many births are past I cannot tell, - How many yet may be no man may say, - But this alone I know and know full well, - That pain and grief embitter all the way.”[1] - -Footnote 1: - - “Folk-Songs of Southern India,” by Charles E. Gover, a fascinating but - little-known work. - -Rather than this—death. How far deeper the gloom revealed by these lines -from the folk-songs of an obscure Dravidian tribe living in the Nilgiri -Hills, than any which cultured Western pessimism can show! Compared with -them, the despairing cry of Baudelaire seems almost a hymn of joy:— - - “’Tis death that cheers and gives us strength to live, - ’Tis life’s chief aim, sole hope that can abide, - Our wine, elixir, glad restorative - Whence we gain heart to walk till eventide. - - Through snow, through frost, through tempests it can give - Light that pervades th’ horizon dark and wide; - The inn which makes secure when we arrive - Our food and sleep, all labour laid aside. - - It is an Angel whose magnetic hand - Gives quiet sleep and dreams of extasy, - And strews a bed for naked folk and poor. - - ’Tis the god’s prize, the mystic granary, - The poor man’s purse and his old native land, - And of the unknown skies the opening door.” - -Folk-songs are more valuable aids than the higher literature of nations -in an inquiry as to what they really believe. The religion of the -Dravidian mountaineers is purely Aryan (though their race is not); their -songs may be taken, therefore, as Aryan documents. They are particularly -characteristic of the dual belief as to a future state which is, to this -day, widely diffused. How firmly these people believe in transmigration -the quatrain quoted above bears witness; yet they also believe that -souls are liable to immediate judgment. This contradiction is explained -by the theory that a long interval may elapse between death and -re-incarnation and that during this interval the soul meets with a -reward or punishment. To say the truth, the explanation sounds a rather -lame one. Is it not more likely that the idea of immediate judgment, -wherever it appears, is a relic of Vedic belief which has to be -reconciled, as best it can, with the later idea of transmigration? The -Dravidian songs are remarkable for their strong inculcation of regard -for animals. In their impressive funeral dirge which is a public -confession of the dead man’s sins, it is owned that he killed a snake, a -lizard and a harmless frog. And that not mere lifetaking was the point -condemned, is clearly proved by the further admission that the -delinquent put the young ox to the plough before it was strong enough to -work. In a Dravidian vision of Heaven and Hell certain of the Blest are -perceived milking their happy kine, and it is explained that these are -they who, when they saw the lost kine of neighbour or stranger in the -hills, drove them home nor left them to perish from tiger or wolf. -Surely in this, as in the Jewish command which it so closely resembles, -we may read mercy to beast as well as to man. - -It is sometimes said that there is as much cruelty to animals in India -as anywhere. Some of this cruelty (as it seems to us) is caused directly -by reluctance to take life; of the other sort, caused by callousness, it -can be only said that the human brute grows under every sky. One great -fact is admitted: children are not cruel in India: Victor Hugo could not -have written his terrible poem about the tormented toad in India. I -think it a mistake to attribute the Indian sentiment towards animals -wholly to transmigration; nevertheless, it may be granted that such a -belief fosters such a sentiment. Indeed, if it were allowable to look -upon the religion of the many as the morality of the one, it would seem -natural to suppose that the theory of transmigration was invented by -some creature-loving sage on purpose to give men a fellow-feeling for -their humbler relations. Even so, many a bit of innocent folk-fable has -served as “protective colouration” to beast or bird: the legend of the -robin who covered up the Babes in the Wood; the legend of the swallow -who did some little service to the crucified Saviour, and how many other -such tender fancies. Who invented them, and why? - -If Plato had wished simply to find a happy substitute for Hades, he -might have found it—had he looked far enough—in the Vedic kingdom of the -sun, radiant and eternal, where sorrow is not, where the crooked are -made straight, ruled over by Yama the first man to die and the first to -live again, death’s bright angel, lord of the holy departed—how far from -Pluto and the “Tartarean grey.” It would not have provided a solution to -the mystery of being, but it might have made many converts, for after a -happy heaven all antiquity thirsted. - -[Illustration: - - THE BUDDHISTIC TIGER. - British Museum. - (_From a painting on silk by Ko-Tō._)] - -It is not sure if the scheme of existence mapped out in soul-wandering -is really more consoling for beast than for man. It is a poor compliment -to some dogs to say that they have been some men. Then again, it is -recognised as easier for a dog to be good than for a man to be good, but -after a dog has passed his little life in well-doing he dies with the -prospect that his spirit, which by his merits becomes again a man, will -be sent down, by that man’s transgressions, to the society of jackals. -According to the doctrine of soul-wandering, animals are, in brief, the -Purgatory of men. Just as prayers for the dead (which means, prayers for -the remission to them of a merited period of probation) represent an -important branch of Catholic observances, so prayers for the remission -of a part of the time which souls would otherwise spend in animal forms -constitute the most vital and essential feature in Brahmanical worship. - -Of course, this is also true of Buddhism, to which many people think -that the theory of soul-wandering belongs exclusively, unmindful that -the older faith has it as well. The following hymn, used in Thibet, -shows how accurately the name of Purgatory applies to the animal -incarnations of the soul:— - - “If we [human beings] have amassed any merit - In the three states, - We rejoice in this good fortune when we consider - The unfortunate lot of the poor [lower] animals, - Piteously engulphed in the ocean of misery; - On their behalf, we now turn the Wheel of Religion.” - -There are grounds for thinking that the purgatorial view of animals was -part of the religious beliefs of the highly civilised native races of -South America. The Christianised Indians are very gentle in their ways -towards animals, while among the savage tribes in Central Peru (which -are probably degraded off-shoots from the people of the Incas) the -belief still survives that good men become monkeys or jaguars, and bad -men parrots or reptiles. For the rest, soul-wandering has an enduring -fascination for the human mind. - -In January, 1907, Leandro Improta, a young man well furnished with -worldly goods, shot himself in a café at Naples. His pocket was found to -contain a letter in which he said that the act was prompted by a desire -to study metempsychosis; much had been written on the subject, but it -pleased him better to discover than to talk: “so I determined to die and -see whether I shall be re-born in the form of some animal. It would be -delightful to return to this world as a lion or a rat.” It might not -prove delightful after all! - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - II - - THE GREEK CONCEPTION OF ANIMALS - - -“THE heralds brought a sacred hecatomb to the gods through the city and -the long-haired Grecians were assembled under the shady grove of -far-darting Apollo, but when they had tasted the upper flesh and had -drawn it out, having divided the shares, they made a delightful feast.” -In this description the poet of the Odyssey not only calls up a -wonderfully vivid picture of an ancient fête-day, but also shows the -habit of mind of the Homeric Greeks in regard to animal food. They were -voracious eaters—although the frequent reference to feasts ought not to -make us suppose that meat was their constant diet; rather the reverse, -for then it would not have been so highly rated. But when they had the -chance, they certainly did eat with unfastidious copiousness and -unashamed enjoyment. It is not pleasant to read about, for it sets one -thinking of things by no means far away or old; for instance, of the -disappearance of half-cooked beef at some Continental _tables d’hôte_. -We find that Homer is painfully near us. But in Homeric times the ghost -of a scruple had to be laid before the feast could be enjoyed. Animal -food was still closely connected with the idea of sacrifice. Sacrifice -lends distinction to subject as well as object; it was some atonement to -the animal to dedicate him to the gods. He was covered with garlands and -attended by long-robed priests; his doom was his triumph. The devoted -heifer or firstling of the flock was glorified beyond all its kind. Some -late sceptic of the _Anthology_ asked what possible difference it could -make to the sheep whether it were devoured by a wolf or sacrificed to -Herakles so that he might protect the sheepfold from wolves? But -scepticism is a poor thing. From immolation to apotheosis there is but a -step; how many human victims willingly bowed their heads to the knife! - -The sacrificial aspect of the slaughter of domestic animals took a -strong hold of the popular imagination. It is still suggested by the -procession of garlanded beasts which traverses the Italian village on -the approach of Easter: the only time of year when the Italian peasant -touches meat. In the tawdry travesty of the _Bœuf gras_, though the -origin is the same, every shred of the old significance is lost, but -among simple folk south of the Alps, unformed thoughts which know not -whence they come still contribute a sort of religious glamour to that -last pageant. Far back, indeed, stretches the procession of the victims, -human and animal—for wherever there was animal sacrifice, at some remote -epoch, “the goat without horns” was also offered up. - -The Homeric Greeks had no butchers; they did the slaying of beasts -themselves or their priests did it for them. Agamemnon kills the boar -sacrificed to Zeus with his own hands, which are first uplifted in -prayer. The commonest meat was the flesh of swine, as may be seen by the -pig of Æsop which replied, on being asked by the sheep why he cried out -when caught, “They take you for your wool or milk, but me for my life.” -In Homer, however, there is much talk of fatted sheep, kids and oxen, -and there is even mention of killing a cow. The Athenians had qualms -about slaughtering the ox, the animal essential to agriculture—though -they did it—but the Homeric Greek was not troubled by such thoughts. He -was not over nice about anything; he was his own cook, and he did not -lose his appetite while he roasted his bit of meat on the spit. A Greek -repast of that age would have shocked the abstemious Indian as much as -the Hindu reformer, Keshub Chunder Sen, confessed to have been shocked -by the huge joints on English sideboards. - -Putting aside his meat-eating proclivities, for which we cannot throw -stones at him, the Greek of the Iliad and of the Odyssey is the friend -of his beast. He does not regard it as his long-lost brother, but he -sees in it a devoted servant; sometimes more than human in love if less -than human in wit. His point of view, though detached, was appreciative. -Practically it was the point of view of the twentieth century. Homer -belongs to the Western world, and in a great measure to the modern -Western world. He had no racial fellow-feeling with animals; yet he -could feel for the sparrow that flutters round its murdered young ones -and for the vulture that rends the air with cries when the countryman -takes its fledglings from the nest. He could shed one immortal tear over -the faithful hound that recognises his master and dies. “There lay the -dog Argus, full of vermin.” If it had not been a living creature, what -sight could have more repelled human eyes? But with dog as with man, the -miserable body is as naught beside—what in the man we call the soul. “He -fawned with his tail and laid down both his ears, but he could no more -come nearer his master.” All the sense of disgust is gone and there is -something moist, perhaps, in our eyes too, though it is not the ichor of -immortality. - -Giving names to animals is the first instinctive confession that they -are not _things_. What sensible man ever called his table Carlo or his -inkpot Trilby? Homer gives his horses the usual names of horses in his -day; this is shown by the fact that he calls more than one horse by the -same name. Hector’s steeds were Xanthus, Æthon and noble Lampus; often -would Andromache mix wine for them even before she attended to the wants -of her husband, or offer them the sweet barley with her own white hands. -Æthe is the name of Agamemnon’s graceful and fleet-footed mare. Xanthus -and Balius, offspring of Podarges, are the horses which Achilles -received from his father. He bids them bring their charioteer back in -safety to the body of the Greeks—and then follows the impressive -incident of the warning given to him of his impending fate. The horse -Xanthus bends low his head: his long mane, which is collected in a ring, -droops till it touches the ground. Hera gives him power of speech and he -tells how, though the steeds of Achilles will do their part right well, -not all their swiftness, not all their faithful service can save their -master from the doom that even now is drawing near. “The furies restrain -the voice”: the laws which govern the natural order of things must not -be violated. “O Xanthus,” cries Achilles, “O Xanthus, why dost thou -predict my death?... Well do I know myself that it is my fate to perish -here, far away from my dear father and mother!” It is the passionate cry -of the Greek, the lover of life as none has loved it, the lover of the -sweet air gladdened by the sun. - -Many a soldier may have spoken to his horse, half in jest, as Achilles -spoke to Xanthus and Balius: “bring me safely out of the fray.” The -supernatural and terrible reply comes with the shock of the unforeseen, -like a clap of thunder on a calm day. This incident is a departure from -the usual Homeric conventionality, for it takes us into the domain of -real magic. The belief that animals know things that we know not, and -see things that we see not, is scattered over all the earth. Are there -not still good people who feel an “eerie” sensation when a cat stares -fixedly into vacancy in the twilight? “Eerie” sensations count for much -in early beliefs, but what counts for more is the observation of actual -facts which are not and, perhaps, cannot be explained. The uneasiness of -animals before an earthquake, or the refusal of some animals to go to -sea on ships which afterwards come to grief—to refer to only two -instances of a class of phenomena the existence of which cannot be -gainsaid—would be sufficient to convince any savage or any primitive man -that animals have foreknowledge. If they know the future on one point, -why should they not know it on others? The primitive man generally -starts from something which he deems _certain_; he deals in -“certainties” far more than in hypotheses, and when he has seized a -“certainty” in his own fashion he draws logical deductions from it. -Savages and children have a ruthless logic of their own. - -The prophetic power of animals has important bearings on the subject of -divination. In cases of animal portents the later theory may have been -that the animal was the passive instrument or medium of a superior -power; but it is not likely that this was the earliest theory. The -goddess did not use Xanthus as a mouthpiece: she simply gave him the -faculty of speech so that he could say what he already knew. The second -sight of animals was believed to be communicable to man through their -flesh, and especially through their blood. Porphyry says plainly that -diviners fed on the hearts of crows, vultures, and moles (the heart -being the fountain of the blood), because in this manner they partook of -the souls of these animals, and received the influence of the gods who -accompanied these souls. The blood conveyed the qualities of the spirit. -In my opinion the Hebrew ordinance against partaking of the blood was -connected with this idea; the soul was not to be meddled with. I do not -know if attention has been paid to the remarkable juxtaposition of the -blood prohibition with enchantment in Leviticus xix. 26. The Institutes -of Manu clearly indicate that the blood was not to be swallowed because, -by doing so, could be procured an illicit mixing up of personality: the -most awful of sins, more awful because so much more mysterious than our -mediæval “pact,” or selling the soul to the devil. A knowledge of magic -is essential to the true comprehension of all sacred writings. - -That animals formerly talked with human voices was the genuine belief of -most early races, but there are few traces of it in Greek literature. A -hint of a real folk-belief is to be found, perhaps, in the remark of -Clytemnestra, who says of Cassandra, when she will not descend from the -car that has brought her, a prisoner, to Agamemnon’s palace:— - - “I wot—unless like swallows she doth use - _Some strange barbarian tongue from over sea_, - My words must bring persuasion to her soul.” - -But such hints are not frequent. The stories of “talking beasts” which -enjoyed an immense popularity in Greece were founded on as conscious -“make-believe” as the Beast tales of the Middle Ages. From the “Battle -of the Frogs and Mice” to Æsop’s fables, and from these to the comedies -of Aristophanes, the animals are meant to hold up human follies to -ridicule or human virtues to admiration. The object was to instruct -while amusing when it was not to amuse without instructing. Æsop hardly -asks the most guileless to believe that his stories are of the “all -true” category—which is why children rarely quite take them to their -hearts. At the same time, he shows a close study of the idiosyncrasies -of animals, so close that there is little to alter in his -characterisation. Out of the mass of stories in the collection -attributed to him, one or two only seem to carry us back to a more -ingenuous age. The following beautiful little tale of the “Lion’s -Kingdom” is vaguely reminiscent of the world-tradition of a “Peace in -Nature.” - -“The beasts of the field and forest had a lion as their king. He was -neither wrathful, cruel, nor tyrannical, but just and gentle as a king -could be. He made during his reign a proclamation for a general assembly -of all the birds and beasts, and drew up conditions for an universal -league in which the Wolf and the Lamb, the Panther and the Kid, the -Tiger and the Stag, the Dog and the Hare, should live together in -perfect peace and amity. The Hare said, ‘Oh, how I have longed to see -this day, in which the weak shall take their place with impunity by the -side of the strong.’” - -The temper of a people towards animals can be judged from its sports. It -has been well said, Who could imagine Pericles presiding over a “Roman -holiday”? Wanton cruelty to animals seemed to the Greeks an outrage to -the gods. The Athenians inflicted a fine on a vivisector of the name of -Xenocrates (he called himself a “philosopher”) who had skinned a goat -alive. In Greece, from Homeric times downwards, the most favourite sport -was the chariot-race which, at first, possessed the importance of a -religious event, and always had a dignity above that of a mere pastime. -The horses received their full share of honour and glory; for many -centuries the graves of Cimon’s mares, with which he had thrice -conquered at the Olympian games, were pointed out to the stranger, near -his own tomb. - -In the ancient Greek as in the modern world, while the majority held the -views about animals which I have briefly sketched, a small minority held -views of quite a different kind. It may be that no outward agency is -required to cause the periodical appearance of men who are driven from -the common road by the nostalgia of a state in which the human creature -had not learnt to shed blood. The earliest tradition agrees with the -latest science in testifying that man did not always eat flesh. It seems -as if sometimes, in every part of the earth, an irresistible impulse -takes hold of him to resume his primal harmlessness. It is natural, -however, that students should have sought some more definite explanation -for the introduction of the Orphic sect into Greece, where it can be -traced to about the time generally given to Buddha—the sixth century -B.C. Some have conjectured that dark-skinned, white-robed missionaries -from India penetrated into Europe as we know that they penetrated into -China, bringing with them the gospel of the unity of all sentient -things. Others agree with what seems to have been thought by Herodotus: -that wandering pilgrims brought home treasured secrets from the temple -of Ammon or some other of those Egyptian shrines with which the Greeks -constantly kept up certain _rapports_. It may be, now, that these two -theories will be abandoned in favour of a third which would refer the -origin of the Orphists to Ægean times and suppose them to be the last -followers of an earlier faith. When they do come into history, it is as -poor and ignorant people—like the Doukhobors of to-day—whose obscurity -might well account for their having remained long unobserved. But this -is no reason for concluding that their beginnings were obscure. - -What is best understood about them is that they abstained rigorously -from flesh except during the rare performance of some rite of -purification, in which they tasted the blood of a bull which was -supposed to procure mystic union with the divine. As happened with the -performers of other cruel or horrid rites, the transcendent significance -they ascribed to the act paralysed their power of recognising its -revolting nature. A diseased spiritualism which ignores matter -altogether is the real key to such phenomena. It is too soon to say -whether any link can be established between the Orphic practices and the -so-called “bull-fights” of which traces have been found in Crete. -Despised and tabooed though they were in historical Greece, the Orphists -are still held to have exercised some sure though undefined influence on -the development of the greatest spiritual fact of Hellenic civilisation, -the Eleusinian Mysteries. - -[Illustration: - - (_Photo:_ _Sommer_) - ORPHEUS. - (_Fresco at Pompeii._)] - -The popular description of Orpheus as founder of the Orphists must be -taken for what it is worth. The sect may have either evolved or borrowed -the legend. Christianity itself appropriated the myth of Orpheus, -pictorially, at least, in those rude tracings in the Roman catacombs -showing the Good Shepherd in that character, which inspired Carlyle to -write one of the most impassioned passages in English prose. The sweet -lute-player who held entranced lion and lamb till the one forgot his -wrath and the other his fear, was the natural symbol of the prototype of -a humane religion. - -Out of the nebulous patches of Greek enthusiasts who cherished tender -feelings towards animals, emerges the intellectual sun of the Samian -sage. It is difficult not to connect Pythagoras in some way with the -Orphists, nor would such a connexion make it the less probable that he -journeyed to the sacred East in search of fuller knowledge. Little, -indeed, do we know about this moulder of minds. He passed across the -world’s stage dark “with excess of light”—an influence rather than a -personality. Yet he was as far as possible from being only a dreamer of -dreams; he was the Newton, the Galileo, perhaps the Edison and Marconi -of his epoch. And it was this double character of moral teacher and man -of science which caused the extraordinary reverence with which he was -regarded. Science and religion were not divorced then; the Prophet could -present no credentials so valid as an understanding of the laws which -govern the universe. Mathematics and astronomy were revelations of -divine truth. It was the scientific insight of Pythagoras, the wonderful -range and depth of which is borne out more and more by modern -discoveries, that lent supreme importance to whatever theories he was -known to have held. The doctrine of transmigration had not been treated -seriously while it was only preached by the Orphists, but after it was -adopted by Pythagoras it commanded a wide attention, though it never won -a large acceptance. One expounder it had, who was too remarkable an -original thinker to be called a mere disciple—the greatly-gifted -Empedocles, who denounced the eaters of flesh as no better than -cannibals, which was going further than Pythagoras himself had ever -gone. - -Even in antiquity, there were some who suspected that at the bottom of -the Pythagorean propaganda was the wish to make men more humane. Without -taking that view, it may be granted that a strong love of animals -prepares the mind to think of them as not so very different from men. A -thing that tends in the same direction is the unfavourable comparison of -some men with some beasts: the sort of sentiment which made Madame de -Staël say that the more she knew of men the more she liked dogs. Did not -Darwin declare that he would as soon be descended from that heroic -little monkey who braved his dreaded enemy to save the life of his -keeper, or from that old baboon who, descending from the mountains, -carried away in triumph his young comrade from a crowd of astonished -dogs, as from various still extant races of mankind? Darwinism is really -the theory of Pythagoras with the supernatural element left out. The -homogeneity of living things is one of the very old beliefs from which -we strayed and to which we are returning. - -Among the Greeks, sensitive and meditative minds which did not place -faith in the Pythagorean system of life were attracted, nevertheless, by -its speculative possibilities which they bent to their own purposes. -Thus Socrates borrowed from Pythagoras when he suggested that imperfect -and earth-bound spirits might be re-incorporated in animals whose -conventionally ascribed characteristics corresponded with their own -moral natures. Unjust, tyrannical, and violent men would become wolves, -hawks, and kites, while good commonplace people—virtuous -Philistines—would take better forms, such as ants, bees, and wasps, all -of which live harmoniously in communities. It is pleasant to find that -Socrates did justice to that intelligent insect, the undeservedly -aspersed wasp. Men who are good in all respects save the highest, may -re-assume human forms. Socrates does not explain why it is that humanity -progresses so slowly if it is always being recruited from such good -material? He passes on from these righteous men to the super-excellent -man to whom alone he allots translation into a divine and wholly -immaterial sphere; he it is who departs from this world completely pure -of earthly dross; who cannot be moved by ill-fortune, poverty, disgrace; -who has “overcome the world” in the Pauline sense, who has died while -living, in the Indian sense. Though Socrates does not say so, it is this -super-excellent man who really convinces him of the immortality of the -soul according to the meaning which we attach to these words. - -That the more tender and poetic aspects of Pythagorean speculations had -deeply impressed Socrates can be seen by the fact that they recurred to -his mind in the most solemn hour of his life. From these he drew the -lovely parable with which he gently reproved the friends who were come -to take leave of him for their surprise at finding him no wise -depressed. He asks if he appears to them inferior in divination to the -swans, who, when they perceive that they must die, though given to song -before, then sing the most of all, delighted at the prospect of their -departure to the deity whose ministers they are. Mankind has said -falsely of the swans that they sing through dread of death and from -grief. Those who say this do not reflect that no bird sings when it is -hungry or cold or afflicted with any other pain, not even the -nightingale or swallow or hoopoe, which are said to sing a dirge-like -strain, “but neither do they appear to me to sing for grief nor do the -swans, but as pertaining to Apollo they are skilled in the divining art, -and having a foreknowledge of the bliss in Hades, they express their joy -in song on that day rather than at any previous time. But I believe -myself to be a fellow-servant of the swans and consecrated to the same -divinity, and that I am no less gifted by my master in the art of -divination, nor am I departing with less good grace than they.” - -Socrates would not have been “the wisest of men” if he had dogmatised -about the unknowable; to insist, he says, that things were just as he -described them, would not become an intelligent being; he only claimed -an approximate approach to the truth. In appearance Plato went nearer to -dogmatic acceptance of the theory of the transmigration of souls, but -probably it was in appearance only. Like his master, he thought it -reasonable to suppose that the human soul ascended if it had done well, -and descended if it had done ill, and of this ascent and descent he took -as symbol its attirement in higher or lower corporeal forms till, freed -from the corruptible, it joined the incorruptible. - -The Greeks were the first people to have an insatiable thirst for exact -knowledge; they showed themselves true precursors of the modern world by -their researches into scientific zoology, which were carried on with -zeal long before Aristotle took the subject in hand. We cannot judge of -these early researches because they are nearly all lost; but Aristotle’s -“History of Animals,” even after the revival of learning, was still -consulted as a text-book, and perhaps nothing that he wrote contributed -more to win for him the fame of - - “... maestro di color che sanno.” - -The story goes that this work was written by desire of Alexander the -Great or, as some say, Philip of Macedon, and that the writer was given -a sum which sounds fabulous in order that he might obtain the best -available information. What interest most the modern reader are the -“sayings by the way” on the moral qualities or the intelligence of -animals. “Man and the mule,” says Aristotle, “are always tame”—a -classification not very complimentary to man. The ox is gentle, the wild -boar is violent, crafty the serpent, noble and generous the lion. Except -in the senses of touch and taste, man is far surpassed by the other -animals—a remark that was endorsed by St. Thomas Aquinas, who inferred -from the limitation of man’s senses that he would have made bad use of -them if they had been more acute. Aristotle laid down the axiom that man -alone can reason, though other animals can remember and learn, but he -never pursued this theory as far as it was pushed by Descartes, much -less by Malebranche. He believed that the soul of infants differed in no -respect from that of animals. All animals present traces of their moral -disposition, though these distinctions are more marked in man. Animals -understand signs and sounds, and can be taught. The females are less -ready to help the males in distress than the males are to help the -females. Bears carry off their cubs with them if they are pursued. The -dolphin is remarkable for the love of its young ones; two dolphins were -seen supporting a small dead dolphin on their backs, that was about to -sink, as if in pity for it, to keep it from being devoured by wild -creatures. In herds of horses, if a mare dies, other mares will bring up -the foal, and mares without foals have been known to entice foals to -follow them and to show much affection to them, though they die for want -of their natural sustenance. - -Aristotle says that music attracts some animals; for instance, deer can -be captured by singing and playing on the pipe. Animals sometimes show -fore-thought, as the ichneumon, which does not attack the asp till it -has called others to help it—which reminds one of the dog whose master -took him to Exeter, where he was badly treated by the yard-dog of the -inn; on this, he escaped and went to London, whence he returned with a -powerful dog-friend who gave the yard-dog a lesson which he must have -long remembered. Hedgehogs are said by Aristotle and other ancient -authors to change the entrance of their burrows according as the wind -blows from north or south; a man in Byzantium got no small fame as a -weather prophet by observing this habit. He thinks that small animals -are generally cleverer than larger ones. A tame woodpecker placed an -almond in a crevice of wood so as to be able to break it, which it -succeeded in doing with three blows. Aristotle does not mention the -similar ingenuity of the thrush which I have noticed myself; it brings -snails to a good flat stone on which it breaks the shell by knocking it -up and down. He admired the skill of the swallow in making her nest. -Although he knew of the migrations of birds, and declared that cranes go -in winter to the sources of the Nile, “where there is a race of -pigmies—no fable, but a fact,” he was not free from the erroneous idea -(which is to be found in modern folk-lore) that some birds hybernate in -caves, out of which they emerge, almost featherless, in the spring. Of -the nightingale, he says that it sings ceaselessly for fifteen days and -nights when the mountains are thick with leaves. - -The spider’s art and graceful movements receive due praise, as do the -cleanly habits of bees, which are said to sting people who use unguents -because they dislike bad smells. “Bright and shiny bees” Aristotle -asserts to be idle, “like women.” - -Of all animals his favourites are the lion and the elephant. The lion is -gentle when he is not hungry and he is not jealous or suspicious. He is -fond of playing with animals that are brought up with him, and he gets -to have a real affection for them. If a blow aimed at a lion fails, he -only shakes and frightens his attacker, and then leaves him without -hurting him. He never shows fear or turns his back on a foe. But old -lions that are unable to hunt sometimes enter villages and attack -mankind. This is the first observation of the “man-eating” lion or -tiger, and the reason given for his perverse conduct is still believed -to be the right one. - -Aristotle assigned the palm of wisdom to the elephant, a creature -abounding in intellect, tame, gentle, teachable, and one which can even -learn how to “worship the king”—which is what many of us saw the -elephants do at the Delhi Durbar. - -[Illustration: - - STELE WITH CAT AND BIRD. - Athens Museum.] - -In a later age, Apollonius of Tyana confirmed from personal observation -all Aristotle’s praise; he watched with admiration the crossing of the -Indus by a herd of thirty elephants which were being pursued by -huntsmen; the light and small ones went first, then the mothers, who -held up their cubs with tusk and trunk, and lastly the old and large -elephants. Pliny gave a similar account of the way in which elephants -cross rivers, and it is, I believe, still noticed as a fact that the old -ones send the young ones before them. The officer whose duty it was to -superintend the embarcation of Indian elephants for Abyssinia during the -campaign of Sir Robert Napier told me how a very fine old elephant, who -perfectly understood the business in hand, drove all the others on -board, but after performing this useful service, when it came to be his -turn, he refused resolutely to move an inch, and had to be left behind. -The sympathy with animals for which Apollonius was remarkable made him -feel for these great beasts brought into subjection; he declares that at -night they mourn over their lost liberty with peculiar piteous sounds -unlike those which they make usually; if a man approaches, however, they -cease their wailing out of respect for him. He speaks of their -attachment to their keeper, how they eat bread from his hand like a dog -and caress him with their trunks. He saw an elephant at Taxila which was -said to have fought against Alexander the Great three hundred and fifty -years before. Alexander named it Ajax, and it bore golden bracelets on -its trunk with the words: “Ajax. To the Sun from Alexander son of Jove.” -The people decked it with garlands and anointed it with precious salves. -Several classical writers bore witness to the pleasure which elephants -took in music; they could be made to dance to the pipe. It was also said -that they could write. Their crowning merit—that of helping away wounded -comrades, which is vouched for by no less an authority than Mr. F. C. -Selous—does not seem to have been observed in ancient times. - -In Greek mythology the familiar animals of the gods occupy a place -half-way between legend and natural history. Viewed by one school as -totems, as the earlier god of which the later is only an appendix, to -more conservative students they may appear to be, in the main, the -outgrowth of the same fondness for coupling man and beast and fitting -man with a beast-companion suited to his character, which gave St. Mark -his lion and St. John his eagle. The panther of Bacchus is the most -attractive of the divine _menagerie_, because Bacchus, in this -connexion, is generally shown as a child and the friendships of beasts -and children are always pleasing. - -The affection of Bacchus for panthers has been attributed to the fact -that he wore a panther-skin, but there seems no motive for deciding that -the one tradition was earlier than the other; the rationale of a myth is -often evolved long after the myth itself. Perhaps, after all, the -stories of gods and animals often originated in the simple belief that -gods, like men, had a weakness for pets! - -In the Pompeian collections at Naples there are several designs of -Bacchus and his panther; one of them shows the panther and the ass of -Silenus lying down together; in another, a very fine mosaic, the winged -genius of Bacchus careers along astride of his favourite beast; in a -third, a chubby little boy, with no signs of godhead about him, clambers -on to the back of a patient panther, which has the long-suffering look -of animals that are accustomed to be teased by children. It may be -noticed that children and animals, both somewhat neglected in the older -art, attained the highest popularity with the artists of the age of -Pompeii. Children were represented in all sorts of attitudes, and all -known animals, from the cat to the octopus and the elephant to the -grasshopper, were drawn not only with general correctness but with a -keen insight into their humours and temperaments. - -It is said that a panther was once caught in Pamphylia which had a gold -chain round its neck with the inscription in Armenian letters: “Arsaces -the king to the Nysæan god.” Oriental nations called Bacchus after Nysa, -his supposed birthplace. It was concluded that the king of Armenia had -given its freedom to this splendid specimen to do honour to the god. The -panther became very tame and was fondled by every one, but when the -spring came it ran away, chain and all, to seek a mate in the mountains -and never more came back. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - III - - ANIMALS AT ROME - - -ROME, the eternal, begins with a Beast-story. However much deeper in the -past the spade may dig than the reputed date of the humanitarian -She-wolf, her descendant will not be expelled from the grotto on the -Capitol, nor will it cease to be the belief of children (the only -trustworthy authorities when legends are concerned) that the grandeur -that was Rome would have never existed but for the opportune -intervention of a friendly beast! - -The fame of the She-wolf shows how eagerly mankind seizes on some touch -of nature, fact or fable, that seems to make all creatures kin. Rome was -as proud of her She-wolf as she was of ruling the world. It was the -“luck” of Rome; even now, something of the old sentiment exists, for I -remember that during King Edward’s visit old-fashioned Romans were angry -because this emblem was not to be seen in the decorations. - -[Illustration: - - (_Photo: Bruckmann._) - CAPITOLINE SHE-WOLF.] - -The story did not make such large demands on credulity as sceptics -pretend. The wolf is not so much the natural enemy of man as the cat is -of the mouse: yet cats have been known to bring up families of mice or -rats which they treated with affection. In recent times a Russian bear -was stated to have carried away to the woods a little girl whom it fed -with nuts and fruits. The evidence seemed good, though the story did -sound a little as if it were suggested by Victor Hugo’s “Épopée du -Lion.” But in India there are stories of the same sort—stories actually -of She-wolves—which appear to be impossible to set aside. In a paper -read before the Bombay Natural History Society, the well-known Parsi -scholar, Jivanji Jamsedji Modi, described how he had seen one such -“wolf-boy” at the Secundra Orphanage: the boy had remained with wolves -up to six years old when he was discovered and captured, not without -vigorous opposition from his vulpine protectors. - -The historical record of Rome as regards animals is not a bright one. -The cruelty of the arena does not stain the first Roman annals; the -earliest certified instance of wild-beast baiting belongs to 186 B.C., -and after the practice was introduced it did not reach at once the -monstrous proportions of later times. Still, one does not imagine that -the Roman of republican times was very tender-hearted towards animals. -Cato related, as if he took a pride in it, that when he was Consul he -left his war-horse in Spain to spare the public the cost of its -conveyance to Rome. “Whether such things as these,” says Plutarch, who -tells the story, “are instances of greatness or littleness of soul, let -the reader judge for himself!” When the infatuation for the shows in the -arena was at its height, the Romans felt an enormous interest in -animals: indeed, there were moments when they thought of nothing else. -It was an interest which went along with indifference to their -sufferings; it may be said to have been worse than no interest at all, -but it existed and to ignore it, as most writers have done, is to make -the explicable inexplicable. If the only attraction of these shows had -been their cruelty we should have to conclude that the Romans were all -afflicted with a rare though not unknown form of insanity. Much the same -was true of the gladiatorial shows. Up to a certain point, what led -people to them was what leads people to a football match or an -assault-at-arms. Beyond that point—well, beyond it there entered the -element that makes the tiger in man, but for the most part it was -inconscient. - -[Illustration: - - LION BEING LED FROM THE ARENA BY A SLAVE. - (_Nennig Mosaic._)] - -When we see Pola or Verona or Nîmes; when we tread the crowded streets -to the Roman Colosseum or traverse the deserted high-road to Spanish -Italica; most of all, when we watch coming nearer and nearer across the -wilderness between Kairouan and El Djem the magnificent pile that stands -outlined against the African sky—we all say the same thing: “What a -wonderful race the Romans were!” It is an exclamation that forces itself -to the lips of the most ignorant as to those of the scholar or -historical student. At such moments, it may be true, that the less we -think of the games of the arena the better; the remembrance of them -forms a disturbing element in the majesty of the scene. But they cannot -be put out of mind entirely, and if we do think of them, it is desirable -that we should think of them correctly. It so happens that it is -possible to reconstruct them into a lifelike picture. There exists one, -though, as far as I know, only one, faithful, vivid, and complete -contemporary representation of the Roman Games. This is the superb -mosaic pavement which was discovered in the middle of the last century -by a peasant striking on the hard surface with his spade, at the village -of Nennig, not far from the Imperial city of Treves. The observer of -this mosaic perceives at once that the games were of the nature of a -“variety” entertainment. There was the music which picturesque-looking -performers played on a large horn and on a sort of organ. (The horn -closely resembles the pre-historic horns which are preserved in the -National Museum at Copenhagen, where they were blown with inspiring -effect before the members of the Congress of Orientalists in 1908.) -There was the bloodless contest between a short and tall athlete, armed -differently with stick and whip. In the central division, because the -most important, is shown the mortal earnest of the gladiatorial fight, -strictly controlled by the Games-master. In the sexagion above this is a -hardly less deadly struggle between a man and a bear: the bear has got -the man under him but is being whipped off so that the “turn” may not -end too quickly, and, perhaps, also to give the more expensive victim -another chance. To the right hand, a gladiator who has run his lance -through the neck of a panther, holds up his hand to boast the victory -and claim applause: the dying panther tries vainly to free itself from -the weapon. To the left is a fight between a leopard and an unfortunate -wild ass, which has already received a terrible wound in its side and is -now having its head drawn down between the fore-paws of the leopard. I -hear that in beast-fights organised by Indian princes, these unequal -combatants are still pitted against each other. Lastly, the Nennig -Mosaic depicts a fat lion that has also conquered a wild ass, of which -the head alone seems to remain: it has been inferred, though I think -rashly, that the lion has eaten up all the rest; at any rate he now -seems at peace with the world and is being led back to his cage by a -slave. - -Everything is quiet, orderly, and a model of good management. The -custodian of the little museum told me that the (surprisingly few) -visitors to Nennig were in the habit of remarking of this representation -of the Roman Games that it made them understand for the first time how -the cultivated Romans could endure such sights. Unhappily, conventional -propriety joined to the sanction of authority will make the majority of -mankind endure anything that causes no danger or inconvenience to -themselves. - -Except with a few, at whom their generation looks askance, the sense of -cruelty more than any other moral sense is governed by habit, by -convention. It is even subject to latitude and longitude; in Spain I was -surprised to find that almost all the English and American women whom I -met had been to, at least, one bull-fight. Insensibility spreads like a -pestilence; new or revived forms of cruelty should be stopped at once or -no one can say how far they will reach or how difficult it will be to -abolish them. One might have supposed that the sublime self-sacrifice of -the monk who threw himself between two combatants—which brought the -tardy end of gladiatorial exhibitions in Christian Rome—would have saved -the world for ever from that particular barbarity; but in the fourteenth -century we actually find gladiatorial shows come to life again and in -full favour at Naples! This little-known fact is attested in Petrarch’s -letters. Writing to Cardinal Colonna on December 1, 1343, the truly -civilised poet denounces with burning indignation an “infernal -spectacle” of which he had been the involuntary witness. His gay friends -(there has been always a singular identity between fashion and -barbarism) seem to have entrapped him into going to a place called -Carbonaria, where he found the queen, the boy-king, and a large audience -assembled in a sort of amphitheatre. Petrarch imagined that there was to -be some splendid entertainment, but he had hardly got inside when a -tall, handsome young man fell dead just below where he was standing, -while the audience raised a shout of applause. He escaped from the place -as fast as he could, horror-struck by the brutality of spectacle and -spectators, and spurring his horse, he turned his back on the “accursed -spot” with the determination to leave Naples as soon as possible. How -can we wonder, he asks, that there are murders in the streets at night -when in broad daylight, in the presence of the king, wretched parents -see their sons stabbed and killed, and when it is considered -dishonourable to be unwilling to present one’s throat to the knife just -as if it were a struggle for fatherland or for the joys of Heaven? - -Very curious was the action of the Vatican in this matter; Pope John -XXII. excommunicated every one who took part in the games as actor or -spectator, but since nobody obeyed the prohibition, it was rescinded by -his successor, Benedict XII., to prevent the scandal of a perpetual -disregard of a Papal ordinance. So they went on cutting each other’s -throats with the tacit permission of the Church until King Charles of -the Peace succeeded in abolishing the “sport.” - -The action of the Church in respect to bull-fights has been much the -same; local opinion is generally recognised as too strong for -opposition. The French bishops, however, did their best to prevent their -introduction into the South of France, but they failed completely. - -I have strayed rather far from the Roman shows, but the savagery of -Christians in the fourteenth century (and after) should make us wonder -less at Roman callousness. All our admiration is due to the few finer -spirits who were repelled by the slaughter of man or beast to make a -Roman’s holiday. Cicero said that he could never see what there was -pleasurable in the spectacle of a noble beast struck to the heart by its -merciless hunter or pitted against one of our weaker species! For a -single expression of censure such as this which has come down to us, -there must have been many of which we have no record. Of out-spoken -censure there was doubtless little because violent condemnation of the -arena would have savoured of treason to the State which patronised and -supported the games just as Queen Elizabeth’s ministers supported -bull-baiting. - -Rome must have been one vast zoological garden, and viewing the strange -animals was the first duty of the tourist. Pausanias was deeply -impressed by the “Ethiopian bulls which they call rhinoceroses” and also -by Indian camels in colour like leopards. He saw an all-white deer, and -very much surprised he was to see it, but, to his subsequent regret, he -forgot to ask where it came from. He was reminded of this white deer -when he saw white blackbirds on Mount Cyllene in Arcadia. I remember a -white blackbird which stayed in the garden of my old English home for -more than two years: a wretched “sportsman” lay in wait for it when it -wandered into a neighbouring field and shot it. - -The feasibility of the transport of the hosts of animals destined to the -arena will always remain a mystery. At the inauguration of the -Colosseum, five thousand wild beasts and six thousand tame ones were -butchered, nor was this the highest figure on a single occasion. -Probably a great portion of the animals was sent by the Governors of -distant provinces who wished to stand well with the home authorities. -But large numbers were also brought over by speculators who sold them to -the highest or the most influential bidder. One reason why Cassius -murdered Julius Cæsar was that Cæsar had secured some lions which -Cassius wished to present to the public. Every one who aimed at -political power or even simply at being thought one of the “smart set” -(the odious word suits the case) spent king’s ransoms on the public -games. For vulgar ostentation the wealthy Roman world eclipsed the -exploits of the modern millionaire. If any one deem this impossible, let -him read, in the _Satyricon_ of Petronius, the account of the fêtes to -be given by a leader of fashion of the name of Titus. Not merely -gladiators, but a great number of freedmen would take part in them: it -would be no wretched mock combat but a real carnage! Titus was so rich -that he could afford such liberality. Contempt is poured upon the head -of a certain Nobarnus who offered a spectacle of gladiators hired at a -low price and so old and decrepit that a breath threw them over. They -all ended by wounding themselves to stop the contest. You might as well -have witnessed a mere cock-fight! - -I should think that not more than one animal in three survived the -voyage. This would vastly increase the total number. The survivors often -arrived in such a pitiable state that they could not be presented in the -arena, or that they had to be presented immediately to prevent them from -dying too soon. Symmachus, last of the great nobles of Rome, who, -blinded by tradition, thought to revive the glories of his beloved city -by reviving its shame, graphically describes the anxieties of the -preparations for one of these colossal shows on which he is said to have -spent what would be about £80,000 of our money. He began a year in -advance: horses, bears, lions, Scotch dogs, crocodiles, chariot-drivers, -hunters, actors, and the best gladiators were recruited from all parts. -But when the time drew near, nothing were ready. Only a few of the -animals had come, and these were half dead of hunger and fatigue. The -bears had not arrived and there was no news of the lions. At the -eleventh hour the crocodiles reached Rome, but they refused to eat and -had to be killed all at once in order that they might not die of hunger. -It was even worse with the gladiators, who were intended to provide, as -in all these beast shows, the crowning entertainment. Twenty-nine of the -Saxon captives whom Symmachus had chosen on account of the well-known -valour of their race, strangled one another in prison rather than fight -to the death for the amusement of their conquerors. And Symmachus, with -all his real elevation of mind, was moved to nothing but disgust by -their sublime choice! Rome in her greatest days had gloried in these -shows: how could a man be a patriot who set his face against customs -which followed the Roman eagles round the world? How many times since -then has patriotism been held to require the extinction of moral sense! - -Sometimes the humanity of beasts put to shame the inhumanity of man. -There was a lion, commemorated by Statius, which had “unlearnt murder -and homicide,” and submitted of its own accord to a master “who ought to -have been under its feet.” This lion went in and out of its cage and -gently laid down unhurt the prey which it caught: it even allowed people -to put their hands into its mouth. It was killed by a fugitive slave. -The Senate and people of Rome were in despair, and Imperial Cæsar, who -witnessed impassible the death of thousands of animals sent hither to -perish from Africa, from Scythia, from the banks of the Rhine, had tears -in his eyes for a single lion! In later Roman times a tame lion was a -favourite pet: their masters led them about wherever they went, whether -much to the gratification of the friends on whom they called is not -stated. - -Another instance of a gentle beast was that of a tiger into whose cage a -live doe had been placed for him to eat. But the tiger was not feeling -well and, with the wisdom of sick animals, he was observing a diet. So -two or three days elapsed, during which the tiger made great friends -with the doe and when he recovered his health and began to feel very -hungry, instead of devouring his fellow-lodger he beat with his paws -against the bars of the cage in sign that he wanted food. These stories -were, no doubt, true, and there may have been truth also in the -well-known story of the lion which refused to attack a man who had once -succoured him. Animals have good memories. - -One pleasanter feature of the circus was the exhibition of performing -beasts. Though the exhibitors of such animals are now sometimes charged -with cruelty, it cannot be denied that the public who goes to look at -them is composed of just the people who are most fond of animals. All -children delight in them because, to their minds, they seem a -confirmation of the strong instinctive though oftenest unexpressed -belief, which lurks in every child’s soul, that between man and animals -there is much less difference than is the correct, “grown-up” opinion; -this is a part of the secret lore of childhood which has its origins in -the childhood of the world. The amiable taste for these exhibitions—in -appearance, at least, so harmless—strikes one as incongruous in the same -persons who revelled in slaughter. Such a taste existed, however, and -when St. James said that there was not a single beast, bird or reptile -which had not been tamed, he may have been thinking of the itinerant -showmen’s “learned” beasts which perambulated the Roman empire. - -Horses and oxen were among the animals commonly taught to do tricks. I -find no mention of monkeys as performing in the arena, though Apuleius -says that in the spring fêtes of Isis, the forerunners of the Roman -carnival, he saw a monkey with a straw hat and a Phrygian tunic—we can -hardly keep ourselves from asking: _what had it done with the -grind-organ?_ But in spite of this startlingly modern apparition, -monkeys do not seem to have been popular in Rome; I imagine even, that -there was some fixed prejudice against them. The cleverest of all the -animal performers were, of course, the dogs, and one showman had the -ingenious idea of making a dog act a part in a comedy. The effects of a -drug were tried on him, the plot turning on the suspicion that the drug -was poisonous, while, in fact, it was only a narcotic. The dog took the -piece of bread dipped in the liquid, swallowed it, and began to reel and -stagger till he finally fell flat on the ground. He gave himself a last -stretch and then seemed to expire, making no sign of life when his -apparently dead body was dragged about the stage. At the right moment, -he began to move very slightly as if waking out of a deep sleep; then he -raised his head, looked round, jumped up and ran joyously to the proper -person. The piece was played at the theatre of Marcellus in the reign of -old Vespasian, and Cæsar himself was delighted. I wonder that no manager -of our days has turned the incident to account; I never yet saw an -audience serious enough not to become young again at the sight of -four-footed comedians. Even the high art-loving public at the Prince -Regent’s theatre at Munich cannot resist a murmur of discreet merriment -when the pack of beautiful stag-hounds led upon the stage in the hunting -scene in “Tannhäuser” gravely wag their tails in time with the music! - -The pet lions were only one example of the aberrations of pet-lovers in -ancient Rome. Maltese lap-dogs became a scourge: Lucian tells the -lamentable tale of a needy philosopher whom a fashionable lady cajoles -into acting as personal attendant to her incomparable Mirrhina. The -Maltese dog was an old fad; Theophrastus, in the portrait of an -insufferable _élégant_, mentions that, when his pet dog dies, he -inscribes “pure Maltese” on its tombstone. - -Many were the birds that fell victims to the desire to keep them in -richly ornamented cages in which they died of hunger, says Epictetus, -sooner than be slaves. The canary which takes more kindly to captivity -was unknown till it was brought to Italy in the sixteenth century. -Parrots there were, but Roman parrots were not long-lived: they shared -the common doom: “To each his sufferings, all are _pets_.” The parrots -of Corinna and of Melior which ought to have lived to a hundred or, at -any rate, to have had the chance of dying of grief at the loss of their -possessors (as a parrot did that I once knew), enjoyed fame and fortune -for as brief a span as Lesbia’s sparrow. Melior’s parrot not only had -brilliant green feathers but also many accomplishments which are -described by its master’s friend, the poet Statius. On one occasion, it -sat up half the night at a banquet, hopping from one guest to another -and talking in a way that excited great admiration; it even shared the -good fare and on the morrow it died—which was less than surprising. I -came across an old-fashioned criticism of this poem in which Statius is -scolded for showing so much genuine feeling about ... a parrot! The -critic was right in one thing—the genuine feeling is there; those who -have known what a companion a bird may be, will appreciate the little -touch: “You never felt alone, dear Melior, with its open cage beside -you!” Now the cage is empty; it is “_la cage sans oiseaux_” which Victor -Hugo prayed to be spared from seeing. Some translator turned this into -“a nest without birds,” because he thought that a cage without birds -sounded unpoetical, but Victor Hugo took care of truth and left poetry -to take of itself. And whatever may be the ethics of keeping cage birds, -true it is that few things are more dismal than the sight of the little -mute, tenantless dwelling which was yesterday alive with fluttering -love. - -We owe to Roman poets a good deal of information about dogs, and -especially the knowledge that the British hound was esteemed superior to -all others, even to the famous breed of Epirus. This is certified by -Gratius Faliscus, a contemporary of Ovid. He described these animals as -remarkably ugly, but incomparable for pluck. British bull-dogs were used -in the Colosseum, and in the third century Nemesianus praised the -British greyhound. Most of the valuable dogs were brought from abroad; -it is to be inferred that the race degenerated in the climate of Rome, -as it does now. Concha, whose epitaph was written by Petronius, was born -in Gaul. While Martial’s too elaborate epitaph on “The Trusty Lydia” is -often quoted and translated, the more sympathetic poem of Petronius has -been overlooked. He tells the perfections of Concha in a simple, -affectionate manner; like Lydia, she was a mighty huntress and chased -the wild boar fearlessly through the dense forest. Never did chain -hamper her liberty and never a blow fell on her shapely, snow-white -form. She reposed softly, stretched on the breast of her master or -mistress, and at night a well-made bed refreshed her tired limbs. If she -lacked speech, she could make herself understood better than any of her -kind—yet no one had reason to fear her bark. A hapless mother, she died -when her little ones saw the light, and now a narrow marble slab covers -the earth where she rests. - -Cicero’s tribute to canine worth is well known: “Dogs watch for us -faithfully; they love and worship their masters, they hate strangers, -their powers of tracking by scent is extraordinary; great is their -keenness in the chase: what can all this mean but that they were made -for man’s advantage?” It was as natural to the Roman mind to regard man -as the lord of creation as to regard the Roman as the lord of man. For -the rest, his normal conception of animals differed little from that of -Aristotle. Cicero says that the chief distinction between man and -animals, is that animals look only to the present, paying little -attention to the past and future, while man looks before and after, -weighs causes and effects, draws analogies and views the whole path of -life, preparing things needful for passing along it. Expressed in the -key of antique optimism instead of in the key of modern pessimism, the -judgment is the same as that of Burns in his lines to the field-mouse: - - “Still thou art blest, compared wi’ me! - The present only touches thee: - But, och! I backward cast my e’e - On prospects drear! - And forward, tho’ I canna see, - I guess and fear.” - -And of Leopardi in the song of the Syrian shepherd to his flock:— - - “O flock that liest at rest, O blessed thou - That knowest not thy fate, however hard, - How utterly I envy thee!” - -Cicero’s more virile mind would have spurned this craving to renounce -the distinguishing human privilege for the bliss of ignorance. - -Wherever we fix the limits of animal intelligence, there is no question -of man’s obligation to treat sentient creatures with humanity. This was -recognised by Marcus Aurelius when he wrote the golden precept: “As to -animals which have no reason ... do thou, since thou hast reason, and -they have none, make use of them with a generous and liberal spirit.” -Here we have the broadest application of the narrowest assumption. From -the time, at least, that Rome was full of Greek teachers, there were -always some partisans of a different theory altogether. What Seneca -calls “the illustrious but unpopular school of Pythagoras” had a little -following which made up by its sincere enthusiasm for the fewness of its -members. Seneca’s own master Sotio was of this school, and his teaching -made a deep impression on the most illustrious of his pupils, who sums -up its chief points with his usual lucidity: Pythagoras gave men a -horror of crime and of parricide by telling them that they might -unawares kill or devour their own fathers; all sentient beings are bound -together in a universal kinship and an endless transmutation causes them -to pass from one form to another; no soul perishes or ceases its -activity save in the moment when it changes its envelope. Sotio took for -granted that the youths who attended his classes came to him with minds -unprepared to receive these doctrines, and he aimed more at making them -accept the consequences of the theory than the theory itself. What if -they believed none of it? What if they did not believe that souls passed -through different bodies and that the thing we call death is a -transmigration? That in the animal which crops the grass or which -peoples the sea, a soul resides which once was human? That, like the -heavenly bodies, every soul traverses its appointed circle? That nothing -in this world perishes, but only changes scene and place? Let them -remember, nevertheless, that great men have believed all this: “Suspend -your judgment, and in the meantime, respect whatever has life.” If the -doctrine be true, then to abstain from animal flesh is to spare oneself -the committal of crimes; if it be false, such abstinence is commendable -frugality; “all you lose is the food of lions and vultures.” - -Sotio himself was a thorough Pythagorean, but there was another -philosopher of the name of Sestius who was an ardent advocate of -abstinence from animal food without believing in the transmigration of -souls. He founded a sort of brotherhood, the members of which took the -pledge to abide by this rule. He argued that since plenty of other -wholesome food existed, what need was there for man to shed blood? -Cruelty must become habitual when people devour flesh to indulge the -palate: “let us reduce the elements of sensuality.” Health would be also -the gainer by the adoption of a simpler and less various diet. Sotio -used these arguments of one whom he might have called an unbeliever, to -reinforce his own. - -Seneca does not say if many of his schoolfellows were as much impressed -as he was by this teaching. For a year he abstained from flesh, and when -he got accustomed to it, he even found the new diet easy and agreeable. -His mind seemed to grow more active. That he was allowed to eat what he -liked without encountering interference or ridicule shows the -considerable freedom in which the youth of Rome was brought up: this -made them men. But at the beginning of the reign of Tiberius there went -forth an edict against foreign cults, and abstinence from flesh was held -to show a leaning towards religious novelties. For this reason the elder -Seneca advised his son to give up vegetarianism. Seneca honestly -confesses that he went back to better fare without much urging; yet he -always remained frugal, and he seems never to have felt quite sure that -his youthful experiment did not agree best with the counsels of -perfection. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - IV - - PLUTARCH THE HUMANE - - -PLUTARCH was the Happy Philosopher—and there were not many that were -happy. A life of travel, a life of teaching, an honoured old age as the -priest of Apollo in his native village in Bœotia: what kinder fate than -this? He was happy in the very obscurity which seems to have surrounded -his life at Rome, for it saved him from spite and envy. He was happy, if -we may trust the traditional effigies, even in that thing which likewise -is a good gift of the gods, a gracious outward presence exactly -corresponding with the soul within. A painter who wished to draw a type -of illimitable compassionateness would choose the face attributed to -Plutarch. Finally, this gentle sage is happy still after eighteen -hundred years in doing more than any other writer of antiquity to build -up character by diffusing the radiance of noble deeds. Nevertheless, -were he to come back to life he would have one disappointment, and that -would be to find how few people read his essays on kindness to animals: -they would stand a better chance of being read if they were printed -alone, but to arrive at them you must dive in the formidable depths of -the _Moralia_: a very storehouse of interesting things, but hardly -attractive to the general in a hurried age. Some of its treasures have -been revealed by Dr. Oakesmith in his admirable monograph on “The -Religion of Plutarch.” The mine of nobly humane sentiment remains, -however, almost unexplored. - -The essays devoted to animals are three in number, with the titles: -“Whether terrestrial or aquatic animals are the more intelligent?” “That -animals have the use of Reason”; “On the habit of eating flesh.” The two -first are in the form of dialogues, and the third is a familiar -discourse, a _conférence_, such as those which now form a popular -feature of the Roman season. Through these studies there runs a vein of -transparent sincerity: we feel that they were composed not to show the -author’s cleverness or to startle by paradoxes, but with the real wish -to make the young men for whom they were intended a little more humane. -Plutarch did not take up the claims of animals because good “copy” could -be made out of them. As his wish is to persuade, he does not ask for the -impossible. It is the voice of the highly civilised Greek addressing the -young barbarians of Rome: for to the Greek’s inmost mind the Roman must -have always remained somewhat of a barbarian. There is great restraint: -though Plutarch must have loathed the games of the arena, he speaks of -them with guarded deprecation. He makes one of his characters say that -the chase (which he did not himself like) was useful in keeping people -from worse things, “such as the combats of gladiators.” He is genuinely -anxious by all means to persuade some, and for this reason he refrains -from scaring away his hearers or readers by extreme demands. Though he -has a strong personal repugnance to flesh-eating, he does not insist on -every one sharing it. Anyhow, he says, Be as humane as you can; cause as -little suffering as is possible; no doubt it is not easy, all at once, -to eradicate a habit which has taken hold of our sensual nature, but, at -least, let us deprive it of its worst features. Let us eat flesh if we -must, but for hunger, not for self-indulgence; let us kill animals but -still be compassionate—not heaping up outrages and tortures “as, alas, -is done every day.” He mentions how swans were blinded and then fattened -with unnatural foods, which is only a little worse than things that are -done now. What is certain is, that extreme and habitual luxury in food -has spelt decadence from the banquets of Babylon downwards. - -Plutarch goes on to ask whether it is impossible to amuse ourselves -without all these excesses? Shall we expire on the spot, are the -resources of men totally exhausted, if the table be not supplied with -_pâtés de foies gras_? Is life not worth living without slaughter to -make a feast, slaughter to find a pastime; cannot we exist without -asking of certain animals that they show courage, and fight in spite of -themselves, or that they massacre other animals which have not the -natural energy to defend themselves? Must we for our sport tear the -mother from the little ones which she suckles or hatches? Plutarch -implores us not to imitate the children of whom Bion speaks, who amused -themselves by throwing stones at the frogs, but the frogs were not at -all amused—they simply died. “When we take our recreation, those who -help in the fun ought to share in it and be amused as well.” Thus does -the kind Greek philosopher exhort us - - “Never to blend our pleasure or our pride - With sorrow of the meanest thing that feels.” - -Did Wordsworth know that his thought had been expressed so long before? -It matters little; the counsels of mercy never grow old. - -With good sense and in that spirit of compromise which is really the -basis of morality, Plutarch argued that cruelty to animals does not lie -in the use but in the abuse of them; it is not cruel to kill them if -they are incompatible with our own existence; it is not cruel to tame -and train to our service those made by nature gentle and loving towards -man which become the companions of our toil according to their natural -aptitude. “Horse and ass are given to us,” as Prometheus says, “to be -submissive servants and fellow-workers; dogs to be guardians and -watchers, goats and sheep to give us milk and wool.” (Cow’s milk seems -to have been rarely drunk, as is still the case in the Mediterranean -islands and in Greece.) - -“The Stoics,” says Plutarch, “made sensibility towards animals a -preparation to humanity and compassion because the gradually formed -habit of the lesser affections is capable of leading men very far.” In -the “Lives” he insists on the same point: “Kindness and beneficence -should be extended to creatures of every species, and these still flow -from the breast of a well-natured man as streams that issue from the -living fountain. A good man will take care of his horses and dogs not -only when they are young, but when old and past service.... We certainly -ought not to treat living creatures like shoes or household goods, -which, when worn out with use, we throw away, and were it only to learn -benevolence to human kind, we should be merciful to other creatures. For -my own part I would not sell even an old ox.” - -Here I may say that Plutarch should have thanked Fate which made him a -philosopher and not a farmer. For how, alas, can the farmer escape from -becoming the accomplice of that which the Italian poet apostrophizes in -the words— - - “Natura, illaudabil maraviglia, - Che per uccider partorisci e nutri!” - -How can well-cared-for old age be the lot of more than a very few of the -animals that serve us so faithfully? The exception must console us for -the rule. The beautiful story of one such exception is told by both -Plutarch and Pliny the Elder. When Pericles was building the Parthenon a -great number of mules were employed in drawing the stones up the hill of -the Acropolis. Some of them became too old for the work, and these were -set at liberty to pasture at large. But one old mule gravely walked -every day to the stone-yard and accompanied, or rather led, the -procession of mule-carts to and fro. The Athenians were delighted with -its devotion to duty, and decided that it should be supported at the -expense of the State for the rest of its days. According to Pliny, the -mule of the Parthenon lived till it had attained its eightieth year, a -record that seems startling even having regard to the proverbial -longevity of pensioners. Plutarch does not mention it, perhaps, because -he had some doubts about its accuracy. In other respects the story may -be accepted as literally true; and does it not do us good to think of -it, as we look at the most glorious work of man’s hands bathed in the -golden afterglow? Does it not do us good to think that at the zenith of -her greatness Athens - - “... Mother of arts - And eloquence, native to famous wits” - -stooped—nay, rose—to generous appreciation of the willing service of an -old mule? - -In dealing with animal psychology Plutarch makes a strong point of the -inherent improbability that, while feeling and imagination are the -common share of all animated beings, reason should be apportioned only -to a single species. “How can you say such things? Is not every one -convinced that no being can feel without also possessing understanding, -that there is not a single animal which has not a sort of thought and -reason just as he comes into the world with senses and instinct?” -Nature, which is said to make all things from one cause and to one end, -has not given sensibility to animals simply in order that they should be -capable of sensations. Since some things are good for them, and others -bad, they would not exist for a single instant if they did not know how -to seek the good and shun the bad. The animal learns by his senses what -things are good and what are bad for him, but when, in consequence of -these indications, of his senses, it is a question of taking and seeking -what is useful and of avoiding and flying from what is harmful, these -same animals would have no means of action if Nature had not made them -up to a certain point capable of reason, of judgment, of memory, and of -attention. Because, if you completely deprived them of the spirit of -conjecture, memory, foresight, preparation, hope, fear, desire, grief, -they would cease to derive the slightest utility from the eyes or ears -which they possess. Plutarch might have added that a mindless animal -would resemble not a child or a savage, but an idiot. He does point out -that they would be better off with no senses at all than with the power -of feeling and no power of acting upon it. But, he adds, could sensation -exist without intelligence? He quotes a line from I do not know what -poet:— - - “The spirit only hears and sees—all else - Is deaf and blind.” - -If we look with our eyes at a page of writing without seizing the -meaning of a word of it, because our thoughts are preoccupied, is it not -the same as if we had never seen it? But even were we to admit that the -senses suffice to their office, would that explain the phenomena of -memory and foresight? Would the animal fear things, not present, which -harm him, or desire things, not present, which are to his advantage? -Would he prepare his retreat or shelter or devise snares by which to -catch other animals? Only one theory can be applied to mind in man and -mind in animals. - -It will be seen from this summary that Plutarch traversed the whole -field of speculation on animal intelligence which has not really -extended its boundaries since the time when he wrote, though it is -possible that we are now on the verge, if not of new discoveries, at -least of the admission of a new point of view. The study of the dual -element in man, the endeavour to establish a line of demarcation between -the conscious and subliminal self, may lead to the inquiry, how far the -conscious self corresponds with what was meant, when speaking of -animals, by “reason,” and the subliminal self with what was meant by -“instinct”? But the use of a new terminology would not alter the -conclusion: call it reason, consciousness, spirit; some of it the -“paragon of animals” shares with his poor relations. The case is put in -a homely way but not without force by the heroine of a forgotten novel -by Lamartine: the speaker is an old servant who is in despair at losing -her goldfinch: “Ah! On dit que les bêtes n’ont pas l’âme,” she says. “Je -ne veux pas offenser le bon Dieu, mais si mon pauvre oiseau n’avait pas -d’âme, avec quoi done n’aurait-il tant aimée? Avec les plumes ou avec -les pattes, peut-être?” - -Plutarch reviews—to reject—the “Automata” argument, which had already -some supporters. Certain naturalists, he says, try to prove that animals -feel neither pleasure nor anger nor yet fear; that the nightingale does -not meditate his song, that the bee has no memory, that the swallow -makes no preparations, that the lion never grows angry, nor is the stag -subject to fear. Everything, according to these theorists, is merely -delusive appearance. They might as well assert that animals cannot see -or hear; that they only appear to see or hear; that they have no voice, -only the semblance of a voice; in short, that they are not alive but -only seem to live. - -The moral aspects of any problem are those which to a moralist seem the -most important, and Plutarch did not seek to deny the force of the -objection: If virtue be the true aim of reason, how can Nature have -bestowed reason on creatures which cannot direct it to its true object? -But he denied the postulate that animals have no ethical potentialities. -If the love of men for their children is granted to be the corner-stone -of all human society, shall we say that there is no merit in the -affection of animals for their offspring? He sums up the matter by -remarking that the limitation of a faculty does not show that it does -not exist. To pretend that every being not endowed at birth with perfect -reason is, by its nature, incapable of reason of any kind, would be to -ignore the fact that although reason is a natural gift the degree in -which it is possessed by any individual depends on his training and on -his teachers. Perfect reason is possessed by none because none has -perfect rectitude and moral excellence. - -Animals exhibit examples of sociability, courage, resource, and again, -of cowardice and viciousness. Why do we not say of one tree that it is -less teachable than another, as we say that a sheep is less teachable -than a dog? It is, of course, because plants cannot think, and where the -faculty of thought is wholly wanting, there cannot be more or less -quickness or slowness, more or less of good qualities or of bad. - -Yet it must be allowed that man’s intelligence is amazingly superior to -that of animals. But what does that prove? Do not some animals leave man -far behind in the keenness of their sight and the sharpness of their -hearing? Shall we say, therefore, that man is blind or deaf? We have -some strength in our hands and in our bodies although we are not -elephants or camels. In the same way, we should be careful not to infer -that animals lack all reasoning faculties from the fact that their -intelligence is duller and more defective than man’s. “Boatfuls” of true -stories can be cited to show the docility and special aptitudes of the -different children of creation. And a very amusing occupation it is, -says Plutarch, for young people to collect such stories. In the course -of his work, he sets them a good example, for he brings together a real -“boatful” of anecdotes of clever beasts, but at this point he contents -himself with observing that madness in dogs and other animals would be -alone sufficient to show that they had some mind: otherwise, how could -they go out of it? - -The stoics who taught the strictest humanity to animals rejected, -nevertheless, the supposition that animals had reason, for how, they -asked, can such a theory be reconciled with the idea of eternal justice? -Would it not make abstinence from their flesh imperative and entail -consequences which would make our life impracticable? If we were to give -up using animals for our own purposes, we should be reduced ourselves -almost to the condition of brutes. “What works would be left for us to -do by land or sea, what industries to cultivate, what embellishments of -our way of living, if we regarded animals as reasonable beings and our -fellow-creatures, and hence adopted the rule (which, clearly, would be -only proper) to do them no harm and to study their convenience.” - -Many a sensitive modern soul has pondered over this crux without finding -a satisfactory solution. Plutarch says that Empedocles and Heraclites -admitted the injustice, and laid it to the door of Nature which permits -or ordains a state of war and necessity, in which nothing is -accomplished without the weaker going to the wall. For himself, he would -propose to those “who, instead of disputing, gently follow and learn” -the better way out of the difficulty—which was introduced by the Sages -of Antiquity, then long lost, and found again by Pythagoras. This better -way is to use animals as our helpers but to refrain from taking life. - -Plutarch here evades a stumbling-block which he does not remove. The -dialogue, as it has come down to us, breaks off suddenly after one final -objection: how can beings have reason which have no notion of God? Some -scholars imagine that Plutarch hurried the dialogue to a close because -this query completely baffled him; others (and they are the majority) -attribute the abrupt finish to the loss of the concluding part. Would -Plutarch have contented himself with citing the analogy of young -children who, although not without the elements of reason, know very -little of theology, or would not he rather have contended with Celsus, -that animals _do_ possess religious knowledge? If he took the last -course, it may well be that the disappearance of the end of the dialogue -was not accidental. At Ravenna there is a terrible mosaic, alive with -wrath and energy, which shows a Christ we know not (for He looks like a -grand Inquisitor) thrusting into the flames heretical books. As I looked -at it, I thought how many valuable classical works, vaguely suspected on -the score of faith or morals, must have shared the fate of “unorthodox” -polemics in the merry bonfires which this mosaic holds up for imitation! - -The argument “that it sounds unnatural to ascribe reason to creatures -ignorant of God,” suggests familiarity with a passage in Epictetus -(Plutarch’s contemporary), where he says that man alone was made to have -the understanding which recognises God—a recognition which he elsewhere -explains by the hypothesis that every man has in him a small portion of -the divine. Having this intuitive sense, man is bound, without ceasing, -to praise his Creator, and, since others are blind and neglect to do it, -Epictetus will do it on behalf of all: “for what else can I do, a lame -old man, than sing hymns to God? If I was a nightingale, I should do the -part of a nightingale; if I were a swan, I would do like a swan; but now -I am a _rational creature_, and I ought to praise God: this is my work; -I do it, nor will I desert this post so long as I am allowed to keep it, -and I exhort you to join in this song.” - -The words are among the sweetest and most solemn that ever issued from -human lips; yet those who care to pursue the subject farther may submit -that there was some one before Epictetus, who called upon the beasts, -the fishes and the fowls to join him in blessing the name of the Lord, -and there was some one after him who commanded the birds of the air to -sing the praises of their Maker and Preserver! It is strange that, -despite the hard-and-fast line which the moulders of the Catholic Faith -were at pains to trace between man and beast, if we would find the most -emphatic assertion of their common privilege of praising God, we must -leave the Pagan world and take up the Bible and the “Fioretti” of St. -Francis! - -[Illustration: - - (_Photo: Sommer._) - BACCHUS RIDING ON A PANTHER. - Naples Museum. - (_Mosaic found at Pompeii._)] - -Of the anecdotes with which Plutarch enlivens his pages, he says himself -that he puts on one side fable and mythology, and limits his choice to -the “all true” category, and if he appears to be at times a little -credulous, one may well believe that he is always candid. Just as in his -“Lives” he tried to ennoble his readers by making noble deeds -interesting, so in his writings on animals, he tried to make people -humane by making his dumb clients interesting. He did not start with -thinking the task an easy one, for he was convinced that man is more -cruel than the most savage of wild beasts. But he aims at pouring, if -not a full draught of mercy, at least some drops, into the heart that -never felt a pang, the mind that never gave a thought. Many of his -stories are taken straight from the common street life of the Rome of -his day, as that of the elephant which passed every day along a certain -street where the schoolboys teased it by pricking its trunk with their -writing stylets (men may come and go, but the small boy is a fixed -quantity!). At last, the elephant, losing patience, picked up one of his -tormentors and hoisted him in the air; a cry of horror rose from the -spectators, no one doubted that in another moment the child would be -dashed to the ground. But the elephant set the offender down very gently -and walked away, thinking, no doubt, that a good fright had been a -sufficient punishment. The Syrian elephant, of whom Plutarch tells how -he made his master understand that in his absence he had been cheated of -half his rations, was not cleverer than some of his kind on service in -India, who would not begin to eat till all three cakes which formed -their rations were set before each of them—a fact that was told me by -the officer whose duty it was to preside at their dinner. Plutarch -speaks of counting oxen that knew when the number of turns was finished -which constituted their daily task at a saw-mill: they refused to -perform one more turn than the appointed figure. As an instance of the -discrimination of animals, he tells how Alexander’s horse, Bucephalus, -when unsaddled, would allow the grooms to mount him, but when he had on -all his rich caparisons, no one on earth could get on his back except -his royal master. There is no doubt that animals take notice of dress. I -have been told that when crinolines were worn, all the dogs barked at -any woman not provided with one. Plutarch was among the earliest to -observe that animals discover sooner than man when ice will not bear, -which he thinks that they find out by noticing if there is any sound of -running water. He says truly that to draw such an inference presupposes -not only sharp ears, but a real power of weighing cause and effect. -Plutarch mentions foxes as particularly clever in this respect, but dogs -possess the same gift. The French Ambassador at Rome—who, like all -persons of superior intelligence, is very fond of animals—told me the -following story. One winter day, when he was French Minister at Munich, -he went alone with his gun and his dog to the banks of the Isar. Having -shot a snipe, he ordered the dog to go on to the ice to fetch it, but, -to his surprise, the animal, which had never disobeyed him, refused. -Annoyed at its obstinacy, he went himself on to the ice, which -immediately gave way, and had he not been a good swimmer he might not be -now at the Palazzo Farnese. - -The two creatures that have been most praised for their wisdom are the -elephant and the ant, but of the ant’s admirers from Solomon to Lord -Avebury, not one was ever so enthusiastic as Plutarch. Horace, indeed, -had discoursed of her foresight: “She carries in her mouth whatever she -is able, and piles up her heap, by no means ignorant or careless of the -future; then, when Aquarius saddens the inverted year, never does she -creep abroad, wisely making use of the stores which were provided -beforehand.” But such a tribute sounds cold beside Plutarch’s praise of -her as the tiny mirror in which the greatest marvels of Nature are -reflected, a drop of the purest water, containing every Virtue, and, -above all, what Homer calls “the sweetness of loving qualities.” Ants, -he declares, show the utmost solicitude for their comrades, alive and -dead. They exhibit their ingenuity by biting off the ends of grains to -prevent them from sprouting and so spoiling the provender. He speaks, -though not from his own observation, of the beautiful interior -arrangements of ant-hills which had been examined by naturalists who -divided the mount into sections, “A thing I cannot approve of!” -Tender-hearted philosopher, who had a scruple about upsetting an -ant-hill! Of other insects, he most admires the skill of spiders and -bees. It is said that the bees of Crete, when rounding a certain -promontory, carried tiny stones as ballast to avoid being blown away by -the wind. I have seen more than once a tiny stone hanging from the -spider-threads which crossed and re-crossed an avenue—it seemed to me -that these were designed to steady the suspension bridge. - -Plutarch insists that animals teach themselves even things outside the -order of their natural habits, a fact which will be confirmed by all who -have observed them closely. Just as no two animals have the same -disposition, so does each one, though in greatly varying degree, display -some little arts or accomplishments peculiar to itself. Plutarch -mentions a trained elephant that was seen practising its steps when it -thought that no one was looking. But he allots the palm of self-culture -to an incomparable magpie that belonged to a barber whose shop faced the -temple called the Agora of the Greeks. The bird could imitate to -perfection any sort of sound, cry or tune; it was renowned in the whole -quarter. Now it happened one morning that the funeral of a wealthy -citizen went past, accompanied by a very fine band of trumpeters which -performed an elaborate piece of music. After that day, to every one’s -surprise, the magpie grew mute! Had it become deaf or dumb or both! -Endless were the surmises, and what was not the general amazement when, -at last, it broke its long silence by bursting forth with a flood of -brilliant notes the exact reproduction of the difficult trills and -cadences executed by the funeral band! Evidently it had been practising -it in its head all that while, and only produced it when it had got it -quite perfect. Several Romans and several Greeks witnessed the facts and -could vouch for the truth of the narrative. - -The swallow’s nest and the nightingale’s song make Plutarch pause and -wonder; he believes, with Aristotle, that the old nightingales teach the -young ones, remarking that nightingales reared in captivity never sing -so well as those that have profited by the parental lessons. He gives a -word to the dove of Deucalion which returned a first time to the ark -because the deluge continued, but disappeared when it was set free -again, the waters having subsided. Plutarch confesses, however, that -this is “mythical,” and though he admits that birds deserved the name by -which Euripides calls them of “Messengers of the gods,” he is inclined -to attribute their warnings to the direct intervention of an over-ruling -deity of whom they are the inconscient agents. - -It is a pleasure to find that Plutarch had a high appreciation of the -hedgehog—the charming “urchin” which represents to many an English child -an epitome of wild nature, friendly yet untamed, familiar yet -mysterious. He does not say that it milks cows—a calumny which is an -article of faith with the British ploughman—but he relates that when the -grapes are ripe, the mother urchin goes under the vines and shakes the -plants till some of the grapes fall off; then, rolling herself over -them, she attaches a number of grapes to her spines and so marches back -to the hole where she keeps her nurslings. “One day,” says Plutarch, -“when we were all together, we had the chance of seeing this with our -own eyes—it looked as if a bunch of grapes was shuffling along the -ground, so thickly covered was the animal with its booty.” - -Dogs that threw themselves on their masters’ pyre, dogs that caused the -arrest of assassins or thieves, dogs that remained with and protected -the bodies of their dead masters, clever dogs, devoted dogs, magnanimous -dogs—these will be all found in Plutarch’s gallery. How high-minded, he -says, it is in the dog when, as Homer advises, you lay down your stick, -even an angry dog ceases to attack you. He praises the affectionate -regard which many have shown in giving decent burial to the dogs they -cherished, and recalls how Xantippus of old, whose dog swam by his -galley to Salamis when the Athenians were forced to abandon their city, -buried the faithful creature on a promontory which “to this day” is -known as the Dog’s Grave. Very desolate was the case of the other -animals that ran up and down distraught when their masters embarked, -like the poor cats and dogs which helped the English soldiers in the -block-houses to while away the weary hours, and which, by superior -orders, were left to their fate, though their comrades in khaki were -anxious enough to carry them away. As a proof of the affection of the -Greeks for their dogs Plutarch might have spoken of the not uncommon -representation of them on the _Stelæ_ in the family group which brings -together all the dearest ties between life and death. - -One animal is missing from Plutarch’s portrait gallery—the cat, to which -he only concedes the ungracious allusion “that man had not the excuse of -hunger for eating flesh, like the weasel or cat.” Can we make good the -omission from other sources? - -There is a general notion that cats “were almost unknown to Greek and -Roman antiquity”—these are the words of so well-informed a writer as M. -S. Reinach. Yet instances exist of paintings of cats on Greek vases of -the fifth century, and I was interested to see in the Museum at Athens a -well-carved cat on a stele. Aristotle, who, like Plutarch, mentions cats -in connexion with weasels (both, he says, catch birds), reckons the time -they live at six years, less than half the life of an average modern -cat; this may indicate that though known, they were not then -acclimatised in Europe. Æsop has four fables of cats: 1. A cat dressed -as a physician offers his services to an aviary of birds; they are -declined. 2. A cat seeks an excuse for eating a cock; he fails to find -the excuse, but eats the cock all the same. 3. A cat pretends to be dead -so that mice may come near her. 4. A cat falls in love with a handsome -young man and induces Venus to change her into a lovely maiden. But on a -mouse coming into the room, she scampers after it. Venus, being -displeased, changes her back into a cat. This belongs to a large circle -of folk-tales, and probably all these fables came from the East. - -Herodotus tells as a “very marvellous thing” that cats are apt to rush -back into a burning house, and that the Egyptians try to save them, even -at the risk of their lives, but rarely succeed: hence great lamentation. -Also, that if a cat die in a house all the dwellers in it shave their -eyebrows; “the cats, when they are dead, they carry for burial to the -city of Bubastis.” The Egyptian name for light (and for cat) is _Mau_, -and the inference is irresistible, that the Egyptians supposed the cat -to be constantly apostrophizing the sacred light of which she was the -symbol. Nothing shows the strength of tradition better than the -existence of an endowment at Cairo for the feeding and housing of -homeless cats. - -If the cat in Europe had been a rarity so great as most people think, it -would have been more highly prized. It seems nearer the truth to say -that it was not admired. Its incomplete domestication which attracts us, -did not attract the ancient world. Tame only so far as it suits their -own purposes, cats patronize man, looking down upon him from a higher -plane, which, if only the house-top, they make a golden bar. - - “Chat mystérieux, - Chat séraphique, chat étrange ... - Peut-être est-il fée, est-il dieu?” - -Greeks and Romans preferred a plain animal to this half-elf, half-god. - -The Greek comic writer, Anaxandrides, said to the Egyptians: “You weep -if you see a cat ailing, but I like to kill and skin it.” The fear lest -cats should be profanely treated in Europe led the Egyptians to do all -they could to prevent their exportation; they even sent missions to the -Mediterranean to ransom the cats borne into slavery and carry them back -to Egypt. But these missions could not have reached the cats that had -been taken inland, and as the animal increases rapidly, it may have been -fairly common from early times. There is no doubt, however, that the -number went up with a bound when Egypt became Christian, and every monk -who came to Europe brought shoals of cats, the date corresponding with -that of the first invasion of the rat in the trail of the Huns. - -[Illustration: - - BRONZE STATUE OF AN EGYPTIAN CAT. - (_Collection of H.E. Monsieur Camille Barrère, French Ambassador at - Rome._)] - -Antiquity regarded the cat, before all things, as a little beast of -prey. Nearly every reference to it gives it this character. In the stele -at Athens the cat is supposed to be looking at a bird-cage to which the -man is pointing; the man holds a bird in his left hand, presumably the -pet of the child who stands by him. It seems as if the cat meditated if -it had not performed some fell deed. Seneca observed that young chickens -feel an instinctive fear of the cat but not of the dog. The fine mosaic -at Pompeii shows a tabby kitten in the act of catching a quail. - -Only one ancient poet, by a slight magician-like touch, calls up a -different vision: Theorcitus makes the voluble Praxinœ say to her maid: -“Eunœ, pick up your work, and take care, lazy girl, how you leave it -lying about again; the cats find it just the bed they like.” There—at -last—is the cat we know! But after all, it is an Egyptian cat: a cat -sure of her privileges, a cat who relies on her goddess prototype, and -has but a modicum of respect for the chattering little Syracusan woman -in whose house she condescends to reside. Such were not cats of ancient -Greece and Rome, who, from being un-appreciated, fell back to the morals -of the simple ravager. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - V - - MAN AND HIS BROTHER - - -TRADITIONAL beliefs are like the _coco de mer_ which was found floating, -here and there, on the sea, or washed up on the shore, and which gave -birth to the strangest conjectures; it was supposed to tell of -undiscovered continents or to have dropped from heaven itself. Then, one -day, some one saw this peculiar cocoanut quietly growing on a tall -palm-tree in an obscure islet of the Indian Ocean. All we gather of -primitive traditions is the fruit. Yet the fruit did not grow in the -air, it grew on branches and the branches grew on a trunk and the trunk -had a root. To get to the root of even the slightest of our own -prejudices—let alone those of the savage—we should have to travel back -far into times when history was not. - -Lucretius placed at the beginning of the ages of mankind a berry-eating -race, innocent of blood. The second age belonged to the hunter who -killed animals, at first, and possibly for a long time, for their skins, -before he used their flesh as food. In the third age animals were -domesticated; first the sheep, because that was gentle and easily tamed -(which one may see by the moufflons at Monte Carlo), then, by degrees, -the others. - -This classification was worthy of the most far-seeing mind of antiquity. -Had not human originally meant humane we should not have been here to -tell the tale. The greater traditions of a bloodless age are enshrined -in sacred books; minor traditions of it abound in the folk-lore of the -world. Man was home-sick of innocence; his conscience, which has gone on -getting more blunted, not more sensitive, revolted at the “daily -murder.” So mankind called upon heaven to provide an excuse for -slaughter. - -The Kirghis of Mongolia say that in the beginning only four men and four -animals were made: the camel, the ox, the sheep, and the horse, and all -were told to live on grass. The animals grazed, but the men pulled up -the grass by the roots and stored it. The animals complained to God that -the men were pulling up all the grass, and that soon there would be none -left. God said: “If I forbid men to eat grass, will you allow them to -eat you?” Fearing starvation, the animals consented. - -From the first chapter of Genesis to the last of the “Origin of Species” -there is one long testimony to our vegetarian ancestor, but beyond the -fact that he existed, what do we know about him? We may well believe -that he lived in a good climate and on a plenteous earth. Adam and Eve -or their representatives could not have subsisted in Greenland. I think -that the killing of wild animals, and especially the eating of them, -began when man found himself confronted by extremes of cold and length -of winter nights. The skins of animals gave him the only possibility of -keeping warm or even of living at all, if he was to brave the outer air, -while their flesh may have been often the only food he could find. He -was obliged to eat them to keep alive, as Arctic explorers have been -obliged to eat their sledge-dogs. Not preference, but hard necessity, -made him carnivorous. - -These speculations are confirmed by the doings of the earliest man of -whom we have any sure knowledge; _not_ the proto-man who must have -developed, as I have said, under very different climatic conditions. -Perhaps he sat under the palm-trees growing on the banks of the Thames, -but though the palm-trees have left us their fruit, man, if he was -there, left nothing to speak of his harmless sojourn. By tens of -thousands of years the earliest man with whom we can claim acquaintance -is the reindeer hunter of Quartenary times. He hunted and fed upon the -reindeer, but he had not tamed them. He wore reindeer skins, but he -could not profit by reindeer milk; no children were brought up by hand, -possibly to the advantage of the children. It is likely, by the by, that -the period of human lactation was very long. The horse also was killed -for food at a time infinitely removed from the date of his first service -to man. - -[Illustration: - - REINDEER BROWSING. - Older Stone Age.] - -[Illustration: - - HORSE DRAWING DISC OF THE SUN. - Older Bronze Age.] - -The reindeer hunter was a most intelligent observer of animals. He was -an artist and a very good one. The best of his scratchings on reindeer -horn and bone of horses and reindeer in different attitudes are -admirable for freedom, life, and that intuition of character which makes -the true animal painter. For a time which makes one dizzy to look down -upon, no such draughtsman appeared as the pre-historic cave dweller. The -men of the age of Polished Stone and of the early ages of metals -produced nothing similar in the way of design. They understood beauty of -form and ornament or, rather, perhaps, they still shared in that -Nature’s own unerring touch; it took millenniums of civilisation for man -to make one ugly pot or pan. But these men had not the gift or even the -idea of sitting down to copy a grazing or running animal. - -We need not go far, however, to find a man who, living under nearly the -same conditions as the reindeer hunter of Southern France, has developed -the same artistic aptitude. I shall always recall with pleasure my visit -to a Laplander’s hut; it was in the broad daylight of Arctic midnight—no -one slept in the hut, except an extraordinarily small baby in a -canoe-shaped cradle. The floor was spread with handsome furs, and its -aspect was neither untidy nor comfortless. I reflected that this was how -the cave dweller arranged his safe retreat. Much more strongly was he -brought to my mind by the domestic objects of every sort made of -reindeer horn and adorned with drawings. As I write I have one of them -before me, a large horn knife, the sheath of which ends with the -branching points. It is beautifully decorated with _graffiti_, showing -the good and graceful creature without whom the Laplander cannot live. -The school of art is distinctly Troglodite. - -A theory has been started that the man of the Quartenary age drew his -horses and his reindeer solely as a magical decoy from the idea that the -pictures “called” the game as whistling (_i.e._, imitating the sound of -the wind) “calls” the wind. I do not know that the Lapps, though -practised in magic, have any such purpose in view. It is said that it -would be absurd to attribute a motive of mere artistic pleasure to the -Troglodite. Why? Some races have as natural a tendency to artistic -effort as the bower-bird has to decorate its nest. Conditions of climate -may have given the hunter periods of enforced idleness, and art, in its -earliest form, was, perhaps, always an escape from _ennui_, a mode of -passing the time. That the early hunter dealt in magic is likely enough; -he is supposed, though not on altogether conclusive grounds, to have -been a fetich-worshipper, and fetich-worship is akin to some kinds of -magic. But it does not follow that _all_ his art had this connexion. How -animals appeared to his eyes we know; what he thought about them he has -not told us. The Eskimo, the modern pre-historic man who is believed to -be a better-preserved type than even the Lapp, may be asked to speak for -him. - -The Eskimo can say that he had a friendly feeling towards all living -things, notwithstanding that he fed on flesh, and that wild beasts -sometimes fed on him. Not that he had ever talked of wild beasts, for he -had no tame ones. He had not a vocabulary of rude terms about animals. -He was inclined to credit every species with many potential merits. The -Eskimo is afraid—very much afraid—of bears. Yet he is the first to admit -that the bear is capable of acting like the finest of fine gentlemen. A -woman was in a fright at seeing a bear and so gave him a partridge; that -bear never forgot the trifling service, but brought her newly killed -seals ever after. Another bear saved the life of three men who wished to -reward him. He politely declined their offer, but if, in winter time, -they should see a bald-headed bear, will they induce their companions to -spare him? After so saying, he plunged into the sea. Next winter a bear -was sighted and they were going to hunt him, when these men, remembering -what had happened, begged the hunters to wait till they had had a look -at him. Sure enough it was “their own bear”! They told the others to -prepare a feast for him, and when he had refreshed himself, he lay down -to sleep and _the children played around him_. Presently he awoke and -ate a little more, after which he went down to the sea, leapt in, and -was never seen again. - -Even such lovely imaginings, we may believe, without an excessive -stretch of fancy, gilded the mental horizon of the Troglodite. He had -long left behind the stage of primal innocence, but no supernatural -chasm gaped between him and his little brothers. - -The reindeer hunters were submerged by what is more inexorable than -man—Nature. The reindeer vanished, and with him the hunter, doomed by -the changed conditions of climate. He vanished as the Lapp is vanishing; -the poignantly tragic scene which was chronicled by two lines in the -newspapers during the early summer of 1906—the suicide of a whole clan -of Lapps whose reindeer were dead and who had nothing to do but to -follow them—may have happened in what we call fair Provence. Thousands -of men paid with their lives for its becoming a rose garden. - -The successors of the reindeer hunters, Turanian like them, but far more -progressive, were the lake dwellers, the dolmen-builders, with their -weaving and spinning, their sowing and reaping, their pottery and their -baskets, their polished flints and their domestic animals. Man’s -greatest achievement, the domestication of animals, had been reached in -the unrecorded ages that divide the rough and the polished stone. Man, -“excellent in art,” had mastered the beast whose lair is in the wilds; -“he tames the horse of shaggy mane, he puts the yoke upon its neck; he -tames the tireless mountain bull.” The great mind of Sophocles saw and -saw truly that these were the mighty works of man; the works which made -man, man. We know that when the Neolithic meat-eater of what is now -Denmark threw away the bones after he had done his meal, these bones -were gnawed by house-dogs. A simple thing, but it tells a wondrous tale. -Did these dogs come with their masters from Asia, or had they been tamed -in their Northern home? The answer depends on whether the dog is -descended from jackal or wolf. In either case it is unlikely that the -most tremendous task of domestication was the first. - -Not everywhere has man domesticated animals, though we may be sure that -he took them everywhere with him after he had domesticated them. If man -walked on dry land across the Atlantic as some enthusiastic students of -sub-oceanic geography now believe that he did, he led no sheep, no -horses, no dogs. In America, when it was discovered, there was only one -domestic animal, and in Australia there was none. Of native animals, the -American buffalo could have been easily tamed. It may be said that in -Australia there was no suitable animal, but the dog’s ancestor could not -have seemed a suitable animal for a household protector; a jackal is not -a promising pupil, still less a wolf, unless there was some more gentle -kind of wolf than any which now survives. Might not a good deal have -been made out of the kangaroo? Possibly the whole task of domestication -was the work of one patient, intelligent and widely-spread race, kindred -of the Japanese, who in making forest trees into dwarfs show the sort of -qualities that would be needed to make a wild animal not only unafraid -(that is nothing), but also a willing servant. - -The Neolithic man’s eschatology of animals and of himself was identical. -He contemplated for both a future life which reproduced this one. “The -belief in the deathlessness of souls,” said Canon Isaac Taylor, “was the -great contribution of the Turanian race to the religious thought of the -world.” This appears to claim almost too much. Would any race have had -the courage to start upon its way had it conceived death as real? - - “It is a modest creed and yet - Pleasant if one considers it, - To own that death itself must be - Like all the rest, a mockery.” - -It is a creed which springs from the very instinct of life. Two pelicans -returning to their nest found their two young ones dead from sunstroke. -The careful observer who was watching them has recorded that they _did -not seem to recognise_ the inert, fluffy heap as what _was_ their -fledglings; they hunted for them for a long while, moving the twigs of -the nest, and at last threw one of the dead birds out of it. So the -primitive man in presence of the dead knows that this is not _he_ and he -begins to ask: where is he? - -But if every race in turn has asked that question, it was asked with -more insistence by some peoples than by others, and above all, it was -answered by some with more assurance. The Neolithic Turanians had -nothing misty in their vision of another world. It was full of movement -and variety: the chase, the battle, the feast, sleep and awakening, -night and day—these were there as well as here. Animals were essential -to the picture, and it never struck the Neolithic man that there was any -more difficulty about their living again than about his living again. If -he philosophised at all, it was probably after the fashion of the Eskimo -who holds the soul to be the “owner” of the body: the body, the flesh, -dies and may be devoured, but he who kills the body does not kill its -“owner.” - -Vast numbers of bones have been found near the dolmens in Southern -France. The steed of the dead man galloped with him into the Beyond. The -faithful dog trotted by the little child, comrade and guardian. In the -exquisite Hebrew idyll Tobias has his dog as well as the angel to -accompany him on his adventurous earthly journey. The little Neolithic -boy had only the dog and his journey was longer; but to some grieving -fathers would it not be a rare comfort to imagine their lost darlings -guarded by loving four-footed friends along the Path of Souls? - -The Celtic conquerors of the dolmen-builders took most of their -religious ideas. When successful aid in mundane matters was what was -chiefly sought in religion, a little thing might determine conversion -_en masse_. If the divinities of one set of people seemed on some -occasion powerless, it was natural to try the divinities of somebody -else. When success crowned the experiment, the new worship was formally -adopted. This is exactly what happened in the historic case of Clovis -and “Clothilde’s God,” and it doubtless happened frequently before the -dawn of history. Druidism is believed to have arisen in this way in a -grafting of the new on the old. The Celts had the same views about the -next world as the dolmen-builders. They are thought to have taken them -from the conquered with the rest of their religious system, but to me it -seems unlikely that they had not already similar views when they arrived -from Asia. In the early Vedas goats and horses were sacrificed to go -before and announce the coming of the dead; Vedic animals kept their -forms, the renewed body was perfect and incorruptible, but it was the -real body. A celebrated racehorse was deified after death. Such beliefs -have a strong affinity to the theory that animals (or slaves) killed at -the man’s funeral will be useful to him in the after-life. However -derived, our European ancestors embraced that theory to the full. - -Only a few years ago a second Viking ship was found at Oseberg, in -Norway, in which were the remains of ten horses, four dogs, a young ox, -and the head of an old ox. Three more horses were found outside. The -dogs had on their own collars with long chains. There were also sledges -with elaborately carved animals’ heads. It was a queen’s grave; her -distaff and spinning-wheel told of simple womanly tasks amidst so much -sepulchral splendour. In those late times the law by which religious -forms grow more sumptuous as the faith behind them grows less, may have -come into operation. Lavish but meaningless tributes may have taken the -place of a provision full of meaning for real wants. - -So the sacrifices to the gods may have been once intended to stock the -pastures of heaven. It cannot be doubted that the victim was never -_killed_ in the mind of the original sacrificer, it was merely -transferred to another sphere. The worser barbarity comes in when the -true significance of the act is lost and when it is repeated from habit. - -After animals were domesticated they were not killed at all for a long -time—still less were they eaten. Of this there can be no shadow of -doubt. The first domestic animals were far too valuable possessions for -any one to think of killing them. As soon would a showman kill a -performing bull which had cost him a great deal of trouble to train. -Besides this, and more than this, the natural man, who is much better -than he is painted, has a natural horror of slaying the creature that -eats out of his hand and gives him milk and wool and willing service. - -There are pastoral tribes now in South Africa which live on the milk, -cheese and butter of their sheep, but only kill them as the last -necessity. In East Africa the cow is never killed, and if one falls ill, -it is put into a sort of infirmary and carefully tended. We all know the -divinity which hedges round the Hindu cow. The same compunction once -saved the labouring ox. When I was at Athens for the Archæological -Congress of 1905, Dr. R. C. Bosanquet, at that time head of the British -school, told me that he had observed among the peasants in Crete the -most intense reluctance to kill the ox of labour. In several places in -Ancient Greece all sorts of devices were resorted to in order that the -sacrificial knife might seem to kill the young bull accidentally, and -the knife—the guilty thing—was afterwards thrown into the sea. This last -custom is important; it marks the moment when the slaughter of domestic -animals, _even_ for sacrificial purposes, still caused a scruple. The -case stands thus: at first they were not killed at all; then, for a long -time, they were killed only for sacrifice. Then they were killed for -food, but far and wide relics of the original scruple may be detected as -in the common invocation of divine permission which every Moslem butcher -utters before killing an animal. - -Animal and human sacrifices are one phenomenon of early manners, not -two. The people who sacrificed domestic animals to accompany their dead -generally, if not always, also sacrificed slaves for the same purpose, -and the sacrifice of fair maidens at the funerals of heroes was to give -them these as companions in another world. - -I am not aware that Gift Sacrifice ever led to cannibalism nor, in its -primitive forms, did it lead to eating the flesh of the animal victim -which was buried or burnt with the body of the person whom it was -intended to honour. This is what was done by the dolmen-builders. The -earlier reindeer hunters had no domestic animals to sacrifice, and it is -unlikely that they sacrificed men. At all events, they were not -cannibals. - -On the other hand, cannibalism is closely connected with Pact Sacrifice, -which there is a tendency now to regard as antecedent to Gift Sacrifice, -especially among those scholars who think that the whole human race has -passed through a stage of Totemism. Psychologically the Totemist’s -sacrifice of a reserved animal to which all the sanctity of human life -is ascribed, resembles the sacrifice by some African tribes of a human -victim—as in both cases not only is a pact of brotherhood sealed, but -also those who partake of the flesh are supposed to acquire the -physical, moral, or supersensual qualities attributed to the victim. -Indeed, it would be possible to argue that the Totem was a substitute -for a human victim, and a whole new theory of Totemism might be evolved -from that postulate, but it is wiser to observe such affinities without -trying to derive one thing from another which commonly proves a snare -and a delusion. It is sufficient to note that among fundamental human -ideas is the belief that man grows like what he feeds upon. - -The sacrifice of the Totem, though found scattered wherever Totemism -prevails, is not an invariable or even a usual accompaniment of it. When -it does occur, the Totem is not supposed to die, any more than the -victim was supposed to die in the primitive Gift Sacrifice. It changes -houses or goes to live with “our lost others,” or returns to eternal -life in the “lake of the dead.” The death of the soul is the last thing -that is thought of. The majority of Totemists do not kill their Totems -under any circumstances, and when the Totem is a wild beast they believe -that it shows a like respect for the members of its phratry. If one dies -they deplore its loss; in some parts of East Africa where the Totem is a -hyena not even the chief is mourned for with equal ceremony. - -Totemism is the adoption of an animal (or plant) as the visible badge of -an invisible bond. The word Totem is an American Indian word for -“badge,” and the word Taboo a Polynesian term meaning an interdiction. -The Totemist generally says that he is descended from his Totem: hence -the men and the beasts of each Totem clan are brothers. But the beast is -something more than a brother, he is the perpetual reincarnation of the -race-spirit. Numerical problems never trouble the natural human mind; -all the cats of Bubastis were equally sacred, and all the crows of -Australia are equally sacred to the clans who have a crow for Totem. To -the mass of country folks every cow is _the_ cow, every mouse is _the_ -mouse; the English villager is practically as much convinced of this as -the American Indian or the Australian native is convinced that every -Totem is _the_ Totem. - -Men and women of the same Totem are _taboo_: they cannot intermarry. But -I need not speak of Totemism here as a social institution. My business -with it is limited to its place in the history of ideas about animals. - -In Totemism we find represented not one idea, but an aggregation of most -of the fundamental ideas of mankind. This is why the attempt to trace it -to one particular root has failed to dispose of the question of its -origin in a final and satisfactory manner. For a time there seemed to be -a general disposition to accept what is called the “Nickname theory” by -which Totemism was attributed to the custom of giving animal nicknames. -We have a peasant called Nedrott (in the Brescian dialect “duck”); I -myself never heard his real name—his wife is “la Nedrott” and his -children are “i Nedrotti.” It is alleged that his father or grandfather -had flat feet. But I never heard of a confusion between the Nedrotti and -their nicknamesakes. It may be said that this would be sure to happen -were they less civilised. How can we be sure that it would be sure to -happen? An eminent scholar who objects to the nickname theory on the -ground that it assigns too much importance to “verbal misunderstanding,” -proposes as an alternative the “impregnation theory.” A woman, on -becoming aware of approaching motherhood, mentally connects the future -offspring with an animal or plant which happens to catch her eye at that -moment. This is conceivable, given the peculiar notions of some savages -on generation, but if all Totemism sprang from such a cause, is it not -strange that in Australia there are only two Totems, the eagle-hawk and -crow? - -As a mere outward fact, the Totem is what its name implies, a badge or -sign; just as the wolf was the badge of Rome, or as the lion is taken to -represent the British Empire. The convenience of adopting a common badge -or sign may have appeared to men almost as soon as they settled into -separate clans or communities. Besides public Totems there exist private -and secret Totems, and this suggests that the earliest communities may -have consisted of a sort of freemasonry, a league of mutual help of the -nature of a secret society. Around the outward and so to speak heraldic -fact of Totemism are gathered the impressions and beliefs which make it -a rule of life, a morality and a religion. - -The time may come when the desire to give a reason for an emotion will -be recognised as one of the greatest factors in myth-making. The -Totemist thinks that he spares his Totem because it is his Totem. But -man is glad to find an excuse for sparing something. Altruism is as old -as the day when the first bird took a succulent berry to its mate or -young ones instead of eating it. Where men see no difference between -themselves and animals, what more natural than that they should wish to -spare them? When it was found difficult or impossible to spare all, it -was a katharsis of the wider sentiment to spare one, and Totemism gave a -very good excuse. It appealed to a universal instinct. This is not the -same as to say that it had its origin in keeping pets; it would be -nearer the truth to describe the love of pets as a later birth of the -same instinctive tendency which the Totemist follows when he cherishes -and preserves his Totem. - -The primitive man is a child in the vast zoological garden of Nature; a -child with a heart full of love, curiosity and respect, anxious to make -friends with the lion which looks so very kind and the white bear who -must want some one to comfort him. The whole folk-lore of the world -bears witness to this temper, even leaving Totemism out of the question. - -The Bechuanas make excuses to the lion before killing him, the Malays to -the tiger, the Red Indians to the bear—he says that his children are -hungry and need food—would the bear kindly not object to be killed? Some -writers see Totemism in all this, and so it may be, but there is -something in it deeper than even Totemism—there is human nature. - -Take the robin—has any one said it was a Totem? Yet Mrs. Somerville -declared she would as soon eat a child as a robin, a thoroughly Totemist -sentiment. A whole body of protective superstition has crystallised -around certain creatures which, because of their confiding nature, their -charming ways, their welcome appearance at particular seasons, inspired -man with an unusually strong impulse to spare them. I was interested to -find the stork as sacred to the Arabs in Tunis and Algeria as he is to -his German friends in the North. A Frenchman remarked that “sacred birds -are never good to eat,” but he might have remembered the goose and hen -of the ancient Bretons which Cæsar tells us were kept “for pleasure” but -never killed; not to speak of the pigeons of Moscow and of Mecca. - -It should be observed how quickly the spared or cherished bird or beast -becomes “lucky.” In Germany and Scandinavia it is lucky to have a -stork’s nest on the roof. The regimental goat is the “luck of his -company.” - -M. S. Reinach’s opinion that in Totemism is to be found the secret of -the domestication of animals offers an attractive solution to that great -problem, but it has not been, nor do I think that it will ever be, -generally accepted. It, is however, plain, that where population is -sparse, and dogs and guns undreamt of, wild animals would be far less -wild than in countries with all the advantages of civilisation; the -tameness of birds on lonely islands when the explorer first makes his -descent is a case in point. No doubt, therefore, with the encouragement -they received, the animal Totems acquired a considerable degree of -tameness, but from that to domestication there is a long step. Our -household “Totem,” the robin, is relatively tame; he will even eat -crumbs on the breakfast-table, but he flies away in springtime and we -see him no more. - -Besides being a social institution and a friendly bond between man and -beast, Totemism is an attempt to explain the universe. Its spiritual -vitality depends on the widely rooted belief in archetypes; the things -seen are the mirror of the things unseen, the material is unreal, the -immaterial the only reality. We are ourselves but cages of immortal -birds. The real “I” is somewhere else; it may be in a fish, as in the -Indian folk-tale, or it may be in a god. I do not know, by the by, if it -has been remarked that a man can be a Totem: the incarnation of the -indwelling race-spirit. The Emperor of Japan corresponds exactly to this -description. The deified Cæsar was a Totem. A god can be a Totem: among -the Hidery (islanders of the North Pacific whose interesting legends -were published by the Chicago Folk-lore Association) the raven, which is -their Totem, is the manifestation of the god Ne-kilst-lass who created -the world. Here Totemism approaches till it touches Egyptian -zoomorphism. Was this form an earlier or a later development than that -in which the Totem is merely an ancestor? Our inability to reply shows -our real want of certainty as to whether Totemism is a body of belief in -a state of becoming or _in a state of dissolution_. - -[Illustration: - - _Photo:_ _Egypt Exploration Fund._ - HATHOR COW. - Cairo Museum. - (_Found in 1906 by Dr. E. Naville at Deir-el-bahari._)] - -We do know that Egyptian zoomorphism is not old, at least in the -exaggerated shape it assumed in the worship of the bull Apis. It is a -cult which owed its success to the animistic tendency of the human mind, -but its particular cause is to be looked for in crystallised figurative -language. The stupendous marble tombs of the sacred bulls that seem to -overpower us in the semi-obscurity of the Serapeum remind one of how -easy it is to draw false conclusions relative to the past if we possess -only half-lights upon it: had Egyptian hieroglyphics never yielded up -their secret we might have judged the faith of Egypt to have been the -most material, instead of one of the most spiritual of religions. - -In Egyptian (as in Assyrian) cosmogony the visible universe is the -direct creation of God. “The god who is immanent in all things is the -creator of every animal: under his name of Ram, of the sheep, Bull, of -the cows: he loves the scorpion in his hole, he is the god of the -crocodile who plunges in the water: he is the god of those who rest in -their graves. Amon is an image, Atmee is an image, Ra is an image: HE -alone maketh himself in millions of ways.” Amon Ra is described in -another grand hymn as the maker of the grass for the cattle, of fruitful -trees for men yet unborn; causing the fish to live in the river, the -birds to fill the air, giving breath to those in the egg, giving food to -the bird that perches, to the creeping thing and to the flying thing -alike, providing food for the rats in their holes, feeding the flying -things in every tree. “Hail to thee, say all creatures. Hail to thee for -all these things: the One, Alone with many hands, awake while all men -sleep, to seek out the good of all creatures, “Amon Sustainer of all!” -This is, indeed, a majestic psalm of universal life. - -Contrary to what was long the impression, the Wheel of Being was not an -Egyptian doctrine, but the dead, or rather some of them, were believed -to have the power of transforming themselves into animals for limited -periods. It was a valued privilege of the virtuous dead: the form of a -heron, a hawk or a swallow was a convenient travelling dress. -Four-footed beasts were reserved to gods. - -There was no prejudice against sport if carried on with due regard to -vested sacred rights. The first hunting-dog whose name we know was -Behkaa, who was buried with his master, his name being inscribed over -his picture on the tomb. The injury of animals sacred to the gods was, -of course, a grave sin. Among the protests of innocence of a departing -soul we read: “I have not clipped the skins of the sacred beasts; I have -not hunted wild animals in their pasturages; I have not netted the -sacred birds; I have not turned away the cattle of the gods; I have not -stood between a god and his manifestation.” - -The Egyptian mind, which was essentially religious, saw the “god who is -immanent in all things” yet standing outside these things to sustain -them with a guiding providence; the highly trained Chinese mind, with -its philosophic trend, saw the divine indivisible intelligence without -volition illuminating all that lived: “The mind of man and the mind of -trees, birds and beasts, is just the one mind of heaven and earth, only -brighter or duller by reflection: as light looks brighter when it falls -on a mirror than when it falls on a dark surface, so divine reason is -less bright in cow or sheep than in man.” This fine definition was given -by Choo-Foo-Tsze, the great exponent of Confucianism, who, when he was -four years old, surprised his father by asking, on being told that the -sky was heaven, “What is above it?” Choo-Foo-Tsze in the thirteenth -century anticipated some modern conclusions of geology by remarking that -since sea shells were found on lofty mountains as if generated in the -middle of stones, it was plain “that what was below became lifted up, -what was soft became hard”; it was a deep subject, he said, and ought to -be investigated. Long before the Nolan, Confucius had conceived the idea -of the great Monad: “one God who contains and comprehends the whole -world.” It was an idea entirely incomprehensible to all but a few -educated men in any age. Confucianism, Buddhism and Taoism left the -Chinese masses what they found them—a people whose folk-lore was their -religion. Were they asked to believe in the Wheel of Being? They made -that folk-lore too. Dr. Giles tells the folk-tale of a certain gentleman -who, having taken a very high degree, enjoyed the privilege (which is -admitted to be uncommon) of recollecting what happened between his last -death and birth. After he died, he was cited before a Judge of Purgatory -and his attention was attracted by a quantity of skins of sheep, dogs, -oxen, horses, which were hanging in a row. These were waiting for the -souls which might be condemned to wear them; when one was wanted, it was -taken down and the man’s own skin was stripped off and the other put on. -This gentleman was condemned to be a sheep; the attendant demons helped -him on with his sheep-skin when the Recording Officer suddenly mentioned -that he had once saved a man’s life. The Judge, after looking at his -books, ruled that such an act balanced all his misdoings: then the -demons set to work to pull off the sheep-skin bit by bit, which gave the -poor gentleman dreadful pain, but at last it was all got off except one -little piece which was still sticking to him when he was born again as a -man. - -This story is amusing as showing what a mystical doctrine may come to -when it gets into the hands of the thoroughgoing realist. For the -Chinese peasant the supernatural has no mystery. To him it is a mere -matter of ordinary knowledge that beasts, birds, fishes and insects not -only have ghosts but also ghosts of ghosts—for the first ghost is liable -to die. If any of these creatures do not destroy life in three -existences, they may be born as men—a belief no doubt due to the -Buddhists, who in China seem to have concentrated all their energies on -humanitarian propaganda and let metaphysics alone. Taoism has been -called an “organised animism.” Organised or unorganised, animism is -still the popular faith of China. It is too convenient to lightly -abandon, for it explains everything. For instance, whatever is odd, -unexpected, very lucky, very unlucky, can be made as plain as day by -mentioning the word “fox.” Any one may be a fox without your knowing it: -the fox is a jinnee, an elf who can work good or harm to man; who can -see the future, get possession of things at a distance, and generally -outmatch the best spiritualist medium. In Chinese folk-lore the fox has, -as it were, made a monopoly of the world-wide notion that animals have a -more intimate knowledge of the supernatural than men. Soothsayers are -thought to be foxes because they know what is going to happen. - -Man’s speculations about himself and the universe arrange themselves -under three heads: those which have not yet become a system, those which -are a system, those which are the remains of a system. It is impossible -that any set of ideas began by being a system unless it were revealed by -an angel from heaven. But no sooner do ideas become systematic than they -pass into the stage of dogma which is accepted not discussed. Everything -is made to fit in with them. Thus to find the free play of the human -mind one must seek it where there are the fewest formulæ, written or -unwritten, for tradition is as binding as any creed or code. There are -savage races which, if they ever had Totemism, have preserved few if any -traces of it. To take them one by one and inquire into their views on -animals would be well worth doing, but it is beyond my modest scope. I -will say this, however—show me a savage who has not some humane and -friendly ideas about animals! The impulse to confess brotherhood with -man’s poor relations is everywhere the same: the excuses or reasons -given for it vary a little. The animal to be kindly treated is the -sanctuary of a god, the incarnation of a tribe, or simply the shelter of -a poor wandering ghost. - -The Amazulu, one of the finest of savage races, believe that _some_ -snakes are Amatongo—some, not all. In fact, these snakes which are dead -men are rather rare. One kind is black and another green. An Itongo does -not come into the house by the door, nor does it eat frogs or mice. It -does not run away like other snakes. Some say, “Let it be killed.” -Others interfere, “What, kill a man?” If a man die who had a scar and -you see a snake with a scar, ten to one it is that man. Then, at night, -the village chief _dreams_ and the dead man speaks to him. “Do you now -wish to kill me? Do you already forget me? I thought I would come and -ask you for food, and do you kill me?” Then he tells him his name. - -Without any teaching, without any system, the savage thinks that the -appearances which stand before him in sleep are real. If they are not -real, what are they? The savage may not be a reasonable being, but he is -a being who reasons. - -In the morning the village chief tells his dream and orders a -sin-offering to the Itongo (ghost) lest he be angry and kill them. A -bullock or a goat is sacrificed and they eat the flesh. Afterwards they -look everywhere for the snake, but it has vanished. - -A snake that forces its way rapidly into a house is known to be a liar -and he is a liar still. Do they turn him out of doors with a lecture on -the beauty of veracity? Far from that. “They sacrifice something to such -an Itongo.” A few men turn into poisonous snakes, but this is by no -means common. If offended, the Amatongo cause misfortune, but even if -pleased they do not seem to confer many benefits; perhaps they cannot, -for surely it is easier to do evil than good. Once, however, a snake -which was really the spirit of a chief, placed its mouth on a sore which -a child had; the mother was in a great fright, but happily she did not -interfere and the snake healed the sore and went silently away. - -[Illustration: - - _Photo:_ _Mansell._ - WILD GOATS AND YOUNG. - British Museum. - (_Assyrian Relief._)] - -Other animals are sometimes human beings as well as snakes. The lizard -is often the Itongo of an old woman. A boy killed some lizards in a -cattle-pen with stones. Then he went and told his grandmother, who said -he had done very wrong—those lizards were chiefs of the village and -should have been worshipped. I think the grandmother was a humane old -person; I even suspect that she said the lizards were chiefs and not old -women to make the admonition more awful. The man who told this story to -Canon Callaway (from whose valuable work on the Amazulu I take these -notes) added that, looking back to the incident, he doubted if the -lizards were Amatongo after all, because no harm came of their murder. -He thought that they must have been merely wild animals which had become -tame owing to people mistakenly thinking that they were Amatongo. - -What can one say to boys who ill-treat lizards? I own that I have -threatened them with ghostly treatment of the same sort. I even tried -the supernatural argument with a little Arab boy, otherwise a nice -intelligent child, who was throwing stones at a lizard which was moving -at the bottom of the deep Roman well at El Djem: I did not know then -that the persecution of lizards in Moslem lands is supposed (I hope -erroneously) to have been ordered by Mohammed “because the lizard mimics -the attitude of the Faithful at prayer.” - -The lizard, one of the most winsome of God’s creatures, has suffered -generally from the prejudice which made reptile a word of reproach. It -is the more worthy of remark, therefore, that in a place where one would -hardly expect it, protective superstition has done its work of rescue: -Sicilian children catch lizards, but let them go unhurt to intercede for -them before the Lord, as the lizard is held to be “in the presence of -the Lord in heaven.” One wonders if this is some distant echo of the -text about the angels of the children (their archetypes) who always see -God. - -Not always were reptiles scorned, but, possibly, they were always -feared. Man’s first idea is to worship what he fears; his second idea, -which may not come for many thousand years, is to throw a stone at it. -The stone, besides representing physical fear, at a given moment also -represents religious reprobation of what had been an object of worship -in a forsaken faith. Primitive man took the interest of a wondering -child in the great Saurian tribe. How did he know that they _flew_, that -there were “dragons” on the earth? How did he know that the snake once -had legs?—for if the snake of Eden was ordered to go on its belly, the -inference seems to be that he was thought once to have moved in another -way. The snake has lost his legs and the lizard his wings, and how the -ancient popular imagination of the world made such accurate guesses -about them must be left a riddle, unless we admit that it was guided by -the fossil remains of extinct monsters. - -The serpent of the Biblical story was, says Dr. H. P. Smith, “simply a -jinnee—a fairy if you will—possessed of more knowledge than the other -animals, but otherwise like them.” Here, again, we meet in the most -venerable form, the belief that animals know more than men. Can we -resist the conclusion that to people constantly inclined towards magic -like the old-world Jews, it must have appeared that Eve was dabbling in -magic—by every rule of ancient religion, the sin of sins? - -The cult of the serpent in its many branches is the greatest of animal -cults, and it is the one in which we see most clearly the process by -which man from being an impressionist became a symbolist, and from being -a symbolist became a votary. We have only to read the Indian statistics -of the number of persons annually killed by snake-bite to be persuaded -that fear must have been the original feeling with which man regarded -the snake. Fear is a religious feeling in primitive man, but other -religious feelings were added to it—admiration, for the snake, as all -who have had the good luck to observe it in its wild state must agree, -is a beautiful, graceful, and insinuating creature; a sense of mystery, -a sense of fascination which comes from those keen eyes fixed fearlessly -upon yours, the simple secret, perhaps, of the much discussed power of -snakes to fascinate their prey. What wonder if man under the influence -of these combined impressions, symbolised in the serpent a divine force -which could be made propitious by worship! - -In the forming of cults there has always been this unconscious passage -from impressions to symbols, from symbols to “manifestations.” But there -has been also the conscious use of symbols by the priests and sages of -ancient religions, in imparting as much of divine knowledge to the -uninitiated as they thought that the uninitiated could bear. The origin -of serpent worship has a probable relationship with this conscious use -of symbols as well as with their unconscious growth. - -Besides the prejudice against reptiles, modern popular superstition has -placed several animals under a ban, and especially the harmless bat and -the useful barn owl. Traditional reasons exist, no doubt, in every case; -but stronger than these are the associations of such creatures with the -dark in which the sane man of a certain temperament becomes a partial -lunatic; a prey to unreal terrors which the flap of a bat’s wing or the -screech of an owl is enough to work up to the point of frenzy. It is a -most unfortunate thing for an animal if it be the innocent cause of a -_frisson_, a feeling of uncanny dread. The little Italian owl, -notwithstanding that it too comes out at dusk, has escaped prejudice. -This was the owl of Pallas Athene and of an earlier cult. As in the case -of the serpent, its wiles to fascinate its prey were the groundwork of -its reputation for wisdom. Of this there cannot be, I think, any doubt, -though the droll bobs and curtesies which excite an irresistible and -fatal curiosity in small birds, have suggested in the mind of the modern -man a thing so exceedingly far from wisdom as _civetteria_, which word -is derived from _civetta_—“the owl of Minerva” as Italian class-books -say. The descent from the goddess of wisdom to the coquette is the -cruellest decadence of all! - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - VI - - THE FAITH OF IRAN - - -THE Zoroastrian theory of animals cannot be severed from the religious -scheme with which it is bound up. It is not a side-issue, but an -integral part of the whole. It would be useless to attempt to treat it -without recalling the main features in the development of the faith out -of which it grew. - -In the first place, who were the people, occupying what we call Persia, -to whom the Sage, who was not one of them, brought his interpretation of -the knowledge of good and evil? The early Iranians must have broken off -from the united body of the Aryans at a time when they spoke a common -language, which though not Sanscrit, was very like it. The affinities -between Sanscrit and the dialect called with irremediable inaccuracy -“Zend” are of the strongest. From this we conclude that, on their -establishment in their new home, the Iranians differed little from the -race of whose customs the Rig-Veda gives—not a full picture—but a -faithful outline. Pastoral folk, devoted to their flocks and herds, but -not unlearned in the cultivation of the earth and the sowing of grain, -they had reached what may be called the highest stage of primitive -civilisation. Though milk, butter and cooked corn formed their principal -food, on feast days they also ate meat, chiefly the flesh of oxen and -buffaloes, which they were careful to cook thoroughly. The progressive -Aryans, who called half-raw meat by a term exactly corresponding to the -too familiar “rosbif saignant,” denounced the more savage peoples who -consumed it as “wild men” or “demons.” They kept horses, asses and -mules; horses were sacrificed occasionally; for instance, kings -sacrificed a horse to obtain male issue. The wild boar was hunted, if -not in the earliest, at least in very early times. The dog was prized -for its fidelity as guardian of the house and flocks, but there is no -trace of its having been protected by extraordinary regulations such as -those which later came into force in Iran. On the other hand, the name -of dog had never yet been used in reproach. It seems to have been among -Semitic races that the contempt for man’s best friend arose, but it is -morally certain that it arose nowhere till dogs became scavengers of -cities. It was the homeless pariah cur that gave the dog the bad name -from which have sprung so many ugly words registered in modern -vocabularies. Even now, when Jew or Moslem uses “dog” in a bad sense, he -means “cur”; he knows quite well the other kind of dog—he knows Tobit’s -dog, which, bounding on before the young man and the angel, told the -glad tidings of his master’s return; Tobit’s dog which was one of the -animals admitted by Mohammed into highest heaven. But “pariah dog” -became synonymous of pariah, and notwithstanding the present tendency to -attribute the opprobrium of the pig to original sanctity (and consequent -reservation), I am inclined to think that the pig likewise came to be -scorned because he was a scavenger. In some Indian cities herds of wild -pigs still enter the gates just before they are closed at dusk, to pass -out of them as soon as they are opened in the morning: during the night -they do their work excellently, and by day they take a well-earned sleep -in the jungle. They deserve gratitude, for they keep the cities free -from disease, but, like other public servants, they scarcely get it. - -In Vedic times every home had its watch-dog, whose warning bark was as -unwelcome to lovers as it was to robbers. The Rig-Veda preserves the -prayer of a young girl who asks that her father, her mother, her -grandfather, _and the watch-dog_ may sleep soundly while she meets her -expected lover: a charming glimpse of the chaste freedom of early Aryan -manners. The newly-wedded wife enters her husband’s house as mistress, -not as slave; the elders say to the young couple: “You are master and -mistress of this house; though there be father-in-law and mother-in-law, -they are placed under you.” If that was not quite what happened, yet the -principle was granted, and there is much in that. The bride rode to her -new home in a car drawn by four milk-white oxen; when she alighted at -the threshold, these golden words were spoken to her: “Make thyself -loved for the sake of the children that will come to thee; guard this -house, be as one with thy husband; may you grow old here together. Cast -no evil looks, hate not thy spouse, be gentle in thought and deed _even_ -_to the animals of this home_.” Bride and bridegroom are exhorted to be -of one heart, of one mind, “to love each other as a cow loves her calf,” -a simple and true metaphor full of the country-side, full of the youth -of the world. - -If these were the customs and this was the life which the Iranians may -be supposed to have taken with them, what was the religion? The early -Aryans had a Nature-cult more spiritualised under the form of Varuna and -more materialised under the form of Indra. Some students of the Avesta -have thought that here could be found the elements of the Dualism which -formed the essential doctrine of Mazdaism. But it is almost certain that -no real Dualism existed in oldest Iran. The Avesta once contrasts the -worshippers of God with the worshippers of Daevas, of those who breed -the cow and have the care of it with those who ill-treat it and -slaughter it at their sacrifices. But Indra-worship has no connexion -with devil-worship, nor does this or similar texts prove that -devil-worship, properly so called, ever flourished in Iran. Other -religious reformers than Zoroaster have named the devotees of former -religions “devil-worshippers.” For the rest, there is reason to think -that in the Avesta the term was applied to Turanian raiders, not to true -Iranians. - -[Illustration: - - _Photo:_ _Mansell._ - ASSYRIAN GOD CARRYING ANTELOPE AND WHEAT-EAR. - British Museum.] - -In an Assyrian inscription, Ahura Mazda is said to have created joy for -_all_ creatures: a belief which Mazdean Dualism impugns. So far as can -be guessed, the earliest Iranian faith was the worship of good -spirits—of a Good Spirit. Less pure extra-beliefs may, or rather must, -have existed contemporaneously, but they remained in the second rank. -The cult of good spirits was the home-cult of shepherd and herdsman -offered to the genii of their flocks and herds. While these genii -answered the purpose of the lares or little saints everywhere dear to -humble hearts, it is probable that in character they already resembled -the Fravashis or archetypes that were to play so great a part in Mazdean -doctrine. The cult of the Good Spirit, the national and kingly cult, was -the worship of one God whose most worthy symbol, before Zoroaster as -after, was the sun and whose sacrament with men was fire. The early -Iranian had no temple, no altar: he went up into a high place and -offered his prayer and sacrifice without priest or pomp. If we wish to -trace his faith back to an Indian source, instead of bringing on the -scene Varuna and Indra, it will be better to inquire whether there were -elements of the same faith underlying the unwieldy fabric of Vedic -religion. The answer is, that there were. The grandest text in the -Rig-Veda, the one text recognised from farthest antiquity as of -incalculable value, is the old Persian religion contained in a formula: -“That Sun’s supremacy—God—let us adore Which may well direct.” - - “Enable with perpetual light, - The dulness of our blinded sight.” - -So great a virtue was attributed to the Gayatri that the mind which -thought it was supposed to unite with the object of thought: the eyes of -the soul looked on Truth, of which all else is but the shadow. This is -the spirit in which it is still repeated every day by every Hindu. The -sacrosanct words were “Vishnu, Brahma, and Shiva,” or, yet more often, -they are described as “the mother of the Vedas,” which, if it means -anything, means that they are older than the Vedas. The point most to be -noticed about the Gayatri is that its importance cannot be set aside by -saying that this text is to be explained by Henotheism: the habit of -referring to each god immediately addressed as supreme. Nor was the text -selected arbitrarily by Western monotheists: for thousands of years -before any European knew it, the natives of India had singled it out as -the most solemn affirmation of man’s belief in the Unseen. - -It is open to argument, though not to proof, that the Gayatri -crystallises a creed which the Iranians took with them in their -migration. Peoples then moved in clans, not in a motley crowd gathered -on an emigrant steamer. The clan or clans to which the Iranians belonged -may have clung to a primordial faith, not yet overlaid by myths which -materialised symbols and mysteries which made truth a secret. - -Such speculations are guess-work, but that the primitive religion of -Persia was essentially monotheistic is an opinion which is likely to -survive all attacks upon it. On less sure grounds stands the -identification of that primitive religion with Zoroastrianism. The great -authorities of a former generation, and amongst them my distinguished -old friend, Professor Jules Oppert, believed that Cyrus was a Mazdean. -But there is a good deal to support the view that Zoroastrianism did not -become the State religion till the time of the Sásánians, who, as a new -dynasty, grasped the political importance of having under them a strong -and organised priesthood. Before that time the Magians seem to have been -rather a sort of Salvation Army or Society of Jesus than the directors -of a national Church. - -As late as the reign of Darius the Persians frequently buried their -dead, a practice utterly repugnant to the Mazdean. Again, from Greek -sources we know that the Persian kings sacrificed hecatombs of animals; -thousands of oxen, asses, stags, &c., were immolated every day. Darius -ordered one hundred bullocks, two hundred rams, four hundred lambs to be -given to the Jews on the dedication of the new Temple (as well as twelve -he-goats as sin-offerings for the twelve tribes) so that they might -offer “sacrifices of sweet savours unto the God of heaven and pray for -the life of the king and his sons.” Evidently Darius considered profuse -animal sacrifices as a natural part of any great religious ceremony. Can -it be supposed that such slaughter would have pleased a strict -Zoroastrian? The Mazdeans retained the sacrifice of flesh as food: a -small piece of the cooked meat eaten at table was included in the daily -offering with bread, grain, fruits and the Homa juice, which was first -drunk by the officiating priest, then by the worshippers, and finally -thrown on the sacred fire. The small meat-offering was not animal -sacrifice or anything at all like it. The Parsis substitute milk even -for this small piece of meat, perhaps because the meat was usually beef, -which would have caused offence to their Hindu fellow-citizens. I asked -a Parsi High Priest who lunched with me at Basle during the second -Congress for the History of Religions, what viands were eschewed by his -community? He replied that they avoided both beef and the flesh of -swine, but only out of respect for their neighbours’ rules: to them oil -alone was forbidden—probably because of its virtue as a light-giver. In -the Zoroastrian sacrifice it was never lost sight of that the outward -act was but one of piety and obedience; the true sacrifice was of the -heart: “I offer good thoughts, good words, good deeds.” It is hardly -needful to say that the Mithraic taurobolium was in sheer contradiction -to Mazdean law. Heretical sects were the bane of Zoroastrianism, and -with one of these sprang up the strange practices which the Romans -brought into Europe. Possibly its origin should be sought in some -infiltration from the West, for it is more suggestive of Orphic rites -than of any form of Eastern ceremonies. A Christian writer of the name -of Socrates, who lived in the fifth century, said that at Alexandria, in -a cavern consecrated to Mithra, human skulls and bones were found, the -inference being that human sacrifice was the real rite, symbolised by -the slaying of the bull. The source of this information is suspect, but -even if not guilty of such excesses, the Mithra-worshippers of Western -Persia must have been rank corrupters of the faith. In the Avesta, -Mithra is the luminous æther; sometimes he appears as an intercessor; -sometimes he dispenses the mercy or wields the vengeance of God. But in -reality he is an attribute, about the nature of which members of the -faith had less excuse for making mistakes than we have. It is difficult -for the Indian or Japanese not to make analogous mistakes concerning -some forms of worship in Southern Europe. - -In Old Iran the Sacred Fire was kept perpetually alight. Sweet perfumes -were spread around the place of prayer, for which a little eminence was -chosen, but there were no images and no temples. Archæologists have -failed to find traces of a building set apart for religious worship -among the splendid ruins of Persepolis: the “forty towers” only tell of -the pleasure-palace of an Eastern king. Was it that the profound -spirituality of this people shrank not only from carving a graven image -of the deity, but also from giving him a house made with hands? What -could the maker of the firmament want with human fanes? Some such -thought may have caused the Iranians to suppress for so long a time the -instinct which impels man to build temples. In any case, it seems as if -Cyrus and after him Darius threw themselves into the scheme for -rebuilding the Hebrew temple with all the more enthusiasm from the fact -that immemorial custom held them back from temple-building at home. The -cuneiform inscriptions bear witness that these kings were monotheists: -they believed in one sole creator of heaven and earth, by whose will -kings reign and govern, and if they invoked the aid of heavenly -hierarchs they never confused the creatures, however powerful, with the -creator. That Creator they called by the name of Ahura Mazda, but they -recognised that he was one, whatever the name might be by which he was -called. “Thus saith Cyrus, king of Persia: the Lord God of Heaven hath -given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and He hath charged me to build -Him a house at Jerusalem, which is Judah.” In the uncanonical Book of -Esdras, it is said more significantly that King Cyrus “commanded to have -the house of the Lord in Jerusalem built where they should worship with -eternal fire.” The recently deciphered Babylonian inscriptions have been -brought forward to show that the Jews were mistaken in thinking that -Cyrus was a monotheist, because he honoured Merodach in Babylon just as -he had honoured Jehovah at Jerusalem. He was, it is said, a “polytheist -at heart.” If he was, his honouring Merodach does not prove it. To my -mind it proves exactly the reverse. Cyrus understood the monotheism -which was at the bottom of the Babylonian religious system and which -these very tablets have revealed to modern scholarship. He understood -that “however numerous and diversified the nations of the earth may be, -the God who reigns over them all can never be more than one.”[2] - -Footnote 2: - - Words written by a Japanese reformer named Okubo about fifty years - ago. - -He was governed by expediency in his respect for the faiths of his -subject peoples, but he was governed also by something higher than -expediency. That Darius Hystaspis, who is allowed to have been a -monotheist, continued his policy, shows that it was not thought to -involve disloyalty to Ahura Mazda since of such disloyalty Darius would -have been incapable. - -If we grant that the Iranians were, in the main, monotheistic at a date -when not more than a part of the population professed Zoroastrianism, -the question follows, of what was the difference between the reformed -and the unreformed religion? To answer this satisfactorily, we must -remember that the paramount object of Zoroaster was less change than -conservation. Like Moses whom an attractive if not well-founded theory -makes his contemporary, he saw around a world full of idolatry, and he -feared lest the purer faith of Iran should be swamped by the -encroachments of polytheism and atheism (for, strangely enough, the -Avesta abounds in references to sheer negation). The aim of every -doctrine or practice which he introduced was to revivify, to render more -comprehensible, more consistent, the old monotheistic faith. - -With regard to practice, the most remarkable innovation was that which -concerned the disposal of the dead. It cannot be explained as a relic of -barbarism: it was introduced with deliberation and with the knowledge -that it would shock human sensibility then, just as much as it does now. -The avowed reason for giving the dead to vultures or animals is that -burial defiles the earth. It was recognised that this argument was open -to the objection that birds or beasts were likely to drop portions of -dead bodies on the earth. The objection was met with scholastic -resourcefulness not to say casuistry: it was declared that “accidents” -do not count. Though so strongly insisted on in the Avesta, the practice -only became general at a late period: even after Mazdeism had made -headway, bodies were often enveloped in wax to avoid defilement of the -earth while evading the prescribed rite. Cremation, the natural -alternative to burial, would have polluted the sacred fire. It was -observed, no doubt, that the consumption of the dead by living animals -was the means employed by Nature for disposing of the dead. Why do we so -rarely see a dead bird or hare or rabbit or squirrel? The fact is not -mysterious when we come to look into it. It may have been thought that -what Nature does must be well done. The Parsis themselves seem to -suppose that this and other prescriptions of their religious law were -inspired by sanitary considerations, and they attribute to them their -comparative immunity from plague during the recent epidemics at Bombay. -Defilement of water by throwing any impurity into rivers is as severely -forbidden as the defilement of the earth. Possibly another reason -against burial was the desire to prevent anything like the material cult -of the dead and the association of the fortunes of the immortal soul -with those of the mortal body, such as prevailed among the Egyptians, -whose practices doubtless were known to the Magi by whom, rather than by -any one man, the Mazdean law was framed. Finally, the last rites -provided a recurrent object-lesson conducive to the mental habit of -separating the pure from the impure. They reminded the Mazdean that life -is pure because given by Ormuzd; death impure because inflicted by -Ahriman. The rule of every religion is designed largely, if not chiefly, -as a moral discipline.[3] - -Footnote 3: - - Among the Buddhists of Thibet the dead are given to dogs and birds of - prey as a last act of charity—to feed the hungry. - -The true originality of Zoroastrianism as a religious system lies in the -dualistic conception of creation which is the nexus that connects all -its parts. This was seen at once, when the Avesta became known in -Europe, but the idea was so entirely misunderstood and even travestied, -that Zoroaster was represented as a believer in two gods whose power was -equal, if, indeed, the power of the evil one were not the greater. -Recently among the manuscripts of Leopardi were found these opening -lines of an unfinished “Hymn to Ahriman”:— - - “Re delle cose, autor del mondo, arcana - Malvagità, sommo potere e somma - Intelligenza, eterno - Dator de’ mali e regitor del moto....” - -They are fine lines, but if Anro-Mainyus might fitly be called “arcana -malvagità” and “dator de’ mali,” nothing could be farther removed from -the Zoroastrian idea than the rest of the description. Ahriman possessed -neither supreme power nor supreme intelligence, nor was he author of the -world, but only of a small portion of it. To this day, however, it has -pleased pessimists to claim Zoroaster, the most optimist of prophets, as -one of their fraternity. - -The real Ahriman gains in tremendous force from the vagueness of his -personality. Sometimes he _acts_ as a person: as in the Temptation of -Zoroaster when he offers him the kingdoms of the world if he will but -serve him. But no artist would have dared to give him human form. And -surely no one in Iran would have alluded to him by mild or good-humoured -euphemisms. He shares this, however, with the mediæval devil, that he -works at an eternally pre-destined disadvantage. He is fore-doomed to -failure. Good is stronger than Evil, and Good is lasting, Evil is -passing. In the end, Evil must cease to be. - -Though not immortal, Ahriman was primordial. Unlike the fallen star of -the morning, what he is, that he was. He did not choose Evil: he _is_ -Evil as Ormuzd _is_ Good. He can create, but only things like himself. -The notion that both Ormuzd and Ahriman proceeded from a prior entity, -Boundless Time, is a late legend. Ormuzd and Ahriman existed always, the -one in eternal light, the other in beginningless darkness. An immense -vacuum divided the light from the darkness and Ahriman knew not Ormuzd, -Evil knew not Good, till Good was externalised in the beneficent -creation. - - “Young life lowed through the meadows, the woods and the echoing - mountains, - Wandered bleating in valleys and warbled on blossoming branches.” - -The sight of created things gave Ahriman the will to create -corresponding things, evil instead of good. He made sin, disease, death, -the flood, the earthquake, famine, slaughter, noxious animals. So the -pieces were set down on the chess-board of being, and, as in all -religions, man’s soul was the stake. - -The difference from other religions lay in the determined effort to -grapple with the problem of the origin of evil. The tribe of divine -students among whom Mazdeism sprang up saw in that unsolved problem the -great cause of unbelief, and they set themselves to solve it by the -theory which J. S. Mill said was the only one which could reconcile -philosophy with religion—the theory of primal forces at war. The Indian -did not attempt to fathom it; the Egyptian and Assyrian set it aside; we -know the offered Hebrew solution: “I form the light and create darkness; -I make peace and create evil, I, the Lord, do all these things.” But -this is a statement, not a solution, because though it may be believed, -it cannot be thought. The attraction of the dualistic conception is -shown by nothing more clearly than by the extraordinary vitality of -Manichæism in the face of every kind of persecution both in the East and -West, although Manichæism, with its ascription of the creation of -mankind to the Evil Principle, its depreciation of woman, its -out-and-out asceticism which included abstinence from animal food (a -rule borrowed by Mani from the Buddhists in his journey in India) -contrasts unfavourably with the faith that did not make a single demand -on human nature except to be good, even as its Creator was good. - -The origin of the Magians was Semitic, or, as some think, præ-Semitic -and præ-Aryan. Travellers brought tales of them to the ancient world -which listened with a fascinated interest, while it failed to see the -importance of the mighty religious phenomenon of Israel. The “Wise men -of the East” had a charm for antiquity, as they were to have for the -Infant Church which never tired of depicting them in its earliest art. -Mention of the “Persarum Magos” is frequent from Herodotus to Cicero, -who speaks of them under that name. According to Herodotus the Magi sang -the Theogony, and Pausanias describes them as reading from a book which -was certainly the Avesta, though it must not be overlooked that never -but once does it contain the smallest reference to them. This tribe of -divine students enjoyed a high reputation at the Babylonian Court, which -seems less unexpected by the light of recent research than it did when -the Babylonians and Assyrians were thought to be destitute of any trace -of an esoteric religion tending to monotheism. That the Magians were -monotheists cannot be disputed. Probably they were skilled in astronomy -and in medicine, the two sciences which almost covered what was meant -then by learning in the East. Probably also they were astrologers like -other searchers of the heavens, but they were not magic-workers, a -calling that had a bad name. The Magi in the Gospel story are supposed -to have been guided by astronomical calculations; whatever these may -have been, they could not have been ignorant of the prophecy in their -own Scriptures of a Virgin who should give birth to the Saviour and -Judge of men. The ante-natal soul of this Virgin had been venerated for -centuries in Iran. An infiltration of Messianic prophecies might induce -them to conclude that the Child would be “King of the Jews.” It was not -likely that they would take so long a journey to do homage to any -new-born earthly king, but it was quite possible that they might go in -search of the promised Saviour. - -[Illustration: - - _Photo:_ _Mansell._ - COUNTING CATTLE. - British Museum. - (_Egyptian Fresco._)] - -In Media we know that the people lived at one time in tribes, without -kings. In one form or another, the tribal organisation existed and -exists everywhere in the East. What is caste but a petrified tribal -system? The first discovery which a European makes on landing on the -skirts of the East, is that everything is done by tribes. The Algerian -conjurors who swallow fire, drive nails into their heads and do other -gruesome feats are a semi-religious tribe which has thrived from time -immemorial on the exercise of the same profession. The dwarfs of the -late Bey of Tunis, whom I saw at Bardo, belonged to a tribe which does -nothing but furnish dwarfs. Apply to a high or worthy end this corporate -pursuit of a given object and it must produce remarkable results. - -The unanimous belief of the Greeks that Zoroaster was founder of the -Magians is held no longer, but he is still thought to have been one of -them. Moslem tradition made him the servant of a Hebrew prophet, and -even serious Western students were inclined to trace Mazdeism to the -Jewish prisoners who were brought into Media by the Assyrians. It is -unnecessary to say that at present the Jews are regarded as the debtors. - -There is no figure of a religious teacher so elusive as that of -Zoroaster, and they are all elusive. But in the case of Zoroaster it is -not only the man that eludes us—it is also his environment. Brahmanical -India of to-day reflects as in a glass the society into which Sakya Muni -cast his seed; in fact, we understand the seed-sowing better than the -harvest; Buddhism at its apogee seems of the nature of an interlude in -the history of the changeless East. China still throws light on its -passionless sage, passionless in a sense so far deeper than the Indian -recluses, who, though they knew it not, did but substitute for the -passion of the flesh the more inebriating passion of the spirit. From -the splendid treasury of præ-Islamic poetry, we know that the Arab race -had acquired its specialised type before the Muezzin first called the -faithful to prayer. The moral petrifaction of the many and the religious -and patriotic ferment of the few which formed the _milieu_ of nascent -Christianity, can be realised without any stretch of the imagination. -Buddha, Confucius, and He that was greater than they, came into highly -civilised societies in organised states; Mohammed came into an -unorganised state which lacked political and religious cohesion, but the -unity of race was already developed: the Emirs of the Soudan whose star -set at Omdurman were the living pictures of the Arabs who first rallied -to the Prophet’s banner. Of the society of Old Iran to which Zoroaster -spoke, it is difficult to form a distinct idea and to judge how far it -had moved away from early Aryan simplicity. We gather that it was still -a society in which sheep-raising and dairy-farming played a preponderant -part. Those modern expressions may serve us better than to say -“shepherds” and “herdsmen,” since fixity of dwelling with the possession -of what then was considered wealth seems to have been a very common -case. Nomadic life lasted on, but it was held in disrepute. There -appears to have been nothing like a national or warlike spirit such as -that possessed by the Jews, though occasional Turanian incursions had to -be repelled. There were few towns and many scattered villages and -homesteads. We are conscious that these impressions derived from the -Avesta may be partially erroneous. Teachers of religion only take note -of political or other circumstances so far as it suits their purpose. - -Zoroaster (the Greek reading of Zarathustra, which in modern Persian -becomes Zardusht), was born, as far as can be guessed, in Bactria, which -became the stronghold of Avestic religion and the last refuge of the -national monarchy on the Arab invasion. There was a time when his -existence was denied, but no one doubts it now. Eight hundred years -before Christ is the date which most modern scholars assign to him, -though some place him much farther back, while others think they discern -reasons for his having appeared after Buddha. The legend of his life -(not to be found in the Avesta) begins in the invariable way: he was -descended from kings; as a young man he retired to a grotto in the -desert, where he lived an austere life of reflection for seven years. -Zoroaster never taught asceticism, but tradition attributes to him the -season of solitude and self-collection without which perhaps, in fact as -well as in fable, the supreme power over other men’s minds was never -wielded by man. - -Various marvellous particulars are related: he was suckled by two ewes; -wild animals obeyed his voice; when thrown under the feet of oxen and -horses, they avoided hurting him. In his seven years’ retirement he -meditated on idol-worship, on false gods and false prophets. The people -of Iran, substantially monotheist but prone to sliding into degrading -superstition, offered a field for his mission. He took to him a few -disciples and began to preach to as many as would hear, but he met with -great difficulties. At last, he found favour with a king by curing his -favourite horse, and he might have ended his days in peace but the -spirit urged him to continue his apostolate. Not to princes but to -peasants did he chiefly address himself; he did not call them away from -their work but exhorted them to pursue it diligently. “He who cultivates -the earth will never lack, but he who does not, will stand idly at the -doors of others to beg food.” Labour is not an evil, man who earns his -bread by the sweat of his brow is not under a curse: he is the -fellow-worker with God! This was the grandest thing that Zoroaster -taught. It is singular to note the affinity between his teaching and the -Virgilian conception of the husbandman as half a priest. In the Middle -Ages the same thought arose where one would not look for it: among those -religious orders which had the luminous inspiration that in work not in -indolence lay the means of salvation: “_Laborare est orare._” - -The care of the God-created animals brought with it a special blessing: -it was actually a way to heaven. If a friend gave us a cherished animal, -should not we treat it well for that friend’s sake as well as for its -own value? Would not it remind us of the giver? Would not we be anxious -that he should find it in good health if by chance he came on a visit? -This is how Zoroaster wished man to feel about the cow, the sheep, the -dog. Auguste Comte considered domestic animals as a part of humanity. -Zoroaster considered them as a trust from God. - -Moslem traditions finish the story of the Mazdean prophet by telling -that he was beaten to death by “devil-worshippers,” probably Turanian -raiders. Zoroastrian authorities are silent about his end, which is -thought to bear out the legend that it was unfortunate. - -The Parsis hold that the whole Avesta was the work of Zoroaster. Much of -the original material has disappeared, and although Western writers are -disposed to throw all the blame on the Moslem invaders, the steady -Persian tradition which accuses “Alexander the Rûman” of having caused -the destruction of an important part of it, cannot be well answered by -saying that such barbarism was not likely to be committed by the -Macedonian conqueror. When Persepolis was reduced to ruins some of the -sacred books “written with gold ink on prepared cow-skins” may have been -destroyed by accident, but as it was certain that the Zoroastrian -priests would do all they could to foment resistance to the hated -idolater, we cannot be too sure that the deed was not done on purpose. -The way of disposing of the dead set the Greeks against the -Zoroastrians, and they even thought or affected to think that the dying -as well as the dead were given to dogs. The Arabs, no doubt, burnt what -they could lay their hands on of what was left, and it tells much for -the devotion of the faithful few, the persecuted remnant in Persia, and -the band of exiles who found a happier fate in India, that nevertheless -the Avesta has been preserved in a representative though incomplete -form, to take its place in among the sacred literatures of the world. -When the Parsis return, as they hope to do, to a free Persia, they may -carry the Avesta proudly before them as the Sikhs carried the Granth to -the prophet-martyr’s tomb at Delhi: they have done more than keep the -faith, they have _lived it_. - -The present Avesta consists of five books. The Gâthâs or hymns alone -really claim to have been composed by Zoroaster himself, and this claim -is admitted by European scholars who disagree with the Parsis in denying -that the other four books are by the same author. They are: the “Yasna,” -a ceremonial liturgy, the “Vispered,” a work resembling the “Yasna,” but -apparently less ancient; the “Vendîdâd,” which contains the Mazdean -religious law, and the “Khordah Avesta,” a household prayer-book for the -laity. The original text was written in an Aryan dialect related to -Sanscrit; after a time, this tongue was understood by no one but the -priests and not much by them; it was decided, therefore, to make a -translation, which was called the “Zend,” or “interpretation,” or, as we -should say, “the authorised version.” At first Europeans thought that -“Zend” meant the original tongue in which the work was written. -Curiously enough, the language into which the Scriptures were rendered -was not Iranian or Old Persian, but Pahlavi, a _lingua franca_ full of -Semitic words, which had been coined for convenience in communicating -with the Assyrians and Syrians when they were under one king. Pahlavi -was also used for official inscriptions, for coinage, for commerce; it -was a sort of Esperanto. The text and the translation enjoyed equal -authority, but the former was called “the Avesta of Heaven” and the -latter “the Avesta of Earth.” - -The first fragment of the “Avesta” that reached Europe was a copy of the -“Yasna” brought to Canterbury by an unknown Englishman in 1633. Other -scraps followed, but no real attempt to translate it was made till the -adventurous Anquetil Duperron published in 1771 the version which he had -made with the assistance of Parsi priests and which was rejected in -unwise haste by Sir William Jones as a _supercherie littéraire_, chiefly -on the score that its contents were for the most part pure nonsense, and -hence could not be the work of Zoroaster. Germany at once was more just -than England to the man who, though he had not succeeded in making a -good translation, deserved the highest honour as a pioneer. - -Even now that better translations are available, the Avesta is apt to -dishearten the reader on his first acquaintance with it. Many passages -have remained obscure, and the desire to be literal in this as in some -other Oriental works has hindered the translators from writing their own -languages well. It needs a Sir Richard Jebb to produce a translation -which is a classic and is yet microscopically accurate. I once asked -Professor F. C. Burkitt why the Septuagint did not make more impression -on the Hellenic and Roman students of Alexandria by mere force of the -literary power of the Bible? He replied that he thought it was to be -explained by the poor degree of literary skill possessed by the Greek -translators or by most of them. Another reminiscence comes to my mind -here: I recollect that eminent scholar and deeply religious-minded man, -Albert Réville, saying to me: “The Bible is so much more amusing than -the Koran!” I am afraid one must confess that the Koran is so much “more -amusing” than the Avesta. It is a good rule, however, to approach all -religious books with patience and with reverence, for they contain, even -if concealed under a bushel, the finest thoughts of man. - -When we have grown accustomed to the outward frame of the Avesta, the -inner sense becomes clearer. It is like a piece of music by -Tschaikowsky: at first the modulations seem bizarre, the themes -incoherent; then, by degrees, a consecutive plan unwinds itself and we -know that what appeared meaningless sound was divine harmony. - -The essential teaching of the Avesta is summed up in the text: “Adore -God with a pure mind and a pure body, and honour Him in His works.” -Force, power, energy, waters and stagnant pools, springs, running -brooks, plants that shoot aloft, plants that cover the ground, the -earth, the heavens, stars, sun, moon, the everlasting lights, the -flocks, the kine, the water-tribes, those that are of the sky, the -flying, the wild ones—“We honour all these, Thy holy and pure creatures, -O Ahura Mazda, divine artificer!” - - “The Voice said: Call My works thy friends.” - -If the lyric note of great religious expression is rarely reached (only, -perhaps, in a few pieces, such as the noble hymn to the sun-symbol), the -sustained exposition of life is so reasonable and yet so lofty that to -contemplate it after gazing at the extravagances of pillar-saints and -Indian Yogi, signals, as it were, a return to sanity and health after -the _nuit blanche_ of fever. - -The “Khordah Avesta” contains this counsel or good wish: “Be cheerful; -live thy life the whole time which thou wilt live.” Man is not asked to -do the impossible or even the difficult: he is asked to _enjoy_. To the -extreme spirituality which shrank from making even a mental image of God -is joined a “this worldliness” which saw in rational enjoyment a -religious duty. Instead of choosing poverty, man was ordered to make -good use of wealth; instead of mortifying the flesh, he was to avoid -calumny, evil-speaking, quarrels, to give clothes to the poor, to pray -not only for himself but for others. If he does wrong, let him repent -honestly in his heart and do some practical good work as a pledge of his -repentance. The soul which grieves for its wrongdoing and sins no more -comes back into the light of “God the giver, Forgiver, rich in Love, who -always is, always was, always will be!” When it was asked, “What is in -the first place most acceptable to this earth?” the answer came: “When a -holy man walks on it, O Zarathustra!” Good men work _with_ God, who, -sure of ultimate triumph, is yet Himself struggling now against the -Power of Darkness. There is no religion without a good life: “All have -not the Faith who do not hear it; all hear it not who are unclean; all -are unclean who are sinners.” God did not send calamities to His -servants, but He compassionates them in their trials: “The voice of him -weeping, however low, mounts up to the star-lights, comes round the -whole world.” It is no sin to desire riches: “Thy kingdom come, O Ahura, -when the virtuous poor shall inherit the earth.” In spite of the -sufferings of good people, even on this fair earth there is more of -pleasantness for the good than for the wicked, and in the next world -there is bliss eternal. I do not think that Robert Browning studied the -Avesta, but to the thoroughly Zoroastrian line quoted above I am tempted -to add this other which is not less so:— - - “Never dreamed, though right were worsted, wrong would triumph.” - -For the individual, as for the universe, Right must triumph. If the -prophet of optimism has a harder task than the oracle of despair, it is, -perhaps, a more profitable task. - -The Parsi repeats daily, as his ancestors did before him, the so-called -Honover or “Ahuna-Vairya,” or _logos_ which brings God down to man as -the Gayatri lifts man up to God: “One Master and Lord, all holy and -supreme; one teacher of His Law, appointed by God’s almighty will as -shepherd to the weak.” The Mazdean “law” was a thought-out system to -prevent idolatry and atheism, and to make men lead good lives. There is -no racial exclusiveness in it: the Mazdeans had no shibboleth or -peculiar sign; Zoroaster, himself a foreigner, did not appeal to a -chosen people or to a miraculously evolved caste: he only knew of good -men and bad. A really good man, truthful and charitable in all his ways, -had three heavens open to him even though he “offered no prayers and -chanted no Gâthâs”; only the fourth heaven, a little nearer the presence -of God, was reserved for those who had devoted their lives to religion. -Temperance was enjoined, as without temperance there could not be -health. The family was sacred and marriage meritorious: children, the -gift of Ahura Mazda, were recruits for the great Salvation Army of the -future. Immorality was severely censured, but the victims of it were -befriended. Stringent and most humane religious laws protected the -_fille-mère_ from being driven “by her shame” to destroy herself or her -offspring. Girls were married at sixteen: the address to young brides -may be compared with that in the Rig-Veda: “I speak these words to you, -maidens who wed. I say them unto you—imprint them on your hearts. Learn -to know the world of the Holy Spirit according to the Law. Even so, let -one of you take the other as the Law ordains, for it will be to you a -source of perfect joy.” - -At the time when Zoroastrianism was the State religion, the Sásánian -period, we find that the kings frequently had harems. It is certain, -however, that if in this as in other things the priests were complacent, -they were untrue to orthodox Zoroastrian doctrine and custom, which only -permitted the taking of a second wife in some rare cases, as when there -was no issue by the first. - -Even then, it does not seem to have been encouraged. The blot on Avestic -morality is the strange recommendation of consanguineous marriages, -which the Parsis interpret as far as possible in a figurative sense, but -it must have been intended to be followed, though it is plain that such -unions were never popular. The declared object was the hypothetical -maximum purity of race: exactly the same object as that contemplated in -the union of Siegemund and Siegelind in the Nibelungenlied—a curious -parallel. To my mind, the desire to keep agricultural property together -may have had something to do with it. The present moral ideas of the -Parsis do not differ from those of Europeans, and when they requested to -be placed under the English instead of the Hindu marriage law, their -wish was granted. - -In Avesta times the priests both married and toiled like the rest of the -people. When their prosperity under the Sásánians tended to make them a -class apart, they seem to have become less faithful to the ideals of -their master, less stern in opposing evil in high places. It is a common -experience of history. Originally they were true citizen-priests, mixing -with the people as being of them. There was no life better or holier -than the common life of duty and work. Isolation of any kind was -contrary to the central Zoroastrian view of man as a social being. Among -the wicked souls in hell, each one thinks itself utterly alone: it has -no sight or knowledge of the host around it. Nothing could illustrate -more powerfully than this the saying of a great French writer: “_Seul a -un synonyme: mort!_” Solitude is the death of the soul. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - VII - - ZOROASTRIAN ZOOLOGY - - -NO investigator of early Iran can afford to neglect the _Shahnameh_ of -Firdusi, which was as good history as he could make it; that is to say, -it was founded on extremely old legendary lore collected by him with a -real wish to revive the memory of the past. Firdusi sang the glories of -the “fire-worshippers” with such enthusiasm that one cannot be surprised -if, when he died, the Sheikh of Tús doubted whether he ought receive -orthodox Moslem burial: a doubt removed by an opportune dream in which -the Sheikh saw the poet in Paradise. In Firdusi’s epic we are told that -the earliest Persian king (who seems to have been not very far off the -first man) lived in peace with all creation. Wild animals came round and -knew him for their lord. He had a son who was killed by demons and a -grandson named Húsheng, who, as soon as he was old enough, made war on -the demons (Turanians?) to avenge his father’s murder. Every species of -wild and tame beast obeyed Húsheng:— - - “The savage beasts, and those of gentler kind, - Alike reposed before him and appeared - To do him homage.” - -In his war on the demon’s brood, Húsheng was helped by wolf, tiger, -lion, and even by the fowls of the air. All this while mankind had lived -on fruit and the leaves of trees. Húsheng taught his people to bake -bread. He was succeeded by his son Taliumen, in whose reign panthers, -hawks, and falcons were tamed. The next king introduced weaving and the -use of armour. His successor was remembered for having kept a herd of -1,000 cows whose milk he gave to the poor. Then came Zorák, who owned -10,000 horses. Zorák was seduced by Iblís, the evil spirit, who, in -order to accomplish it, became his chief cook. Iblís was the real -founder of the culinary art; till then, people lived still almost -entirely on bread and fruit, but the king’s new _chef_ prepared the most -savoury dishes, for which he used the flesh of all kinds of birds and -beasts. Finally, he sent to table a partridge and a pheasant, after -which Zorák promised the devil to grant him any request he might make. - -[Illustration: - - _Photo:_ _J. Dieulafoy._ - KING FIGHTING GRIFFIN WITH SCORPION’S TAIL. - Palace of Darius. - (_By permission of M. Marcel Dieulafoy._)] - -Here there are fugitive reminiscences of parallel legends in the -_Bundehesh_, a Parsi religious book belonging to post-Avestic times. The -first human couple served God faithfully till, for some unexplained -reason, they were induced to ascribe creation and supreme power to the -daevas. This was the “unforgivable sin,” the ascription of the -miraculous power of God to the devil. Ahriman rejoiced at their treason, -though it is not said that he was the cause of it: man could choose -between good and evil. After their defection, the man and the woman -clothed themselves in leaves and took to hunting. Ahriman put it into -their heads to kill a goat and then to light a fire by rubbing two -sticks: they blew on the fire to fan the flame and roasted a piece of -the goat. One bit they threw in the air as a sacrifice to the Nature -spirits, saying, “This for the Yazatas!” A kite flew past and carried -off the sacrifice. Afterwards, the man and woman dressed in skins and -told innumerable lies. Going from bad to worse, they engendered a large -family whence sprang the twenty-five races of mankind. - -How this story got into the _Bundehesh_ I do not know, but I am sure -that Zoroaster would have disowned it. He knew of no collective “fall of -man,” whether in connexion with partridges, pheasants, or goat-flesh. - -The Avesta, in its sober cosmogony, is content to speak of the -proto-man, Gayo Marathan (mortal life), and the proto-good-animal, Geus -Urva, from whom all human beings and all animals of the good creation -are derived. Nevertheless, Ahura Mazda is described frequently as -_creating_ each animal; the proto-creature was only the _modus operandi_ -of the divine power. As in biology, divided sex was a secondary -development. From the bull, Geus Urva, proceeded first his own species, -and then sheep, camels, horses, asses, birds, water-animals. - -The distinguishing qualification given him of _good and laborious_ is -the most striking proof of the originality of Magian ideas: instead of -the strong bulls of Basan roaring in their might, the bull we have here -is one with the ploughing ox:— - - “T’amo, o pio bove; e mite un sentimento - Di vigore e di pace al cor m’infondi....” - -—the patient, the long-suffering, the gentle, though strong-limbed -helper of man in his daily toil, good in his vigour, good in his -mildness, but good most of all in his labour, for Zoroaster called -labour a holy thing. The animal which did most to cultivate God’s earth -and make the desert flower like a rose, was the paragon of creatures. It -must not be thought that to the Geus Urva or his kind was ever rendered -the homage due to their Creator. If there was one thing more abhorrent, -to the Zoroastrian mind than idolatry it was zoolatry: when Cambyses -killed a new Apis with many of his followers in Egypt, he had no reason -to fear Mazdean criticism. - -The soul of the bull receives _dulia_ not _latria_. “We honour the soul -of the bull ... and also our own souls and our cattle’s souls who help -to preserve our life; the souls by which they exist and which exist for -them.” So runs one of the Gâthâs, one of the hymns of Zoroaster himself. -“We honour the souls of the swift, wild animals; we honour the souls of -just men and women in whatever place they are born, whose pure natures -have overcome evil. We honour saintly men and saintly women, living -immortal, always living, always increasing in glory—all man and woman -souls faithful to the Spirit of God.” - -In this song of praise we have brought before us vividly a fundamental -doctrine of the Avesta which pervades every page of it: the belief in -the Fravashi, the soul-partner, the double or angel, which exists before -birth as during life and after death. This belief has a great interest -for us as it would seem that it was only by chance that it did not pass -into the body of Christian dogma. The Jews of the new school had held it -for quite two hundred years before Christ. Besides other allusions, are -the three distinct references to the soul-partner in the New Testament. -Christ Himself speaks of the angels of the children who are always in -the presence of God and who complain to Him if the children are -ill-treated. Secondly, when Peter issued from prison, those who saw him -said, “It is his angel.” Thirdly, it is stated that the Sadducees -believed that there was no resurrection, “neither angel nor Spirit,” but -that the Pharisees, of whom Paul was one, “confessed both.” These three -references become intelligible for the first time after reading the -Gâthâs. True it is that he who knows only one religion, knows none. - -Ahriman inflicted every sort of suffering on the primal creature—this -was the beginning of cruelty to animals. At last, he caused its death. -The soul of the Bull dwells in the presence of God, and to it, as -intercessor, all suffering creatures lift their plaints. Why were they -made to suffer wrath, ill-usage, hunger? Will no one lead them to sweet -pastures? The creature-soul carries the cry of the creatures to God. -Ahura Mazda promises the advent of Zoroaster, redresser of all wrongs. -But the Bull-soul weeps and complains: how can the voice of one weak man -avail to help? It invokes stronger and more effectual aid. - -The hymn is really a litany of suffering animals, the grandeur of the -thought flashing across obscurities which make it almost impossible to -translate. Very mysterious is the expression of incredulity in the -efficacy of the help of Zoroaster, an expression which stands quite -alone, and in which some have seen a proof that this hymn was not -written by the Prophet. But would any one else have dared to question -his power or to call him “one weak man”? Can it be that Zoroaster was -distressed to find his efforts to prevent cruelty so unavailing, and -that he here covertly invokes the “strong arm of the law” to do what he -had failed in doing? - -In the pages of the Avesta everything is tried to enforce humanity: -hopes of reward, threats of punishment, appeals to religious obedience, -common gratitude, self-interest. It cannot but appear singular that -among an Eastern pastoral and agricultural people such reiterated -admonitions should have been needful. The cow and the horse, “animals -manifestly pure which bring with them words of blessing,” inflict -terrible anathemas on their tormentors:— - - The cow curses him who keeps her: “Mayest thou remain without - posterity, ever continuing of evil report, thou who dost not - distribute me food, and yet causest me to labour for thy wife, - thy children and thy own sustenance.” - - The horse curses his owner: “Mayest thou not be he who harnesses - swift horses, not one of those who sit on swift horses, not one - who makes swift horses hasten away. Thou dost not wish strength - to me in the numerous assembly, in the circle of many men.” - -The cow which is led astray by robbers calls to Mithra “ever with -unlifted hands, thinking of the stall,” and Mithra, here figuring as the -vengeance of God, destroys the house, the clan, the confederacy, the -region, the rule of him who injured her. She is the type of prosperity: -“O thou who didst create the cow, give us immortal life, safety, power, -plenty.” She is dear to her Creator: “Thou hast given the earth as a -sweet pasture for the cow.” She is praised because she furnishes the -offerings, flesh, milk, and butter. - -This reminds us of the differences of point of view between the Persian -and the Indian humanitarian. The Indian, in theory at least, simply -forbade taking animal life. He had the great advantage of the argument -of the straight line. The Zoroastrian was handicapped by his moderation. -It is easier far to teach extraordinary than ordinary well-doing; every -moralist who has set out to improve mankind has found that. Zoroaster -had not the smallest doubt about his contention that man has imperative -duties in regard to what used to be called “the brute creation.” Man -could not live as man at all without it: we who have harnessed steam and -trapped the electric spark might entertain such a possibility, but to -Zoroaster the idea would have seemed absurd. As we owe so much to -animals, the least we can do is to treat them well. Yet, though he -included wanton and useless slaughter in “ill-treatment,” he allows the -killing of animals for food. Herodotus remarked that, unlike the -Egyptians, the Magian priests did not think it pollution to kill animals -with their own hands—except dogs and oxen. - -It is to be supposed that the framers of Zoroastrian law believed that -animal food was necessary for man’s health and strength, perfect health -being the state most acceptable to the Creator. Believing this, they -could not forbid the temperate use of it. Gargantuan feasts were not -dreamt of; if they had been, they would have received the condemnation -given to all excesses. We are apt to fall into the way of thinking of -sacred books which is that of their own adepts; we think of them as -written by unpremeditated impulse. But commonly this was not the case. -The Avesta, especially, bears signs of conclusions reached by patient -reasoning. While, however, the Magians permitted the slaughter of -animals, they bowed to the original scruple which has no race-limits, by -ordering that such slaughter should be accompanied by an expiatory rite -without the performance of which it was unlawful. This was the offering -of the head of the animal to Homa: regarded, in this instance, as the -archetype of the “wine of life”—the sacred or sacramental juice of the -plant which has been identified with the Indian Soma. The Homa juice was -much the most sacred thing that could be eaten or drunk; if it is true -that it contained alcohol, the little jet of flame that would start -upwards as it was thrown on the sacrificial fire might seem actually to -bear with it the spirit of the offering. Whatever was the exact idea -implied by the dedication of slaughtered animals to Homa, the fact that -they were killed for food did not, of course, in any way affect their -extra-mortal destiny. The “souls of our cattle”—their archetypes—could -not suffer death. - -As a careful observer, which he is now allowed to have been, Herodotus -remarked that not only might the priests take animal life, but that they -thought it highly meritorious to take the life of certain animals such -as ants, serpents, and some kinds of birds. It required no profound -knowledge of the East to notice something unusual in this. Even the -Jews, with their classification of clean and unclean beasts, cast no -moral slur on the forbidden category, and if the serpent of Eden was -cursed, later snakes regained their character and inspired no loathing; -the snake-charmer with his crawling pupils was a well known and popular -entertainer. Farther East, every holy man respected the life of an ant -as much as of an elephant. Zoroaster alone banned the reptile and the -major part of the insect world. No penance was more salutary than to -kill ten thousand scorpions, snakes, mosquitoes, ants that walk in -single file, harvesting ants, wasps, or a kind of fly which was the very -death of cattle. The innocent lizard suffered by reason of his -relationship with the crocodile; the harmless frog and tortoise excited -a wrath which they had done nothing to merit. Among mammals, the mouse -is singled out for destruction: although the wolf is a legionary of -Ahriman, he is more often classed with the “wicked two-legged -one”—perverse man—than with the evil creation properly so called. In one -place Ahriman is said to have created “devouring beasts,” but on closer -examination these devouring beasts proved to be only the harvesting ants -which were reckoned deadly foes of the agriculturist. Any one who has -seen how much newly-sown grass seed these favourites of Solomon will -remove in a shining hour will understand the prejudice, though he will -not, I hope, share it. Roughly speaking, the diligent, old-fashioned -gardener who puzzles his pious mind as to why “those things” were ever -created, is a born Zoroastrian. To tell him with Paul that “every -creature of God is good” does not comfort him much. Zoroaster’s answer -is as philosophically complete as it is scientifically weak. Certain -creatures are noxious to man; a good Creator would not have made -creatures noxious to men, ergo, such creatures were not made by a good -Creator. Besides the scientific objection to any hard-and-fast line of -division between animals, there is another: the pity of it. I wonder -that some velvet-coated field-mouse, approaching softly on tip-toe as -Zoroaster lay in his grotto, did not inquire with its appealing eyes: -“Do you really think that I look as if I were made by the Evil One?” In -spite of the numerous advantages of a theory which, in a literal sense, -makes a virtue of necessity (a sad necessity to some of us), the -theological ban of creatures for no other reason than that they are -inconvenient to man detracts from the ideal beauty of Zoroastrian faith. - -Darwin, in a letter to Asa Gray, the American botanist, said that the -sufferings of caterpillars and mice made him doubt the existence of “a -beneficent and omnipotent Creator.” How often does doubt seem more -religious than belief! - -The eschatology of the creatures deemed of darkness is not clear, but I -believe there is no mention of their Fravashis: it is permissible to -suppose, therefore, that, all along, they are rather appearances than -realities: things that cannot feel, though Ahriman feels defeat in their -destruction. For the rest, though Zoroaster treated wasps or mice much -as Torquemada treated heretics, he made it no merit to torment them: he -simply desired their extermination as every fruit-grower or farmer -desires it to this day. - -Students of Zoroastrianism have been mystified by the seeming detachment -of the dog from the other “good” animals and the separate jurisdiction -designed for it. In my opinion this arose only from the fact that the -dog was not a food-providing animal. Hence it could be made penal (by -religious, not by civil, law, it must be remembered) to kill a dog, and -it was natural that his body should be disposed of in the same way as a -man’s. What else could be done with it? It was natural also that since -his death was inflicted by Ahriman (since it came of itself), -purification ceremonials should be performed to remove the pollution. -The religious scope of such ceremonials was like that of reconsecrating -a church in which suicide or murder has been committed. That the dog was -highly appreciated, that he was valued as an essential helper in the -existing conditions of life, is amply proved, but that he was -“reverenced” more than some other animals—_e.g._, the cow—is open to -doubt. The dog was recognised as more human which made him more liable -to err. It was the celebrated chapter on the dog which convinced Sir W. -Jones that Anquetil Duperron’s translation was a forgery. It should have -struck him that this was not how a European would have made Zoroaster -speak about the favoured animal. In the comparisons of canine qualities -with those of certain human beings, there is more of satire than of -panegyric. The whole Fargard XIII. has been interpreted as purely -mystical: the dog symbolising the “will,” a meaning which, according to -this argument, fits the term “Dog” in all passages of the scriptures of -Iran. This is a hard saying. More reasonable is the supposition that -Fargard XIII. formed part of a treatise on animals and got into the -Vendîdâd by chance. However that may be, the “eight characters” of the -dog show observation though not reverence: he loves darkness like a -thief, and at times has been known to be one; he fawns like a slave, he -is a self-seeker like a courtezan, he eats raw meat like a beast of -prey. The words relative to his “chasing about the well-born cow” have -been interpreted to mean that he chased her back home when she had -strayed, but I seem to have seen dogs chasing about well-born cows from -no such benevolent motive. Some of the comparisons are neither -flattering nor critical but descriptive: the dog loves sheep like a -child, he runs here and there in front, like a child; he dodges in and -out like a child. - -[Illustration: - - THE REAL DOG OF IRAN. - Louvre. - (_By permission of Messrs. Chapman & Hall, Ltd._)] - -The _jeu d’esprit_ of the “eight characters” is followed by what appears -to be a serious statement of how to treat the dog which misconducts -himself. There is no capital punishment, nothing like the stoning of the -ox which gores a man or woman, in the Bible. If a dog attacks man or -cattle he is to lose an ear; if he does it a third time his foot is to -be cut off, or, as Bleeck humanely suggests, he is to be rendered so far -lame that it is easy to escape from him. The “dumb dog” of vicious -disposition is to be tied up. If a dog is no longer sane in his mind and -has become dangerous on that account, you are to try and cure him as you -would a man, but if this fails, you must chain him up and muzzle him, -using a sort of wooden pillory which prevents him from biting. This -passage is curious, because, while it seems to allude plainly to -hydrophobia, it contains no hint of the worser consequences to man than -a simple bite. - -We find that there were four if not more breeds of dogs, each of which -was carefully trained for its work. The house-dog, the personal dog -(which may have been a blood-hound), sheep and herd-dogs are all -mentioned, but there is no mention of sporting-dogs or of sport in the -Avesta. The dogs must have been powerful, as they were required to be a -match for the wolf, “the growing, the flattering, the deadly wolf,” -which was the dread of every homestead in Iran. There were also “wolves -with claws” (tigers), but they were comparatively few. The kinship of -wolf and dog was recognised, and there was an impression that the most -murderous wolf was the half-breed of a wolf and a bitch. Perhaps the -wolf of dog-descent came more boldly to the dwelling of man, having no -instinctive fear of him. It is said, too, that the deadliest kind of dog -was the dog that had a wolf-mother. Possibly such cross-breeding was -tried experimentally in the hope of obtaining dogs which could best -resist the wolf. - -If the dog is never represented as a creature of faultless perfection, -it yet remains an established truth that “dwellings would not stand fast -on the earth created by Ahura Mazda were there not dogs which pertain to -the cattle and to the village.” It is the Lord of Creation who says: -“The dog I have made, O Zarathustra, with his own clothing and his own -shoes; with keen scent and sharp teeth, faithful to men, as a protector -to the folds. For I have made the dog, I who am Ahura Mazda!” To attack -the dog was like an attack on the police. Slitting the ear of the house -or sheep-dog out of malice, or cutting off his foot, or belabouring him -so that thieves got at the sheep, were not unfrequent crimes and they -are dealt with no more severely than they deserve. Who killed a -house-dog outright, or a sheep-dog or personal dog or well-trained dog, -was warned that in the next world his soul would go howling worse than a -wolf in the depths of the forest; shunned by all other souls, growled at -by the dogs that guard the bridge Chinvat. Eight hundred blows with a -horse-goad are adjudged to the wretch who so injures a dog that it die. -To strike or chase a bitch with young brings a dreadful curse. Much is -said about the proper care of the mother and the puppies. To give a dog -too hot food or too hard bones is as bad as turning apostate. His right -food is milk and fat and lean meat. “Of all known creatures that which -ages soonest is the dog left foodless among people who eat—who seeks -here and there his food and finds it not.” - -As a rule unnamed wild animals may be supposed to have been protected. -The fox was considered a powerful daeva-scarer, which shows that not -only in China did the fox seem an “uncanny” beast. In Iran his -supernatural services made him highly esteemed. There seem to have been -no cats though so many mice. The later Iran was destined to be a great -admirer of cats, witness the praise of them by Persian poets, but it is -not easy to fix the date when they were introduced. Monkeys were known -and were attributed by a post-Avestic superstition to the union of human -women and daevas. Vultures were sacred because they devoured good -Mazdeans. On the whole, not much attention was paid to wild nature, with -one striking exception: the extraordinary respect for the water-dog, -beaver or otter. Suddenly the solid utilitarian basis of Zoroastrian -zoology gives way and we behold a fabric of dreams. We might understand -it better could we know the early animistic beliefs of Iran, though the -trend of the Avesta apparently ran _counter_ to old popular credences -far more than with them. It should be remembered that water was only a -little less sacred than fire in the Zoroastrian system; the defilement -of rivers was strictly forbidden. The Udra, or beaver, became the “luck” -of the rivers: to destroy it would provoke a drought. If it was found -roaming on the land, the Mazdean was bound to carry it to the nearest -stream. In later legend, the Udra, even more than the fox, was a -daeva-foe. But by far its most important characteristic is its mythical -connexion with the dog. To the question: “What becomes of the aged dog -when his strength fails him and he dies?” follows the answer: “He goes -to the dwelling in the water, where he is met by two water-dogs.” These -are his conductors to the dogs’ paradise. A fair sward beneath the -waters, cool and fresh in the summer heat, is at least a pleasant idea, -but when the two water-dogs are described as consisting of one thousand -male and one thousand female dogs, the myth seems to lose its balance -which no proper myth ought to do. Myths have the habit of proceeding -rationally enough in their own orbit. Later commentators reject this -fantastic interpretation and suppose the verse to mean that the dog-soul -is received, not by two, but by two thousand water-dogs, which in -Oriental hyperbole would mean merely “a great many.” - -Be this as it may, Udra-murder was a frightful sin, and frightful were -the penalties attached to it. Besides undergoing the usual blows with a -horse-goad (to be self inflicted?) the murderer must kill ten thousand -each of some half-dozen insects and reptiles: this, at least, is how it -looks, but as a matter of fact the long lists of penalties in the -Vendîdâd must be taken not as cumulative, but as alternative. This is -evident, though it is never stated, and it explains many things. A large -number of the alternative punishments for beaver-killing take the form -of offerings to the priests. Arms, whips, grindstones, handmills, -house-matting, wine and food, a team of oxen, cattle both small and -large, _a suitable wife_—the young sister of the sinner—these are among -the specified offerings. The culprit may also build a bridge, or breed -fourteen dogs as an act of expiation; in short, he may do any kind of -meritorious deed, but something he must do, or it will be the worse for -him in the world to come. - -The Vendîdâd was not a code of criminal law enforced by the civil power, -but an adjugation of penances for the atonement of sin. This was not -understood at first, which caused the selection of punishments to appear -more extravagant than it really is. For the most part the penances were -active good works or things which were reckoned as such. Charity and -alms-giving were always contemplated among the means of grace, and if -they were not dwelt upon more continually, it was because there existed -nothing comparable to modern destitution. Moreover, it was understood -better than in other parts of the East that not every beggar was a -saint: too often he was a lazy fellow who had shirked the common -obligation of labour. The repetition of certain prayers was another -practice recommended to the repentant sinner. But no good work or pious -exercise was of any avail unless accompanied by sincere sorrow for -having done wrong. The Law opened the door of grace, but to obtain it -the heart must have become changed. God forgives those who truly desire -His forgiveness. It is impossible to doubt that the spurious Mazdeism -which got into Europe, distorted though it was, yet took with it the two -great Mazdean doctrines of repentance and the remission of sin. Great -ideas conquer, and it was by these two doctrines that Mithraism so -nearly conquered the Western world—not by its unlovely rites. - -On one or two points the human eschatology of Zoroastrianism is -associated with dogs. A dog is brought into the presence of the dying -man. This has been explained by reference to the dogs of Yama, the Vedic -lord of death, and the European superstition about the howling of a dog -being a death-portent is explained in the same way, but in both -instances the immediate cause seems nearer at hand. An Indian officer -once remarked to me that any one who had heard the true “death-howl” of -a dog would never need any recondite reason for the uncomfortable -feeling which it arouses. As regards the Zoroastrian dog, the immediate -cause of the belief that he drives away evil spirits lies in the fact -that he drives away thieves and prowlers in the night. Death being a -pollution as the work of Ahriman, evil spirits beset the dying, but they -flee at the sight of the dog, created by Ahura Mazda to protect man. The -dead wander for three days near the tenantless body: then they go to the -bridge Chinvat, where the division takes place between the good and the -wicked. The bridge is guarded by dogs, who drive away all things evil -from the path of the righteous, but do nothing to prevent bad spirits -from tripping up sinners so that they fall into the pit. - -The good go into light, sinners into darkness, where Ahriman, “whose -religion is evil,” mocks them, saying: “Why did you eat the bread of -Ahura Mazda and do my work? and thought not of your own Creator but -practised my will?” Nothing is told of the punishment of Ahriman—the -doom of Evil is to be Evil—but in the end he will be utterly -extinguished. Through time, _but not_ through eternity the wicked remain -in his power. In the Khordah Avesta it is said that God, after purifying -all the obedient, will purify the wicked out of hell. In the words of a -living Parsi writer: “The reign of terror, at the end of the stipulated -time, vanishes into oblivion, and its chief factor, Ahriman, goes to -meet his doom of total extinction, whilst Ahura Mazda, the Omnipotent -Victor, remains the Great All in All.” - -The Zoroastrian was as free as Socrates himself from the materialism -which looks upon the body after death as if it were still the being that -tenanted it. Some kind of renewed body the dead will have: meanwhile, -this is not they! The hope of immortality was so firm that it was -thought an actual sin to give way to excessive mourning: the wailing and -keening of the Jews seem to be here condemned, though they are not -mentioned, there being no direct allusion to the religions of other -peoples in the Avesta. There is a river of human tears which hinders -souls on their way to beatitude: the dead would fain that the living -check their tears which swell the river and make it hard to cross over -in safety. The same idea is to be found in one of the most beautiful of -Scandinavian folk-songs. - -The small work known as the Book of Ardâ Vîrâf is a document of -priceless worth to the student of Mazdean eschatology, and it is also of -the greatest interest in its relation to ideas about animals. If printed -in a convenient form, every humane person would carry it in his pocket. -Like the vision of the Seer of Patmos this work is purely religious; it -attempts no criticism of life and man such as that embodied in the -“Divina Commedia,” but in spite of this difference in aim, there is an -astonishing resemblance between its general plan and that of the poem of -Dante. Without going into this subject, I may say that I cannot feel -convinced that with the geographical, astronomical, and other knowledge -of the East which is believed to have reached Dante by means of -conversations with merchants, pilgrims and perhaps craftsmen (for that -Italian artists worked in India at an early date the Madonna-like groups -in many a remote Hindu temple bear almost certain testimony), there did -not come to him also some report of the travels of the Persian visitant -to the next world. - -The author of the Persian vision was a pious Mazdean whose whole desire -was to revive religious feeling amid growing indifference. He is -supposed to have lived not earlier than 500, and not later than 700 A.D. -The former is the likelier date. Had the assault of Islam begun, the -book must have borne traces of the struggle with invaders who threatened -to annihilate the faith. The author states that the work was intended as -an antidote in the first place to atheism and in the second to “the -religions of many kinds” that were springing up. This probably contains -a reference to Christian sects, but it is not the way that allusion -would have been made to propagandists with a sword in their hands. -Christian sects managed to recover from the first persecution in 344 -A.D., after which they were more often than not tolerated, though the -Zoroastrian priesthood feared a Church that possessed an organisation so -much like their own. They were accused, moreover, as at Rome, of being -anti-national: everywhere the sentiment against the Christians took a -form closely resembling the anti-Semiticism of our days. Such -accusations can hardly fail to create, to some extent, the thing they -predicate, and it is no great wonder if in the end the Persian -Christians received the Moslem invaders with favour. Though the essence -of Mazdeism is peace to men of good-will, it is to be feared that the -Zoroastrian priests (like others) were less tolerant than their creed, -and that the harassing of the Christians generally originated with them. -They are known to have counselled this policy to Homizd IV., who gave -them the memorable answer that his royal throne could not stand on its -front legs alone, but needed the support of the Christians and other -sectaries as well as of the faithful. It was one of the wisest sayings -that ever fell from the lips of a king and more Mazdean than all the -bigotry of Zoroastrian clericalism. - -The author of Ardâ Vîrâf tried the perfectly legitimate means of -persuasion in rallying his countrymen to their own religion. He tells -the story of how, in an age of doubt, it was agreed that the best thing -would be to send some one into the next world to see if Mazdeism were, -indeed, the true religion. Lots fell on a very virtuous man named Ardâ -Vîrâf, who was commissioned to make the journey in a trance-state -produced by the administration of a narcotic. Even now, in India, -children and others are given narcotics, sometimes of a dangerous sort, -in order to obtain knowledge which is supposed to come to them whilst -insensible. To a Mazdean the ordeal would be particularly terrible, -because sleep, like death, was created by Ahriman. The calm fortitude -with which Ardâ Vîrâf submits, while his family break into loud weeping, -almost reminds one of the bearing of Socrates on the eve of a similar -departure but one with no return. “It is the custom that I should pray -to the departed souls and make a will,” he says; “when I have done that, -give me the narcotic.” His body was treated as though dead, being kept -at the proper distance from fire and other sacred things, but priests -stayed near it night and day, praying and reading the Scriptures, that -the powers of ill might not prevail. - -At the end of seven days the wandering spirit of Ardâ Vîrâf re-entered -his inanimate form, and after he had taken food and water and wine he -called for a ready writer, to whom he dictated the tale of what he had -seen. Guided by Srosh the Pious and Ataro the Angel (Virgil and -Beatrice) the traveller visited heaven and hell. At the outset he saw -the meeting of a righteous soul and its Fravashi. This soul crosses the -Chinvat bridge in safety, and on the other side passes into an -atmosphere laden with an ineffably sweet perfume which emanates from the -direction of the presence of God. Here it meets a damsel more wondrously -fair than aught it has beheld in the land of the living. Enraptured at -the sight, it asks her name and receives the answer: “I am thine own -good actions.” Every good deed embellishes the human soul’s archetype, -every evil deed mars and stains it with the hideousness of sin. This -poetic and beautiful conception was not due to the author of Ardâ Vîrâf: -it is taken from the venerable pages of the Avesta itself. - -In the abode of Punishment the most impressive penalties are those -undergone by the souls which have tortured helpless infants or dumb -animals. The mother who feeds another’s child from greed and starves her -own, is seen digging into an iron hill with her breasts while the cry of -her child for food comes ever from the other side of the hill, “but the -infant comes not to the mother nor the mother to the infant.” Here the -supreme anguish is mental: it is caused by the awakening of that -maternal instinct which the woman stifled on earth. Has the _Inferno_ -any thought so luminously subtle as this? The woman-soul will never -reach her child “till the renewal of the world.” Till the renewal of the -world! Across the hell-fog penetrates the final hope! - -The unfaithful wife who destroys the fruit of her illicit love suffers a -horrible punishment. It is strange that if we wish to find an analogy to -these severe judgments on offences against infancy, we must go to a -small tribe of Dravidian mountaineers in the Nilgiri hills, among whose -folk-songs is one which describes a vision of heaven and hell. In this a -woman is shown who is condemned to see her own child continually die, -because she refused help to a stranger’s child, saying: “It is not -mine!” - -Those who treated their beasts cruelly, who overworked them, overloaded -them, gave them insufficient food, continued to work them when they -suffered from sores caused by leanness instead of trying to cure the -sores, are seen by Ardâ Vîrâf hung up head downwards while a ceaseless -rain of stones falls on their backs. Those who wantonly killed animals -have a knife driven ceaselessly into their hearts. Those who muzzled the -ox which ploughed the furrows are dashed under the feet of cattle. The -same punishment falls to those who forget to give water to the oxen in -the heat of the day or who worked them when hungry and thirsty. Demons -like dogs constantly tear the man who kept back food from -shepherds’-dogs and house-dogs or who beat or killed them: he offers -bread to the dogs, but they eat it not and only tear the more. - -Ardâ Vîrâf tells a story which belongs to the cycle of “Sultan Murad,” -immortalised by Victor Hugo. A certain lazy man named Davânôs, who never -did any other thing of good during all the years when he governed many -provinces, once cast a bundle of grass with his right foot to within the -reach of a ploughing-ox. Hence his right foot is exempted from torment -while the rest of his body is gnawed by noxious creatures. - -It is easy to imagine that the realistic picture of heaven and hell by a -poet of no little power produced the deepest effect on the minds of -people, who for the most part took it to be literally true. No Oriental -work ever became more popular or was more widely read and translated. -People still living can remember the time when it was the habit of the -Parsis at Bombay to have public readings of Ardâ Vîrâf, on which -occasions the audience, especially the feminine part of it, broke into -violent sobbing from the excitement caused by the description of the -punishment of the wicked. The Parsis have abandoned now the theory that -the book is other than a work of imagination, but it may be hoped that -they will not cease to regard it as a cherished legacy from their -fathers and a precious bequest to their children. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - VIII - - A RELIGION OF RUTH - - -AN Englishman who went to see a Hindu saint was deterred from entering -the cave where the holy man lived by the spectacle of numerous rats. The -hermit, observing his hesitation, inquired what was the matter? “Don’t -you see them?” answered his visitor. “Yes,” was the brief reply. “Why -don’t you kill them?” asked the Englishman. “Why should I kill them?” -said the native of the land. Finding the whole onus of the discussion -thrown on his shoulders, the English traveller felt that it would be -difficult with his limited knowledge of the language to express a -European’s ideas about rats. He thought to sum up the case in one -sentence: “We people kill them.” To which the saint answered: “We people -don’t kill them.” - -In another country, but still among a race which has inherited the habit -of looking at questions between man and animals not exclusively from the -man’s point of view, a learned professor proposed to an old gardener at -Yezd that they should dig up an ant-hill to ascertain if the local -prejudice were true which insisted that inside each ant-hill there -lodged two scorpions. The old Persian declined to be a party to any such -proceeding. “As long as the scorpions stay inside,” he said with -decision, “we have no right to molest them and to do so would bring -ill-luck.” - -These anecdotes show, amusingly and convincingly, the wall of -demarcation between Eastern and Western thought by which the son of the -West is apt to find his passage barred. They serve my purpose in quoting -them the better because they are not connected with the religious sect -whose precepts I am going to sketch. They illustrate what I believe to -be true, namely, that this sect and Buddhism itself would not have made -their way in so wonderful a manner, seemingly almost without effort, had -they not found the ground prepared by a racial tendency to fly to the -doctrine of _Ahimsa_, or “non-killing,” which forms part of their -systems. - -No religion prevails unless it appeals to some chord, if not of the -human heart everywhere, at least of the particular human hearts to which -it is directed. In the West a religion based on Vegetarianism would not -have a chance. Not that there exists no trace of the life-preserving -instinct among Western peoples—far from that. All nice children have it -and all saints of the type of him of Assisi. Other people have it who -are neither children, nor saints, nor yet lunatics (“though by your -smiling you seem to say so”). I know an old hero of the Siege of Delhi -who to this day would stoop to lift a worm from his path. But the -sentiment, which in the West is rather a secret thing, forming a sort of -freemasonry among those who feel it, asserts its sway in the East in the -broad light of day. No one there would mind giving the fullest publicity -to his opinion that the scorpion has as good a right to live undisturbed -in his domestic ant-hill as you have in your suburban villa. - -Long before the Jainas made _Ahimsa_ a gateway to perfection, -innumerable Asiatics practised and even preached the very same rule. It -was the bond of union between all the religious teachers and ascetics -who constituted a well-defined feature in Indian life from remote if not -from the earliest antiquity. The founders of Jainism and of Buddhism, -too, were Gurus like the rest, only they possessed an intensified -magnetic influence and, at least in Buddha’s case, an unique genius. -Every Eastern religion has been taught by a Guru, not excepting the most -divine of them all.[4] - -Footnote 4: - - “It is stated of the Divine Founder of the Christian religion that - without a parable spoke He not to the people. Christ, in fact, acted - and taught as an _Oriental Guru_, a character which none of the - European writers of Christ’s life has invested Him with” (Rev. J. - Long: v. “Oriental Proverbs” in the Report of the Proceedings of the - Second Congress of Orientalists). - -In the occurrence of a new religious evolution much depends on the -individual, but much also on the fulness of time. When Buddhism and -Jainism arose, the psychological moment was come for a change or -modification in the current faith. To some degree, both were a revolt -against Sacerdotalism. Men were told that they could work out their -salvation without priestly aid or intervention. The new teachers, though -each springing from the class of the feudal nobility, won to their side -the surging wave of the only kind of democratic yearning which, till -now, Asia has known—the yearning for religious equality. Professor -Hermann Jacobi (the foremost authority on Jainism, to whom all who study -the subject owe an unbounded debt) suggests that there was a certain -friction between the highly meritorious of the noble and the priestly -castes because the priests were inclined to look down on the layman -saint. To this category belonged Sakya Muni, who was the younger son of -a prince, or, as we should say, a feudal lord, and who renounced rank -and riches to become a recluse. The same family history is told of -Mahavira, whom the Jainas claim to be their founder. For a long time -Europeans believed the two religions to have but one source, and Jainism -was dismissed as a Buddhist sect. The Jainas, however, always strongly -held that they had a founder of their own, namely, Mahavira, and they -even declared that Buddha was not his master but his disciple. After -much research, Professor Jacobi decided the case in their favour by -assigning to them a separate origin. Both Sakya Muni and Mahavira are -generally believed to have flourished in the sixth century B.C. - -The confusion of the Jainas with the Buddhists and even with the -Brahmans has made it difficult to reckon their present numbers: in the -census of 1901 they are estimated at 1,334,138, chiefly living in the -Bombay Presidency, but this does not tell us their real number. Jainas -are to be found almost everywhere in Upper India, in the West and South -and along the Ganges. They inhabit the towns more than the country. In -treating ancient Indian religions the living document is always round -the corner, ready to be called into the witness-box, and the Jainas of -to-day can give a good account of themselves. Every one has a good word -for them; a friend of mine, than whom few know India better, describes -them thus: “A tall, fair, handsome, good and humble lot they are and -terribly bullied they are by their more bellicose fellow-countrymen, who -all look on Jainas as made for them to pilfer, but the Jainas never turn -on their persecutors.” In spite of their meekness, they are good men of -business, which is proved by their remarkable success in commerce. -Perhaps it is not such bad policy to be peaceful, and helpful, and -honest as a cynical century supposes. - -The Jainas say of Mahavira that he was one of a long line of holy -ascetics twenty-four of whom are venerated in their temples under the -name of Tirthakaras or Jinas, “Conquerors” in the sense of having -conquered the flesh. Needless to point out that the founders of great -religious systems invariably accept this principle of evolution: they -complete what others began, and in due time a new manifestation will -arrive either in the form of a more perfect revelation of themselves or -in that of a fore-destined successor. The Buddhists now await Matreya, -or “the Buddha of kindness.” The Jainas have not added to their -twenty-four glorified beings, but there is nothing to prevent them from -doing so. To these specimens of perfected humanity they have raised some -of the most glorious temples ever lifted by the hand of man towards -heaven. Tier on tier mount the exquisitely beautiful towers of the Jaina -cathedrals in the most lonely part of the Muklagerri hills. They seem -like the Parsifal music turned into stone: an allegory of the ascent of -the soul from corruption to incorruption, from change to permanency. The -desire to worship something finds a vent in the reverence paid to the -Tirthakaras, but the Jaina religion admits neither relics nor the -iteration of prayers. The building of splendid shrines and of refuges -for man and beast are the particular means of grace open to the Jaina -who cannot comply in all respects with the exacting demands of his -scriptures, which, were they literally fulfilled, would leave no one on -the world but ascetics. The wealthy Jaina is only too glad to avail -himself of the chance of acquiring some merit, however far it must fall -short of the highest. Besides this, in moments of religious fervour -temple-building becomes a frenzy: whole races are swept along by the -blind impulse to incarnate their spiritual cravings in spires or pagodas -or minarets pointing to the sky—the eternal symbol. The greatest of -Jaina temples mark the epoch of some such wave of spiritual emotion. - -The Jaina scriptures, which were first collected from aural report and -written down by a learned man in the sixth century A.D., are really a -Rule of Discipline for monks, and not a guide for the mass of mankind. -If we could imagine the only Christian Scripture being the immortal book -of Thomas à Kempis, we should form the idea of a very similar state of -things. It is surprising not how little but how much of this rigid rule -is followed by every Jaina to this day, be he monk or layman. The -vegetarian principle involved in _Ahimsa_ is observed rigorously by -all—clearly with no bad effect on health after a trial of about -twenty-four centuries, for the Jainas’ physique is excellent, and they -are less subject to disease than the other communities. They strain and -boil water before drinking, and whatever may be said of the motive, the -practice must be highly commended. They are also often to be seen -wearing a mouth-cloth to prevent them from swallowing flies, and they -carry little brooms with which they sweep insects out of their path. The -hospitals for sick animals begin to be better managed than formerly, -when they incurred much censure as mere conglomerations of hopeless -suffering to relieve which practical means were not taken. A folly -adopted by the more fanatical Jainas at the time of their origin was -that of going “sky-clad,” which makes it probable that they were the -gymnosophists known to the Greeks. They saw well later to limit this -practice to certain times and occasions or to abandon it for the far -more pleasant one of wearing white garments. Buddha warned his followers -against the “sky-clad” aberration. He disagreed with the Jainas on a -more vital point in the view he took of penance and self-inflicted -torture. It shows the high intellectuality of the man that towards the -end of his life he pronounced penance, though he had gone through much -of it himself, to be vanity of vanities. The Jainas took the opposite -view: “Subdue the body just as fire consumes old wood.” They hold that -merit is bound up with a certain definite and tangible thing: the -Buddhist, more philosophically, makes it consist in intention. This is -the chief doctrinal difference between Jaina and Buddhist, and though -each is bound to charity and the Jaina is particularly enjoined by his -scriptures not to turn other people’s religion into ridicule, it has to -be confessed that in their frequent disputes they spare no pains and -neglect no arts of Socratic reasoning to reduce each other’s theories to -an absurdity. Irony is a weapon always used in Indian religious -discussion. - -Mahavira himself “fulfilled the law” by allowing gnats, flies, and other -things to bite him and crawl over him for four months without ever once -losing his equanimity. It is told that he met all sorts of pleasant or -unpleasant events with an even mind whether they arose from divine -powers, men, or animals. The Jainas did not deny that there were divine -powers: there might be any number of them, and the influence they -wielded for good or for ill (I think especially for ill) was not -inconsiderable. Only they were not morally admirable like a man -victorious through suffering. The greater willingness of the Jainas to -admit gods into the wheel of being, and even to allow some homage to be -paid to them, was one reason why they clashed less with the Brahmans. -After the subsidence of Buddhism the Jainas managed to go on existing, -somewhat despised and annoyed, but tolerated. - -While both Buddhists and Jainas place the prohibition to take life at -the head of their law, its application is infinitely more thoroughgoing -among the Jainas, who also attach to it ideas which have no place in -Buddhist metaphysics. From the Jaina position, it seems to imply a -tendency to primitive animism, though it is hard to say whether this -comes from a real process of retrogression or simply from the Indo-Aryan -desire for a synthesis—the more easily attained the more you assume. It -is startling to hear that in the last census over eight millions were -returned as animists—it proves that the old credences die hard. The -Jainas took into their soul-world fire, water, wind, shooting plants and -germinating seeds. The disciplinary results must have been inconvenient, -but a religion was never less popular because it put its devotees to -inconvenience. Those who still clung to animistic beliefs were already -prepared to see a soul in the flickering fire, the rushing water, the -growing blade. We all have odds and ends of animism; did not Coventry -Patmore say: “There is something human in a tree?” With more detail the -Jaina observes that trees and plants are born and grow old; they -distinguish the seasons, they turn towards the sun, the seeds grow up: -how, then, shall we deny all knowledge to them? “The asoka buds and -blossoms when touched by a fair girl’s feet.” Can we help recalling the -familiar lines in the “Sensitive Plant?”— - - “I doubt not the flowers of that garden sweet - Rejoiced in the sound of her gentle feet; - I doubt not they felt the spirit that came - From her glowing fingers thro’ all their frame.” - -Now, Science, which is on the way to becoming very kind to man’s early -beliefs, comes forward in the person of Mr. Francis Darwin to tell us -that plants _have_ “mind” and “intelligence,” especially the hop and the -bryony. All fairy-tales will come true if we wait long enough. - -Once, and once only, in Jaina writings I have noticed it given as a -distinct reason for sparing plants and trees, that they may contain the -transmigrated soul of a man. Even in the case of animals the doctrine of -transmigration is rarely adduced as the reason for not killing them, -though it is fully accepted by Jainas in common with all the Indian -sects sprung from Brahmanism by which it was started. Coming to the -Indian views of animals from those which antiquity represented as the -preaching of Pythagoras, we expect to see this argument put forward at -every turn, but it is not. In Jaina writings the incentive is humanity: -to do to others as we would be done by. It is true that as an aid to -this incentive, the cruel are threatened with the most awful -punishments. In Indian sacred writings one is wearied by the nice -balance constantly drawn between every deed and its consequences to the -doer for a subsequent millennium. In mediæval monkish legends we find -exactly the same device for keeping the adept in the paths of virtue, -but wherever we find it, we sigh for the spontaneous emotion of pity of -the Good Samaritan who never reflected “If I do not get off my ass and -go to help that Jew, how very bad it will be for my Karman!” - -We ought not to forget in this connexion that rewards and punishments -have not the same meaning to the Indian as to us: they are not -extraneous prizes or penalties, but the working out of a mathematical -problem which we both set and solve for ourselves. It is utterly -impossible to escape from the consequences of our evil acts: they are -debts which must be paid, though we may set about performing good acts -which will make our future happiness exceed our future misery in time -and extent. The highest good comes of itself, automatically, to him who -merits it, as is illustrated with great beauty in the Jaina story of the -White Lotus. This flower, the symbol of perfection, bloomed in the -centre of a pool and was descried by many who made violent efforts to -reach it, but they were all set fast in the mud. Then came a holy -ascetic who stood motionless on the bank. “O white Lotus, fly up!” he -said, and the White Lotus flew to his breast. Even among Indian sects -which all abound in this kind of composition the Jainas are remarkable -for their wealth of moral tales and apothegms. As is well known, they -possess a parable called “The Three Merchants,” closely resembling the -parable of the Talents as told by Matthew and Luke, and still more -exactly agreeing with the version given in the so-called “Gospel -according to the Hebrews.” - -The theory of Karman suggests several modern scientific speculations -such as the idea that the brain retains an ineffaceable print of every -impression received by it, and again, the extreme view of heredity which -makes the individual the moral and physical slave of former generations. -It is a theory which has the advantage of disposing of many riddles. -Different sects have slightly varying opinions about the nature of the -Karman: the Jainas see in this receptacle of good and evil deeds a -material, though supersensual, reality with a physical basis. Each -individual consists of five parts: the visible body, the vital energy -thought to consist of fire, or, as we might say, of electricity, the -Karman and two subliminal selves which appear to be only latent in most -persons, but by which, when called into activity, the individual can -transform himself, travel to distances and do other unusual things. That -each man is provided with a wraith or double is an old and widely-spread -belief; but in Western lore the double does not seem to be commanded by -its pair: it rather moves like an unconscious, wandering photograph of -him. - -The Jainas have the same word for the soul and for life: _gîva_, and -this name they bestow on the whole range of things which they consider -as living: the elements, seeds, plants, animals, men, gods. One would -think that the sense of personal identity would become vague in the -contemplation of voyages over so vast a sea of being, but, on the -contrary, this identity is the one thing about which the individual -seems perfectly sure. We have frequently such utterances as: “My own -self is the doer and the undoer of misery and happiness; my own self is -friend and foe.” A sort of void seems spread round the individual which -even family affection, very strong though it has always been in India, -is powerless to bridge. A lovely testimony to this affection, and at the -same time an avowal of its unavailingness, is to be found in the one -single exception to the Jaina law that the wholly virtuous man must -desire nothing, not even Nirvana must he desire, much less earthly love -or friendship. But he may desire to take upon him the painful illness of -one of his dear kindred. It is added sadly, however, that never has such -a desire been fulfilled, for one man cannot take upon him the pains of -another, neither can he feel what another feels. - -“Man is born alone, he dies alone, he falls alone, he rises alone. His -passions, consciousness, intellect, perceptions and impressions belong -to him exclusively. Another cannot save him or help him. He grows old, -his hair turns white, even this dear body he must relinquish—none can -stay the hour.” - -Again it is written:— - -“Man! thou art thy own friend, why wishest thou for a friend beyond -thyself?” - -The isolation of the soul with its paramount importance to its owner -(that is to say, to itself) makes it obligatory to pursue its interests -even at the expense of the most sacred affections. The Pagan, the Jew, -the Moslem could not have been brought to yield assent to this doctrine, -but it meets us continually in Catholic hagiology; for instance, St. -François de Sales told Madame de Chantal that she ought, if needful, to -walk into the cloister over the dead body of her son. So in a Jaina -story, father, mother, wife, child, sister, brother try in vain to wrest -a holy young man from his resolve to leave them. In vain the old people -say: “We will do all the work if you will only come home; come, child! -We will pay your debts; you need not stay longer than you like—only come -home!” The quite admirable young man (who sets one furiously wishing for -a stout birch rod) proceeds on his way unmoved. But it is remarked, “At -such appeals the weak break down like old, worn-out oxen going up hill.” -We prefer the weak. - -Who was the first anchorite? Perhaps in very early states of society a -few individuals got lost in the mountain or forest, where they lived on -fruits and nuts, and then, after a long time, some of them were -re-discovered, and, because they seemed so strange and mysterious after -their long seclusion, they were credited with supernatural gifts. -Animals do not go away alone except in the rare case of being seized -with mania, or in the universal case of feeling the approach of death. -The origin of hermits cannot, therefore, be explained by analogy with -animals. - -One can conceive that a hermit’s life may have great attractions, but -scarcely that of a Jaina hermit, who is expected to employ his leisure -in the most painful mortification of the flesh. Though other-worldly -advantages form the great object which spurs men to choose such a lot we -must not forget that this sort of life is held to confer powers which -are, by no means, other-worldly. By it the Brahman becomes superior to -caste, being incapable of pollution: if he wished he could drink after -the most miserable Western had touched the cup. - -The theory of asceticism is very much alike everywhere, and the -extraordinary faculties claimed by the Jainas for their holy men are the -portion, more or less, of the Indian holy man in general. These -faculties may be briefly described as an abnormal development of the -subliminal self, but that is not an adequate account of the vastness of -their range. One feels often inclined to ask—without granting revelation -or, indeed, the existence of an omniscient being who could give it—_how_ -does the Buddhist or Jaina acquire perfect certainty that he knows all -about his own and man’s destiny? The question of authority is of primary -importance in all religions: in what way does Buddhist or Jaina solve -it? It is evident that scepticism based on this very ground does -sometimes harass the soul of the Jaina novice: “The weak,” we are told, -“when bitten by a snarling dog or annoyed by flies and gnats, will begin -to say: ‘_I have not seen the next world, all may end with death._’” It -startles one to hear from the mouth of the devil’s advocate in an -ancient Eastern homily a cry so modern, so Western:— - - “Death means heaven, he longs to receive it, - But what shall I do if I don’t believe it?”[5] - -Footnote 5: - - “Verses written in India,” p. 13. - -Sir Alfred Lyall’s questioner found none to answer him, but the Jaina -has an answer which, if accepted, must prove entirely satisfactory. The -superlatively virtuous individual possesses an effortless certainty -about the secrets of life. In a state superinduced by means which, -though arduous, are at the disposal of all, the soul can view itself, -read its history, past, present and to come, know the souls of others, -remember what happened in former births, understand the heavenly bodies -and the universe. Here is nothing miraculous: a veil is lifted, and -hidden things become plain. It is as if a man who had cataract in both -eyes underwent a successful operation—after which he sees. - -The supersensual perception of Jaina, or Joghi, or Guru is much akin to -the “infused knowledge” ascribed to the saints of the Thebaid. He -knows—because he knows. By the devout, information derived from these -persons is accepted as readily as we should accept information about -radium from a qualified scientific man. The most confident of all that -the information is true is he who gives it: fraud must be dismissed -finally as the key to any such phenomena. - -The Indian mind has grasped a great idea in referring what we call -spirit to fixed laws no less than what we call matter. But in spirit it -sees a force infinitely exceeding the force of matter. “The holy monk,” -say the Jaina scriptures, “might reduce millions to ashes by the fire of -his wrath.” Besides such tremendous powers as these he has all the minor -accomplishments of the spiritualist or hypnotist: thought-reading, -levitation, clairvoyance, &c., and he can always tame wild beasts. He is -under strict obligations to use his powers with discretion. It is not -right to make profit out of them: that man is anathema who lives by -divination from dreams, diagrams, sticks, bodily changes, the cries of -animals. The Jainas denounce magic not less strongly than the other -religious teachers of the East. This is interesting because the reasons -are lacking which are commonly held to explain the world-wide prejudice -against magic: the Jainas do not attribute it to the agency of evil -spirits, nor can their dislike of it be attributed to the professional -jealousy of priests in regard to rival thaumaturgists. For the Jaina the -power of magic-working lies in every one, and those who have developed -their other spiritual powers have also this one at their command, but to -avail themselves of it is an enormous sin. There is a weird story -showing what infamies a magic-working “ascetic” may perpetrate. A monk -carried off, by magical arts, all the women he met, till the king of -that country trapped him in a hollow tree and had him put to death. The -women were set free and returned to their husbands, except one, who -refused to go back because she had fallen desperately in love with her -seducer. A very wise man suggested that the monk’s bones should be -pounded and mixed with milk, and then given to the woman to drink: this -was done and she was cured of her passion. - -Over the whole East, the report that some one was working miracles, even -the most beneficent, raised both suspicion and jealousy. This was why -secrecy was recommended about all such acts. - -How far the belief in the extraordinary gifts of the ascetic rests on -hallucination, and how far men in an artificially created abnormal -condition can do things of which hypnotic manifestations are but the -outer edge, it is not my purpose to inquire. The Jaina monks are said -sometimes to fast for four days, and no doubt the stimulus of starvation -(especially when the brain has not been weakened by long disease), -produces an ecstatic state which men have everywhere supposed to -indicate religious perfection. This may be observed even in birds, which -from some difficulty in swallowing, die of starvation: I had a canary -that sang for days before it died a sweet incessant song, the like of -which I never heard: it seemed not earthly. - -The best side in Eastern religions is not their thaumaturgy but the -steady ethical tendency which pushes itself up out of the jungle of -extravagance and self-delusion. Though we may not have much sympathy -with the profession of a “houseless” saint, it is impossible to deny the -moral elevation of such a picture of him as is drawn in the Jaina -conversion story of “The True Sacrifice.” A holy man, born in the -highest Brahmanical caste, but who had found wisdom in Jaina vows, went -on a long journey and walked and walked till he came to Benares, where -he found a very learned Brahman who was deeply versed in astronomy and -in the Vedas. When the “Houseless” arrived, the priest was about to -offer up sacrifice, and perhaps because he did not wish to be disturbed -at such a moment, he told him rudely to go away—he would have no beggars -there. The holy man was not angry; he had not come to extort food or -water, but from the pure desire to save souls. He quietly told the -priest that he was ignorant of the essence of the Vedas, of the true -meaning of sacrifice, of the government of the heavenly bodies. There -must have been a peculiar effluence of sanctity flowing from the -“Houseless” as the priest took his rebukes with meekness, and merely -asked for enlightenment. Then the seer delivered his message. It is not -the tonsure that makes the priest or repetition of the sacred syllable -_om_ that makes the saint. It is not by dwelling in woods or by wearing -clothes of bark or grass that salvation may be reached. Equanimity, -chastity, knowledge, and penance are the ways to holiness. His actions -alone colour a man’s soul: as his works are, so is he. Persuaded of the -truth, the priest addressed the “Houseless” as the truest of -sacrificers, the most learned of all who know the Vedas, the inspired -exponent of Brahmanhood, and begged him to accept his alms. But the -mendicant refused: he only conjured the priest out of pity for his own -soul to join the order of the “Houseless.” After having been rightly -schooled in Jaina precepts, the Brahman followed his advice, and in due -time he became a very great saint like his instructor. - -As the Jaina scriptures are in effect a manual of discipline for monks, -it is natural that they should be severe on womankind. Not that a -woman’s soul is worth less than a man’s or, rather, since spirit is -sexless, the distinction does not exist. A woman may be as good a saint -as a man; a nun may be as meritorious as a monk. The identity of -mysticism independent of creed was never more apparent than in the -beautiful saying of a Jaina nun: “As a bird dislikes the cage, so do I -dislike the world,” which might have been uttered by any of the -self-consumed spirits of the Latin Church from St. Teresa downwards. I -have never come across an allusion to being born again as a woman as a -punishment. But though the fullest potentiality of merit is allowed to -woman in the abstract, the Eternal Feminine is looked upon in the -concrete as man’s worst snare. “Women are the greatest temptation in the -world.” The Jaina books are Counsels of Perfection and not a Decalogue -framed for common humanity: they give one the idea of being intended for -preternaturally good people, and never more so than in the manner in -which they treat the dreadful snares and temptations for which women are -answerable: instead of a Venusberg, we are shown—the domestic hearth! -The story in question might be called “The Woes of the Model Husband!” A -girl who vowed that she would do anything rather than be parted from the -dear object of her affections, has no sooner settled the matter once for -all by marriage than she begins to scold and trample on the poor man’s -head. Her spouse is sent on a thousand errands, not one moment can he -call his own. Countless are the lady’s wants and her commands keep pace -with them: “Do look for the bodkin; go and get some fruit; bring wood to -cook the vegetables; why don’t you come and rub my back instead of -standing there doing nothing? Are my clothes all right? Where is the -scent-bottle? I want the hair-dresser. Where is my basket to put my -things in? And my trinkets? There, I want my shoes and my umbrella. -Bring me my comb and the ribbon to tie up my hair. Get the looking-glass -and a tooth-brush. I must have a needle and thread. You really ought to -look after the stores, the rainy season will be here in no time.” These -and many more are the young wife’s behests, the appalling list of which -might well intimidate those about to marry, but there is worse to come. -When “the joy of their lives, the crown of their wedded bliss” arrives -in the shape of a baby, it is the unfortunate husband who is set to mind -it: he has to get up in the night to sing lullabies to it “just as if he -were a nurserymaid,” and ashamed though he is of such a humiliation, he -is actually put to wash the baby-linen! “All this has been done by many -men who for the sake of pleasure have stooped so low; they become the -equals of slaves, animals, beasts of burden, _mere nobodies_.” Would not -most readers take this for a quotation from one of Ibsen’s plays rather -than from a sacred volume which was composed a considerable time before -the beginning of our era? - -The Indian pessimist is withheld from suicide by the dread of a worse -existence beyond the pyre. He is the coward of conscience to a much -greater extent than the weary Occidental, because his sense of the -unseen is so much stronger. In the Jaina system, however, suicide is -permitted under certain circumstances. After twelve years of rigorous -penance a man is allowed the supreme favour of “a religious death”—in -other words, he may commit suicide by starvation. This is called Itvara. -The civilised Indian does not seem to have the power of dying when he -pleases without the assistance of starvation which is possessed by some -of the higher savage races. - -The soul may be re-born in any earthly form from the lowest to the -highest, but there are other possibilities before it when it leaves its -mortal coil. Those who are very bad, too bad to disgrace the earth -again—above all, the cruel—are consigned to an _Inferno_ more awful than -Dante’s, though not without points of striking resemblance to it. The -very good who abounded in charity and in truth, but who yet lived in the -world the life of the world, become gods, glorified beings enjoying a -great measure of happiness and power, but not eternal. Far beyond the -joys of this heaven, which are still thinkable, is the unthinkable bliss -of the Perfect, of the Conquerors, of the Changeless. The human mind -could not adjust the idea of evolution more scientifically to the soul’s -destiny. - -It is unnecessary to say that the number who become even gods is very -small. A great deal is achieved if a man is simply born again as a man, -for though Jaina and Buddhist thinks that man’s lot is wretched (or, at -least that it ought to be when we consider its inherent evils), yet it -must be distinctly remembered that he thinks the life of beasts far more -wretched. Leopardi’s “Song of the Nomadic Shepherd in Asia,” in which he -makes the world-weary shepherd envy the fate of his sheep, is steeped in -Western not in Eastern pessimism: only in the last lines, which really -contradict the rest, we find the true Eastern note:— - - “Perchance in every form - That Nature may on everything bestow - The day of birth brings everlasting woe.” - -The Indian seems never to be struck by what to us seems (perhaps in -error, but I hope not) the inconscient joy of creatures, nor yet that of -children. He is constantly sure that all creation groaneth and -travaileth. Nothing is young in Asia, all is very old. Every one is -tired. In our minds thoughtless joy is connected with innocency, and in -these Indian creeds there is no innocency as there is no effortless -All-Good. Perfection is the result of labour. No other religious teacher -spoke of little children as Christ did—Christ, whose incomprehensible -followers were one day to consign the larger part of them, as a favour, -“to the easiest room in hell.” Ardently as children are desired and -lovingly as they are treated in the East, something essential to the -charm of childhood eludes the Oriental perception of it. - -In the sacred books of those Indian communities which concern themselves -most about animals, they are very rarely shown in an attractive light. -The horse, almost alone, is spoken of with genuine admiration; for -instance, there is this simile: “As the trained Kambôga steed whom no -noise frightens, exceeds all other horses in speed, so a very learned -monk is superior to all others.” An elephant is extolled for having -knelt down before a holy recluse though only newly tamed, and we hear -that Mahavira’s words were understood by all animals. Folk-lore tells -much that scriptures do not tell, and if we had a collection of Jaina -folk-lore we should find, no doubt, records of charming friendships -between beasts and saints, but in the Jaina sacred books pity, not love, -is the feeling shown towards animals. - -[Illustration: - - BUDDHA PACIFYING AN INTOXICATED ELEPHANT. - India Museum.] - -As a rule, Indian philosophical writers shirk the question of how far -the soul which was and may be again a man’s retains its consciousness -during its residence in lower forms. Probably the answer, were it given, -would be: “Not very far,” but the higher animals are credited with a -fuller share of reflection than in the West. Hence it is preferable to -assume the shape of one of the higher than of one of the lower -organisms, but still it is far better to be re-born as the lowest of men -than as the highest of animals. - -If it is something to be re-born as a man at all, it is a great deal to -be re-born as a fortunate man, healthy, wealthy, and surrounded by -troops of friends: at least, to the simple-minded such a prospect must -appear to hold out a very splendid hope. It is remarkable what good care -the framers of the intensely ascetic Jaina faith took of people who -could not pretend to walk in the path of the elect. The mere -“householder” (so called to distinguish him from the more admirable -“Houseless”) has the promise of an ample recompense if he is only -truthful, and humane, and liberal in alms-giving and temple-building. He -may win very great promotion on earth or even a place in the Jaina -heaven, the abode of light, where happy beings live long and enjoy great -power and energy, and never grow old. Such a state agrees with the -logical evolution of a virtuous but still this-worldly man. Could he -aspire sincerely to a more spiritual state, and can the soul outsoar its -own aspirations? The Jaina heaven is not eternal, but does every one -wish for eternity? Most people wish for ten or fifteen years of -tolerable freedom from care on this side of the grave. If they knew for -certain that they were going to enjoy one thousand years of heaven, they -would not think much of what would happen at the end of that time. - -There remain the pure and separated spirits who in this present life -have climbed beyond the plane of mortality. They are in the world, not -of it, and they, indeed, “have a glimpse of incomprehensibles and -thoughts of things which thoughts but tenderly touch.” For these, the -Jaina, like the Buddhist, keeps Nirvana. - -The extreme reticence of Buddha and even of Buddhist commentators on the -inner significance of this word—meaning literally “liberation”—is not -observed by the Jainas, though it must not be inferred that there was -any doctrinal difference of it in the view taken by the two sects. The -Jainas show a great anxiety to tell what Nirvana is; if they fail it is -because it baffles all description. They repudiate the idea that it -signified annihilation, but admit that the subject oversteps the bounds -of the thinkable. “The liberated soul perceives and knows, but there is -no analogy by which to describe it—without body, re-birth, sex, -dimensions.” We think of the wonderful lines in the _Helena_ of -Euripides:— - - “... the mind - Of the dead lives not, but immortal sense - When to immortal ether gone, possesses;” - -lines which, like not a few others in Euripides, seem to reflect a light -not cast from Grecian skies. - -Like every stage in the history of the life-soul (_giva_) Nirvana is -governed by an immutable law of evolution. When all the dross is -eliminated only pure spirit is left: a distilled essence not only -indestructible, for spirit is always indestructible, but also -changeless. All the rest dies, which means that it changes, that it is -re-born: this part can die no more, and hence can be born no more. It -has gained the liberty of which the soul goes seeking in the Dantesque -sense. It has gained safety, rest, peace. - -How familiar the words sound! Here am I in Asia, and I could dream -myself back under the roof of the village church where generations of -simple folk had sought a rest-cure for their minds: where I, too, first -listened to those words _safety_, _rest_, _peace_, with the strange -home-sickness they awaken in young children or in the very old who have -preserved their childhood’s faith. There are words that, by collecting -round them inarticulate longings and indefinite associations, finally -leave the order of language and enter that of music; they evoke an -emotion, not an idea. The emotions which sway the human heart are few, -and they are very much alike. The self-same word-music transports the -English child to the happy land, far, far away, and the Indian mystic to -Nirvana. - -Almost everything which the Jainas say of Nirvana might have been said -by any follower of any spiritual religion who attempted to suggest a -place of final beatitude. “There is a safe place in view of all, but -hard to approach, where there is no old age, nor death, nor pain, nor -disease. This place which is in view of all is called Nirvana or freedom -from pain, or it is called perfection; it is the safe, happy, quiet -place. It is the eternal haven which is in view of all, but is difficult -to approach.” - -Nirvana is the getting-well of the soul. “He will put away all the -misery which always afflicts mankind; as it were, _recovered from a long -illness_, he becomes infinitely happy and obtains the final aim.” - -We are told that the Buddhas that were and the Buddhas that will be, -have peace for their foundation, even as all things have the earth for -their foundation. (The term Buddha, or “Enlightened,” is used by Jainas -as well as by Buddhists for super-excellent beings.) - -Nirvana may or rather must be possessed before the death of the visible -body: it must be obtained by the living if it is to be enjoyed by the -dead. Detachment from the world, self-denial, selflessness, help the -soul on its way, but the two moral qualities which are absolutely -essential are kindness and veracity. Ruth and truth are written over the -portals of eternity. “He should cease to injure living things whether -they move or not, on high, below or on earth, for this has been called -Nirvana, which consists in peace.” “A sage setting out for Nirvana -should not speak untruth: this rule comprises Nirvana and the whole of -carefulness.” - -If a novice does anything wrong, he should never deny it: if he has not -done it he should say, “I have not done it.” A lie must never be -told—“not even in jest or in anger.” Were there nothing else of good in -Jaina discipline this devotion to truth would place it high on mankind’s -mountain. - -[Illustration: - - _Photo in_ _India Museum._ - COLOSSAL RECLINING BULL - (_Southern India._)] - -The law of _Ahimsa_, “non-killing,” which stands at the head of the -precepts of both Buddhist and Jaina, is not only far more rigidly -observed by the Jaina, but also invested by him with a greater positive -as well as relative value. One might say that with the Buddhists it is -more a philosophic deduction, with the Jainas more a moral necessity. -The position of Buddhists in this matter of _Ahimsa_ is one of -compromise. There never was a Buddhist who did not think cruelty to -animals an abominable sin, there is no compromise on that point, but, in -respect to animal food, the usual Buddhist layman is not really more -strict than any very humane person in the West; he abjures sport, he -will not kill animals himself, but he does not refuse to eat meat if it -is set before him. The Buddhists declare that the Lord Buddha was prayed -to forbid animal food absolutely, but he would not. It is argued that in -the flesh itself, when the life is gone from it, there is nothing -particularly sacred: therefore it is permissible to sustain life on it. -Your servants may buy meat ready for sale in the market: it would be -there just the same if you did not send to buy it, but you ought not to -tell them to give an order for some sort of meat which is not on sale; -still less should you incite people to snare or shoot wild animals for -your table. The Buddhists of to-day say with the opponents to -vegetarianism in Europe, that total abstention from the flesh of animals -would lead to the disappearance of the chief part of them; though it -might be answered that sheep would still be wanted for their wool, goats -and cows for their milk, oxen for ploughing. But a harder question is, -What would happen to these animals when they grew old? The Jainas seek -to settle this crux by building hospitals for them, but the result has -been indifferently encouraging. - -In Siam even monks are allowed animal food within certain limits, but as -a rule what I have said of the Buddhist view of _Ahimsa_ does not apply -to the religious, who leans to the strictest Jaina principle of having -nothing to do with shedding blood on any pretence. The Buddhist monks in -China teach the virtue of “fang sheng” (“life-saving”) by object-lessons -in the shape of tanks built near the convents to which people bring -tortoises, fishes and snakes to save them from death, and the monks also -keep homes for starving or lost animals. Favoured European visitors are -invited to witness the custom of feeding the wild birds before the -morning meal is served: the brothers sit silently at the refectory-table -with their bowls of rice and vegetables in front of them, but none -begins to eat till one brother rises, after a sort of grace has been -said, and goes to the door with a little rice in his hands which he -places on a low stone pillar. All the birds are waiting on the roofs and -fly down delighted to partake of their breakfast. - -Fra Odoric, the Venetian Franciscan who dictated an account of his -travels in 1330, describes a convent scene which was shown to him as a -most interesting thing, so that when he went home he might say that he -had seen “this strange sight or novelty.” To win the consent of the -monks his native friend, who acted as cicerone, informed them that this -Raban Francus, this religious “Frenchman” (Europeans were all -“Frenchmen”) was going to the city of Cambaleth to pray for the life of -the great Can. Thus recommended he was admitted, and the “religious man” -with whom they had spoken “took two great basketsful of broken relics -which remained on the table and led me into a little walled park, the -door whereof he unlocked with his key, and there appeared unto us a -pleasant fair green plot, into the which we entered. In the said green -stands a little mount in form of a steeple, replenished with fragrant -herbs and fine shady trees. And while we stood there, he took a cymbal -or bell and rang therewith, as they use to ring to dinner or bevoir in -cloisters, at the sound thereof many creatures of divers kinds came down -from the mount, some like apes, some like cats, some like monkeys, and -some having faces like men. And while I stood beholding of them, they -gathered themselves together about him, to the number of 4,200 of these -creatures, putting themselves in good order, before whom he set a -platter and gave them the said fragments to eat. And when they had eaten -he rang upon his cymbal a second time and they all returned to their -former places. Then, wondering greatly at the matter, I demanded what -kind of creatures those might be. They are (quoth he) the souls of noble -men which we do here feed for the love of God who governeth the world, -and as a man was honourable or noble in this life, so his soul after -death entereth the body of some excellent beast or other, but the souls -of simple and rustical people do possess the bodies of more vile and -brutish creatures.” - -Odoric’s informant was in error if he really said that distinctions of -rank influenced the soul’s destiny, as this is no Buddhist doctrine. The -charming description of the “strange sight or novelty” was imitated by -Mandeville, who adds, with a sympathetic tolerance which is very -characteristic of him, that the monks were “good religious men after -their faith and law.” - -That the stricter was also the more primitive Buddhist rule seems -probable, and it may be that Buddha’s alleged defence of meat-eating was -an invention meant to cover later latitudinarianism. Nevertheless, -_Ahimsa_ was, from the first, a more integral part of the Jaina religion -than of the Buddhist. The true keynote of either faith can be detected -in their respective conversion stories. In all outbursts of religious -revivalism (of which nature both Buddhism and Jainism largely partook) -the moment of conversion is the hinge on which everything turns. - -In the Buddhist story, a young prince, born on the steps of the throne, -nursed in luxury and happily wedded, sees consecutively a broken-down -old man, a man with a deadly disease, and a decomposing corpse. These -dreadful and common realities were brought home to his mind with -intolerable force. We seem to hear the despairing cry of R. L. -Stevenson: “Who would find heart to begin to live if he dallied with the -consideration of death”? We live because we drug ourselves with the -waters of a new Lethe which make us forget future as well as past. Sakya -Muni could not forget what he had seen or the lesson which it taught: -the rest of his life was devoted to freeing himself and others from -being endlessly subject to a like doom. - -Now let us recall the Jaina conversion story. The son of a powerful king -was on his way to marry a beautiful princess. At a certain place he saw -a great many animals in cages and enclosures looking frightened and -miserable. He asked his charioteer why all those animals which desired -to be free and happy were penned up in cages and enclosures? The -charioteer replied that they were not to be pitied, they were “lucky -animals” which were to furnish a feast for a great multitude at His -Highness’s wedding. (This is the very thing that an English poor man -would have said.) Full of compassion, the future “saviour of the world” -reflected: “If for my sake all these living creatures are killed, how -shall I obtain happiness in another world?” Then and there he renounces -the pomps and vanities of human existence, and he means it, too. The -poor little bride, forsaken in this life, and not much comforted by -promised compensation in the next, “not knowing what she could do,” cuts -off her pretty hair and goes to a nunnery. In time she becomes a model -of perfection, and many of her kindred and servants are persuaded by her -to join the order. - -In this story the revulsion is caused by pity, not by loathing. The -instant he sees these poor animals, the kind-hearted prince feels sorry -for them; then comes that unlucky word “lucky” which to the man of -ignorance seems to be so particularly appropriate; it jars on Mahavira’s -nerves as it would on the nerves of any sensitive or refined person. -Nothing moves men to tears or laughter so surely as the antithetical -shock of the incongruous. A rush of emotion overpowers Mahavira: he will -not be happy at the cost of so much misery; he would become odious in -his own sight. So he renounces all for the eternity of one moment of -self-approving joy. - -The Jainas carefully exclude every excuse for taking animal life: none -is valid. Animals must not be killed for offering up in sacrifice, not -for their skin, flesh, tail feathers, brush, horns, tusks, sinews, -bones. They must not be killed with a purpose or without a purpose. If -we have been wounded by them, or fear to be wounded by them, or if they -eat our flesh or drink our blood, still we should not only bear it, but -also feel no anger. “This is the quintessence of wisdom, not to kill -anything whatever: know this to be the legitimate conclusion from the -principle of reciprocity.” - -No one denies that the principle of reciprocity is the basis of all -morality, and by extending it from men to sentient things, the Jainas -have safeguarded their doctrine of _Ahimsa_ with a stronger wall of -defence than any built on the fantastic fear of devouring one’s -ancestors. Nor can it be said of the Jainas that to a superstitious -repugnance to taking life they join indifference to causing suffering: -inflicting suffering is hardly distinguished from inflicting death. “All -breathing, existing, living, sentient creatures should not be slain nor -treated with violence, nor abused, nor tormented, nor driven away. This -is the pure unchangeable law.” “Indifferent to worldly objects, a man -should wander about treating all the creatures in the world as he -himself would be treated.” - -Perhaps the most remarkable of Jaina stories is a real masterpiece of -wit and wisdom in which this theory of reciprocity is enforced. For the -whole of it I must refer the reader to Professor Jacobi’s translation; I -can only give the leading points. Once upon a time three hundred and -sixty-three philosophers, representing a similar number of philosophical -schools, and differing in character, opinions, taste, undertakings and -plans, stood round in a large circle, each one in his place. They -discussed their various views, and at last one man took a vessel full of -red-hot coals which he held at a distance from him with a pair of tongs. -“Now, you philosophers,” said he, “just take this for a moment and hold -it in your hands. No trickery, if you please; you are _not_ to hold it -with the tongs or to put the fire out. Fair and honest!” - -With extreme unanimity the three hundred and sixty-two drew back their -hands as fast as they could. Then the speaker continued: “How is this, -philosophers; what _are_ you doing with your hands?” “They will be -burnt,” said the others. “And what does it matter if they are burnt?” -“But it would hurt us dreadfully.” “So you do not want to suffer pain?” -Well, this is the case with all animals. This maxim applies to every -creature, this principle, this religious reflection, holds good of all -living things. Therefore those religious teachers who say that all sorts -of living things may be beaten or ill-treated, or tormented, or deprived -of life will, in time, suffer in the same way themselves, and have to -undergo the whole round of the scale of earthly existence. They will be -whirled round, put in irons, see their mothers, fathers, children die, -have bad luck, poverty, the society of people they detest, separation -from those they love, “they will again wander distraught in the -beginningless and endless wilderness.” - -Like a true orator the Jaina member of this early Congress of Religions, -who has drifted from irony to fierce denunciation, does not leave his -hearers with these visions of terror, but with the consoling promise to -the merciful of everlasting beatitude. - -[Illustration: - - WILD BULLS AND TAMED BULLS. - Reliefs on two gold cups found at Vapheio. - (_From Schuckhardt’s “Schliemann’s Excavations.” By permission of - Messrs. Macmillan & Co., Ltd._)] - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - IX - - LINES FROM THE ADI GRANTH - - -THE Adi Granth, or sacred Book of the Sikhs of the Punjab, was composed -by the founder of their religion and their nationality, Baba Nanak (_b._ -1469), who abolished caste and idolatry, and established a pure -monotheism. A striking incident at the Coronation Durbar was the arrival -of the Sikh mission in charge of the Adi Granth, which was brought on a -pilgrimage from its shrine in the exquisitely beautiful golden temple at -Amritsar to the tomb of the disciple of Nanak, who, before suffering -martyrdom at Delhi during the Mogul Empire, prophesied the advent of a -fair race destined to sweep the Mogul power to the winds. I take these -few sentences to show the essential continuity of Indian thought about -animals. In the faith of Nanak none remains of the particular tenets of -Buddhism or Jainism or Hinduism, but the animal is still _inside_, not -_outside_, the pale of what may be called Pan-humanity: the whole family -of earth-born creatures. - - - I. - - Say not that this or that distasteful is, - In all the dear Lord dwells,—they all are His - - Grieve not the humblest heart; all hearts that are, - Are priceless jewels, all are rubies rare. - - Ah! If thou long’st for thy Beloved, restrain - One angry word that gives thy brother pain. - - - II. - - All creatures, Lord, are Thine, and Thou art theirs, - One bond Creator with created shares; - - To whom, O Maker! must they turn and weep - If not to Thee their Lord, who dost all keep? - - All living creatures, Lord, were made by Thee, - Where Thou hast fixed their station, there they be. - - For them Thou dost prepare their daily bread, - Out of Thy loving-kindness they are fed; - - On each the bounties of Thy mercy fall, - And Thy compassion reaches to them all. - - - III. - - One understanding to all flesh He gives, - Without that understanding nothing lives; - - As is their understanding,—they are so; - The reckoning is the same. They come and go. - - The faithful watch-dog that does all he can, - Is better far than the unprayerful man. - - Birds in their purse of silver have no store, - But them the Almighty Father watches o’er. - - They say who kill, they do but what they may, - Lawful they deem the bleating lamb to slay; - - When God takes down the eternal Book of Fate, - Oh, tell me what, what then will be their state? - - He who towards every living thing is kind, - Ah! he, indeed, shall true religion find! - - - IV. - - Great is the warrior who has killed within - Self,—Self which still is root and branch of sin. - - “I, I,” still cries the World, and gads about, - Reft of the Word which Self has driven out. - - - V. - - Thou, Lord, the cage,—the parrot, see! ’Tis I! - Yama the cat: he looks and passes by. - - By Yama bound my mind can never be, - I call on Him who Yama made and me. - - The Lord eternal is: what should I fear? - However low I fall, He still will hear. - - He tends his creatures as a mother mild - Tends with untiring love her little child. - - - VI. - - I do not die: the world within me dies: - Now, now, the Vivifier vivifies; - - Sweet is the world,—ah! very sweet it is, - But through its sweets we lose the eternal bliss! - - Perpetual joy, the inviolate mansion, where - There is no grief, woe, error, sin, nor care; - - Coming and going and death, enter not in; - The changeless only there an entrance win. - - Whosoe’er dieth, born again must be, - Die thou whilst living, and thou wilt be free! - - - VII. - - He, the Supreme, no limit has nor end, - And what HE is how can _we_ comprehend? - - Once did a wise man say: “He only knows - God’s nature to whom God His mercy shows.” - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - X - - THE HEBREW CONCEPTION OF ANIMALS - - - I - - ... “About them frisking played - All beasts of the earth, since wild, and of all chase - In wood or wilderness, forest or den; - Sporting the lion ramped, and in his paw - Dandled the kid; bears, tigers, ounces, pards, - Gambolled before them; the unwieldy elephant, - To make them mirth, used all his might, and wreathed - His lithe proboscis.” - _Paradise Lost_, Book IV. - -THE idea of a condition of existence in which all creatures are happy -and at peace implies a protest against the most patent fact of life as -we see it. Western civilisation inherited from the Roman Empire the -hardness of heart towards animals of which the popularity of -beast-fights in the Arena was the characteristic sign. It was, however, -a Roman poet who first pointed out in philosophical language that the -sufferings of animals stand written in the great indictment against -Nature no less than the sufferings of men. Not only man is born to -sorrow, said Lucretius; look at the cow whose calf bleeds before some -lovely temple, while she wanders disconsolate over all the fields, -lowing piteously, uncomforted by the image of other calves, because her -own is not. - -Eighteen hundred years later Schopenhauer said that by taking a very -high standard it was possible to justify the sufferings of man but not -those of animals. Darwin arrived at the same conclusion. “It has been -imagined,” he remarks, “that the sufferings of man tend to his moral -improvement, but the number of men in the world is nothing compared with -the number of other sentient beings which suffer greatly without moral -improvement.” To him, the man of the religious mind whom men lightly -charged with irreligion, it was “_an intolerable thought_” that after -long ages of toil all these sentient beings were doomed to complete -annihilation. - -Yes, and to the young conscience of mankind this was also an intolerable -thought. And since it was intolerable the human conscience in the -strength of its youth shook it off, cast it aside, awoke from it as we -awake from a nightmare. Religion has been regarded too exclusively as a -submission to Nature. At times it is a revolt against Nature, a -repudiation of what our senses report to us, an assertion that things -seen are illusions, and that things unseen are real. Religion is born of -Doubt. The incredibility of the Known forced man to seek refuge in the -Unknown. From that far region he brought back solutions good or bad, -sublime or trivial, to the manifold problems which beset man’s soul. - -A poet, doomed to early death, who looked into Nature on a summer’s day -and could discern nothing but “an eternal fierce destruction,” wrote, in -his despair— - - “Things cannot to the will - Be settled, but they tease us out of thought. - ... It is a flaw - In happiness to see beyond our bourn; - It forces us in summer skies to mourn, - It spoils the singing of the nightingale.” - -But when the world was young things _could_ be settled to the will. We -are, of course, constantly regulating our impressions of phenomena by a -standard of higher probability. If we see a ship upside down, we say, -“This is not a ship, it is a mirage.” When the primitive man found -himself face to face with seeming natural laws which offended his sense -of inherent probability, he rejected the hypothesis that they were -actual or permanent, and supposed them to be either untrustworthy -appearances or deviations from a larger plan. - -Every basic religion gave a large share of thought to animals. The -merit, from a humane point of view, of the explanation of the mystery -offered by the religious systems of India has been praised even to -excess. In contrast to this, it was often repeated that the Hebrew -religion ignored the claims of animals altogether. I wish to show that -even if this charge were not open to other disproof, no people can be -called indifferent to those claims which believes in a Nature Peace. - -Traces of such a belief spread from the Mediterranean to the Pacific, -from the Equator to the Pole. But the Peace is not always complete; -there are reservations. In the glowing prediction of a Peace in Nature -in the Atharva-Veda, vultures and jackals are excluded. Mazdeans would -exclude the “bad” animals. The Hebrew Scriptures, on the other hand, -declare that all species are good in the sight of their Maker. Every -beast enjoyed perfect content according to the original scheme of the -Creator. But man fell, and all creation was involved in the consequences -of his fall. - -I remember seeing at the Hague an impressive painting by a little-known -Italian artist[6] which represents Adam about to take the apple from Eve -while at their feet a tiger tenderly licks the wool of a lamb. Adam’s -face shows that he is yielding—yielding for no better reason than that -he cannot say “No”—to the beautiful woman at his side; and there, -unconscious and happy, lie the innocent victims of his act: love to be -turned to wrath, peace to war. The Nature Peace has been painted a -hundred times, but never with such tragic significance. - -Footnote 6: - - Cignani. A singular sixteenth-century “Nature War” may be observed in - a _graffito_ on the pavement of the Chapel of St. Catherine in the - church of St. Domenico, at Siena. A nude youth, resembling Orpheus, - sits on a rock in a leafy grove, in the midst of various animals; with - a disturbed air he looks into a mirror at the back of which is an eye, - a leopard shows his teeth at him, while a vulture screams at a monkey, - and another bird snatches a surprised rabbit or squirrel; the other - creatures, unicorn, wolf, eagle, display signs of uneasiness. - Endeavours to read this fable have not proved satisfactory. - -[Illustration: - - _Photo:_ _Bruckmann._ - THE GARDEN OF EDEN. - (_By Rubens._) - Hague Gallery.] - -The Miltonic Adam sees in the mute signs of Nature the forerunners of -further change:— - - “The bird of Jove, stooped from his airy tour, - Two birds of gayest plume before him drove; - Down from a hill the beast that reigns in woods, - First hunter then, pursued a gentle brace, - Goodliest of all the forest, hart and hind.” - -In an uncanonical version of Genesis which was translated from an -Armenian manuscript preserved at Venice, by my dear and sadly missed -friend, Padre Giacomo Issaverdens, a still more dramatic description is -given of the manner in which the Peace ended. When Adam and Eve were -driven from the Garden of Eden they met a lion, which attacked Adam. -“Why,” asked Adam, “do you attack me when God ordered you and all the -animals to obey me?” “You disobeyed God,” replied the lion, “and we are -no longer bound to obey you.” Saying which, the noble beast walked away -without harming Adam. But war was declared. - -War was declared, and yet the scheme of the Creator could not be for -ever defeated. Man who had erred might hope—and how much more must there -be hope for those creatures that had done no harm. - -When the Prophets spoke of a Peace in Nature in connexion with that -readjustment of the eternal scales which was meant by the coming of the -Messiah, it cannot be doubted that they spoke of what was already a -widely accepted tradition. But without their help we should have known -nothing of it and we are grateful to them. Of all the radiant dreams -with which man has comforted his heart, aching with realities, is there -one to be compared with this? It is of the earth earthly, and that is -the beauty of it. “The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard -lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion together; and a -little child shall lead them; the cow and the bear shall feed; and their -young ones lie down together; and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.” - - “For behold I create new heavens and a new earth. They shall not - hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain, saith the Lord.” - -Is not this the best of promised lands, the kindest of Elysiums, which -leaves none out in the cold of cruelty and hatred? The importunate -questioner may inquire, How can this primal and ultimate happiness -compensate for the intervening ages of pain? About this, it may be -observed that in religious matters people ought not to want to know too -much. This is true of the faithful and even of the unfaithful. -Scientific researches in the great storehouse which contains the -religions of the world are more aided by a certain reserve, a certain -reverence, than by the insatiable curiosity of the scalpel. Religions -sow abroad _idées mères_; they tell some things, others they leave -untold. They take us up into an Alpine height whence we see the broad -configuration of the country and lose sight of the woods and the -tortuous ravines among which we so often missed the track. Now, from the -Alpine height of faith, the idea of an original and final Nature Peace -makes the intervening discord seem of no account—a false note between -two harmonies. - -The Nature Peace as the emblem of perfect moral beauty became nearly the -first Christian idea carried out in art. I remarked a rude but striking -instance of it on one of the funereal monuments which have been found -lately at Carthage, belonging to a date when Christian and pagan -commemorated their dead in the same manner, the former generally only -adding some slight symbolical indication of his faith. In this stele -Christ, carrying the lamb across His shoulders, is attended by a panther -and a lion. All such primitive attempts to represent a Nature Peace are -chiefly interesting (and from this point of view their interest is -great) from the fact that in child-like, stammering efforts they reveal -the intrinsic idiosyncrasy of Christian thought after the Church had -parted from the realities of proximity with its Founder, and had not -reached the realities of a body corporate striving for supremacy. Christ -the Divine Effluence was the faith which made men willing to face the -lions. - -Doubtless many of those martyrs clung to the sublime conception of a -final Peace, the complement of the first. That this was accepted as no -allegory by the later spiritualised Jews, and especially by the -Pharisees, seems to be a well-established fact. It is difficult to -interpret in any other way the solemn statement of St. Paul, that the -“whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together _until now_,” -waiting for redemption; or the beatific vision of Josephus: “The whole -Creation also will lift up a perpetual hymn ... and shall praise Him -that made them together with the angels and spirits and men, now freed -from all bondage.” _Homines et jumenta salvabis Domine._ - - - II. - -What was the view taken of animals by the Jewish people, apart from the -fundamental ideas implied by a primordial Peace in Nature? - -It was the habit of Hebrew writers to leave a good deal to the -imagination; in general, they only cared to throw as much light on -hidden subjects as was needful to regulate conduct. They gave precepts -rather than speculations. There remain obscure points in their -conception of animals, but we know how they did _not_ conceive them: -they did not look upon them as “things”; they did not feel towards them -as towards automata. - -After the Deluge, there was established “the everlasting covenant -between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the -earth.” Evidently, you cannot make a covenant with “things.” - -[Illustration: - - _N. Consoni._ - GENESIS VIII. - (_Loggie di Raffaello._)] - -That the Jews supposed the intelligence of animals to be not extremely -different from the intelligence of man is to be deduced from the story -of Balaam, for it is said that God opened the mouth—not the mind—of the -ass. The same story illustrates the ancient belief that animals see -apparitions which are concealed from the eyes of man. The great interest -to us, however, of the Scriptural narrative is its significance as a -lesson in humanity. When the Lord opened the mouth of the ass, what did -the ass say? She asks her master why he had smitten her three times? -Balaam answers, with a frankness which, at least, does him credit, -because he was enraged with the ass for turning aside and not minding -him, and he adds (still enraged, and, strange to say, nowise surprised -at the animal’s power of speech) that he only wishes he had a sword in -his hand, as he would then kill her outright. How like this is to the -voice of modern brutality! The ass, continuing the conversation, rejoins -in words which it would be a shame to disfigure by putting them into the -idiom of the twentieth century: “Am I not thine ass upon which thou hast -ridden ever since I was thine unto this day? Was I ever wont to do so -unto thee?” Balaam, who has the merit, as I have noticed, of being -candid, replies, “No, you never were.” Then, for the first time, the -Prophet sees the angel standing in the path with a drawn sword in his -hand—an awe-inspiring vision! And what are the angel’s first words to -the terrified prophet who lies prostrate on his face? They are a reproof -for his inhumanity. “Wherefore hast thou smitten thine ass these three -times?” Then the angel tells how the poor beast he has used thus has -saved her master from certain death, for had she not turned from him, he -would have slain Balaam and saved her alive. “And Balaam said unto the -angel of the Lord, I have sinned.” - -Balaam was not a Jew; but the nationality of the personages in the Bible -and the origin or authorship of its several parts are not questions -which affect the present inquiry. The point of importance is, that the -Jews believed these Scriptures to contain Divine truth. - -With regard to animals having the gift of language, it appears from a -remark made by Josephus that the Jews thought that all animals spoke -before the Fall. In Christian folk-lore there is a superstition that -animals can speak during the Christmas night: an obvious reference to -their return to an unfallen state. - -Solomon declares that the righteous man “regardeth the life of his -beast”; a saying which is often misquoted, “merciful” being substituted -for “righteous,” by which the proverb loses half its force. The Hebrew -Scriptures contain two definite injunctions of humanity to animals. One -is the command not to plough with the ox and the ass yoked together—in -Palestine I have seen even the ass and the camel yoked together; their -unequal steps cause inconvenience to both yoke-fellows and especially to -the weakest. The other is the prohibition to muzzle the ox which treads -out the corn: a simple humanitarian rule which it is truly surprising -how any one, even after an early education in casuistry, could have -interpreted as a metaphor. There are three other commands of great -interest because they show how important it was thought to preserve even -the mind of man from growing callous. One is the order not to kill a cow -or she-goat or ewe and her young both on the same day. The second is the -analogous order not to seethe the kid in its mother’s milk. The third -refers to bird-nesting: if by chance you find a bird’s nest on a tree or -on the ground and the mother bird is sitting on the eggs or on the -fledglings, you are on no account to capture her when you take the eggs -or the young birds (one would like bird-nesting to have been forbidden -altogether, but I fear that the human boy in Syria had too much of the -old Adam in him for any such law to have proved effectual!). Let the -mother go, says the sacred writer, and if you must take something, take -only the young ones. This command concludes in a very solemn way, for it -ends with the promise (for what may seem a little act of unimportant -sentiment) of the blessing promised to man for honouring his own father -and mother—that it will be well with him and that his days will be long -in the land. - -In the law relative to the observance of the Seventh Day, not only is no -point insisted on more strongly than the repose of the animals of -labour, but in one of the oldest versions of the fourth commandment the -repose of animals is spoken of as if it were the chief object of the -Sabbath: “Six days shalt thou do thy work, and on the seventh day thou -shalt rest: _that_ thine ox and thine ass may rest” (Exodus xxiii. 12). -Moreover, it is expressly stated of the Sabbath of the Lord, the seventh -year when no work was to be done, that all which the land produces of -itself is to be left to the enjoyment of the beasts that are in the -land. The dominant idea was to give animals a chance—to leave something -for them—to afford them some shelter, as in the creation of -bird-sanctuaries in the temples. - -In promises of love and protection to man, to the Chosen People, animals -are almost always included. “The heavens shall tremble: the sun and moon -shall be dark, and the stars shall withdraw their shining” (Joel ii. -10). “Be not afraid, ye beasts of the field: for the pastures of the -wilderness do spring, for the tree beareth her fruit, the fig-tree and -the vine do yield their strength. Be glad, ye children of Zion, and -rejoice in the Lord your God” (Joel ii. 22, 23). - -The wisdom of animals is continually praised. “Go to the ant, thou -sluggard; consider her ways and be wise: which having no guide, -overseer, or ruler, provideth her meat in the summer, and gathereth her -food in the harvest.” So said the wisest of the Jews. I am tempted to -quote here a passage from the writings of Giordano Bruno: “With what -understanding the ant gnaws her grain of wheat lest it should sprout in -her underground habitation. The fool says this is instinct, but we say -it is a species of understanding.” If Solomon did not make the same -reflection, it was only because that wonderful word “instinct” had not -yet been invented. - -[Illustration: - - _Photo:_ _Alinari._ - DANIEL AND THE LIONS. - (_Early Christian Sarcophagus at Ravenna._)] - -We have seen that the Jews supposed animals to be given to men for use -not for abuse, and the whole of Scripture tends to the conclusion that -the Creator—who had called good all the creatures of His hand—regarded -none as unworthy of His providence. This view is plainly endorsed by the -saying of Christ that not a sparrow falls to the ground without the will -of the Father (or “not one of them is forgotten in the sight of God”), -and by the saying of Mohammed, who likewise believed himself the -continuer of Jewish tradition: “There is no beast that walks upon the -earth but its provision is from God.” - -But there is something more. Every one knows that the Jews were allowed -to kill and eat animals. The Jewish religion makes studiously few -demands on human nature. “The ways of the Lord were pleasant ways.” -Since men craved for meat or, in Biblical language, since they lusted -after flesh, they were at liberty to eat those animals which, in an -Eastern climate, could be eaten without danger to health. But on one -condition: the body they might devour—what was the body? It was earth. -The soul they might not touch. The mysterious thing called life must be -rendered up to the Giver of it—to God. The man who did not do this, when -he killed a lamb, was a murderer. “The blood shall be imputed to him; he -hath shed blood, and that man shall be cut off from among his people.” - -The inclination must be resisted to dispose of this mysterious ordinance -as a mere sanitary measure. It was a sanitary measure, but it was much -besides. The Jews believed that every animal had a soul, a spirit, which -was beyond human jurisdiction, with which they had no right to tamper. -When we ask, however, what this soul, this spirit, was, we find -ourselves groping in the dark. Was it material, as the soul was thought -to be by the Egyptians and by the earliest doctors of the Christian -Church? Was it an immaterial, impersonal, Divine essence? Was its -identity permanent, or temporary? We can give no decisive answer; but we -may assume with considerable certainty that life, spirit, whatever it -was, appeared at least to the majority of the Jews to possess one -nature, whether in men or in animals. When a Jew denied the immortality -of the soul, he denied it both for man and for beast. “I said in my -heart,” wrote the author of Ecclesiastes, “concerning the estate of the -sons of men that God might manifest them, and that they might see that -they themselves are beasts. For that which befalleth the sons of men -befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them; as the one dieth so the -other dieth; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no -pre-eminence above a beast.” - -The mist which surrounds the Hebrew idea of the soul may proceed from -the fact that they did not know themselves what they meant by it, or -from the fact that they once knew what they meant by it so well as to -render elucidation superfluous. If the teraphim represented the Lares or -family dead, then the archaic Jewish idea of the soul was simple and -definite. It is possible that in all later times two diametrically -opposed opinions existed contemporaneously, as was the case with the -Pharisees and Sadducees. The Jewish people did not feel the pressing -need to dogmatise about the soul that other peoples have felt; they had -one living soul which was immortal, and its name was Israel! - -Still, through all ages, from the earliest times till now, the Jews have -continued to hold sacred “the blood which is the life.” - -In Hindu religious books, where similar ordinances are enforced, there -are hints of a suspicion which, as I have said elsewhere, could not have -been absent from the minds of Hebrew legislators—the haunting suspicion -of a possible mixing-up of personality. Here we tread on the skirts of -magic: a subject which belongs to starless nights. - -We come back into the light of day when we glance at the relations -which, according to Jewish tradition, existed between animals and their -Creator. We see a beautiful interchange of gratitude on the one side and -watchful care on the other. As the ass of Balaam recognised the angel, -so do all animals—except man—at all times recognise their God. “But ask -now the beasts and they shall teach thee; and the fowls of the air, and -they shall tell thee.... Who knoweth not of all these that the hand of -the Lord hath wrought this? In whose hand is the soul of every living -thing, and the breath of all mankind.” - -I will only add to these words of Job a few verses taken here and there -from the Psalms, which form a true anthem of our fellow-creatures of the -earth and air:— - - “Beasts and all cattle, creeping things and flying fowl, let them - praise the name of the Lord. - He giveth to the beast his food and to the young ravens which cry. - He sendeth the springs into the valleys which run among the hills; - They give drink to every beast of the field, the wild asses quench - their thirst. - By them shall the fowls of heaven have their habitation which sing - among the branches: - The trees of the Lord are full of sap, the cedars of Lebanon which He - hath planted, - Where the birds make their nests; as for the stork, the fir-trees are - her house. - The great hills are a refuge for the wild goats and the rocks for the - conies. - Thou makest darkness, and it is night, wherein all the beasts of the - forest do creep forth; - The young lions roar after their prey, and seek their meat from God; - The sun ariseth, they gather themselves together and lay them down in - their dens. - ... Yea, the sparrow hath found an house, and the swallow a nest for - herself where she may lay her young. - Even thine altars, O Lord of Hosts, my King and my God!” - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - XI - - “A PEOPLE LIKE UNTO YOU” - - -A FRIEND who was spending the winter at Tunis asked me if it were true -that there was any teaching of kindness to animals in the religion of -Islam? She had seen with pain the little humanity practised by the lower -class of Arabs, and she had difficulty in believing that such conduct -was contrary to the law of the Prophet. I replied, that if men are -sometimes better than their creeds, at other times they are very much -worse. At the head of every chapter of the Koran, it is written: “In the -name of the most merciful God.” If God be merciful, shall man be -unmerciful? Alas, that the answer should have been so often “yes”! - -Inhumanity to animals is against the whole spirit of the Koran, and also -against that of Moslem tradition. In the “Words of Mohammed,” of which -one thousand four hundred and sixty-five collections exist, and which -are looked upon as “the Moslem’s dictionary of morals and manners,” the -Apostle is described as saying: “Fear God in these dumb animals, and -ride them when they are fit to be rode, and get off them when they are -tired.” Mohammed was asked by his disciples: “Verily, are there rewards -for our doing good to quadrupeds and giving them water to drink? “He -said: “There are rewards for benefiting every animal having a moist -liver” (every sentient creature). He said again: “There is no Moslem who -planteth a tree or soweth a field, and man, birds or beasts eat from -them, but it is a charity for him.” Like all other religious teachers, -he was made by legend the central figure of a Nature Peace. He had -miraculous authority over beasts as well as over man, and beasts, more -directly than man, knew him to be from God. Once he was standing in the -midst of a crowd when a camel came and prostrated itself before him. His -companions exclaimed, “O Apostle of God! Beasts and trees worship thee, -then it is meet for us to worship thee.” Mohammed replied, “Worship God, -and you may honour your brother—that is, me.” - -Those who know nothing else about Mohammed know the story of how he cut -away his sleeve rather than awaken his cat, which was sleeping upon it. -He is reported to have told how a woman was once punished for a cat: she -tied it till it died of hunger—she gave that cat nothing to eat, nor did -she allow it to go free, so that it might have eaten “the reptiles of -the ground.” (Cats do eat lizards and snakes too, even when they have -plenty of food—very bad for them it is.) Mohammed’s fondness of cats has -been suggested as the reason why two or three of them usually go with -the Caravan which takes the Sacred Carpet from Cairo to Mecca, but -perhaps the origin of that custom is far more remote. - -[Illustration: - - “AN INDIAN ORPHEUS.” - Royal Palace at Delhi. - (_Imitated from a painting by Raphael._)] - -In the words of Mohammed there is this beautiful version of the “Sultan -Murad” cycle: an adulteress was passing by a well when she saw a dog -which was holding out its tongue from the thirst which was killing him. -The woman drew off her shoe and tied it to the end of her garment; then -she drew up water and gave the dog to drink. The dog fawned on her and -licked her hands. Now the Sultan was passing that way, and he saw the -woman and the dog and inquired into the matter. When he had heard all, -he told the guards to undo her chain and give her back her veil and lead -her to her own home. - -On one occasion the Prophet met a man who had a nest of young doves, and -the mother fluttered after and even down about the head of him that held -it. The Prophet told him to put the nest back where he found it, for -this wondrous love comes from God. - -The verse which gives the keynote to Moslem ideas about animals occurs -in the sixth chapter of the Koran, and runs thus: “There is no beast on -earth nor bird which flieth with its wings but the same is a people like -unto you, we have not omitted anything in the Book of our decrees; then -unto their Lord shall they return.” In other texts where the word -“creatures” is used there is a strong presumption that animals, as well -as men, genii and angels, are included; as, for instance, “unto Him do -all creatures which are in heaven and earth make petition,” and again, -“all God’s creatures are His family, and he is the most beloved of God -who trieth to do the most good to God’s creatures”—which is almost word -for word— - - “He prayeth best, who loveth best - All things both great and small; - For the dear God who loveth us, - He made and loveth all.” - -The common grace after eating is “Praise be to the Lord of all -creatures!” Moslem hunters and butchers have the custom, called the -Hallal, of pronouncing a formula of excuse (Bi’sm-illah!) before slaying -any animal. The author of “Malay Magic” mentions, that if a Malay takes -a tiger in a pitfall, the Pawang, or medicine-man, has to explain to the -quarry that it was not he that laid the snare but the Prophet Mohammed. - -By orthodox Moslem law hunting was allowed, provided it was for some -definite end or necessity. It was legitimate to hunt for food, or for -clothing, as when the skin was the object. Dangerous wild beasts, the -incompatible neighbours of all but saints, might be hunted to protect -the more precious lives of men. Beyond this, from an orthodox point of -view, hunting was regarded as indefensible. Such was the rule, and there -is no greater mistake than to undervalue the moral standard because -every one does not attain to it. Perhaps few Moslems keep this rule -rigidly, but it is true now as it was when Lane wrote on the subject, -that a good Moslem who hunts for amusement does not seek to prolong the -chase: he tries to take the game as quickly as he can, and if it is not -dead when taken, it is instantly killed by having its throat cut. Such -amusements as shooting pigeons, or the unspeakable abomination of firing -at wild birds from ships, which makes certain tourist steamers a curse -in the Arctic regions, would inspire even the not too orthodox Moslem -with profound disgust. - -There were some Moslems who went far beyond the law—for whom taking -life, when the fact of doing so came rudely before them, was a thing -revolting in itself. Such sensibility was manifest in the Persian poets, -and it has been attributed to their inherited Zoroastrian tendencies; -but to think this is to misunderstand the groundwork of Mazdean humane -teaching, which was not based on sensitiveness about taking life. Such -sensitiveness is rarely found, except among Aryan races, and -Zoroastrianism, though it spread among an Aryan people, was not an Aryan -religion. It is more likely to be true that the Persian peculiar -tenderness for animals was an atavistic revival of the old Aryan -temperament. Renan said that Sufism was a racial Aryan reaction against -_l’effroyable simplicité de l’esprit sémitique_. Sensitiveness about -animals was a necessary ingredient, so to speak, of Sufism. Sadi, the -Sufic poet _par excellence_, poured blessings on the departed spirit of -Firdusi for the couplet which Sir William Jones translated so well and -loved so much:— - - “Ah, spare yon emmet, rich in hoarded grain; - He lives with pleasure, and he dies with pain.” - -That birds and many, if not all, animals have a language by which they -can interchange their thoughts is a belief shared by Moslems, both -learned and ignorant. The Koran says that the language of birds was -understood by Solomon, and folk-lore gives many other persons credit for -the same accomplishment. A person believed to have such powers could -turn the belief, if not the powers, to uses both good and bad. An -Arabian tale relates how a pleasure-loving Persian king summoned a -Maubadz, a head Magian, to tell him what two owls were chattering about. -The Maubadz told with considerable detail the plan which the female owl -was unfolding to the male owl, of how each of their future numerous -offspring might be set up in life as sole possessor of a forsaken -village, if only the present “fortunate king” lived long enough. The -monarch understood the rebuke, and resolved to mend his ways, and to -encourage tillage and agriculture, instead of devoting himself to idle -pastimes. - -[Illustration: - - MOSLEM BEGGAR FEEDING DOGS AT CONSTANTINOPLE.] - -Bird-trills mean sentences or words, chiefly religious. The pigeon cries -continually, “Alláh! Alláh!” The common dove executes this long -sentence: “Assert the unity of your Lord who created you, so will He -forgive you your sin.” There was a parrot who could repeat the whole -Koran by heart and could never be put out so as to make mistakes. I knew -of an old priest who repeated the _Divina Commedia_ from the first line -to the last, and the knowledge of the whole of the _Iliad_ was common in -ancient Athens, where people were laughed at who gave themselves the -airs of scholars on the ground of such feats of memory. But in the -bird-world the Moslem parrot surely stands alone, though we hear of a -pious raven who could say correctly the thirty-second chapter and who -always made the proper prostration when it came to the words: “My body -prostrateth itself before Thee, and my heart confideth in Thee.” - -The chapter of the Koran entitled “the Ant” is full of charming zoology. -God bestowed knowledge on David and Solomon, and Solomon, who was -“David’s heir,” said to the people: “O men, we have been taught the -speech of birds, and have had all things bestowed on us: this is -manifest excellence.” The armies of Solomon consisted of men and genii -and birds: they were arrayed in proper order on an immense carpet of -green silk: the men were placed to the right, the genii to the left, and -the birds flew overhead, making a canopy of shade from the burning rays -of the sun. Solomon sat in the middle on his throne, and when it was -desired to move, the wind transported the carpet with all on it from one -place to another. This account, however, is not in the Koran, and need -not be believed. But that the armies were of the three species of beings -we have the highest authority for asserting. They arrived, one day, in -the Valley of Ants. A sentinel ant beheld the approaching host and -called to her companions to hasten into their habitations for fear that -Solomon and his armies should crush them underfoot without perceiving -it. This made Solomon smile, but while he laughed at her words, he yet -remembered to thank the Lord for the favour wherewith He had favoured -him: the privilege of knowing the language of beasts. After blessing -God, and praying that in the end He would take him into paradise among -His righteous servants, the king looked around at his feathered army and -lo! he missed the lapwing. Some say that the reason why he noticed her -absence was because in that place water was lacking for the ablution, -and, as every one knows, the lapwing is the water-finder. Be that as it -may (it is not stated in the Koran), he cried in displeasure: “What is -the reason I do not see the lapwing? Is she absent? Verily I will -chastise her with a severe punishment, or I will put her to death unless -she bring me a just excuse.” Not long did he have to wait before the -lapwing appeared, nor was the just excuse wanting. She had seen a -country which the king had not seen, and she brought hence a remarkable -piece of news. In the land of Saba (Sheba) a woman reigned who received -all the honour due to a great prince. She had a magnificent throne of -gold and silver; she and her people worshipped the Sun besides God. -Satan, added the lapwing, becoming controversial, had turned them away -from the truth lest they should worship the true God, from whom nothing -is hid. And then this little bird of a story like a fairy-tale ends her -discourse with one of those sharp, sudden, antithetical organ-blasts -which again and again lift the mind of the reader of the Koran into the -highest regions of poetry and religion: “God! there is no God but He; -the Lord of the Magnificent Throne!” What wonderful art there is in the -repetition of the words which had been applied just before to earthly -splendour! The effect is the same as that of the words in Arabic which -we see carved at every turn in the splendid halls of the Alhambra: “God -only is conqueror.” What is the splendour or the power of earthly kings? - -The story resumes its course. Solomon tells the lapwing that they will -see, by and by, if she has told the truth or is a liar. He writes a -letter (which tradition says was perfumed with musk and sealed with the -king’s signet), and he commands the bird to take it to the land of Saba. -Some say that the lapwing delivered the letter by throwing it into the -queen’s bosom as she sat surrounded by her army; others that she brought -it to her through an open window when she was sitting in her chamber: at -any rate, it reached its destination, and the lapwing’s character was -completely rehabilitated. With regard to Queen Balkis, the Bible, the -Koran, and the Emperor Menelek may be consulted. - -One of the beasts most esteemed by Moslems, one of those who, with -Balaam’s ass, Jonah’s whale, Abraham’s ram, Solomon’s ant, and several -other favourite animals, are known to have been admitted into the -highest heaven, is the dog in the Moslem version of the “Seven Sleepers -of Ephesus,” the legend of the seven young men who hid in a cave and -slept safely through a long period of persecution. The dog has a Divine -command to say to the young men, “I love those who are dear to God, and -I will guard you.” He lay stretched across the mouth of the cave during -the whole time that the persecution lasted. Moslems say of a very -avaricious man, “He would not give a bone to the dog of the Seven -Sleepers.” The dog’s name was Katmîr (though some said it was Al Rakîm), -and people wrote it as a talisman on important letters sent to a -distance or oversea, to make sure of their arriving safely: it was like -registration without the fee. He appears to have slept, as did his -masters, while he guarded the entrance to the cave: the protection which -he afforded must be attributed to his supernatural gifts as a -devil-scarer rather than to the watch he kept. Dogs were believed to see -“things invisible to us”—_i.e._, demons. If a dog barks in the night the -Faithful ask God’s aid against Satan. The cock is also a devil-scarer -and sees angels as well as demons: when he crows it is a sign that he -has just seen one. - -Sometimes genii take the form of certain animals such as cats, dogs, and -serpents (animals which are not eaten). If a man would kill one of the -animals in which genii often appear, he must first warn the genii to -vacate its form. This means that there is a greater prejudice against -taking the life of such animals than in the case of animals slaughtered -for food, when it is sufficient (though necessary) to say “If it pleases -God.” While non-mystical Moslems did not respect life as such, -nevertheless they realised the great scientific truth that _life_ is the -supreme mystery. “The idols ye invoke besides God,” says the Koran, “can -never create a single fly although they were all assembled for that -purpose, and if the fly snatch anything from them” (such as offerings of -honey) “they cannot recover the same from it.” Moslems are fond of the -legend from the Gospel of the Infancy of how the Child Jesus, when He -and other children were playing at making clay sparrows, breathed on the -birds made by Him and they flew away or hopped on His hands. The parents -of the other children forbade them to play any more with the Holy Child, -whom they thought to be a sorcerer. That the Jews really imagined the -unusual things done by Christ to be magic-working, and that this belief -entered more into their wish to compass His death than is commonly -supposed, a knowledge of Eastern ideas on magic inclines one to think. -Moslems readily admit the truth of the miracle of the sparrows as of the -other miracles of Jesus; they add, however, that life came into the clay -figures “by permission of God.” - -Towards the end of the world, animals will speak with human language. -Before this happens will have come to pass the reign of the “Rooh -Allah,” the Spirit of God, as all Moslems call Christ. It is told that -He will descend near the White Tower east of Damascus and will remain on -earth for forty (or for twenty-four) years, during which period malice -and hatred will be laid aside and peace and plenty will rejoice the -hearts of men. While Jesus reigns, lions and camels and bears and sheep -will live in amity and a child will play with serpents unhurt. - -A kind of perpetual local Nature Peace prevails at Mecca; no animals are -allowed to be slaughtered within a certain distance of the sacred -precinct. It should be noted also that pilgrims are severely prohibited -from hunting; the wording of the verse in the Koran which establishes -this rule seems to imply the possibility that wild animals themselves -are doing the pilgrimage; hence they must be held sacred. - -The law forbidding Moslems to eat the flesh of swine was copied from the -Jewish ordinance, without doubt from the conviction that it was -unwholesome. Those who were driven by extreme hunger to eat of it were -not branded as unclean. There is a curious Indian folk-tale which gives -an account of why swine-flesh was forbidden. At the beginning Allah -restrained man from eating any animals but those which died a natural -death. As they did not die as quickly as they wished, men began to -hasten their deaths by striking them and throwing stones at them. The -animals complained to Allah, who sent Gabriel to order all the men and -all the animals to assemble so that He might decide the case. But the -obstinate pig did not come. So Allah said: “The pigs, the lowest of -animals, are disobedient; let no one eat them or touch them.” There is -no record whatever of the pigs having signed a protest. - -It is by no means clear when the prejudice against dogs took hold of the -Moslem mind. At first their presence was even tolerated inside the -Mosque, and the report that the Prophet ordered all the dogs at Medina -to be killed, especially those of a dark colour, is certainly a fable. -The Caliph Abu Djafar al Mausur asked a learned man this very question: -why dogs were treated with scorn? The learned man was so worthy of that -description that he had the courage to say he did not know. “Tradition -said so.” The Caliph suggested that it might be because dogs bark at -guests and at beggars. There is a modern saying that angels never go -into a house where there is a dog or an image. Still, the ordinary -kindness of the Turks to the pariah dogs at Constantinople, where the -beggar shares his last crust with them, shows that the feeling belongs -more to philology than to nature. The pariah dog is the type of the -despised outcast, but when a European throws poisoned bread to him the -act is not admired by the Moslem more than it deserves to be. - -Several _savants_ have thought that the dog is scorned by Moslems -because he was revered by Mazdeans; that he suffered indignity at the -hands of the new believers as a protest against the excess of honour he -had received from the old. This theory, though ingenious, does not seem -to be borne out by facts. The comparisons of the qualities of the good -dervish and the dog, which is a sort of vade mecum of dervishes -everywhere, was almost certainly suggested by the “Eight -Characteristics” of the dog in the Avesta. It is singular that the dog -gets far better treatment in the Moslem comparisons than in the Mazdean. -“The dog is always hungry: so is it with the faithful; he sleeps but -little by night: so is it with those plunged in divine Love; if he die, -he leaves no heritage: so is it with ascetics; he forsakes not his -master even if driven away: so is it with adepts; he is content with few -temporal goods: so is it with the pursuers of temperance; if he is -expelled from one place he seeks another: so is it with the humble; if -he is chastised and dismissed and then called back he obeys: so is it -with the modest; if he sees food he remains standing afar: so is it with -those who are consecrated to poverty; if he go on a journey he carries -no refreshment for the way: so is it with those who have renounced the -world.” Some of these “Characteristics” are flung back in irony at the -dervishes by those who bitterly deride them, as the friars in the ages -of Faith were derided in Europe—without its making the least difference -to their popularity—but the homily itself is quite serious and meant for -edification. Hasan Basri, who died in 728 A.D., was the author or -adapter. Its wide diffusion is due to the accuracy with which it depicts -the wandering mystic, whether he be called a dervish or a Fakeer, or, in -the Western translation of Fakeer, a “Poverello” of St. Francis. - -A certain rich man apologised to a Dervish because his servants, without -his knowledge, had often driven him away: the holy man showed, he said, -great patience and humility in coming back after such ill-treatment. The -dervish replied that it was no merit but only one of the “traits of the -dog,” which returns however often it is driven off. The worst enemies to -the dervish have ever been the Ulemas, for whom he is a kind of -dangerous lunatic strongly tinged with heresy. Among his unconventional -ideas was sure to penetrate, more or less, the neoplatonist or Sufic -view of animals. Wherever transcendental meditations on the union of the -created with the Creator begin to prevail, men’s minds take the -direction of admitting a more intimate relation of all living things -with God. We might be sure that the dervishes would follow this -psychological law even if we could not prove it. To prove it, however, -we need go no further than the great prayer, one of the noblest of human -prayers, which is used by many of the Dervish orders. There we read: -“Thy science is everlasting and knows even the numbers of the breaths of -Thy creatures: Thou seest and hearest the movements of all Thy -creatures; thou hearest even the footsteps of the ant when in the dark -night she walks on black stones; even the birds of the air praise Thee -in their nests; the wild beasts of the desert adore Thee; the most -secret as well as the most exposed thoughts of Thy servants Thou -knowest....” - -In the same way, it was natural that the Dervishes should be supposed to -have the power attributed to all holy (or harmless) men over the kings -of the desert and forest. It could not be otherwise. Bishop Heber heard -of two Indian Yogis who lived in different parts of a jungle infested by -tigers in perfect safety; indeed, it was reported that one of these -ascetics had a nightly visit from a tiger, who licked his hands and was -fondled by him. This is a Hindu jungle story, but it would be just as -credible if it were told of a Dervish. Of the credibility of the first -part of it, and probably of the last also, there is not a single -wandering ascetic of any sort who would entertain a doubt. Some years -ago a Moslem recluse deliberately put his arm into the cage of Moti, the -tiger in the Lahore Zoological Gardens. The tiger lacerated the arm, and -the poor man died in the hospital after some days’ suffering, during -which he showed perfect serenity. He had made a mistake; the tiger, -brought up as a cub by British officers and deprived of his liberty, was -not endowed with the power of discrimination possessed by a king of the -wild. This, I hope, the Fakeer reflected, but it is more likely that he -deemed that cruel clutch a sign of his own unworthiness and accepted -death meekly, hoping not for reward but for pardon. - -One would like to know more of a book which Mr. Charles M. Doughty found -a certain reputed saint “poring and half weeping over,” the argument of -which was “God’s creatures the beasts,” while its purpose was to show -that every beast yields life-worship unto God. Even if this Damascus -saint was not very saintly (as the author of “Arabia Deserta” hints), -yet it is interesting to note that this subject should have appeared to -a would-be new Messiah the most important he could choose for his -Gospel. - -A Persian poet, Azz’ Eddin Elmocadessi, advises man to learn from the -birds, - - “Virtues that may gild thy name; - And their faults if thou wouldst scan, - Know thy failings are the same.” - -The recognition in animals of most human qualities in a distinct though -it may be a limited form underlies all Eastern animal-lore and gives it -a force and a reality even when it deals with extravagant fancies. There -is a broad difference between the power of feeling _for_ animals and the -power of feeling _with_ them. The same difference moulds the sentiments -of man to man: nine men in ten can feel for their fellow-humans, but -scarcely one man in ten can feel with them. They even know it, and they -say ungrammatically, “I feel the greatest sympathy _for_ so and so.” An -instance of true _mitempfindung_, of insight into the very soul of a -creature, exists in an Arabian poem by Lebid, who was one of the most -interesting figures of the period in which the destinies of the Arab -race were cast. He was the glory of the Arabs, not only on account of -his faultless verse, but also because of his noble character. It is told -of him that whenever an east wind blew, he provided a feast for the -poor. Himself a pre-Islamic theist, he hailed the Prophet as the -inspired enunciator of the creed he had held imperfectly and in private. -All his poems were composed in the “Ignorance”; on being asked for a -poem after his conversion at ninety years of age, he copied out a -chapter of the Koran, and said, “God has given me this in exchange for -poesy.” I do not think this meant that he despised the poet’s art, but -that now, when he could no longer exercise it, he had what was still -more precious. - -The passage in question is one of several which show Lebid’s -surprisingly close acquaintance with the ways and thoughts of wild -animals. It is one of those elaborate similes which were the pride of -Arabian poets, who often preferred to take comparisons already in use -than to invent new ones. Wherever literature became a living -entertainment, something of this kind happened: witness the borrowings -from the Classics by the poets of the Renaissance; people liked to -recognise familiar ideas in a new dress. Lebid’s similes have been -turned and re-turned by other poets, but none approached the art and -truth he infused into them. I am indebted to Sir Charles Lyall for the -following version, which is not included in his volume of splendid -translations of early Arabian poetry. The subject of the passage is the -grief of a wild cow that has lost her calf:— - - “Flat-nosed is she—she has lost her calf and ceases not to roam - About the marge of the sand meadows and cry - For her youngling, just weaned, white, whose limbs have been torn - By the ash-grey hunting wolves who lack not for food. - They came upon it while she knew not, and dealt her a deadly woe: - —Verily, Death, when it shoots, misses not the mark! - The night came upon her, as the dripping rain of the steady shower - Poured on and its continuous flow soaked the leafage through and - through. - She took refuge in the hollow trunk of a tree with lofty branches - standing apart - On the skirts of the sandhills where the fine sand sloped her way. - The steady rain poured down, and the flood reached the ridge of her - back, - In a night when thick darkness hid away all the stars; - And she shone in the face of the mirk with a white, glimmering light - Like a pearl born in a sea-shell, that has dropped from its string. - Until, when the darkness was folded away and morning dawned, - She stood, her legs slipping in the muddy earth. - She wandered distracted about all the pools of So’âid - For seven nights twinned with seven whole long days, - Until she lost all hope, and her udders shrunk— - The udders that had not failed in all the days of the suckling and - weaning, - Then she heard the sound of men and it filled her heart with fear, - Of men from a hidden place; and men, she knew, were her bane. - She rushed blindly along, now thinking the chase before, - And now behind her: each was a place of dread. - Until, when the archers lost hope, they let loose on her - Trained hounds with hanging ears, each with a stiff leather collar - on its neck; - They beset her and she turned to meet them with her horns - Like to spears of Semhar in their sharpness and their length. - To thrust them away: for she knew well, if she drove them not off, - That the fated day of her death among the fates of beasts had come; - And among them, Kesâb was thrust through and slain and rolled in blood - lay there, - And Sukhâm was left in the place where he made his onset.” - -There the description breaks off. In spite of the haunting cry of the -cow of Lucretius, in spite of the immortal tears of Shakespeare’s “poor -sequester’d stag”—no vision of a desperate animal in all literature -seems to me so charged with every element of pathos and dramatic -intensity as this cow of Lebid. How fine is the altogether unforeseen -close, which leaves us wondering, breathless: Will she escape? Will no -revengeful arrow reach her? Will the archers do as Om Piet did to the -wildebeest?— - - “A wildebeest cow and calf were pursued by Om Piet with three - hunting-dogs. The Boer hunter tells the tale: ‘The old cow laid - the first dog low; the calf is now tired. The second dog comes - up to seize it; the cow strikes him down. Now the third dog - tries to bite the little one, who can run no more, but the cow - treats him so that there’s nothing to be done but to shoot him. - Then Om Piet stands face to face with the wildebeest, who snorts - but does not fly. Now though I come to shoot a wildebeest yet - can I not kill a beast that has so bravely fought and will not - run away; so Om Piet takes off his hat, and says, “Good-day to - you, old wildebeest. You are a good and strong old wildebeest.” - And we dine off springbuck that night at the farm.’”[7] - -Footnote 7: - - “A Breath from the Veldt,” by Guille Millais, 2nd edition, 1899. - -I ought to explain that, like the “cow” of Om Piet, Lebid’s “cow” is an -antelope—the _Antilope defassa_—of which a good specimen may be seen in -the Natural History Museum at South Kensington. The old Boer’s hunting -yarn brings an unexpected confirmation of the Arabian poet’s testimony -to its courage and maternal love. - -Since the chase began, down to the blind brutality of the battue (which -wiped it out) chivalry has been a trait of the genuine sportsman. In the -golden legend of hunter’s generosity should be inscribed for ever the -tale—the true tale as I believe it to be—of the Moslem prince -Sebectighin, who rose from slave-birth to the greatest of Persian -thrones—and more honour to him, notwithstanding the slur which Firdusi, -stung by Mahmoud’s want of appreciation, cast, in a foolish moment, on -his father’s origin. Sebectighin was a horseman in the service of the -Sultan and as a preparation for greater things he found a vent for his -pent-up energies in the chase. One day he remarked a deer with her -little fawn peacefully grazing in a glade of the forest. He galloped to -the spot, and in less than a second he had seized the fawn, which, after -binding its legs, he placed across his saddle-bows. Thus he started to -go home, but looking back, he saw the mother following, with every mark -of grief. Sebectighin’s heart was touched; he loosened the fawn and -restored it to its dam. And in the night he had a vision in his dreams -of One who said to him, “The kindness and compassion which thou hast -this day shown to a distressed animal has been approved of in the -presence of God; therefore in the records of Providence the kingdom of -Ghusni is marked as a reward against thy name. Let not greatness destroy -thy virtue, but continue thy benevolence to man.” - -Among the Afghan ballads collected by James Darmesteter, of which it has -been aptly said that they give an admirable idea of Homer in a state of -becoming, there is one composed in a gentler mood than the songs of war -and carnage which has a gazelle for heroine and the Prophet as _Deus ex -machina_. As there is no translation of it into English I have attempted -the following version:— - - “The Son of Abu Jail he set a snare for a gazelle, - Without a thought along she sped, and in the snare she fell. - - ‘O woe is me!’ she weeping cried, ‘that I to look forgot! - Fain would I live for my dear babes, but hope, alas! is not.’ - - Then to the Merciful she made this short and fervent prayer: - ‘I left two little fawns at home; Lord, keep them in Thy care!’ - - The son of Abu Jail he came, in haste and glee he ran, - ‘Ah, now I’ve got you in my net, and who to save you can?’ - - He grasped her by her tender throat, his fearsome sword did draw, - When lo! the Lord held back his hand! The Prophet’s self he saw! - - ‘The world was saved for love of thee, save for thy pity’s sake!’ - So breathed the trembling doe, and then the holy Prophet spake: - - ‘Abu, my friend, this doe let go, and hark to my appeal; - She has two tender fawns at home who pangs of hunger feel, - - ‘Let her go back one hour to them, no longer will she stay, - And when she comes, O heartless man, then mayest thou have thy way! - - But if, by chance, she should not come, then by my faith will I - Be unto thee a bonded slave until the day I die.’ - - Then Abu the gazelle let go; to her dear young she went, - ‘Quick, children, take my breast,’ she said, ‘my life is almost spent; - - ‘The Master of the Universe for me a pledge I gave, - But I must swift return and then no man my life can save.’ - - Then said the little ones to her, ‘Mother, we dare not eat; - Go swiftly back, redeem the pledge, fast as can fly thy feet.’ - - One hour had scarce run fully out when, panting, she was there; - Now, Abu, son of Abu, thou mayest take her life or spare! - - Said Abu, ‘In the Prophet’s name, depart, I set you free ... - But thou, our Helper, at God’s throne, do thou remember me!’ - - So have I told, as long ago my father used to tell, - How Pagan Abu Moslem turned and saved his soul from hell.” - -This brief sketch will suffice to show that if the Moslem is not humane -to animals it is his own fault, as I think it is his own fault if he is -not humane to man. Teaching humanity to animals must always imply the -teaching of humanity to men. This was perfectly understood well by all -these Oriental tellers of beast-stories: they would all have endorsed -the saying of one of my Lombard peasant-women (dear, good soul!), “Chi -non è buono per le bestie, non è buono per i Cristiani”; _Cristiano_ -meaning, in Italian popular speech, a human being. Under the most varied -forms, in fiction which while the world lasts, can never lose its -freshness, the law of kindness is brought home. Perhaps the most -beautiful of all humane legends is one preserved in a poem by Abu -Mohammed ben Yusuf, Sheikh Nizan-eddin, known to Europeans as Nizami. -This Persian poet, who died sixty-three years before Dante was born, may -have taken the legend from some collection of Christ-lore, some -uncanonical book impossible now to trace; it is unlikely that he -invented it. As Jesus walks with His disciples through the market-place -at evening, He comes upon a crowd which is giving vent to every -expression of abhorrence at the sight of a poor dead dog lying in the -gutter. When they have all had their say, and have pointed in disgust to -his blear eyes, foul ears, bare ribs, torn hide, “which will not even -yield a decent shoe-string,” Jesus says, “How beautifully white his -teeth are!” No story of the Saviour outside the Gospels is so worthy to -have been in them. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - XII - - THE FRIEND OF THE CREATURE - - -IN Hindu mythology Gunádhya attracts a whole forestful of beasts by -reciting his poems to them. The power of Apollo and of Orpheus in taming -beasts depended on a far less surprising _modus operandi_; like the -greater part of myths, this one was not spun from the thin air of -imagination. Music has a real influence on animals; in spite of theories -to the contrary, it is probable that the sweet flute-playing of the -snake-charmer—his “sweet charming” in Biblical phrase—is no mere piece -of theatrical business, but a veritable aid in obtaining the desired -results. I myself could once attract fieldmice by playing on the violin, -and only lately, on the road near our house at Salò, I noticed that a -goat manifested signs of wishing to stop before a grind-organ; its -master pulled the string by which it was led, but it tugged at it so -persistently that, at last, he stopped, and the goat, turning round its -head, listened with evident attention. Independently of the pleasure -music may give to animals, it excites their curiosity, a faculty which -is extremely alive in them, as may be seen by the way in which small -birds are attracted by the pretty antics of the little Italian owl; they -cannot resist going near to have a better view, and so they rush to -their doom upon the limed sticks. - -Legends have an inner and an outer meaning; the allegory of Apollo, Lord -of Harmony, would have been incomplete had it lacked the beautiful -incident of a Nature Peace—partial indeed, but still a fairer triumph to -the god than his Olympian honours. For nine years he watched the sheep -of Admetus, as Euripides described:— - - “Pythean Apollo, master of the lyre, - Who deigned to be a herdsman and among - Thy flocks on hills his hymns celestial sung; - And his delightful melodies to hear - Would spotted lynx and lions fierce draw near; - They came from Othry’s immemorial shade, - By charm of music tame and harmless made; - And the swift, dappled fawns would there resort, - From the tall pine-woods and about him sport.” - -When Apollo gave Orpheus his lyre, he gave him his gift “to soothe the -savage breast.” In the splendid Pompeian fresco showing a Nature Peace, -the bay-crowned, central figure is said to be Orpheus, though its -god-like proportions suggest the divinity himself. At any rate, nothing -can be finer as the conception of an inspired musician: the whole body -_sings_, not only the mouth. A lion and a tiger sit on either side; -below, a stag and a wild boar listen attentively, and a little hare -capers near the stream. In the upper section there are other wild beasts -sporting round an elephant, while oxen play with a tiger; an -anticipation of the ox and tiger in Rubens’ “Garden of Eden.” - -The power of Orpheus to subdue wild beasts was the reason why the early -Christians took him as a type of Christ. Of all the prophecies which -were believed to refer to the Messiah none so captivated the popular -mind as those which could be interpreted as referring to His recognition -by animals. The four Gospels which became the canon of the Church threw -no light on the subject, but the gap was filled up by the uncanonical -books; one might think that they were written principally for the -purpose of dwelling on this theme, so frequently do they return to it. -In the first place, they bring upon the scene those dear objects of our -childhood’s affection, the ass and the ox of the stable of Bethlehem. -Surely many of us cherish the impression that ass and ox rest on most -orthodox testimony: an idea which is certainly general in Catholic -countries, though, the other day, I heard of a French priest who was -heartless enough to declare that they were purely imaginary. “Alas,” as -Voltaire said, “people run after truth!” As a matter of fact, it appears -evident that the ass and the ox were introduced to fulfil the prophecy -of Isaiah: “The ox knoweth his owner and the ass his master’s manger, -but Israel knoweth Me not.” But there arose what was thought a -difficulty: the apocryphal Gospels, in harmony with the earliest -traditions, place the birth of Christ, not in a stable, but in the -grotto which is still shown to travellers. To reconcile this with the -legend of the ass and ox and also with the narrative of St. Luke, it was -supposed that the Holy Family moved from the grotto to a stable a few -days after the Child was born. This is a curious case of finding a -difficulty where there was none, for it is very likely that the caves -near the great Khan of Bethlehem were used as stables. In every -primitive country shepherds shelter themselves and their flocks in holes -in rocks; I remember the “uncanny” effect of a light flickering in the -depths of a Phœnician tomb near Cagliari; it was almost disappointing to -hear that it was only a shepherd’s fire. - -Thomas, “the Israelite philosopher,” as he called himself, author of the -Pseudo-Thomas which is said to date from the second century, appears to -have been a Jewish convert belonging to one of the innumerable -“heretical” sects of the earliest times. It may be guessed, therefore, -that the Pseudo-Thomas was first written in Syriac, though the text we -possess is in Greek. It is considered the model on which all the other -Gospels of the Infancy were founded, but the Arabic variant contains so -much divergent matter as to make it probable that the writer drew on -some other early source which has not been preserved. Mohammed was -acquainted with this Arabian Gospel, and Mohammedans did not cease to -venerate the sycamore-tree at Matarea under which the Arabian evangelist -states that the Virgin and Child rested, till it died about a year ago. -The Pseudo-Thomas contains some vindictive stories, which were modified -or omitted in the other versions: probably they are all to be traced to -Elisha and his she-bears: a theory which I offer to those who cannot -imagine how they arose. A curious feature in these writings is the -scarcity of anything actually original; the most original story to be -found in them is that of the clay sparrows, which captivated the East -and penetrated into the folk-lore even of remote Iceland. -Notwithstanding the fulminations of Councils, the apocryphal Gospels -were never suppressed; they enjoyed an enormous popularity during the -Middle Ages, and many details derived solely from these condemned books -crept into the _Legenda Aurea_ and other strictly orthodox works. - -The “Little Child” of Isaiah’s prophecy was the cause of troops of wild -beasts being convoked to attend the Infant Christ. Lions acted as guides -for the flight into Egypt, and it is mentioned that not only did they -respect the Holy Family, but also the asses and oxen which carried their -baggage. Besides, the lions, leopards, and other creatures “wagged their -tails with great reverence” (though all these animals are not of the dog -species, but of the cat, in which wagging the tail signifies the reverse -of content). - -This is the subject of an old English ballad:— - - “And when they came to Egypt’s land, - Amongst those fierce wild beasts, - Mary, she being weary, - Must needs sit down to rest. - ‘Come, sit thee down,’ said Jesus, - ‘Come, sit thee down by Me, - And thou shall see how these wild beasts - Do come and worship Me.’” - -First to come was the “lovely lion,” king of all wild beasts, and for -our instruction the moral is added: “We’ll choose our virtuous princes -of birth and high degree.” Sad rhymes they are, nor, it will be said, is -the sense much better; yet, hundreds of years ago in English villages, -where, perhaps, only one man knew how to read, this doggerel served the -end of the highest poetry: it transported the mind into an ideal region; -it threw into the English landscape deserts, lions, a Heavenly Child; it -stirred the heart with the romance of the unknown; it whispered to the -soul— - - “The Now is an atom of sand, - And the Near is a perishing clod; - But Afar is a Faëry Land, - And Beyond is the bosom of God.” - -The pseudo-gospel of Matthew relates an incident which refers to a later -period in the Holy Childhood. According to this narrative, when Jesus -was eight years old He went into the den of a lioness which frightened -travellers on the road by the Jordan. The little cubs played round His -feet, while the older lions bowed their heads and fawned on Him. The -Jews, who saw it from a distance, said that Jesus or His parents must -have committed mortal sin for Him to go into the lion’s den. But coming -forth, He told them that these lions were better behaved than they; and -then He led the wild beasts across the Jordan and commanded them to go -their way, hurting no one, neither should any one hurt them till they -had returned to their own country. So they bade Him farewell with gentle -roars and gestures of respect. - -These stories are innocent, and they are even pretty, for all stories of -great, strong animals and little children are pretty. But they fail to -reveal the slightest apprehension of the deeper significance of a peace -between all creatures. Turn from them to the wonderful lines of William -Blake:— - - “And there the lion’s ruddy eyes - Shall flow with tears of gold, - And pitying the tender cries - And walking round the fold - Saying: Wrath by His meekness, - And by His health sickness, - Are driven away - From our mortal day. - - And now beside thee, bleating lamb, - I can lie down and sleep, - Or think on Him who bore thy name, - Graze after thee, and weep; - For, washed in life’s river, - My bright mane for ever - Shall shine like the gold - As I guard o’er the fold.” - -No one but Blake would have written this, and few things that he wrote -are so characteristic of his genius. The eye of the painter seizes what -the mind of the mystic conceives, and the poet surcharges with emotion -words which, like the Vedic hymns, infuse thought rather than express -it. - -A single passage in the New Testament connects Christ with wild animals; -in St. Mark’s Gospel we are told that after His baptism in the Jordan -Jesus was driven by the Spirit into the wilderness, where “He was with -the wild beasts, and the angels ministered unto Him.” In the East the -idea of the anchorite who leaves the haunts of men for the haunts of -beasts was already fabulously old. In the Western world of the Roman -Empire it was a new idea, and perhaps on that account, while it excited -the horror of those who were faithful to the former order of things, it -awoke an extraordinary enthusiasm among the more ardent votaries of the -new faith. It led to the discovery of the inebriation of solitude, the -powerful stimulus of a life with wild nature. Many tired brain-workers -have recourse to mountain ascents as a restorative, but these can rarely -be performed alone, and high mountains with their immense horizons tend -to overwhelm rather than to collect the mind. But to wander alone in a -forest, day after day, without particular aim, drinking in the pungent -odours of growing things, fording the ice-cold streams, meeting no one -but a bird or a hare—this will leave a memory as of another existence in -some enchanted sphere. We have tasted an ecstasy that cities cannot -give. We have tasted it, and we have come back into the crowded places, -and it may be well for us that we have come back, for not to all is it -given to walk in safety alone with their souls. - -[Illustration: - - _Photo:_ _Anderson._ - ST. JEROME EXTRACTING A THORN FROM THE PAW OF A LION. - (_By Hubert van Eyck._) - Naples Museum.] - -Of one of the earliest Christian anchorites in Egypt it is related that -for fifty years he spoke to no one; he roamed in a state of nature, -flying from the monks who attempted to approach him. At last he -consented to answer some questions put by a recluse whose extreme piety -caused him to be better received than the others. To the question of why -he avoided mankind, he replied that those who dwelt with men could not -be visited by angels. After saying this, he vanished again into the -desert. I have observed that the idea of renouncing the world was not a -Western idea, yet, at the point where it touches madness, it had already -penetrated into the West—we know where to find its tragic record:— - - “Ego vitam agam sub altis Phrygiae columinibus, - Ubi cerva silvicultrix, ubi aper nemorivagus?” - -The _point of madness_ would have been reached more often but for the -charity of the stag and the wild boar and the lion and the buffalo, who -felt a sort of compassion for the harmless, weak human creatures that -came among them, and who were ready to give that response which is the -sustaining ichor of life. - -The same causes produce the same effects—man may offer surprises but -never men. Wherever there are solitaries there are friendships between -the recluse and the wild beast. All sorts of stories of lions and other -animals that were on friendly terms with the monks of the desert have -come down to us in the legends of the Saints. The well-known legend of -how St. Jerome relieved a lion of a thorn which was giving him great -pain, and how the lion became tame, was really told of another saint, -but Jerome, if he did not figure in a lion story, is the authority for -one: in his life of Paul the Hermit he relates that when that holy man -died, two lions came out of the desert to dig his grave; they uttered a -loud wail over his body and knelt down to crave a blessing from his -surviving companion—none other than the great St. Anthony. He also says -that Paul had subsisted for many years on food brought to him by birds, -and when he had a visitor the birds brought double rations. - -As soon as the hermit appears in Europe his four-footed friends appear -with him. For instance, there was the holy Karileff who tamed a buffalo. -Karileff was a man of noble lineage who took up his abode with two -companions in a clearing in the woods on the Marne, where he was soon -surrounded by all sorts of wild things. Amongst these was a buffalo, one -of the most intractable of beasts in its wild state, but this buffalo -became perfectly tame, and it was a charming sight to see the aged saint -stroking it softly between its horns. Now it happened that the king, who -was Childebert, son of Clovis, came to know that there was a buffalo in -the neighbourhood, and forthwith he ordered a grand hunt. The buffalo, -seeing itself lost, fled to the hut of its holy protector, and when the -huntsmen approached they found the monk standing in front of the animal. -The king was furious, and swore that Karileff and his brethren should -leave the place for ever; then he turned to go, but his horse would not -move one step. This filled him with what was more likely panic fear than -compunction; he lost no time in asking the saint for his blessing, and -he presented him with the whole domain, in which an abbey was built and -ultimately a town, the present Saint-Calais. On another occasion the -same Childebert was hunting a hare, which took refuge under the habit of -St. Marculphe; the king’s huntsman rudely expostulated, and the monk -surrendered the hare, but, lo and behold! the dogs would not continue -the pursuit and the huntsman fell off his horse! - -A vein of more subtle sensibility runs through the story of St. Columba, -who, not long before his death, ordered a stork to be picked up and -tended when it dropped exhausted on the Western shore of Iona. After -three days, he said, the stork would depart, “for she comes from the -land where I was born and thither would she return.” In fact, on the -third day, the stork, rested and refreshed, spread out its wings and -sailed away straight towards the saint’s beloved Ireland. When Columba -was really dying the old white horse of the convent came and laid its -head on his shoulder with an air of such profound melancholy that it -seemed nigh to weeping. A brother wished to drive it away, but the saint -said No; God had revealed to the horse what was hidden from man, and it -was come to bid him goodbye. - -Evidently there is only a slight element of the marvellous in these -legends and none at all in others, such as the story of Walaric, who fed -little birds and told the monks not to approach or frighten his “little -friends” while they picked up the crumbs. To the same order belong -several well-authenticated stories of the Venerable Joseph of Anchieta, -apostle of Brazil. He protected the parrots that alighted on a ship by -which he was travelling from the merciless sailors who would have caught -and killed them. Whilst descending a river he would have saved a monkey -which some fishermen shot at with their arrows, but he was not in time; -the other monkeys gathered round their slain comrade with signs of -mourning: “Come near,” said the holy man, “and weep in peace for that -one of you who is no more.” Presently, fearing not to be able longer to -restrain the cruelty of the men, he bade them depart with God’s -blessing. - -Here is no marvel; only sympathy which is sometimes the greatest of -marvels. It needed the mind of a Shakespeare to probe just this secret -recess of feeling for animals:— - - “—— What dost thou strike at, Marcus, with thy knife? - —— At that I have killed, my Lord, a fly. - —— Out on thee, murderer, thou killest my heart; - Mine eyes are cloyed with view of tyranny; - A deed of death done on the innocent, - Becomes not Titus’ brother; get thee gone, - I see thou art not for my company. - —— Alas! my Lord, I have but killed a fly. - —— But how if that fly had a father and mother? - How would he hang his slender gilded wings - And buz lamented doings in the air? - Poor harmless fly! - That with his pretty buzzing melody - Came here to make us merry, and thou hast killed him.” - -If St. Bernard saw a hare pursued by dogs or birds threatened by a hawk -he could not resist making the sign of the cross, and his benediction -always brought safety. It is to this saint that we owe the exquisite -saying, “If mercy were a sin I think I could not keep myself from -committing it.” - -[Illustration: - - _Photo:_ _Hanfslängl._ - ST. EUSTACE AND THE STAG. - (_By Vittore Pisano._) - National Gallery.] - -Apart from the rest, stands one saint who brought the wild to the -neighbourhood of a bustling, trafficking little Italian town of the -thirteenth century and peopled it with creatures which, whether of fancy -or of fact, will live for ever. How St. Francis tamed the “wolf of -Agobio” is the most famous if not altogether the most credible of the -animal stories related of him. That wolf was a quadruped without morals; -not only had he eaten kids but also men. All attempts to kill him -failed, and the townsfolk were afraid of venturing outside the walls -even in broad daylight. One day St. Francis, against the advice of all, -went out to have a serious talk with the wolf. He soon found him and, -“Brother Wolf,” he said, “you have eaten not only animals but men made -in the image of God, and certainly you deserve the gallows; -nevertheless, I wish to make peace between you and these people, brother -Wolf, so that you may offend them no more, and neither they nor their -dogs shall attack you.” The wolf seemed to agree, but the saint wished -to have a distinct proof of his solemn engagement to fulfil his part in -the peace, whereupon the wolf stood up on his hind legs and laid his paw -on the saint’s hand. Francis then promised that the wolf should be -properly fed for the rest of his days, “for well I know,” he said -kindly, “that all your evil deeds were caused by hunger”—upon which text -several sermons might be preached, for truly many a sinner may be -reformed by a good dinner and by nothing else. The contract was kept on -both sides, and the wolf lived happily for some years—“notricato -cortesemente dalla gente”—at the end of which he died of old age, -sincerely mourned by all the inhabitants. - -If any one decline to believe in the wolf of Gubbio, why, he must be -left to his invincible ignorance. But there are other tales in the -_Fioretti_ and in the _Legenda Aurea_ which are nowise hard to believe. -What more likely than that Francis, on meeting a youth who had -wood-doves to sell, looked at the birds “con l’occhio pietoso,” and -begged the youth not to give them into the cruel hands that would kill -them? The young man, “inspired by God,” gave the doves to the saint, who -held them against his breast, saying, “Oh, my sisters, innocent doves, -why did you let yourselves be caught? Now will I save you from death and -make nests for you, so that you may increase and multiply according to -the commandment of our Creator.” Schopenhauer mentions, with emphatic -approval, the Indian merchant at the fair of Astrachan who, when he has -a turn of good luck, goes to the market-place and buys birds, which he -sets at liberty. The holy Francis not only set his doves free, but -thought about their future, a refinement of benevolence which might -“almost have persuaded” the humane though crusty old philosopher to put -on the Franciscan habit. - -(At this point I chance to see from my window a kitten in the act of -annoying a rather large snake. It is a coiled-up snake; probably an -Itongo. It requires a good five minutes to induce the kitten to abandon -its quarry and to convey the snake to a safe place under the myrtles. -This being done, I resume my pen.) - -I have remarked that in some respects the Saint of Assisi stands apart -from the other saints who took notice of animals. It was a common thing, -for instance, for saints to preach to creatures, but there is an -individual note in the sermon of Francis to the birds which is not found -elsewhere. The reason why St. Anthony preached to the fishes at Rimini -was that the “heretics” would not listen to him, and St. Martin -addressed the water-fowl who were diving after fish in the Loire -because, having compared them to the devil, seeking whom he may devour, -he thought it necessary to order them to depart from those waters—which -they immediately did, no doubt frightened to death by the apparition of -a gesticulating saint and the wild-looking multitude. The motive of -Francis was neither pique at not being listened to nor the temptation to -show miraculous skill as a bird-scarer; he was moved solely by an -effusion of tender sentiment. Birds in great quantities had alighted in -a neighbouring field: a beautiful sight which every dweller in the -country must have sometimes seen and asked himself, was it a parliament, -a garden party, a halt in a journey? “Wait a little for me here upon the -road,” said the saint to his companions; “I am going to preach to my -sisters the birds.” And so, “_having greeted them as creatures endowed -with reason_,” he went on to say: “Birds, my sisters, you ought to give -great praise to your Creator, who dressed you with feathers, who gave -you wings to fly with, who granted you all the domains of the air, whose -solicitude watches over you.” The birds stretched out their necks, -fluttered their wings, opened their beaks, and looked at the preacher -with attention. When he had done, he passed in the midst of them and -touched them with his habit, and not one of them stirred till he gave -them leave to fly away. - -The saint lifted worms out of the path lest they should be crushed, and -during the winter frosts, for fear that the bees should die in the hive, -he brought honey to them and the best wines that he could find. Near his -cell at Portionuculo there was a fig-tree, and on the fig-tree lived a -cicada. One day the Servant of God stretched out his hand and said, -“Come to me, my sister Cicada”; and at once the insect flew upon his -hand. And he said to it, “Sing, my sister Cicada, and praise thy Lord.” -And having received his permission she sang her song. The biographies -that were written without the inquisition into facts which we demand, -gave a living idea of the man, not a photograph of his skeleton. What -mattered if romance were mixed with truth when the total was true? We -know St. Francis of Assisi as if he had been our next-door neighbour. It -would have needed unbounded genius to invent such a character, and there -was nothing to be gained by inventing it. The legends which represent -him as one who consistently treated animals as creatures endowed with -reason are in discord with orthodox teaching; they skirt dangerously -near to heresy. Giordano Bruno was accused of having said that men and -animals had the same origin; to hold such an opinion qualified you for -the stake. But the Church that canonised Buddha under the name of St. -Josephat has had accesses of toleration which must have made angels -rejoice. - -Some think that Francis was at one time a troubadour, and troubadours -had many links with those Manichæan heretics whom Catholics charged with -believing in the transmigration of souls. This may interest the curious, -but the doctrine of metempsychosis has little to do with the vocation of -the Asiatic recluse as a beast-tamer, and St. Francis of Assisi was true -brother to that recluse. He was the Fakeer or Dervish of the West. When -the inherent mysticism in man’s nature brought the Dervishes into -existence soon after Mohammed’s death, in spite of the Prophet’s -well-known dislike for religious orders, they justified themselves by -quoting the text from the Koran, “Poverty is my pride.” It would serve -the Franciscan equally well. The begging friar was an anachronism in the -religion of Islam as he is an anachronism in modern society, but what -did that matter to him? He thought and he thinks that he will outlive -both. - -The Abdâl or pre-eminently holy Dervish who lived in the desert with -friendly beasts over whom he exercised an extraordinary power, became -the centre of a legend, almost of a cult, like his Christian -counterpart. There were several Abdâls of high repute during the reigns -of the early Ottoman Sultans. Perhaps there was more confidence in their -sanctity than in their sanity, for while the Catholic historian finds it -inconvenient to admit the hypothesis of madness as accounting for even -the strangest conduct of the saints of the desert or their mediæval -descendants, a devout Oriental sees no irreverence in recognising the -possible affinity between sainthood and mental alienation. In India the -holy recluse who tames wild beasts is as much alive to-day as in any -former time. Whatever is very old is still a part of the everyday life -of the Indian people. Accordingly the native newspapers frequently -report that some prince was attacked by a savage beast while out -hunting, when, at the nick of time, a venerable saint appeared at whose -first word the beast politely relaxed his hold. Those who know India -best by no means think that all such stories are invented. Why should -they be? Cardinal Massaia (who wore, by the by, the habit of Francis) -stated that the lions he met in the desert had very good manners. A few -years ago an old lady met a large, well-grown lioness in the streets of -Chatres; mistaking it for a large dog, she patted it on the head and it -followed her for some time until it was observed by others, when the -whole town was seized with panic and barred doors and windows. Even with -the provocation of such mistrust the lioness behaved well, and allowed -itself to be reconducted to the menagerie from which it had escaped. - -Those who try to divest themselves of human nature rarely succeed, and -the reason nearest to the surface why, over all the world, the lonely -recluse made friends with animals was doubtless his loneliness. On their -side, animals have only to be persuaded that men are harmless for them -to meet their advances half-way. If this is not always true of wild -beasts, it is because (as St. Francis apprehended) unfortunately they -are sometimes hungry; but man is not the favourite prey of any wild -beast who is in his right mind. Prisoners who tamed mice or sparrows -followed the same impulse as saints who tamed lions or buffaloes. How -many a prisoner who returned to the fellowship of men must have -regretted his mouse or his sparrow! Animals can be such good company. -Still, it follows that if their society was sought as a substitute, they -were, in a certain sense, vicarious objects of affection. We forget that -even in inter-human affections much is vicarious. The sister of charity -gives mankind the love which she would have given to her children. The -ascetic who will never hear the pattering feet of his boy upon the -stairs loves the gazelle, the bird fallen from its nest, the lion cub -whose mother has been slain by the hunter. And love, far more than -charity (in the modern sense), blesses him that gives as well as him -that takes. - -But human phenomena are complex, and this explanation of the sympathy -between saint and beast does not cover the whole ground. Who can doubt -that these men, whose faculties were concentrated on drawing nearer to -the Eternal, vaguely surmised that wild living creatures had unperceived -channels of communication with spirit, hidden _rapports_ with the -Fountain of Life which man has lost or has never possessed? Who can -doubt that in the vast cathedral of Nature they were awed by “the -mystery which is in the face of brutes”? - -Beside the need to love and the need to wonder, some of them knew the -need to pity. Here the ground widens, for the heart that feels the pang -of the meanest thing that lives does not beat only in the hermit’s cell -or under the sackcloth of a saint. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - XIII - - VERSIPELLES - - -THE snake and the tiger are grim realities of Indian life. They mean a -great deal—they mean India with its horror and its splendour; above all, -with its primary attention given to things which for most Europeans are -_nil_ or are kept for Sunday. And Sunday, the day most calm, most -bright, has only a little portion of them, only the light not the -darkness of the Unknown. - -To the despair of the English official, the Hindu, like his forefathers -in remotest antiquity, respects the life of tiger and snake. In doing so -he is not governed simply by the feeling that makes him look on serenely -whilst all sorts of winged and fleet-footed creatures eat up his growing -crops—another tolerance which exasperates the Western beholder: in that -instance it is, in the main, the rule of live and let live which -dictates his forbearance, the persuasion that it is wrong to monopolise -the increase of the earth to the uttermost farthing’s-worth. His -sentiment towards tiger and snake is of a more profound nature. - -The Hindu will not kill a cobra if he can help it, and if one is killed -he tries to expiate the offence by honouring it with proper funeral -rites. The tiger, like the snake, gives birth to those ancient twins, -fear and admiration. The perception of the beautiful is one of the -oldest as it is one of the most mysterious of psychological phenomena in -man and beast. Why should the sheen of the peacock’s tail attract the -peahen? Why should the bower-bird and the lyre-bird construct a lovely -pleasance where they may dance? Man perceived the beautiful in fire and -wind, in the swift air, the circle of stars, the violent water, the -lights of heaven: “being delighted with the beauty of these things, he -took them to be gods”—as was said by the writer of the Wisdom of Solomon -about two hundred years before Christ. He also perceived the beautiful -in the lithe movements of the snake and in the tiger’s symmetry. - -As to the sense of fear, how is it that this fear is unaccompanied by -repulsion? To this question the more general answer would seem to be -that Nature, if regarded as divine, cannot repel. But the snake and -tiger are in some special way divine, so that they become still further -removed from the range of human criticism. They are manifestations of -divinity—a safer description of even the lowest forms of zoolatry than -the commoner one which asserts that they are “gods.” Deity, if -omnipresent, “must be able to occupy the same space as another body at -the same time,” which was said in a different connexion, but it is the -true base of all beliefs involving the union of spirit and matter from -the lowest to the highest. - -The animal which is a divine agent, ought to behave like one. If it -causes destruction, such destruction should have the fortuitous -appearance of havoc wrought by natural causes. The snake or tiger should -not wound with malice prepense, but only in a fine, casual way. This is -just what, as a rule, they are observed to do. I have seen many snakes, -but I never saw one run after a man, though I have seen men run after -snakes. Now and then the Italian peasant is bitten by vipers because he -walks in the long grass with naked feet. He treads on the snake or -pushes against it, and it bites him. So it is with the Indian peasant. -It is much the same in the case of the normal tiger; unless he is -disturbed or wounded, he most rarely attacks. But there are abnormal -tigers, abnormal beasts of every sort—there is the criminal class of -beast. What of him? It might be supposed that primitive man would take -such a beast to be an angry or vindictive spirit. By no means. He -detects in him a fellow-human. The Indian forestalled Lombroso; the -man-eating tiger is a degenerate, really not responsible for his -actions, and still less is the god behind him responsible for them. - -Little need be said of the natural history of the man-eating tiger; yet -a few words may not be out of place. To his abnormality every one who -has studied wild beasts bears witness. All agree that the loss of life -from tigers is almost exclusively traceable to individuals of tiger-kind -which prey chiefly or only on man. The seven or eight hundred persons -killed annually by tigers in British India are victims of comparatively -few animals. Not many years ago a single man-eating tigress was -certified to have killed forty-eight persons. While the ordinary tiger -has to be sought out with difficulty for the sport of those who wish to -hunt him, the man-eater night after night waylays the rural postman or -comes boldly into the villages in search of his unnatural food. During -great scarcity caused by the destruction or disappearance of small game -in the forests, the carnivora are forced out of their habits as the -wolves in the Vosges are induced to come down to the plains in periods -of intense cold. Such special causes do not affect the question of the -man-eater, which eats man’s flesh from choice, not from necessity. Why -he does so Europeans have tried to explain in various ways. One is, that -the unfamiliar taste of human flesh creates an irresistible craving. In -South America they say that a jaguar after tasting man’s flesh once -becomes an incorrigible man-eater for ever after. Others think -man-eating is a form of madness, a disease, and they point to the fact -that the man-eater is always in bad condition; his skin is useless. But -it is not sure if this be cause or effect, since man’s flesh is said to -be unwholesome. A third and plausible theory would attribute man-eating -to the easy capture of the prey: a tiger that has caught one man will -hunt no other fleeter game. Especially in old age, a creature that has -neither horns nor tusks nor yet swift feet must appear an attractive -prey. This coincides with an observation made by Apollonius of Tyana: he -says that lions caught and ate monkeys for medicine when they were sick, -but that when they were old and unable to hunt the stag and the wild -boar, they caught them for food. Aristotle said that lions were more -disposed to enter towns and attack man when they grew old, as old age -made their teeth defective, which was a hindrance to them in hunting. - -Another possible clue may be deduced from a belief which exists in -Abyssinia about the man-eating lion. In that country the people dislike -to have Europeans hunt the lion, not only because they revere him as the -king of beasts (though this is one reason, and it shows how natural to -man is the friendly feeling towards beasts, and how it flourishes along -with any sort of religion, provided the religion has been left Oriental -and not Westernised), but also because they are convinced that a lion -whose mate has been killed becomes ferocious and thirsts for human -blood. This belief is founded on accurate observation of the capacity of -wild beasts for affection. The love of the lion for his mate is no -popular error. That noble hunter, Major Leveson, told a pathetic story -of how he witnessed in South Africa a fight between two lions, while the -lioness, palm and prize, stood looking on. A bullet laid her low, but -the combatants were so hotly engaged that neither of them perceived what -had happened. Then another bullet killed one of them: the survivor, -after the first moment of surprise as to why his foe surrendered, turned -round and for the first time saw the hunters who were quite near. He -seemed about to spring on them, when he caught sight of the dead -lioness: “With a peculiar whine of recognition, utterly regardless of -our presence, he strode towards her, licked her face and neck with his -great rough tongue and patted her gently with his huge paw, as if to -awaken her. Finding that she did not respond to his caresses, he sat -upon his haunches like a dog and howled most piteously....” Finally the -mourning lion fled at the cries of the Kaffirs and the yelping of the -dogs close at hand. He had understood the great, intolerable fact of -death. Would any one blame him if he became an avenger of blood? - -Supposing that this line of defence could be transferred to the tiger, -instead of being branded as lazy, decrepit, mad, or bad, he might hope -to appear before the public with a largely rehabilitated character. - -The natives of the jungle resort to none of these hypotheses to account -for the man-eater: a different bank of ideas can be drawn on by them to -help them out of puzzling problems. The free force of imagination is far -preferable, if admitted, as a solver of difficulties, to all our patient -and plodding researches. The jungle natives tell many stories of the -man-eater, of which the following is a typical example. It was told to a -British officer, from whom I had it. - -Once upon a time there was a man who had the power of changing himself -into a tiger whenever he liked. But for him to change back into the -shape of a man it was necessary that some human being should pronounce a -certain formula. He had a friend who knew the formula, and to him he -went when he wished to resume human shape. But the friend died. - -The man was obliged, therefore, to find some one else to pronounce the -formula. At last he decided to confide the secret to his wife; so, one -day, he said to her that he should be absent for a short time and that -when he came back it would be in the form of a tiger; he charged her to -pronounce the proper formula when she should see him appear in -tiger-shape, and he assured her that he would then, forthwith, become a -man again. - -In a few days, after he had amused himself by catching a few antelopes, -he trotted up to his wife, hoping all would be well. But the woman, in -spite of all that he had told her, was so dreadfully frightened when she -saw a large tiger running towards her, that she began to scream. The -tiger jumped about and tried to make her understand by dumb-show what -she was to do, but the more he jumped the more she screamed, and at last -he thought in his mind, “This is the most stupid woman I ever knew,” and -he was so angry that he killed her. Directly afterwards he recollected -that no other human being knew the right formula—hence he must remain -for ever a tiger. This so affected his spirits that he acquired a hatred -for the whole human race, and killed men whenever he saw them. - -This diverting folk-tale shows a root-belief in the stage of becoming a -branch-belief. In the present case the root is the ease with which men -are thought to be able to transform themselves (or be transformed by -others) into animals. The branch is the presumption that a very wicked -animal must be human. The corresponding inference that a very virtuous -animal must be human, throws its reflection upon innumerable -fairy-tales. I think it was the more primitive of the two. Even the -tiger is not everywhere supposed to be the worse for human influence. In -the Sangor and Nerbrudda territories people say that if a tiger has -killed one man he will never kill another, because the dead man’s spirit -rides on his head and guides him to more lawful prey. Entirely primitive -people do not take an evil view of human nature—which is proved by their -confidence in strangers: the first white man who arrives among them is -well received. Misanthropy is soon learnt, but it is not the earliest -sentiment. The bad view of the man-tiger prevails in the Niger delta, -where the negroes think that “some souls which turn into wild beasts -give people a great deal of trouble.” Other African tribes hold that -tailless tigers are men—tigers which have lost their tails in fighting -or by disease or accident. I do not know if these are credited with good -or bad qualities. - -By the rigid Totemist all this is ascribed to Totemism. Men called other -tribesmen by the names of their totems; then the totem was forgotten and -they mistook the tiger-totem-man for a man-tiger _et sic de ceteris_. My -Syrian guide on Mount Carmel told me that the ravens which fed Elijah -were a tribe of Bedouins called “the Ravens,” which still existed. If -this essay in the Higher Criticism was original it said much for his -intelligence. But because such confusions may happen, and no doubt do -happen, are they to be taken as the final explanation of the whole vast -range of man and animal mutations? What have they to do with such a -belief as that vouched for by St. Augustine—to wit, that certain witch -innkeepers gave their guests drugs in cheese which turned them into -animals? These witches had a sharp eye to business, for they utilised -the oxen, asses, and horses thus procured, for draught or burden, or let -them out to their customers, nor were they quite without a conscience, -as when they had done using them they turned them back into men. Magic, -the old rival of religion, lies at the bottom of all this order of -ideas. Magic may be defined as the natural supernatural, since by it man -_unaided_ commands the occult forces of nature. The theory of demoniacal -assistance is of later growth. - -A story rather different from the rest is told by Pausanias, who records -that, at the sacrifice of Zeus on Mount Lycæus, a man was always turned -into a wolf, but if for nine years in wolf-shape he abstained from -eating human flesh, he would regain his human form. This suggests a -Buddhist source. The infiltration of Buddhist folk-lore into Europe is a -subject on which we should like to know more. Buddhism was the only -missionary religion before Christianity, and there is every probability -that it sent missionaries West as well as East. - -The early Irish took so favourable a view of wolves that they were -accustomed to pray for their salvation, and chose them as godfathers for -their children. In Druidical times the wolf and other animals were -divine manifestations, and the Celts were so attached to their -beast-gods that they did not maledict what they had worshipped, but -found it a refuge somewhere. In the earliest Gallic sculpture the -dispossessed animals are introduced as companions of the new Saints. - -It will be noticed that in the Indian folk-tale, though the -identification of the man with the man-eater is clear, a very lenient -view is taken of him: he was not always so; even his excursions in -tiger-skin were, at first, purely innocent; he was a good husband and a -respectable citizen till his wife’s nerves made him lose his temper. - -In early Christian times, the man-wolf might be not only innocent but a -victim. He might be a particularly good man turned by a sorcerer into a -wolf, and in such cases he preserves his good tendencies. In the seventh -century such a man-wolf defended the head of St. Edward the Martyr from -other wild beasts. - -On the other hand, there are stories of Christian saints who turned -evil-disposed persons into beasts by means of the magical powers which, -at first, _all_ baptized persons were thought to possess potentially if -not actively. St. Thomas Aquinas believed in the possibility of doing -this. In a Russian folk-tale the apostles Peter and Paul turned a bad -husband and wife into bears. - -In Europe by degrees the harmless were-wolf entirely disappeared but the -evil one survived. The superstition of lycanthropy concentrated round -one point (as superstitions often do): the self-transformation of a -perverse man or sorcerer into an animal for nefarious purposes. The -object of the transformation might be the opportunity for giving free -range to sanguinary appetites; but there was another object lurking in -the background, and this was the acquirement of second sight, which some -animals (if not all) are supposed to be endowed with. Just as Varro and -Virgil believed in lycanthropy, so the most highly educated Europeans in -the time of Louis XIV. and after, believed in were-wolves. The choice of -the animal was immaterial, but it fell naturally on the most prominent -and feared wild animal which was locally extant. A fancy or exotic -animal would not do, which illustrates the link there is between popular -beliefs and _facts_; distorted facts, it may be, but real and not -imaginary things. If a bear of bad morals appears in Norway, people -declare that it can be “no Christian bear”—it must be a Lapp or a Finn, -both these peoples, who are much addicted to magic, being supposed to -have the power of changing into bears when they choose. Instead of -seeking the wild beast in man, people sought the man in the wild beast. - -As in Asia so in Europe, it was noticed and pondered that the normal -wild beast is dangerous, perhaps, but not from a human point of view -perverse. The normal wolf like the normal tiger does not attack or -destroy for the love of destruction. Wolves attack in packs, but the -instinct of the single individual is to keep out of man’s way. He does -not kill even animals indiscriminately. In the last times when there -were wolves in the Italian valleys of the Alps, the news spread that a -wolf had killed a number of sheep. What had really happened was this, -which an old hunter told at Edolo to a relative of mine. The wolf jumped -down into a sheepfold sunk in the ground. He killed a sheep and ate some -of it and then found, to his dismay, that he could not get up the wall -of the sheepfold. Nothing daunted, however, he killed a sufficient -number of sheep to form a mound, up which he climbed and so effected his -escape. No one thought such a clever wolf as this a _lupo manaro_. But -some wolves, like some dogs, are subject to fits of mental alienation, -in which they slay without rhyme or reason. Sheep are found killed all -over the countryside, and men or children may be among the victims. The -question arises of who did it—a wolf, a man, or both in one? The -material fact is there, and it is a fact calculated to excite terror, -surprise, curiosity. That the fact may remain always a mystery recent -experience shows. When the were-wolf mania was rampant in France, -honestly conducted judicial inquiry succeeded in a few cases, in tracing -the outrages to a real wolf or to a real man. At last, in 1603, a French -court of law pronounced the belief in were-wolves to be an insane -delusion, and from that date it slowly declined. Heretics were suspected -of being were-wolves. As late as fifty years ago, a reminiscence of the -_loup garou_ existed in most parts of France, in the shape of the -_meneux des loups_, who were supposed to charm or tame whole packs of -wolves which they led across the waste lands on nights when the moon -shone fitfully through rifts in hurrying clouds. The village recluse, -the poacher, the man who simply “knew more than he should,” fell under -the suspicion of being a “wolf-leader,” and, of course, the usual -“eye-witness” was forthcoming to declare that he had _seen_ the -suspected individual out upon his midnight rambles with his wolves -trotting after him. In some provinces all the fiddlers or bag-pipers -were thought to be “wolf-leaders.” - -[Illustration: - - _Maurice Sand._ - “LE MENEUR DES LOUPS.”] - -If the wolf turnskin died out sooner in England than in France, it was -because there were no wolves to fasten it upon. Throughout the horrible -witch-mania British sorcerers were supposed to turn into cats, weasels, -or innocent hares! Italian witches still turn into cats. I remember how -graphically C. G. Leland described to me a visit he had paid to a Tuscan -witch; her cottage contained three stools, on one of which sat the -witch, on the second her familiar jet-black cat, and on the third my old -friend, who, I feel sure, had come to believe a good deal in the “old -religion,” and who, in his last years, might have sat for a perfect -portrait of a magician! The connexion of the witch and the cat is a form -of turnskin-belief in which the feature of the acquirement of second -sight is prominent. No witch without a cat! The essential _fact_ in the -superstition is the fondness of poor, old friendless women for -cats—their last friends. A contributing fact lay in the mysterious -disappearances and reappearances of cats and in their half-wild nature. -The cat in Indian folk-lore is the tiger’s aunt. - -The mode of effecting transformation into animals is various, but always -connected with fixed magical procedure. A root or food, or still oftener -an ointment, is resorted to: ointments played a great part in -superstition; it was by ointments that the unlucky persons accused of -being wizards were held to have spread the plague of Milan. But the -surest method of transformation was a girdle made of the skin of the -animal whose form it was desired to take. This is regarded as a -makeshift for not being able to put on the whole skin. An old French -record tells of a man who buried a black cat in a box where four roads -met, with enough bread soaked in holy water and holy oil to keep it -alive for three days. The man intended to dig the cat up and, after -killing it, to make a girdle of its skin by which means he expected to -obtain the gift of second sight; but the burial-place of the cat was -discovered by some dogs that were scratching the earth, before the three -days had elapsed. The man, put to the torture, confessed all. In this -case, it will be noticed that the spiritual powers of the cat were to be -obtained without assuming its outward form. The turnskin who wishes to -go back into his human shape, has also to follow fixed rules: a formula -must be pronounced by some one else, as in the jungle tiger story, or -the man-beast must eat some stated food as in Lucian’s skit (if Lucian -wrote it) of the man who, by using the wrong salve, turned himself into -a donkey instead of into a bird as he had wished, and who could only -resume his own form by eating roses, which he did not accomplish until -he had undergone all sorts of adventures. - -The belief that beasts were inhabited by depraved men has a certain -affinity with the belief that depraved men were inhabited by demons. -Dante maintains that some persons have actually gone to their account -while their bodies are still above-ground, the lodgings of evil spirits. - -The history of the turnskin leads up to several conclusions, of which -the most important is, that superstitions often grow uglier as they grow -older. They descend, they rarely ascend. This experience should make us -pause before we pronounce hideous beliefs to be, in a true sense, -primitive. The idea of transformation is one of the oldest of human -ideas, much older than transmigration, but at the outset, far from -lending itself to such repulsive applications as man-tigers and -demon-men, it gave birth to some of the fairest passages in the poetry -of mankind which he calls his religion. It is impossible to imagine a -more beautiful myth than the Vedic belief in the swan-maidens, the -Apsarases who, by putting on skirts of swan feathers, could become -swans. Their swan-skirts stretch from the hot East to the cold North, -for they are the same that are worn by the Valkyries. All these early -legends of swans bring into particularly clear light the moral identity -of the impressions received from things seen by man at the bottom and at -the top of the ladder of intellectual progress. Natural objects, lovely -or terrible, raise archetypal images of things lovely or terrible which -in our minds remain shapeless but to which the primitive man gives a -local habitation and a name. Swans, sailing on still waters or circling -above our heads, inspire us with indefinite longings which took form in -the myth of the Apsarases and appear again in the Vedic story of the -sage who, by deep knowledge and holiness, became a golden swan and flew -away to the sun. To this day, if the Hindu sees a flight of swans -wending its mysterious way across the sky, he repeats the saying almost -mechanically (as a Catholic crosses himself if he pass a shrine): “The -soul flies away, and none can go with it.” - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - XIV - - THE HORSE AS HERO - - -FIFTY years ago the knell of the horse was rung, with due solemnity, by -the American statesman, Charles Sumner. The age of chivalry, he said, -was gone—an age of humanity had come; “the horse, whose importance more -than human, gave the name to that period of gallantry and war, now -yields his foremost place to man.” As a matter of fact, the horse is -yielding his foremost place to the motor-car, to the machine; and this -is the topsy-turvy way in which most of the millennial hopes of the -mid-nineteenth century are being fulfilled by the twentieth; the big -dream of a diviner day ends in a reality out of which all that is ideal -is fading. But the reason why I quote the passage is the service which -it renders as a reminder of the often forgotten meaning of the word -“chivalry.” The horse was connected with the ideals no less than with -the realities of the phase in human history that was called after him; -the mental consequences of the partnership between man and that noble -beast were not less far reaching than the physical. There are a hundred -types of human character, some of them of the highest, in the making of -which the horse counts for nothing; but this type, this figure of the -very perfect gentle knight, cannot be imagined in a horseless world. We -hear of what man taught animals, but less of what animals taught man. In -the unity of emotion between horse and rider something is exchanged. -Even the epithets which it is natural to apply to the knightly hero, one -and all fit his steed: defiant and gentle, daring and devoted, trusty -and tireless, a scorner of obstacles, of a gay, brave spirit—the list -could be lengthened at will. And the qualities and even the defects they -had in common were not so much the result of accident as the true fruit -of their mutual interdependence. - -In the aftermath of chivalry which produced the song-writers and the -splendid adventurers of the Elizabethan age, horsemanship came again to -the fore as a passion rather than as a mere necessary pursuit. We know -that, not satisfied with what England could provide, the fashionable -young men frequented the schools of skilled Italians, generally of noble -birth, such as Corte da Pavia, who was Queen Elizabeth’s riding-master. -The prevailing taste is reflected in Shakespeare, who, though he was for -all time, was yet, essentially of his own; his innumerable allusions to -horses show, in the first place, that he knew all about them, as he did -about most things, and in the second, that he knew that these allusions -would please his audience, which no born dramatist ever treated as a -negligible quantity, and the least of all Shakespeare. Even the -performing or “thinking” horse does not escape his notice; “the dancing -horse will tell you,” in “Love’s Labour Lost,” refers to the “Hans” or -“Trixie” of the period who also attracted the attention of Ben Jonson, -Downe, Sir Kenelm Digby, Sir Walter Raleigh, Hall, and John Taylor, the -water-poet. This animal’s name was “Morocco” but he was often called -“Bankes’ horse,” from his master who taught him to tell the number of -pence in silver coins and the number of points in throws of dice, and on -one occasion made him walk to the top of St. Paul’s. Alas, for the fate -of “Morocco” and his master, “Being beyond the sea burnt for one witch,” -as chronicled by Ben Jonson! Like Esmeralda and her goat, they were -accused of magic, and the charge, first started at Orleans, was followed -by condemnation and death in Rome. Greater tragedies of superstition -hardly come with such a shock as this stupid slaughter of a poor showman -and his clever beast. - -In Elizabethan society interest in horses was directed chiefly to the -turnings and windings, the “shapes and tricks” of the riding-school, and -this lighter way of looking on them as affording man his most splendid -diversion is, in the main, Shakespeare’s way—though he does not forget -that, at times, a horse may be worth a kingdom. Not to him, however, or -to any modern poet, do we go for the unique, incomparable description of -the truly heroic horse, the uncowed charger of the East, created to awe -rather than to be awed by man, whom no image of servility would fit. -Here is this specimen of the world’s greatest poetry, in case any one be -so unfortunate as not to know it by heart:— - -“He paweth in the valley and rejoiceth in his strength; he goeth on to -meet the armed men. He mocketh at fear, and is not affrighted; neither -turneth he back from the sword. The quiver rattleth against him, the -glittering spear and the shield. He swalloweth the ground with -fierceness and rage: neither believeth he that it is the sound of the -trumpet. He saith among the trumpets, Ha! ha! He smelleth the battle -afar off, the thunder of the captains and the shouting.” - -How the portrait leaps out of the page into life as Velasquez’s horse in -the Prado leaps out of his frame! We feel the pulse of a passion which -throbs through every vein from head to hoof. This Triumph of the -War-horse is one of the points of affinity in the Book of Job with Arab -rather than with Hebrew civilisation. The text itself is nearer Arabic -than any other Biblical book, and the life of the protagonist is very -like the life of an ancient Arabian chieftain. The Jews proper cared -little for horses; when they fell into their hands they knew no better -than to destroy them. They were a pastoral people, at no time fond of -sport, which was hardly recognised as lawful by their religious -ordinances. They do not seem to have ridden on horseback. Zechariah, -indeed, speaks of the war-horse, but only to represent him as the -beautiful image of peace, no more mixing in the fray, but bearing on his -bell (which was meant to affright the foe) the inscription: “Holiness -unto the Lord.” - -[Illustration: - - _Photo:_ _Mansell._ - THE ASSYRIAN HORSE. - British Museum.] - -On the other hand, the Arab, and, most of all, the Nomadic Arab, has a -dual existence with his horse. He could not live without it; it is a -part of himself—of all that makes him himself and not another. The same -is true of the Todas and their buffaloes, the Lapps and their reindeer. -In summer when the reindeer are in the hills, to save them from what is -there called the heat, a Lapp seems only half a Lapp; but his thoughts -are still of reindeer and his fingers are busy with scratching its -likeness on his spoons, his milk-bowls, his implements of all sorts, all -of which are made of reindeer-horn. His songs are still of reindeer: -“While the reindeer lasts, the Lapp will last; when the reindeer fails, -the Lapp will fail,” as ran the infinitely pathetic ditty I heard sung -by a Lapp woman who was shown to me as the best singer of the tribe. - -With all these people the flesh of the beloved animal is esteemed the -greatest delicacy; a fact in which there seems to lie suggestions of -cannibalism in its real psychological aspect—the eating of the hero in -order to acquire his attributes. Sometimes, however, the reason may be -simply that they were for long periods in the impossibility of obtaining -other meat; since the natural man prefers food to which he has grown -familiar. - -In what is probably the oldest version of Boccaccio’s Falcon story, the -Emperor of Constantinople sends to ask a very generous præ-Islamic Arab -Chief, by name Hatem Tai (celebrated as the type of chivalry over all -the Moslem world), to give him a horse which Hatem is known to value -beyond all his possessions. The object of the demand was to put his -reputation for generosity to the test. The officer, who is the bearer of -the Emperor’s request, is regaled sumptuously on the evening of his -arrival; and, according to the laws of Oriental courtesy, he puts off -speaking of the business in hand till next day. When he delivers his -message Hatem replies that he would have complied gladly, but that the -officer had eaten the horse last night for supper! The horse was the -most costly and coveted food which the chief could offer his guest, and -the story becomes thus more intelligible than when the victim is an -uneatable bird like a hawk. - -In Oriental poetry the camel “who asks but a thorn from the bed of roses -of the world” takes a well-merited share of attention, but the animal -which is before all others the Eastern poets’ beast is, of course, the -horse: he might himself be called the poet as well as the prince among -beasts, for if any living thing incarnates the poetry “of form, of -motion, of glad devotion,” it is surely the high-bred Arab steed. -Innumerable tributes credit him with three parts human qualities:— - - “The courser looks his love as plainly as if he could speak, - He waves his mane, his paws, he curls his nostrils and his lips; - He makes half-vocal sounds, uprears or droops his neck and hips, - His deep and pensive eyes light up with lambent flame, then seem - As if they swam in the desires of some mysterious dream.”[8] - -Footnote 8: - - Translated by W. R. Alger. - -Of the true Arab horse it is said that his foot is so light that he -could dance on a woman’s breast without leaving a bruise. Some of the -Arabian ballads of horses are among the very few Oriental poems which -have acquired universal fame, as that which tells of how the peerless -Lahla picked up his captured and bound master and carried him with his -teeth back to the tribe, on reaching which he sinks dead, amidst the -tears and lamentations of all. Horses, the Koran expressly says, were -created for man’s use, but also “to be an ornament unto him”: all the -romance, the valour, the deep-seated aristocratic instinct of the Arab, -proudest of mankind, is bound up with his horse. The splendid Arab chief -who stands aside motionless to let go by an automobile carrying a party -of tourists across the Sahara reflects, as he draws his burnoose closer -over his mouth, “_This_ is the ‘_ornament_’ of Western man!” And, -looking at his horse, which stands motionless as he (for the Arab steed -fears nothing when his master is near), he adds to himself: “These -pass—we remain.” False it may be as a prophecy, but he believes it -_because convinced of his superiority_. - -Still by the camp-fires in the desert they tell the old story of a great -chief who, in præ-Gallic times, was taken prisoner by the Emir’s -horsemen. He escaped, but hardly had he reached his tent when in the -desert air, in which sounds are heard afar off, a clattering of hoofs -could be distinguished—the Sultan’s men were coming! The chief sprang on -his mare and fled. When the men came up they knew that only one horse -could overtake the mare, her beautiful sister, not less swift than she. -A soldier leapt from his own horse intending to mount her, but the -chiefs son, yet a child, instantly shot her dead with a pistol. And so -the chief was saved. - -The Ulemas of Algeria say that when God wished to create the mare He -spoke to the wind: “I will cause thee to bring forth a creature that -shall bear all My worshippers, that shall be loved by My slaves, and -that will cause the despair of all who will not follow My laws.” And -when He had created her He said: “I have made thee without an equal: the -goods of this world shall be placed between thy eyes; everywhere I will -make thee happy and preferred above all the beasts of the field, for -tenderness shall everywhere be in the heart of thy master; good alike -for the chase and retreat, thou shalt fly though wingless, and I will -only place on thy back the men who know me, who will offer ME prayers -and thanksgivings; men who shall be My worshippers from one generation -to another.” - -For the Arab the horse was not only the means of performing great -enterprises but the very object of life, the thing in itself most -precious, the care, the preoccupation, and the prize. The Arab’s horse -is his kingdom. - -[Illustration: - - ARABIAN HORSE OF THE SAHARA.] - -I suppose that there is no doubt that the knightly type was a flower -transported from the East, though, like many other Eastern flowers, it -grew to its best in European gardens. The Crusaders learnt more than -they taught. Coming down later, the national hero of Spain, for all his -pure Gothic blood, is an Eastern not a Western hero. He will be -understood far better when he is tried by this standard. If we weigh him -in Eastern rather than in Western scales, a more lenient and above all a -juster judgment will be the result, and we shall see how the fine -qualities with which legend credits him were not disproved by some acts -which the modern Western conscience condemns. On the whole it may be -taken for granted, in spite of all that has been said to the contrary, -that tradition which easily errs about facts, is rarely wrong about -character. - -Ruy Diaz de Bivar was a hero after the Arab’s own heart:— - - “Noble y leal, soldado y Caballero, - Señor te apellido la gente Mora,” - -as the lines run on his coffin in the town-hall at Burgos. Nothing being -sacred to a critic, it has been contested that he was first called “Myo -Cid,” or “My Lord,” by the Moors, but tradition and etymology agree too -well for this to be reasonably doubted. It is certain that both Moors -and Christians called him by his other title of Campeador in Spanish and -Al-kambeyator in the form the Arabic writers gave it. It was derived -from his gallantry in single combats and did not mean, as some have -thought, “Champion of the Christians.” - -It is entirely in keeping with the Cid’s Arab affinities that his horse -should have attained a fame almost as great as his own. From Bucephalus -to Copenhagen never was there a European horse equal in renown to -Bavieca. His glory, is it not writ in nearly every one of the hundred -ballads of the Cid? The choosing of Bavieca is one of the most striking -events in the Cid’s youth. The boy asked his godfather, a fat, -good-natured old priest, to give him a colt. The priest took him to a -field where the mares and their colts were being exercised and told him -to take the best. They were driven past him and he let all the -handsomest go by; then a mare came up with an ugly and miserable-looking -colt—“This,” he cried, “is the one for me!” His godfather was angry and -called him a simpleton, but the lad only answered that the horse would -turn out well and that “Simpleton” (“Bavieca”) should be his name. - -Horses which begin as ugly ducklings and end as swans are an extensive -breed. Count de Gubernatis, in his valuable work on “Zoological -Mythology,” mentions Hatos, the magical horse of the Hungarians, as -belonging to this class. If as old as the oldest legend, they are, in a -sense, as new as the “outsider” which carries off one of the greatest -prizes of the Turf. The choosing of Bavieca was in the mind of Cervantes -when he described in his inimitable way the choosing of Rozinante -(“ex-jade”), who never became anything but a _rozin_ in the most present -tense, except in the imagination of his master, but who will live for -ever in his company, to bear witness to the indivisible oneness of the -knight and his horse. - -Completely Oriental in sentiment is the splendid ballad which relates -how the Cid offered Bavieca to his king because it was not meet that a -subject should have a horse so far more precious than any possessed by -his lord. There is in this not only the act of homage but also the -absorbing pride which made the Arab who was overtaking a horse-stealer, -shout to him the secret sign at which his stolen mare would go her best, -preferring to lose her than to vanquish her. - - “O king, the thing is shameful that any man beside - The liege lord of Castile himself should Bavieca ride. - For neither Spain nor Araby could another charger bring - So good as he, and certes, the best befits the king.” - -The gorgeous simplicity of the original is missed by Lockhart in the -succeeding verses, in which the Cid, before giving up the horse, mounts -him to show his worth, his ermine mantle hanging from his shoulders. He -will do, he says, in the presence of the king what he has not done for -long except in battle with the Moor: he will touch Bavieca with his -spurs. Then comes the maddest, wildest, yet most accomplished display of -noble horsemanship that ever witched the world. One rein breaks and the -beholders tremble for his life, but with ease and grace he guides the -foaming and panting horse before the king and prepares to yield him up. -Then Alfonso cries, God forbid that he should take him: he shall be -accounted, indeed, as his, but shameful would it be - - “That peerless Bavieca should ever be bestrid - By any mortal but Bivar—‘Mount, mount again, my Cid!’” - -There is a spot in Spain where we still seem to breathe the very air of -chivalrous romance: the royal armoury at Madrid, in which the mail-clad -knights with their plumes, their housings, their lances, their trophies, -sit their fine horses as gallantly as if they were riding straight into -the lists. There, and there alone, we can invoke the proper _mise en -scène_ for the gestes and jousts described in the Spanish ballads. - -Historically, it seems certain that the Cid died at Valencia in July, -1099, an access of grief that his captains—who, owing to his ill-health, -were obliged to replace him—had failed to hold the Moors in check. King -Alfonso came to the assistance of his noble widow, Jimena, but finally -Valencia had to be abandoned; all the Christians left the town and the -Cid’s body was borne to his distant Northern home. Such is the -historical outline, sufficiently pathetic in itself but adorned with -additions, not all of them, perhaps, invented in the sublime legend of -the Last Ride. It is said that the Cid, knowing that his last hour was -near, refrained from any food except certain draughts of rose-water in -which were dissolved the myrrh and balsam sent to him by the great -Sultan of Persia. He gave particular instructions as to how his body was -to be anointed with the myrrh and balsam which remained in the golden -caskets, and how it was to be set upright on Bavieca, fully saddled and -armed, to be still a terror to the Moors, who were to be kept in -complete ignorance of his death. All this was done and a great victory -was won over the Moors, who thought they saw their dreaded enemy once -more commanding in person. Then the victors started on the long journey -to San Pedro de Cardeña, near Burgos, the Cid riding his horse by day, -supported by an artful contrivance, and by night placed on a dummy horse -wrought by Gil Diaz, his devoted servitor. Jimena, with all the Cid’s -men, followed in his train. On the way the procession is joined by the -Cid’s two daughters and by a great mass of people who mourned in their -hearts for Spain’s greatest hero, but they wore rich and gay apparel, -for the Cid had forbidden the wearing of mourning. So Cardeña was -reached, and tenderly and lovingly Ruy Diaz lifted the Cid’s body for -the last time from Bavieca’s back—never more to bear a man. The glorious -war-horse lived for two years, led to water each day by Gil Diaz. On his -death, at more than forty years of age and leaving not unworthy -descendants behind him, he was buried, according to the Cid’s express -desire, in a deep and ample grave, “so that no dog might disturb his -bones,” near the gate of the Convent, and two elms were planted to mark -the spot. When Gil Diaz died, full of years and richly provided for by -the Cid’s daughters, he was laid to rest beside the horse he had loved -and tended so faithfully. - -In this narrative, condensed from the Chronicles, the curious particular -will have been noticed of the gift by the “Great Sultan of Persia” to -the Christian warrior of those precious spices and aromatic gums which -seem to have been the secret treasure of old Persia, forming a priceless -offering reserved for the very greatest personages. The strangeness of -bringing in the Sultan of Persia almost suggests that there was truth in -the assertion that he had sent presents to the Cid. Over the sea and -over the fruitful fields the radiance of noble deeds travels, as Pinder -said of old. A little after the march of the Thousand, the Arabs of the -desert were heard discussing round their camp-fires the exploits of -Garibaldi. If the fame of the Cid reached Persia, as it is very likely -that it did, he would have found fervent admirers among a people which -was still electrified by the epic poem of Firdusi, who died within a -year or two of the Cid’s birth. In that epic is told the story of the -Persian Campeador—the Champion Rustem, who not only in his title but in -all we know of his general bearings has so great a resemblance to the -Cid that it is a wonder if no historical “discoverer” has derived one -from the other, the more so since there have not been wanting writers -who denied the Cid’s existence. And if Ruy Diaz de Bivar has his -analogue in Rustem, has not Bavieca a perfect counterpart in Rakush? - -It is the horse not his master that leads me into the mazes of the _Shah -Nameh_, but something of Rustem must be told to make Rakush’s story -intelligible. Like Siegfried, Rustem was of extraordinary size and -strength: he looked a year old on the day of his birth. When he was -still a child a white elephant broke loose and began trampling the -people to death: Rustem ran to the rescue and slew it. A little time -after this his father, whose name was Zal, called the boy and showed him -all his horses, desiring him to choose that which pleased him best, but -not one was powerful enough or spirited enough to satisfy him. Unlike -the Cid, Rustem wanted a horse that looked as perfect as he really was. -After examining them all and trying many, he noticed at a little -distance a mare followed by a marvellously beautiful foal. Rustem got -ready his noose to throw about the foal’s neck, and while he did so, a -stable-man whispered to him that this foal was, indeed, worth anything -to secure; the dam, named Abresh, was famous, while the sire had been no -mortal creature but a djinn. The foal’s name was Rakush (“Lightning”), a -name given to a dappled or piebald horse, and his coat, that was as soft -as silk, looked like rose-leaves strewn on a saffron ground. Several -persons who had tried already to capture the foal had been killed by the -mare, who allowed no one to go near it. - -In fact, no sooner has Rustem lassoed the foal than its mother rushes -towards him ready to seize him with her white teeth, which glisten in -the sun. Rustem utters a loud cry which so startles the mare that she -pauses for an instant: then, with clenched fist, he rains blow on blow -on her head and neck till she drops down to die. It was done in -self-defence: still, it is a barbaric prelude. - -Rustem continued to hold Rakush with his free hand while he conquered -the mare, but now the colt drags him hither and thither like an -inanimate object: the dauntless youth has to strive long for the -mastery, but he does not rest till the end is achieved. The horse is -broken in at one breath, after the fashion of American cow-boys. It -should be noticed that legendary heroes always break in their own -horses—no other influence has been ever brought to bear on the horse but -their own. Rakush has found a master indeed, but a master worthy of him. -He has recognised that there is one—only one—fit to rule him. Like all -true heroes’ horses, he will suffer no other mortal to mount him: if -Barbary really allowed Bolingbroke to ride him it was a sure sign that -his poor royal master was no hero. This same characteristic belonged -also to Julius Cæsar’s horse, which was a remarkable animal in more ways -than one, as he was reported to have feet like a human being. I have no -doubt that Soloman’s white mare, Koureen, followed the same rule as well -as the angel Gabriel’s reputed steed, Haziûm, though I have not found -record of the fact. - -When the colt is broken in, he stands before his master perfect and -without flaw. “Now I and my horse are ready to join the fighting-men in -the field,” says Rustem as he places the saddle on his back, to the -boundless joy of Zal, whose old, withered heart becomes as green as -springtide with the thrill of fatherly pride. - -So Rakush is richly caparisoned and Rustem rides away on him, beardless -youth though he is, to command great armies, slay fearsome dragons, -defeat the wiles of sorcerers, and do all the other feats with which the -fresh fancy of a young nation embroidered the story of its favourite -hero—for, it must be remembered, Firdusi did not invent Rustem any more -than Tennyson invented Lancelot. I think there is every reason to -believe that there was a real Rustem just as there was a real Cid; and -that the first, like the second, was a combination of the _guerrillero_, -the _condottiere_, the magnificent free-booter, with the knight-errant -or paladin—a stamp which was impressed upon the other _rôle_ by the -personal quality of noble-mindedness possessed by the individual in each -case. For years unnumbered the exploits of Rustem have entertained the -Persian listener from prince to peasant, but the story will ever remain -young because it is of those which reflect that which holds mankind -spell-bound: the magnetic power of human personality. - -One hears the clear, crisp clatter of the horse’s hoofs as they gallop -through the epic. Docile as Rakush has become, his spirit is unbent; he -is eager to fight his own battles and his master’s too. Like Baiardo, -the horse in Ariosto, he uses his hoofs with deadly effect, and on one -occasion there is a regular duel between him and another horse while -Rustem is fighting its rider. His rashness inspires Rustem with much -anxiety in their earlier journeys together. Quite at the beginning, when -Rustem is on his way to liberate his captive king—his first “labour”—he -lies down to sleep in a forest, leaving Rakush free to graze, and what -is not his surprise when he wakes to find a large lion extended dead on -the grass close by. Rakush killed the savage beast with teeth and heels -while his master slept tranquilly. Rustem remonstrates with his too -venturesome steed: Why did he fight the lion all alone? Why did he not -neigh loudly and call for assistance? Had he reflected how terribly -unfortunate it would be for Rustem if anything were to happen to him? -Who would carry his heavy battle-axe and all his other accoutrements? He -conjures Rakush to fight no more lions single-handed. Then and at other -times Rustem talks to Rakush, but Rakush does not answer like the horse -of Achilles. The Persians of the eleventh century had reached the stage -of people who take their marvels with discrimination; they accepted -Simurghs, white demons, phantom elks, giants, dragons, but they might -have hesitated about a talking horse. Another of Rustem’s addresses to -his horse was spoken after one of his first victories when the enemy was -in full retreat: “My valued friend,” he said, “put forth thine utmost -speed and bear me after the foe.” The noble animal certainly understood, -for he bounded over the plain snorting as he flew along and tossing up -his mane, and great was the booty which fell into his master’s hands. -Rustem once said that with his arms and his trusty steed he would not -mind fighting thirty thousand men. As a matter of fact, he never lacked -followers, for he was of those captains who have only to stamp on the -ground for there to spring up soldiers. - -In the nineteenth century a “legendary hero” wandered with his horse -over the plains of Uruguay much as Rustem wandered with Rakush. “In my -nomad life in America,” writes Garibaldi, “after a long march or a day’s -fighting, I unsaddled my poor tired horse and smoothed and dried his -coat ... rarely could I offer him a handful of oats since those -illimitable fields provide so little grain that oats are not often given -to horses. Then, after leading him to water, I settled him for the night -near my own resting-place. Well, when all this was done, which was no -more than a duty to my faithful companion of toil and peril, I felt -content, and if by chance he neighed, refreshed, or rolled on the green -turf—oh, then I tasted _la gentil voluttà d’esser pio_!” Marvels are out -of date, but feeling remains unchanged, and the “sweets of kindness” -were known, surely, even to the earliest hero who made a friend of his -horse and found him, in the solitude of the wild, no bad substitute for -human friends. - -In the story of Sohrab, one of the finest episodes in epic poetry, -Rakush is introduced as the primary cause of it all. Tired with hunting -in the forest, and perhaps inclined to sleep by a meal of roasted wild -ass, which seems to have been his favourite game, Rustem lay down to -rest under a tree, turning Rakush free to graze as was his wont. When he -awoke the horse was nowhere to be seen! Rustem looked for his prints, a -way of recovering stolen animals still practised with astonishing -success in India. He found the prints and guessed that his favourite had -been carried off by robbers, which was what had actually happened: a -band of Tartar marauders lassoed the horse with their kamunds and -dragged him home. Rustem followed the track over the border of the -little state of Samengan, the king of which, warned of the approach of -the hero of the age, went out to meet him on foot with great deference. -The hero, however, was in no mood for compliments; full of wrath, he -told the king that his horse had been stolen and that he had traced his -footprints to Samengan. The king kept his presence of mind better than -might have been expected; he made profuse excuses and declared that no -effort should be spared to recover the horse—meanwhile he prayed Rustem -to become his honoured guest. - -Emissaries were sent in all directions in search of Rakush and a grand -entertainment was prepared for his master. Pleased and placated, Rustem, -who had spared little time for luxury in his adventurous life, finally -lay down on a delightful and beautifully adorned bed. How poetic was -sleep when it was associated, not with an erection on four legs, but -with a low couch spread with costly furs and rich Eastern stuffs! So -Rustem reposed, when his eyes opened on a living dream, a maiden -standing by his side, her lovely features illuminated by a lamp which a -slave girl held. “I am the daughter of the king,” says the fair vision; -“no one man has ever seen my face or even heard my voice. I have heard -of thy wondrous valour....” Rustem, still wondering if he slept or woke, -asked her what was her will? She answered that she loved him for his -fame and glory, and that she had vowed to God she would wed no other -man. Behold, God has brought him to her! She desires him to ask her hand -to-morrow of her father and so departs, lighted on her way by the little -slave. - -Was ever anything more chaste in its self-abandonment than the avowal of -this love, holy as Desdemona’s and irresistible as Senta’s? Nowhere in -fiction can be found a more convincing illustration of the truth that -the essential spring of woman’s love for man is hero-worship. On which -truth, in spite of the illusions it covers, what is best in human -evolution is largely built. - -The king gave glad assent to the marriage, which was celebrated -according to the rites of that country. Rustem tarried but one night -with his bride: in the morning with weeping eyes she watched him -galloping away on the recovered Rakush. Long she grieved, and only when -a son was born was her sad heart comforted. The grandfather gave the boy -the name of Sohrab. Rustem had left an amulet to be placed in the hair -if God gave her a daughter but bound round the arm if a son were born. - -In due course Rustem sent a gift of costly jewels to his wife Tahmineh, -with inquiries whether the birth of a child had blessed the marriage? -And now the mother of Sohrab made the fatal mistake of a deception which -led to all the evil that followed; she sent word that a girl had been -born because she was afraid that if Rustem knew that he had a son, he -would take him from her. Rustem, disappointed in his hopes, thought no -more about Samengan. - -There is no hint that Tahmineh’s fibbing, which, like very many other -“white lies,” ended in dire disaster, was in the slightest degree the -moral as well as the actual cause of the fatality. Herodotus said that -every Persian child was taught to ride and to speak the truth; by -Firdusi’s time the second part of the instruction seems to have been -neglected, for in the _Shah Nameh_ he makes everybody give full rein to -his powers of invention without the slightest scruple. The bad -consequences are attributed to blind fate, not to seeing Nemesis. - -What is so agonising in the doom of Sohrab is precisely the lack of -moral cause such as exists in the Greek tragedies. Though we do not -accept as a reality the Greek theory of retribution, we do accept it as -a point of view, and it helps us, as it helped them, to endure the -unspeakable horror of the Ædipus story. - -Sohrab goes forth, with a boy’s enthusiasm, to conquer Persia as a -present to his unknown father. The two meet, and are incited to engage -in single combat, each not knowing the other. After a Titanic contest, -Sohrab falls fatally wounded, and only then does Rustem discover his -identity. Matthew Arnold’s poem has familiarised English readers with -this wonderful scene, and though the “atmosphere” with which he -surrounded it, is rather classical than Eastern, his “Sohrab and Rustum” -remains the finest rendering of an Eastern story in English poetry. Some -blind guide blamed him for “plagiarising” Firdusi: in a few points he -might have done wisely to follow his original still more closely; at -least, it is a pity that he did not enshrine in his own beautiful poem -Sohrab’s touching words of comfort to his distracted father: “None is -immortal—why this grief?” Brave, spotless, kind, Firdusi’s hero-victim -who “came as the lightning and went as the wind” will always rank with -the highest in the House of the Youthful Dead. - -Sohrab had a horse as well as Rustem. This sort of repetition or -variation which is often met with in Eastern literature pleases -children, who like an incident much the better if they are already -acquainted with it, but to the mature sense of the West it seems a fault -in art. No doubt for this reason Matthew Arnold does not mention -Sohrab’s horse, while doing full justice to Rakush. But connected with -the young man’s charger there is a scene of the deepest human interest -and pathos, when it is led back to his mourning, sonless mother who had -watched him ride forth on it, rejoicing in its strength and in his own. -It was chosen by him and saddled by him for the first time in his glad -boyhood; now it is led back alone, with his arms and trappings hanging -from the saddle-bows. In an agony of grief Tahmineh presses its hoofs to -her breast and kisses head and face, covering them with her tears. - -The mother dies after a year of ceaseless heartbreak; the father and -slayer grieves with a strong man’s mighty grief, but he lives to -struggle and fight. He and his Rakush have many more wondrous -adventures, passing through enchantments and disenchantments and -undergoing wounds and marvellous cures both of men and beast, till their -hour too comes. Rustem had a base-born half-brother, named Shughad, who -was carefully brought up and wedded to a king’s daughter, though the -astrologers had foretold that he would bring ruin to his house. This -evil genius invites his invincible kinsman to a day’s hunting, having -secretly prepared hidden pits bristling with swords. The wise Rakush -stops short at the brink of the first pit, refusing to advance; Rustem -is stirred to anger and strikes his favourite, who, urged thus, falls -into the pit, but with superhuman energy, though cruelly cut about, -emerges from it with his rider safely on his back. It is in vain, for -another and another pit awaits them—seven times they come up, hacked -about with wounds, but on rising out of the seventh pit they both sink -dying at the edge. Faintness clouds Rustem’s brain; then, for a little -space, it grows clear and cool and he utters the accusing cry, “_Thou, -my brother!_” The wretch’s answer is no defence of him—there can exist -none—but strangely, unexpectedly, in spite of the impure lips that speak -it, it gives the justification of God’s ways. “God has willed Rustem’s -end for all the blood he has shed.” From his own stern faith with its -Semitic roots, Firdusi took this great, solemn conception of -blood-guiltiness which allowed no compromise. “Thou hast shed blood -abundantly and hast made great wars.” One thinks, too, of the wail of -one who was of modern men, the most like the old Hebrew type: “All I -have done,” said Bismarck in his old age, “is to cause many tears to -flow.” - -The king, who is the father-in-law of Shughad, offers to send for a -magic balm to cure Rustem’s wounds, but the hero will have none of it. -He is now quite collected, though his life-blood is ebbing away. In a -quiet voice he asks Shughad to do him the kindness of stringing his bow -and placing it in his hands, so that when dead he may be a scarecrow to -keep away wolves and wild beasts from devouring his body. With a hateful -smile of triumph Shughad complies; Rustem grasps the bow, and taking -unerring aim lets go the arrow, which nails the traitor to the tree, -whither he rushed to hide himself. So Rustem dies, thanking the Almighty -for giving him the power to avenge his murder. - -There are few better instances of the long survival of a traditional -sentiment than the fact of the king’s (or the chief’s) stable being -regarded in modern Persia as an inviolable sanctuary. This must have -originated in the veneration once felt for the horse. The misfortunes -which befell the grandson of Nadir Shah were attributed to his having -put to death a man who took refuge in his stable. No horse will carry to -victory a master who profanes his stable with bloodshed. Even political -offenders or pretenders to the throne were safe if they could reach the -stable for as long as they remained in it. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - XV - - ANIMALS IN EASTERN FICTION - - -I WAS looking idly at the motley Damascus crowd behind whose outward -strangeness to my eyes I knew there lay a deeper strangeness of ideas, -when in the middle of a clearing I saw a monkey in a red fez which began -to go through its familiar tricks. I thought to myself, “How very near -that monkey seems to me!” It was like the well-known figure of an old -friend. So it is with the animal-lore of Eastern fiction; it seems very -near to us; its heroes are our familiar friends. Perhaps we would lose -everything in the treasure-house of Oriental tales sooner than the -stories of beasts. If those stories had a hidden meaning which escapes -us we are not troubled by their hidden meaning. In their obvious sense -they appeal to us directly, without any effort to call up conditions of -life and mind far removed from our own. We take them to our hearts and -keep them there. - -Indeed, the West liked the Eastern stories of beasts so well that it -borrowed not a few without any acknowledgment. We all know that the -Welsh dog, Gellert, whose grave is shown to this day, had a near -relative in the mungoose of a Chinese Buddhist story which exists in a -collection dating from the fifth century. The same motive reappears in -the _Panchatantra_, a Sanscrit collection to which is assigned a -slightly later date. These are the earliest traces of it that have come -to light, but its subsequent wanderings are endless. The theme does not -vary much; a faithful animal saves a child from imminent peril: it is -seen with marks of blood or signs of a struggle upon it, and on the -supposition that it has killed or hurt the child, it is killed before -the truth is discovered. The animal varies according to the locality, -and amongst the other points of interest in this world-legend is that of -reminding us of the universal diffusion of pet animals. We learn, too, -which was the characteristically household animal with the people who -re-tell the story: in Syria, Greece, Spain, as in Wales, and also -(rather to our surprise) among the Jews, we hear of a dog. The weasel -tribe prevails in India and China, the cat in Persia. Probably in India -and in China dogs were not often admitted inside the houses; in a -Chinese analogous tale, of which I shall speak presently, there is a -dog, but the incidents take place on the highway. The mungoose was the -traditional pet of India because its enmity to snakes must have gained -for it admittance into dwelling-places from very early times, and -wherever man lives in domesticity with any animal that he does not look -upon as food, he cannot save himself from becoming attached to it only a -little less than he is attached to the human members of his household. -To this rule there are no exceptions. - -In the matter of folk-tales, even when we seem to have a clue to their -origin, it is rash to be dogmatic. It has been remarked that the origin -of this story was probably Buddhist, because it is unquestionable that -Buddhist monks purposely taught humanity to animals. Supposing that the -story was diffused with a fixed purpose over the vast area covered at -one time or another by Buddhism, it would have started with a wide base -whence to spread. Moreover, as I mentioned, we find it first in a -Buddhist collection of stories. But I am far from sure that the story -did not exist—nay, that the fact may not have happened—long before -Gautama preached his humane morality. Why should not the fact have -happened over and over again? It is one of those stories that are more -true than truth. I can tell a perfectly true tale which, though not -quite the same as “Gellert’s hound,” deserves no less to go round the -world. A few years ago a man went out in a boat on a French river to -drown his dog. In mid stream he threw the dog into the water and began -to row away. The dog followed and tried to clamber up into the boat. The -man gave it some severe blows about the head with the oar, but the dog -still followed the boat. Then the man lost his temper and lost his -balance: just as he aimed what he thought would be the final blow he -tumbled into the water, and as he did not know how to swim he was on the -point of being drowned. Then the dog played his part: he grasped the -man’s clothes with his teeth and held him up till assistance came. That -dog was never drowned! - -Things are soon forgotten now, but if this had only happened on a -Chinese canal three thousand years ago we might still have been hearing -about it. More folk-tales arose in such a way than an unbelieving world -suspects. - -In the Chinese Buddhist version of Gellert we are told that a very poor -Brahman who had to beg his bread possessed a pet mungoose, which, as he -had no children, became as fondly loved as if it had been his son. How -true is this touch which shows the love of animals as the _katharsis_ of -the heart-ache or heartbreak of the childless! But, by and by, to the -great joy of the Brahman, his wife bore him a son; after this happy -event he cherished the mungoose even more than ever, for he said to -himself that it was the fact of his having treated it as if it had been -his child which had brought him the unhoped-for good luck of having a -real child of his own. One day the Brahman went out to beg, but before -he went out he told his wife to be sure and take good care of the child -and carry it with her if she left the house even for a minute. The woman -fed the child with cream and then remembered that she had to grind some -rice; she went into the garden to grind it and forgot to take the little -boy with her. After she was gone, a snake, attracted by the smell of the -cream, crept quite close to where the child lay and was going to bite -it, when the mungoose perceived what was going on and reflected: “My -father has gone out and my mother too and now this poisonous snake -wishes to kill my little brother.” So the mungoose attacked the -poisonous snake and tore it into seven pieces. Then it thought that, -since it had killed the snake and saved the child, it ought to acquaint -its father and mother of what had happened and rejoice their hearts. -Therefore it went to the door and waited for them to return, its mouth -still covered with blood. Just then the Brahman came home and he was not -pleased to see his wife without the child in the out-house, where the -mill was. Thus, though this is left for the hearer to infer, he was -already vexed and anxious, when he met the mungoose waiting by the door -with blood on its mouth. The thought rushed into his mind, “This -creature, being hungry, has slain and eaten the child! “He took up a -stick and beat the mungoose to death. (Such a little thing, it is so -easily killed!) After that he went into the house, where he found the -baby sitting up in his cradle playing merrily with his fingers, while -the seven pieces of the dead snake lay beside him! Sorrow filled the -Brahman now; alas, for his folly! The faithful creature had saved his -child and he, thoughtless wretch that he was, had killed it! - -Only in this version are we informed of just what the devoted animal -thought; which may be a sign of its Buddhist origin. In the modern -Indian variant, the mungoose, tied by a string, does not succeed in -getting free till after the child has been bitten by the snake with -which he had been playing, thinking it a new toy. The cobra took the -play in good part till the child accidentally hurt it; then, angry with -the pain, it bit him in the neck. When the mungoose got loose the deed -was done and the cobra had slunk back into its hole. Off ran the -mungoose into the jungle to find the antidote which the Indian natives -believe that this creature always uses when it is itself bitten by -snakes. The mother comes in at the moment when the mungoose is returning -with the antidote: she sees the child lying motionless, and thinking -that the mungoose has killed it she seizes it and dashes it to the -ground. It quivers for a few seconds, then it dies. Only when it is -dead, does the mother notice the snake-root which it still holds tightly -in its mouth. She guesses the whole truth and quickly administers the -antidote to the child, who recovers consciousness. The mungoose “had -been a great pet with all the children and was greatly mourned for.” - -In the Sanscrit version preserved in the _Panchatantra_ collection the -mother has brought up an ichneumon with her only child, as if it had -been his brother; nevertheless, a sort of fear has always haunted her -that the animal might hurt the child sooner or later. I must interrupt -the story to remark how often the inglorious Shakespeare of these poor -little folk-tales traces with no mean art the psychological process -which leads up to the tragic crisis. What more true to life than the -observation of the two opposing feelings balancing each other in the -same mind till some accident causes one of them to gain uncontrollable -mastery? - -When the woman has killed her innocent little favourite she is bitterly -unhappy, but instead of blaming her own hastiness, she says it was all -her husband’s fault: what business had he to go out begging, “through a -greedy desire of profit,” instead of minding the baby as she had told -him to do, while she went to the well to fetch water? And now the -reprobate has caused the death of the ichneumon, the darling of the -house! - -The touching trait of the creature, which runs to its master or mistress -after saving the child, with the charming confidence and pride which any -animal shows when it knows that it deserves praise, appears in nearly -all the versions. Prince Llewellyn’s greyhound goes out to meet him “all -bloody and _wagging his tail_.” The ichneumon ran joyously to meet its -mistress, and the cat, in the Persian version, came up to its master -“rubbing against his legs.” In the Persian tale the child’s mother dies -at its birth, and it is stated that she was very fond of the cat, which -made the man even more grieved that he had killed it. - -In German folk-lore the story of the dog “Sultan” sounds as if it were -invented by some happy-souled humorist who had the Llewellyn motive in -his mind, but who wanted to tell a merry tale instead of a sad one. -“Sultan” is so old that his master wishes to kill him, though much -against the advice of his wife. So “Sultan” consults a wolf of his -acquaintance, who proposes the stratagem of pretending that he is going -to eat the good people’s child, while “Sultan” pretends to come up just -at the nick of time to save it. The plan is carried out with complete -success, and “Sultan” lives out his days surrounded by respect and -gratitude. - -There are several Eastern tales which are of the same family as -Llewellyn’s hound, but in which the animal, instead of saving a child, -confers some other benefit on its possessor. In a Persian fable a king -kills his falcon because it spilled a cup of water which he is about to -drink: of course, the water was really poisoned. A current folk-tale of -Bengal makes a horse the victim of its devotion in preventing its master -from drinking poisonous water. - -Rather different is the following Chinese tale, which is to be found, -told at more length, in Dr. Herbert H. Giles’s delightful book, “Strange -Stories from a Chinese Studio”:— - -There was a man of Lu-ngan who had scraped together enough money to -release his father from prison, where he was like to die of all the -untold miseries of Chinese durance. He got on a mule and set out for the -town where his father was languishing, taking the silver with him. When -he was well on his way, he was much annoyed to see that a black dog -which belonged to the family was following him; he tried in vain to make -it go back. After riding on for some time, he got off the mule to rest -and he took the opportunity for throwing a large stone at the dog, which -ran away, but as soon as he was on the road again the dog trotted up and -took hold of the mule’s tail, as if trying to stop it. The man beat it -off with the whip, but it only ran round in front of the mule, and -barked frantically so as to impede its progress. The man now reflected, -“This is a very bad omen,” and he got fairly into a rage and beat the -dog off with such violence that it did not come back. So he continued -his journey without further incidents, but when he reached the city in -the dark of the evening, what was not his despair on finding about half -his money gone! He did not doubt that he must have dropped it on the -way, and after passing a night of terrible distress he remembered, -towards dawn, the strange way in which the dog behaved, and he began to -think that there might be some connexion between this and the loss of -his money. Directly the gates were open he retraced his steps along the -road, though he hardly hoped to find any clue to his loss, as the route -was traversed by many travellers. But at the spot where, on the previous -day he dismounted from his mule to rest, he saw the dog stretched dead -on the ground, its hair still moist with perspiration, and when he -lifted up the body by one of its ears, he found his lost silver safely -concealed underneath it! His gratitude was great, and he bought a -coffin, in which he placed the dog and then buried it. The place is -known as “the Grave of the Faithful Dog.” - -It is not true that every one in China eats dogs, but some do, and the -trade in such animals is a recognised business. There are several cat -and dog restaurants at Canton. This unenviable habit gives rise to the -story of a merchant who had made a good stroke of business at Wu-hu and -was going home in a canal boat, when he noticed on the bank a butcher -who was tying up a dog previous to killing it. It is not stated if the -merchant had always a tender heart or if his good fortune in the town -made him wish to do a good turn to some living thing; anyhow, he -proposed to buy the dog. The butcher was no fool; he guessed that the -trader would never leave the dog to its fate after thinking about -rescuing it—what dreadful sleepless nights such a proceeding would cost -any of us! So he boldly asked a great deal more than the dog was worth, -which was paid down, and the animal was untied and put on the boat with -his new master. Now it so happened that the boatman had been a brigand, -and, though partially reformed, the feeling that he had on board a -traveller with a large sum of money was too strong a temptation for him. -So he stopped the boat by running it among the rushes and drew out a -long knife, with which he prepared to murder his passenger. The merchant -begged the brigand not to mutilate him or cut off his head, because such -treatment causes the victim to appear in the next world as no one would -like to. Brigands are generally religious, and this one was no -exception; he was willing to oblige the merchant and tied him up, quite -whole, in a carpet, which he threw into the river. The dog, which had -been looking on, was in the water in a moment, hugging and tugging at -the bundle till he got it to a shallow place. Then he barked and barked -till people came to see what was the matter, and they undid the carpet -and found the trader still alive. The first thought of the rescued man -was to track the thief, for which purpose he started at once to go back -to Wu-hu. At the time of starting, much to his distress, he missed the -dog. On arriving at Wu-hu he hunted among the endless boats and shipping -for the boat by which he had travelled, but unfortunately he could see -nothing of it, and at last he gave up the search and was going home with -a friend when what should he see but his lost dog, which barked in a -curious way as if to invite him to follow it. The merchant did so, and -the dog led him to a boat that was lying close to the quay. Into this -boat the dog jumped and seized hold of one of the boatmen by the leg. In -spite of blows the animal would not let go, and then the merchant, on -looking hard at the boatman, recognised him as the very man who tried to -murder him, though he had a nice new suit of clothes and a new boat. The -thief was arrested and the money found at the bottom of the boat. “To -think,” says the story-teller, “that a dog could show gratitude like -that!” To which Dr. Giles adds that dogs in China are usually “ill-fed, -barking curs” which, if valued as guardians of house and chattels, are -still despised. But beautiful moral qualities have the power to conquer -loathing, and even in those countries where the dog is regarded -generally with aversion it is still the chosen type of sublime fidelity -and love. - -I can never think of Chinese dogs without remembering a story told by my -cousin, Lord Napier of Magdala, of an incident which, he said, gave him -more pain than anything that had ever happened to him in his life. When -he was in China he chanced to admire a dog, which was immediately -offered to him as a gift. He could not accept the offer, and next day he -heard that the owner of the dog with all his family, five persons, had -drowned himself in a well. Probably they imagined that he was offended -by their offering him a mere dog. - -In India, to return to that home of legend, the two most sublime Beast -Stories are to be found in the Great Epic of the Hindu race, the -_Mahabharata_. They are both stories of the faithfulness of man to -beast, and they afford consolation for the sorry figure presented by the -human actor in the martyred mungoose tale. The first of these stories is -the legend of the Hawk and the Pigeon. A pigeon pursued by a hawk flies -for protection to the precinct of sacrifice, where a very pious king is -about to make his offering. It clings to the king’s breast, motionless -with fright. Then up comes the hawk, which, perching on a near -vantage-ground, begins to argue the case. All the princes of the earth -declare the king to be a magnanimous chief; why, therefore, should he -fly in the face of natural laws? Why keep its destined food from the -hawk, which feels very hungry? The king answers that the pigeon came -flying to him, overcome by fear and seeking to save its life. How can he -possibly give it up? A trembling bird which enters his presence begging -for its life? How ignoble it would be to abandon it! Surely it would be -a mortal sin! In fact, that is exactly what the Law calls it! - -The hawk retorts that all creatures must eat to live. You can sustain -life on very little, but how are you going to live on nothing at all? If -the hawk has nothing to eat, his vital breath will depart this very day -“on the road where nothing more affrights.” If he dies, his wife and -children will die too for want of their protector. Such an eventuality -cannot be contemplated by the Law: a law which contradicts itself is a -very bad law and cannot be in accordance with eternal truth. In -theological difficulties one has to consider what seems just and -reasonable and interpret the point in that sense. - -“There is a great deal to be said for what you say, best of fowls,” -replies the king, who is impressed by the hawk’s forensic skill and -begins to think him a person not to be trifled with; “you are very well -informed; in fact, I am inclined to think that you know everything. How -_can_ you suppose, then, that it would be a decent thing to give up a -creature that seeks refuge? Of course, I understand that with you it is -a question of a dinner, but something much more substantial than this -pigeon can be prepared for you immediately; for instance, a wild boar, -or a gazelle or a buffalo—anything that you like.” - -The hawk answers that he never, by any chance, touches meat of that -sort: why does the king talk to him about such unsuitable diet? By an -immutable rule hawks feed on pigeons, and this pigeon is the very thing -he wants and to which he has a perfect right. In a delicate metaphor he -hints that the king had better leave off talking nonsense. - -The king, who sees that arguments are no good, now declares that -anything and everything he will give the hawk by way of compensation, -but that as to the pigeon, he will not give it up, so it is no good -going on discussing the matter. - -The hawk says, in return, that if the king is so tenderly solicitous on -the pigeon’s account, the best thing he can do is to cut out a piece of -his own flesh and weigh it in the scales with the pigeon—when the -balance is equal, then and then only will the hawk be satisfied. “As you -ask that as a favour,” says the king, “you shall have what you wish”—a -consent which seems to contain a polite hint that the hawk might have -been a little less arrogant, for in the hawk’s demand there was no -mention of favours. - -The king himself cuts out the piece of his flesh (no one else would have -dared do it). But, alas! when it is weighed with the pigeon, the pigeon -weighs the most! The king went on cutting pieces of his flesh and -throwing them into the scales, but the pigeon was still the heaviest. At -last, all lacerated as he was, he threw himself into the scales. Then, -with a blast of revelation, the esoteric sense of the story is made -plain. There is something grand in the sudden antithesis. - -The hawk said: “I am Indra, O prince, thou that knowest the Law! And -this pigeon is Agni! Since thou hast torn thy flesh from thy limbs, O -thou Prince of Men, thy glory shall shine throughout all worlds. As long -as there be men on earth they will remember thee, O king. As long as the -eternal realms endure thy fame shall not grow dim.” - -So the gods returned to heaven, to which the pious Wusinara likewise -ascended with his renovated body, luminously bright. He needs not to -complete his sacrifice—himself has he offered up. - -The listeners (Eastern stories are for listeners, not for readers) are -exhorted to raise their eyes and behold with the mind’s vision that pure -and holy abode where the righteous dwell with the gods in glory -ineffable. - -This beautiful fable belongs to the general class of the ancient stories -of Divine visitants, but it has a more direct affinity with the lovely -legends of the Middle Ages, in which pious people who give their beds to -lepers or others suffering from loathsome disease find that it was -Christ they harboured. Though the story of the Hawk and the Pigeon may -be used simply as a fairy tale, the moral of it is what forms the -essential kernel of other-worldly religions. Through the mazes of Indian -thought emerges the constant conviction—like a Divine sign-post—that -martyrdom is redemption. The gods themselves are less than the man who -resigns everything for what his conscience tells him to be right. Indra -bows before Wusinara and seeks to learn the Law from him. India’s gods -are Nature-gods, and Nature teaches no such lesson:— - - “There is no effort on _my_ brow— - I do not strive, I do not weep, - I rush with the swift spheres and glow - For joy, and when I will, I sleep.” - -Higher religions are a criticism of Nature: they “occupy the sphere that -rational interpretation seeks to occupy and fails, and fails the more -the more it seeks,” and if they change with the change of moral -aspirations they are still the passionate endeavour of the soul to -satisfy them. - -The Buddhists took the story of the Hawk and the Pigeon and adapted it -to their own teaching. Indra, chief of the gods, feels that his god-life -is waning—for the gods of India labour, too, under the sense of that -mysterious fatality of doom which haunted Olympus and Walhalla. Indra, -knowing his twilight to be near, desired to consult a Buddha, but there -was not one at that time upon the earth. There was, however, a virtuous -king of the name of Sivi, and Indra decides to put him to the ordeal, -which forms the subject of the other story, because, if he comes out -scathless, he will be qualified to become a full Buddha. King Sivi had a -severe struggle with himself, but he conquered his weakness, and when he -feels the scale sink under him he is filled with indescribable joy and -heaven and earth shake, which always happens when a Buddha is coming -into existence. A crowd of gods descended and rested on the air: the -sight of Sivi’s endurance caused them to weep tears that fell like rain -mingled with divine flowers, which the gods threw down on the voluntary -victim. - -Indra puts off the form of a dove and resumes his god-like shape. What, -he asks, does the king desire? Would he be universal monarch? Would he -be king of the Genii? _Would he be Indra?_ There is a fine touch in this -offer from the god of his godship to the heroic man, and, like most -Buddhist amplifications of older legends, it might be justified from -Brahmanical sources, as by incredible self-denial it was always held to -be possible to dethrone a god and put oneself in his place. But Sivi -replies that the only state he craves is that of a Buddha. Indra -inquires if no shade of regret crosses the king’s mind when he feels the -anguish reaching to his bones? The king replies, “I regret nothing.” -“How can I believe it,” says Indra, “when thy body trembles and shivers -so that thou canst hardly speak?” Sivi repeats that from beginning to -end he has felt no shadow of regret; all has happened as he wished. In -proof that he speaks truth, may his body be as whole as before! He had -scarcely spoken when the miracle was effected, and in the same instant -King Sivi became a Buddha. - -There is a Russian folk-tale which seems to belong to this cycle. A -horse which was ill-treated and half-starved saves the child of one of -his masters from a bear. He has a friend, a cat, who is also -half-starved. After he has saved the child he is better fed and he gives -the cat part of his food. The masters notice this and again ill-treat -him. He resolves to kill himself so that the cat may eat him, but the -cat will not eat her friend and resolves to die likewise. - -The second great story of man and beast contained in the _Mahabharata_ -is that of Yudishtira and his dog. Accompanied by his wife and by his -brethren, the saintly king started upon a pilgrimage of unheard-of -difficulty which he alone was able to complete, as, on account of some -slight imperfections that rendered them insufficiently meritorious to -reach the goal, the others died upon the way. Only a dog, which followed -Yudishtira from his house, remains with him still. At the final stage he -is met by Indra, who invites him to mount his car and ascend to heaven -in the flesh. The king asks if his brethren and the “tender king’s -daughter,” his wife, are to be left lying miserably upon the road? Indra -points out that the souls of these have already left their mortal coil -and are even now in heaven, where Yudishtira will find them when he -reaches it in his corporeal form. Then the king says, “And the dog, O -lord of what Is and Is to be—the dog which has been faithful to the end, -may I bring him? It is not my nature to be hard.” Indra says that since -the king has this day obtained the rank of a god together with -immortality and unbounded happiness, he had better not waste thoughts on -a dog. Yudishtira answers that it would be an abominably unworthy act to -forsake a faithful servant in order to obtain felicity and fortune. -Indra objects that no dogs are allowed in heaven; what is a dog? A -rough, ill-mannered brute which often runs away with the sacrifices -offered in the temples. Let Yudishtira only reflect what wretched -creatures dogs are, and he will give up all idea of taking his dog to -heaven. Yudishtira still asserts that the abandonment of a servant is an -enormous sin; it is as bad as murdering a Brahman. He is not going to -forsake his dog whatever the god may say. Besides, it is not violent at -all, but a gentle and devoted creature, and now that it is so weak and -thin from all it has undergone on the journey and yet so eager to live, -he would not leave it, even if it cost him his life. That is his final -resolve. - -Arguing in rather a feminine way, Indra returns to the charge that dogs -are rough, rude brutes and quite ignores the good personal character -given to this dog by its master. He goes on to twit Yudishtira with -having abandoned his beloved Draupadi and his brothers on the road down -there, while he makes all this stand about a dog. He winds up with -saying, “You must be quite mad to-day.” - -Repelling the disingenuous charge of abandoning his wife and brethren, -Yudishtira remarks with dignity that he left not them but their dead -bodies on the road: he could not bring them to life again. He might have -said that Indra himself had pointed out to him this very fact. The -refusal of asylum, the murder of a woman, the act of kidnapping a -sleeping Brahman, the act of deceiving a friend—there is nothing, says -Yudishtira, to choose between these four things and the abandonment of a -faithful servant. - -The trial is over and the god admits his defeat. “Since thou hast -refused the divine chariot with the words, ‘This dog is devoted,’ it is -clear, O Prince of Men, that there is no one in heaven equal to thee.” -Yudishtira, alone among mortals, ascends to bliss in his own body. And -the dog—what of the dog? One is sorry to hear that the dog vanished and -in his place stood Yama, King of Death. - -To us, far away from the glamour of Eastern skies, the -god-out-of-the-machine or out of the beast-skin is not always a welcome -apparition. We cannot help being glad when, sometimes, the animals just -remain what they are, as in the charming Indian fable of the Lion and -the Vulture. A lion who lived in a forest became great friends with a -monkey. One day the monkey asked the lion to look after its two little -ones while it was away. But the lion happened to go to sleep and a -vulture that was hovering overhead seized both the young monkeys and -took them up into a tree. When the lion awoke he saw that his charges -were gone, and gazing about he perceived the vulture holding them tight -on the top branches of the nearest tree. In great distress of mind the -lion said, “The monkey placed its two children under my care, but I was -not watchful enough and now you have carried them off. In this way I -have missed keeping my word. I do beg you to give them back; I am the -king of beasts, you are the chief of birds: our nobility and our power -are equal. It would be only fair to let me have them.” Alas! -compliments, though they will go very far, do little to persuade an -empty stomach. “You are totally unacquainted with the circumstances of -the case,” replied the vulture; “I am simply dying of hunger: what is -the equality or difference of rank to me?” Then the lion with his claws -tore out some of his own flesh to satisfy the vulture’s appetite and so -ransomed the little monkeys. - -In this fable we have the Hawk and the Pigeon motive with the miraculous -kept in but the mythological left out. - -Like a great part of the Buddhist stories of which the Lion and the -Vulture is one, we owe its preservation to the industrious Chinese -translator. In the same work that contains it, the _Tatchi-lou-lun_, we -are told how, when a bird laid her eggs on the head of the first Buddha -which she mistook for the branch of a tree, he plunged himself into a -trance so as not to move till the eggs were hatched and the young birds -had flown. The Buddha’s humanity is yet again shown by the story of how -he saved the forest animals that were fleeing from a conflagration. The -jungle caught fire and the flames spread to the forest, which burnt -fiercely on three sides; one side was safe, but it was bounded by a -great river. The Buddha saw the animals huddling in terror by the -water’s edge. Full of pity, he took the form of a gigantic stag and -placing his fore-feet on the further bank and his hind-feet on the -other, he made a bridge over which the creatures could pass. His skin -and flesh were cruelly wounded by their feet, but love helped him to -bear the pain. When all the other animals had passed over, and when the -stag’s powers were all but gone, up came a panting hare. The stag made -one more supreme effort; the hare was saved, but hardly had it crossed, -when the stag’s backbone broke and it fell into the water and died. The -author of the fable may not have known that hares swim very well, so -that the sacrifice was not necessary, unless, indeed, this hare was too -exhausted to take to the water. - -We can picture the first Buddhist missionaries telling such stories over -the vast Chinese empire to a race which had not instinctively that -tender feeling for animals which existed from the most remote times in -the Indian peninsula. A good authority attributes the present Chinese -sensitiveness about animals wholly to those early teachers. - -A Sanscrit story akin to the preceding ones tells how a saint in the -first stage of Buddhahood was walking in the mountains with his disciple -when he saw in a cavern in the rock a tigress and her newly-born little -ones. She was thin and starving and exhausted by suffering, and she cast -unnatural glances on her children as they pressed close to her, -confident in her love and heedless of her cruel growls. Notwithstanding -his usual self-control, the saint trembled with emotion at the sight. -Turning to his disciple, he cried, “My son, my son, here is a tigress, -which, in spite of maternal instinct, is being driven by hunger to -devour her little ones. Oh! dreadful cruelty of self-love, which makes a -mother feed upon her children!” - -He bids the young man fly in search of food, but while he is gone he -reflects that it may be too late when he returns, and to save the mother -from the dreadful crime of killing her children, and the little ones -from the teeth of their famished mother, he flings himself down the -precipice. Hearing the noise, and curious as to what it might mean, the -tigress is turned from the thought of killing her young ones, and on -looking round she sees the body of the saint and devours it. - -The most remarkable of all the many Buddhist animal stories is that of -the Banyan Deer, which is in the rich collection of old-world lore known -as the _Jātaka Book_. The collection is not so much an original Buddhist -work as the Buddhist redaction of much older tales. It was made in about -the third century B.C. The Banyan Deer story had the additional interest -that illustrations of it were discovered among the bas-reliefs of the -stupa of Bharhut. I condense the story from the version of it given in -Professor T. W. Rhys Davids’ “Buddhist India.” - -In the king’s park there were two herds of deer, and every day either -the king or his cook hunted them for venison. So every day a great many -were harassed and wounded for one that was killed. Then the golden-hued -Banyan Deer, who was the monarch of one herd, went to the Branch Deer, -who was king of the other herd, and proposed an arrangement by which -lots were to be cast daily, and one deer on whom the lot fell should go -and offer himself to the cook, voluntarily laying his head on the block. -In this way there would be no unnecessary suffering and slaughter. - -[Illustration: - - _Photo:_ _Griggs._ - THE BANYAN DEER. - (_From “Stûpa of Bharhut,” by General Cunningham._)] - -The somewhat lugubrious proposition met with assent, and all seems to -have gone well till one day the lot fell to a doe of the Branch king’s -herd, who was expecting soon to become a mother. She begged her king to -relieve her of the duty, as it would mean that two at once should -suffer, which could never have been intended. But with harsh words the -Branch king bade her be off to the block. Then the little doe went -piteously to the Banyan king as a last hope. No sooner had he heard her -tale than he said he would look to the matter, and what he did was to go -straight to the block himself and lay his royal head upon it. But as the -king of the country had ordered that the monarchs of both herds should -be spared, the cook was astonished to see King Banyan with his head on -the block, and went off in a hurry to tell his lord. Mounted in a -chariot with all his men around him, the sovereign rode straight to the -place. Then he asked his friend, the king of the deer, why had he come -there? Had he not granted him his life? The Banyan Deer told him all. -The heart of the king of men was touched, and he commanded the deer to -rise up and go on his way, for he gave him his life and hers also to the -doe. But the Banyan Deer asked how it would be with all the others: were -two to be saved and the rest left to their peril? The king of men said -that they too should be respected. Even then the Banyan Deer had more to -ask: he pleaded for the safety of all living, feeling things, and the -king of men granted his prayer. (What will not a man grant when his -heart is touched by some act of pure abnegation?) - -There is a curious epilogue to the story. The doe gave birth to a most -beautiful fawn, which went playing with the herd of the Branch Deer. To -it the mother said:— - - “Follow rather the Banyan Deer, - Cultivate not the Branch! - Death with the Banyan were better far - Than with the Branch long life.” - -The verse is haunting in its vagueness, as a music which reaches us from -far away. “Follow rather the Banyan Deer!” ... follow the ideal, follow -the merciful, he who loses his life shall find it. - -The Indian hermit of whatsoever sect has always been, and is still, good -friends with animals, and when he can, he gives asylum to as many as he -is able, around his hermitage. This fact, which is familiar to all, -becomes the groundwork of many stories. One of the best is the elaborate -Chinese Buddhist tale of Sama, an incarnation of Buddha, who chose to be -born as a son to two old, blind, childless folks, in order to take care -of their forlornness. When the child was ten years old he begged his -parents respectfully to go with him into the solitary mountains where -they might practise the life of religious persons who have forsaken the -world. His parents agreed; they had been thinking about becoming hermits -before his birth, but that happy event made them put the thought away. -Now they were quite willing to go with him. So they gave their worldly -goods to the poor and followed where he led. - -[Illustration: - - _Photo:_ _Mansell._ - EGYPTIAN FOWLING SCENE. - British Museum. - (_Mural painting._)] - -There is a beautiful description of the life in the mountains. Sama made -a shelter of leaves and branches, and brought his old parents sweet -fruits and cool water—all that they needed. The birds and beasts of the -forest, showing no fear, delighted the blind couple with their song and -friendship, and all the creatures came at Sama’s call and followed him -about. Herds of deer and feathered fowl drank by the river’s bank while -he drew water. Unhappily one day the king of Kasi was out hunting in -those wilds and he saw the birds and the deer, but Sama he did not see -and an arrow he aimed at the herd pierced the boy’s body. The wounded -boy said to the king, “They kill an elephant for its ivory teeth, a -rhinoceros for its horn, a kingfisher for its feathers, a deer for its -skin, but why should I be killed?” - -The king dismounted, and asked him who he was—consorting with the wild -herds of the forest. Sama told him that he was only a hermit boy, living -an innocent life with his blind parents. No tiger or wolf had harmed -them, and now the arrow of his king laid him low. - -The forest wailed; the wild beasts and birds, the lions, tigers, and -wolves uttered dismal cries. “Hark, how the beasts of the forest cry!” -Said the old couple to one another, “Never before have we heard it so. -How long our son has been gone!” - -Meanwhile, the king, overcome by sorrow and remorse, tried in vain to -draw the arrow from the boy’s breast. The birds flew round and round -screaming wildly; the king trembled with fear. Sama said, “Your Majesty -is not to blame; I must have done ill in a former life, and now suffer -justly for it: I do not grieve for myself but for my blind parents ... -what will they do? May heavenly guardians protect them!” - -Then the king said, “May I undergo the torments of hell for a hundred -æons, but O! may this youth live!” It was not to be; Sama expired, while -all the wood birds flocking together tried tenderly to staunch the blood -flowing from his breast. - -I cannot tell the whole story, which has a strong suggestion of some -poetic fancy of Maeterlinck. In the end Sama is brought back to life, -and the eyes of his parents are opened. The king is admonished to return -to his dominions and no longer take life in the chase. - -In a Jaina hermit story a king goes hunting with a great attendance of -horses, elephants, chariots, and men on foot. He pursues the deer on -horseback, and, keen on his sport, he does not notice, as he aims the -arrow, that the frightened creature is fleeing to a holy ascetic who is -wise in the study of sacred things. Of a sudden, he beholds the dead -deer and the holy man standing by it. A dreadful fear seizes the king: -he might have killed the monk! He gets off his horse, bows low, and -prays to be forgiven. The venerable saint was plunged in thought and -made no answer; the king grew more and more alarmed at his silence. -“Answer me, I pray, Reverend Sir,” he said. “Be without fear, O king,” -replied the monk, “but grant safety to others also. In this transient -world of living things, why are you prone to cruelty?” Why should the -king cling to kingly power, since one day he must part with everything? -Life and beauty pass, wife and children, friends and kindred—they will -follow no man in death: what do follow him are his deeds, good or evil. -When he heard that, the king renounced his kingdom and became an -ascetic. “A certain nobleman who had turned monk said to him, ‘As you -look so happy, you must have peace of mind.’” - -It may be a wrong conception of life that makes men seek rest on this -side of the grave, but one can well believe that the finding of it -brings a happiness beyond our common ken. For one thing, he who lives -with Nature surely never knows _ennui_. The most marvellous of dramatic -poems unfolds its pages before his eyes. Nor does he know loneliness; -even one little creature in a prisoner’s cell gives a sense of -companionship, and the recluse in the wild has the society of all the -furred and feathered hosts. The greatest poet of the later literature of -India, Kálidása, draws an exquisite picture of the surroundings of an -Indian heritage:— - -“See under yon trees the hallowed grains which have been scattered on -the ground, while the tender female parrots were feeding their unfledged -young ones in their pendant nests.... Look at the young fawns, which, -having acquired confidence in man, and accustomed themselves to the -sound of his voice, frisk at pleasure, without varying their course. -See, too, where the young roes graze, without apprehension from our -approach, on the lawn before yonder garden, where the tops of the -sacrificial grass, cut for some religious rite, are sprinkled round.”[9] - -Footnote 9: - - Sir William Jones’s translation. - -In the play of _Sacontala_—which filled Goethe with a delight -crystallised in his immortal quatrain—no scene is so impressed by -genuine feeling and none so artistic in its admirable simplicity as that -in which the heroine takes leave of her childhood’s pet. - -The hermit, who has been the foster-father of Sacontala, is dismissing -her upon her journey to the exalted bridegroom who awaits her. At the -last moment she says to him: “My father, see you there my pet deer, -grazing close to the hermitage? She expects soon to fawn, and even now -the weight of the little ones she carries hinders her movements. Do not -forget to send me word when she becomes a mother.” - -The hermit, Canna, promises that it shall be done; then as Sacontala -moves away, she feels herself drawn back, and turning round, she says, -“What can this be fastened to my dress?” - -Canna answers:— - - “My daughter, - It is the little fawn, thy foster child. - Poor helpless orphan! It remembers well - How with a mother’s tenderness and love - Thou didst protect it, and with grains of rice - From thine own hand didst daily nourish it, - And ever and anon when some sharp thorn - Had pierced its mouth, how gently thou didst tend - The bleeding wound and pour in healing balm. - The grateful nursling clings to its protectress, - Mutely imploring leave to follow her.” - -Sacontala replies, weeping, “My poor little fawn, dost thou ask to -follow an unhappy wretch who hesitates not to desert her companions? -When thy mother died, soon after thy birth, I supplied her place and -reared thee with my own hands, and now that thy second mother is about -to leave thee, who will care for thee? My father, be thou a mother to -her. My child, go back and be a daughter to my father!” - - * * * * * - -It is the fatality of the dramatist that he cannot stamp with truth -sentiments which are not sure of a response from his audience: he must -strike the keyboard of his race. We can imagine how thoroughly an Indian -audience would enter into the sentiment of this charming scene. To the -little Indian girl, who was still only a child of thirteen or fourteen, -the favourite animal did not appear as a toy, or even as a simple -playmate. It was the object of grave and thoughtful care, and it -received the first outpouring of what would one day be maternal love. - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - XVI - - THE GROWTH OF MODERN IDEAS ON ANIMALS - - -THE last age of antiquity was an age of yeast. Ideas were in -fermentation; religious questions came to be regarded as -“interesting”—just as they are now. The spirit of inquiry took the place -of placid acceptance on the one hand, and placid indifference on the -other. It was natural that there should be a rebound from the effort of -Augustus to re-order religion on an Imperial, conventional, and -unemotional basis. Then, too, Rome, which had never been really Italian -except in the sublime previsions of Virgil, grew every day more -cosmopolitan: the denizens of the discovered world found their way -thither on business, for pleasure, as slaves—the influence of these last -not being the least important factor, though its extent and character -are not easy to define. Everything tended to foment a religious unrest -which took the form of one of those “returns to the East” that are ever -destined to recur: the spiritual sense of the Western world became -Orientalised. The worship of Isis and Serapis and much more of Mithra -proved to be more exciting than the worship of the Greek and Roman gods -which represented Nature and law, while the new cults proposed to raise -the veil on what transcends natural perception. No doubt the atmosphere -of the East itself favoured their rapid development; the traveller in -North Africa must be struck by the extraordinary frequency with which -the symbols of Mithraism recur in the sculpture and mosaics of that once -great Roman dependency. Evidently the birthland of St. Augustine bred in -the matter-of-fact Roman colonist the same nostalgia for the Unknowable -which even now a lonely night under the stars of the Sahara awakes in -the dullest European soul. Personal immortality as a paramount doctrine; -a further life more real than this one; ritual purification, redemption -by sacrifice, mystical union with deity; these were among the un-Roman -and even anti-Roman conceptions which lay behind the new, strange -propaganda, and prepared the way for the diffusion of Christianity. With -the Italian peasants who clung to the unmixed older faith no progress -was made till persecution could be called in as an auxiliary. - -[Illustration: - - _Photo:_ _Mansell._ - ASSYRIAN LION AND LIONESS IN PARADISE PARK. - British Museum.] - -In such a time it was a psychological certainty that among the other -Eastern ideas which were coming to the fore, would be those ideas about -animals which are roughly classed under the head of Pythagoreanism. The -apostles of Christ in their journeys East or West might have met a -singular individual who was carrying on an apostolate of his own, the -one clear and unyielding point of which was the abolition of animal -sacrifices. This was Apollonius, of Tyana, our knowledge of whom is -derived from the biography, in part perhaps fanciful, written by -Philostratus in the third century to please the Empress Julia Domna, who -was interested in occult matters. Apollonius worked wonders as well -attested as those, for instance, of the Russian Father John, but he -seems to have considered his power the naturally produced result of an -austere life and abstinence from flesh and wine which is a thoroughly -Buddhist or Jaina theory. He was a theosophist who refrained from -attacking the outward forms and observances of established religion when -they did not seem to him either to be cruel or else incongruous to the -degree of preventing a reverential spirit. He did not entirely -understand that this degree is movable, any more than do those persons -who want to substitute Gregorian chants for opera airs in rural Italian -churches. He did not mind the Greek statues which appealed to the -imagination by suggestions of beauty, but he blamed the Egyptians for -representing deity as a dog or an ibis; if they disliked images of stone -why not have a temple where there were no images of any kind—where all -was left to the inner vision of the worshipper? In which question, -almost accidentally, Apollonius throws out a hint of the highest form of -spiritual worship. - -[Illustration: - - _Photo:_ _Alinari._ - LAMBS. - (_Relief on fifth century tomb at Ravenna._)] - -The keenly intellectual thinkers whom we call the Fathers of the Church -saw that the majority of the ideas then agitating men’s minds might find -a quietus in Christian dogma which suited them a great deal better than -the vague and often grotesque shape they had worn hitherto. But there -was a residuum of which they felt an instinctive fear, and peculiar -notions about animals had the ill-luck of being placed at the head of -these. It could not have been a fortunate coincidence that two of the -most prominent men who held them in the early centuries were declared -foes of the new faith—Celsus and Porphyry. - -When the Church triumphed, the treatise written by Celsus would have -been no doubt entirely destroyed like other works of the same sort, had -not Origen made a great number of quotations from it for the purpose of -confutation. Celsus was no _borné_ disputant after the fashion of the -Octavius of Minucius, but a man of almost encyclopædic learning; if he -was a less fair critic than he held himself to be, it was less from want -of information than from want of that sympathy which is needful for true -comprehension. The inner feeling of such a man towards the Christian -Sectaries was not near so much that of a Torquemada in regard to -heretics as that of an old-fashioned Tory upholder of throne and altar -towards dissent fifty years ago. It was a feeling of social aloofness. - -Yet Celsus wished to be fair, and he had studied religions to enough -purpose not to condemn as delusion or untruth everything that a -superficial adversary would have rejected at once; for instance, he was -ready to allow that the appearances of Christ to His disciples after the -Crucifixion might be explained as psychical phenomena. Possibly he -believed that truth, not falsehood, was the ultimate basis of all -religions as was the belief of Apollonius before him. In some respects -Celsus was more unprejudiced than Apollonius; this can be observed in -his remarks on Egyptian zoomorphism; it causes surprise, he says, when -you go inside one of the splendid Egyptian temples to find for divinity -a cat, a monkey or a crocodile, but to the initiated they are symbols -which under an allegorical veil turn people to honour imperishable -ideas, not perishable animals as the vulgar suppose. - -It may have been his recondite researches which led Celsus to take up -the question of the intelligence of animals and the conclusions to be -drawn from it. He only touches lightly on the subject of their origin; -he seems to lean towards the theory that the soul, life, mind, only, is -made by God, the corruptible and passing body being a natural growth or -perhaps the handiwork of inferior spirits. He denied that reason -belonged to man alone, and still more strongly that God created the -universe for man rather than for the other animals. Only absurd pride, -he says, can engender such a thought. He knew very well that this, far -from being a new idea, was the normal view of the ancient world from -Aristotle to Cicero; the distinguished men who disagreed with it had -never won more than a small minority over to their opinion. Celsus takes -Euripides to task for saying— - - “The sun and moon are made to serve mankind.” - -Why mankind? he asks; why not ants and flies? Night serves them also for -rest and day for seeing and working. If it be said that we are the king -of animals because we hunt and catch them or because we eat them, why -not say that we are made for them because they hunt and catch us? -Indeed, they are better provided than we, for while we need arms and -nets to take them and the help of several men and dogs, Nature furnishes -them with the arms they require, and we are, as it were, made dependent -on them. You want to make out that God gave you the power to take and -kill wild animals, but at the time when there were no towns or -civilisation or society or arms or nets, animals probably caught and -devoured men while men never caught animals. In this way, it looks more -as if God subjected man to animals than _vice versâ_. If men seem -different from animals because they build cities, make laws, obey -magistrates and rulers, you ought to note that this amounts to nothing -at all, since ants and bees do just the same. Bees have their “kings”; -some command, others obey; they make war, win battles, take prisoner the -vanquished; they have their towns and quarters; their work is regulated -by fixed periods, they punish the lazy and cowardly—at least they expel -the drones. As to ants, they practise the science of social economy just -as well as we do; they have granaries which they fill with provisions -for the winter; they help their comrades if they see them bending under -the weight of a burden; they carry their dead to places which become -family tombs; they address each other when they meet: whence it follows -that they never lose their way. We must conclude, therefore, that they -have complete reasoning powers and common notions of certain general -truths, and that they have a language and know how to express fortuitous -events. If some one, then, looked down from the height of heaven on to -the earth, what difference would he see between our actions and those of -ants and bees? If man is proud of knowing magical secrets, serpents and -eagles know a great deal more, for they use many preservatives against -poisons and diseases, and are acquainted with the virtues of certain -stones with which they cure the ailments of their young ones, while if -men find out such a cure they think they have hit on the greatest wonder -in the world. Finally, if man imagines that he is superior to animals -because he possesses notion of God, let him know that it is the same -with many of them; what is there more divine, in fact, than to foresee -and to foretell the future? Now for that purpose men have recourse to -animals, especially to birds, and all our soothsayers do is to -understand the indications given by these. If, therefore, birds and -other prophetic animals show us by signs the future as it is revealed to -them by God, it proves that they have closer relations with the deity -than we; that they are wiser and more loved by God. Very enlightened men -have thought that they understood the language of certain animals, and -in proof of this they have been known to predict that birds would do -something or go somewhere, and this was observed to come true. No one -keeps an oath more religiously or is more faithful to God than the -elephant, which shows that he knows Him. - -Hence, concludes Celsus, the universe has _not_ been made for man any -more than for the eagle or the dolphin. Everything was created not in -the interest of something else, but to contribute to the harmony of the -whole in order that the world might be absolutely perfect. God takes -care of the universe; it is that which His providence never forsakes, -that which never falls into disorder. God no more gets angry with men -than with rats or monkeys: everything keeps its appointed place. - -In this passage Celsus rises to a higher level than in any other of the -excerpts preserved for us by Origen. The tone of irony which usually -characterises him disappears in this dignified affirmation of supreme -wisdom justified of itself not by the little standards of men—or ants. -It must be recognised as a lofty conception, commanding the respect of -those who differ from it, and reconciling all apparent difficulties and -contradictions forced upon us by the contemplation of men and Nature. -But it brings no water from the cool spring to souls dying of thirst; it -expounds in the clearest way and even in the noblest way the very -thought which drove men into the Christian fold far more surely than the -learned apologies of controversialists like Origen; the thought of the -crushing unimportance of the individual. - -The least attentive reader must be struck by the real knowledge of -natural history shown by Celsus: his ants are nearly as conscientiously -observed as Lord Avebury’s. Yet a certain suspicion of conscious -exaggeration detracts from the seriousness of his arguments; he strikes -one as more sincere in disbelieving than in believing. A modern writer -has remarked that Celsus in the second half of the second century -forestalled Darwin in the second half of the nineteenth by denying human -ascendancy and contending that man may be a little lower than the brute. -But it scarcely seems certain whether he was convinced by his own -reasoning or was not rather replying by paradoxes to what he considered -the still greater paradoxes of Christian theology. - -The shadow of no such doubt falls on the pages of the neoplatonists -Plotinus and Porphyry. To them the destiny of animals was not an -academic problem but an obsession. The questions which Heine’s young man -asked of the waves: “What signifies man? Whence does he come? Whither -does he go?” were asked by them with passionate earnestness in their -application to all sentient things. Plotinus reasoned, with great force, -that intelligent beast-souls must be like the soul of man since in -itself the essence of the soul could not be different. Porphyry (born at -Tyre, A.D. 233), accepting this postulate that animals possess an -intelligent soul like ours, went on to declare that it was therefore -unlawful to kill or feed on them under any circumstances. If justice is -due to rational beings, how is it possible to evade the conclusion that -we are also bound to act justly towards the races below us? He who loves -all animated nature will not single out one tribe of innocent beings for -hatred; if he loves the whole he will love every part, and, above all, -that part which is most closely allied to ourselves. Porphyry was quite -ready to admit that animals in their own way made use of words, and he -mentions Melampus and Apollonius as among the philosophers who -understood their language. He quoted with approval the laws supposed to -have been framed by Triptolemus in the reign of Pandion, fifth king of -Athens: “Honour your parents; make oblations of your fruits to the gods; -hurt not any living creature.” - -Neoplatonism penetrated into the early Church, but divested of its views -on animal destiny; even the Catholic neoplatonist Boëthius, though he -was sensitively fond of animals (witness his lines about caged birds), -yet took the extreme view of the hard-and-fast line of separation, as -may be seen by his poem on the “downward head,” which he interpreted to -indicate the earth-bound nature of all flesh save man. Birds, by the by, -and even fishes, not to speak of camel-leopards, can hardly be said to -have a “downward head.” Meanwhile, the other manner of feeling, if not -of thinking, reasserted its power as it always will, for it belongs to -the primal things. Excluded from the broad road, it came in by the -narrow way—the way that leads to heaven. In the wake of the Christian -Guru came a whole troop of charming beasts, little less saintly and -miraculous than their holy protectors, and thus preachers of the -religion of love were spared the reproach of showing an all-unloving -face towards creatures that could return love for love as well as most -and better than many of the human kind. The saint saved the situation, -and the Church wisely left him alone to discourse to his brother fishes -or his sister turtle-doves, without inquiring about the strict orthodoxy -of the proceeding. - -Unhappily the more direct inheritors of neoplatonist dreams were not -left alone. A trend of tendency towards Pythagoreanism runs through -their different developments from Philo to the Gnostics, from the -Gnostics, through the Paulicians to the Albigenses. It passes out of our -sight when these were suppressed in the thirteenth century by the most -sanguinary persecution that the world has seen, but before long it was -to reappear in one shape or another, and we may be sure that the thread -was never wholly lost. - -[Illustration: - - “IL BUON PASTORE.” - (_Mosaic at Ravenna._)] - -An effort has been made to prove that the official as well as the -unofficial Church always favoured humanity to animals. The result of -this effort has been wholly good; not only has it produced a delightful -volume,[10] but, indirectly, it was the cause of Pope Pius X. -pronouncing a blessing on every one who is working for the prevention of -cruelty to animals throughout the world. _Roma locuta est._ To me this -appears to be a landmark in ethics of first-class importance. -Nevertheless, historically speaking, it is difficult to resist the -conclusion that the diametrically opposite view expressed by Father -Rickaby in a manual intended for use in the Jesuit College at -Stonyhurst,[11] more correctly gives the measure of what had been the -practical teaching of the Church in all these ages. Even now, -authoritative Catholics, when enjoining humanity to animals, are careful -to add that man has “no duties” towards them, though they may modify -this by saying with Cardinal Manning (the most kind-hearted of men) that -he owes “a sevenfold obligation” to their Creator to treat them well. -Was it surprising that the Neapolitan peasant who heard from his priest -that he had no duties to his ass went home, not to excogitate the -sevenfold obligation but to belabour the poor beast soundly? Though the -distinction is capable of philosophical defence, granted the premises, -to plain people it looks like a juggling with words. When St. Philip -Neri said to a monk who put his foot on a lizard, “What has the poor -creature done to you?” he implied a duty to the animal, the duty of -reciprocity. He spoke with the voice of Nature and forgot, for the -moment, that animals were not “moral persons” nor “endowed with reason,” -and that hence they could have “no rights.” - -Footnote 10: - - “L’Église et la Pitié envers les animaux,” Paris, 1903. An English - edition has been published by Messrs. Burns and Oates. - -Footnote 11: - - “Moral Philosophy,” p. 250. - -At an early date, in the heart of official Catholicism, an inconsistency -appeared which is less easily explained than homilies composed for -fishes or hymns for birds; namely, the strange business of animal -prosecutions. Without inquiring exactly what an animal is, it is easy to -bestow upon it either blessings or curses. The beautiful rite of the -blessing of the beasts which is still performed once a year in many -places involves no doctrinal crux. In Corsica the priest goes up to the -high mountain _plateaux_ where the animals pasture in the summer, and -after saying Mass in presence of all the four-footed family, he solemnly -blesses them and exhorts them to prosper and multiply. It is a -delightful scene, but it does not affect the conception of the moral -status of animals, nor would that conception be affected by a right-down -malediction or order to quit. What, however, can be thought of a regular -trial of inconvenient or offending animals in which great care is taken, -to keep up the appearance of fair-play to the defendants? Our first -impression is, that it must be an elaborate comedy; but a study of the -facts makes it impossible to accept this theory. - -The earliest allusions to such trials that seem to exist belong to the -ninth century, which does not prove that they were the first of the -kind. One trial took place in 824 A.D. The Council of Worms decided in -866 that if a man has been killed by bees they ought to suffer death, -“but,” added the judgment, “it will be permissible to eat their honey.” -A relic of the same order of ideas lingers in the habit some people have -of shooting a horse which has caused a fatal accident, often the direct -consequence of bad riding or bad driving. The earlier beast trials of -which we have knowledge were conducted by laymen, the latter by -ecclesiastics, which suggests their origin in a folk-practice. A good, -characteristic instance began on September 5, 1370. The young son of a -Burgundian swineherd had been killed by three sows which seemed to have -feared an attack on one of their young ones. All members of the herd -were arrested as accomplices, which was a serious matter to their -owners, the inmates of a neighbouring convent, as the animals, if -convicted, would be burnt and their ashes buried. The prior pointed out -that three sows alone were guilty; surely the rest of the pigs ought to -be acquitted. Justice did not move quickly in those times; it was on -September 12, 1379, that the Duke of Burgundy delivered judgment; only -the three guilty sows and one young pig (what had _it_ done?) were to be -executed; the others were set at liberty “notwithstanding that they had -seen the death of the boy without defending him.” Were the original ones -all alive after nine years? If so, would so long a respite have been -granted them had no legal proceedings been instituted? - -An important trial took place in Savoy in the year 1587. The accused was -a certain fly. Two suitable advocates were assigned to the insects, who -argued on their behalf that these creatures were created before man, and -had been blessed by God, who gave them the right to feed on grass, and -for all these and other good reasons the flies were in their right when -they occupied the vineyards of the Commune; they simply availed -themselves of a legitimate privilege conformable to Divine and natural -law. The plaintiffs’ advocate retorted that the Bible and common sense -showed animals to be created for the utility of man; hence they could -not have the right to cause him loss, to which the counsel for the -insects replied that man had the right to command animals, no doubt, but -not to persecute, excommunicate and interdict them when they were merely -conforming to natural law “which is eternal and immutable like the -Divine.” - -The judges were so deeply impressed by this pleading that to cut the -case short, which seemed to be going against him, the Mayor of St. -Julien hastened to propose a compromise; he offered a piece of land -where the flies might find a safe retreat and live out their days in -peace and plenty. The offer was accepted. On June 29, 1587, the citizens -of St. Julien were bidden to the market square by ringing the church -bells, and after a short discussion they ratified the agreement which -handed over a large piece of land to the exclusive use of the insects. -Hope was expressed that they would be entirely satisfied with the -bargain. A right of way across the land was, indeed, reserved to the -public, but no harm whatever was to be done to the flies on their own -territory. It was stated in the formal contract that the reservation was -ceded to the insects in perpetuity. - -All was going well, when it transpired that, in the meantime, the flies’ -advocates had paid a visit to that much-vaunted piece of land, and when -they returned, they raised the strongest objection to it on the score -that it was arid, sterile, and produced nothing. The mayor’s counsel -disputed this; the land, he said, produced no end of nice small trees -and bushes, the very things for the nutrition of insects. The judges -intervened by ordering a survey to find out the real truth, which survey -cost three florins. There, alas! the story ends, for the winding up of -the affair is not to be found in the archives of St. Julien. - -Records of 144 such trials have come to light. Of the two I have -described, it will be remarked that one belongs, as it were, to criminal -and the other to civil law. The last class is the most curious. No doubt -the trial of flies or locusts was resorted to when other means of -getting rid of them had failed; it was hoped, somehow, that the -elaborate appearance of fair-play would bring about a result not to be -obtained by violence. We can hardly resist the inference that they -involved some sort of recognition or intuition of animals’ rights and -even of animal intelligence. - -In the dawn of modern literature animals played a large, though -artificial, part which must not be quite ignored on account of its -artificiality, because in the Bestiaries as in the Æsopic and Oriental -fables from which they were mainly derived, there was an inextricable -tangle of observations of the real creature and arbitrary ascription to -him of human qualities and adventures. At last they became a mere method -for attacking political or ecclesiastical abuses, but their great -popularity was as much due to their outer as to their inner sense. There -is not any doubt that at the same time floods of Eastern fairy-tales -were migrating to Europe, and in these the most highly appreciated hero -was always the friendly beast. In a romance of the thirteenth century -called “Guillaume de Palerme” all previous marvels of this kind were -outdone by the story of a Sicilian prince who was befriended by a -were-wolf! - -It is not generally remembered that the Indian or Buddhist view of -animals must have been pretty well known in Europe at least as early as -the fourteenth century. The account of the monastery “where many strange -beasts of divers kinds do live upon a hill,” which Fra Odoric, of -Pordenone, dictated in 1330, is a description, both accurate and -charming, of a Buddhist animal refuge, and in the version given of it in -Mandeville’s “Travels,” if not in the original, it must have been read -by nearly every one who could read, for no book ever had so vast a -diffusion as the “Travels” of the elusive Knight of St. Albans. - -With the Italian Renaissance came the full modern æsthetic enjoyment of -animals; the admiration of their beauty and perfection which had been -appreciated, of course, long before, but not quite in the same spirit. -The all-round gifted Leo Battista Alberti in the fifteenth century took -the same critical delight in the points of a fine animal that a modern -expert would take. He was a splendid rider, but his interest was not -confined to horses; his love for his dog is shown by his having -pronounced a funeral oration over him. We feel that with such men -humanity towards animals was a part of good manners. “We owe justice to -men,” said the intensely civilised Montaigne, “and grace and benignity -to other creatures that are capable of it; there is a natural commerce -and mutual obligation between them and us.” Sir Arthur Helps, speaking -of this, called it “using courtesy to animals,” and when one comes to -think of it, is not such “courtesy” the particular mark and sign of a -man of good breeding in all ages? - -The Renaissance brought with it something deeper than a wonderful -quickening of the æsthetic sense in all directions; it also brought that -spiritual quickening which is the co-efficient of every really upward -movement of the human mind. Leonardo da Vinci, greatest of -artist-humanists, inveighed against cruelty in words that might have -been written by Plutarch or Porphyry. His sympathies were with the -vegetarian. Meanwhile, Northern Churchmen who went to Rome were -scandalised to hear it said in high ecclesiastical society that there -was no difference between the souls of men and beasts. An attempt was -made to convert Erasmus to this doctrine by means of certain extracts -from Pliny. Roman society, at that time, was so little serious that one -cannot believe it to have been serious even in its heterodoxy. But -speculations more or less of the same sort were taken up by men of a -very different stamp; it was to be foreseen that animals would have -their portion of attention in the ponderings of the god-intoxicated -musers who have been called the Sceptics of the Renaissance. For the -proof that they did receive it we have only to turn to the pages of -Giordano Bruno. “Every part of creation has its share in being and -cognition.” “There is a difference, not in quality, but in quantity, -between the soul of man, the animal and the plant.” “Among horses, -elephants and dogs there are single individuals which appear to have -almost the understanding of men.” - -Bruno’s prophetic guess that instinct is inherited habit might have -saved Descartes (who was much indebted to the Nolan) from giving his -name an unenviable immortality in connexion with the theory which is -nearly all that the ignorant know now of Cartesian philosophy. This was -the theory that animals are automata, a sophism that may be said to have -swept Europe, though it was not long before it provoked a reaction. -Descartes got this idea from the very place where it was likely to -originate, from Spain. A certain Gomez Pereira advanced it before -Descartes made it his own, which even led to a charge of plagiarism. -“Because a clock marks time and a bee makes honey, we are to consider -the clock and the bee to be machines. Because they do one thing better -than man and no other thing so well as man, we are to conclude that they -have no mind, but that Nature acts within them, holding their organs at -her disposal.” “Nor are we to think, as the ancients do, that animals -speak, though we do not know their language, for, if that were so, they, -having several organs related to ours, might as easily communicate with -us as with each other.” - -About this, Huxley showed that an almost imperceptible imperfection of -the vocal chord may prevent articulated sounds. Moreover, the click of -the bushmen, which is almost their only language, is exceedingly like -the sounds made by monkeys. - -Language, as defined by an eminent Italian man of science, Professor -Broca, is the faculty of making things known, or expressing them by -signs or sounds. Much the same definition was given by Mivart, and if -there be a better one, we have still to wait for it. Human language is -evolved; at one time man had it not. The babe in the cradle is without -it; the deaf mute, in his untaught state, is without it; _ergo_ the babe -and the deaf mute cannot feel. Poor babes and poor deaf mutes should the -scientific Loyolas of the future adopt this view! - -I do not know if any one has remarked that rural and primitive folk can -never bring themselves to believe of any foreign tongue that it is real -human language like their own. To them it seems a jargon of meaningless -and uncouth sounds. - -Chanet, a follower of Descartes, said that he would believe that beasts -thought when a beast told him so. By what cries of pain, by what looks -of love, have not beasts told men that they thought! Man himself does -not think in words in moments of profound emotion, whether of grief or -joy. _He cries out_ or he _acts_. Thought in its absolutely elementary -form is _action_. The mother thinks in the kiss she gives her child. The -musician thinks in music. Perhaps God thinks in constellations. I asked -a man who had saved many lives by jumping into the sea, “What did you -think of at the moment of doing it?” He replied: “You do not think, or -you might not do it.” - -The whole trend of philosophic speculation worthy of the name lies -towards unity, but the Cartesian theory would arbitrarily divide even -man’s physical and sensational nature from that of the other animals. To -remedy this, Descartes admitted that man was just as much an automatic -machine as other creatures. By what right, then, does he complain when -he happens to have a toothache? Because, says Descartes triumphantly, -man has an immortal soul! The child thinks in his mother’s womb, but the -dog, which after scenting two roads takes the third without demur, sure -that his master must have gone that way, this dog is acting “by springs” -and neither thinks nor feels at all. - -The misuse of the ill-treated word “Nature” cannot hide the fact that -the beginning, middle, and end of Descartes’ argument rests on a -perpetually recurrent miracle. Descartes confessed as much when he said -that God _could_ make animals as machines, so why should it be -impossible that He _had_ made them as machines? Voltaire’s clear reason -revolted at this logic; he declared it to be absurd to imagine that God -had given animals organs of feeling in order that they might _not_ feel. -He would have endorsed Professor Romanes’ saying that “the theory of -animal automatism which is usually attributed to Descartes can never be -accepted by common sense.” - -On the other hand, while Descartes was being persecuted by the Church -for opinions which he did _not_ hold, this particular opinion of his was -seized upon by Catholic divines as a vindication of creation. Pascal so -regarded it. The miraculous element in it did not disturb him. -Malebranche said though opposed by reason it was approved by faith. - -Descartes said that the idea that animals think and feel is a relic of -childhood. The idea that they do _not_ think and feel might be more -truly called a relic of that darkest side of perverse childhood, the -existence of which we are all fain to forget. Whoever has seen a little -child throwing stones at a toad on the highway—and sad because his hands -are too small to take up the bigger stones to throw—will understand what -I mean. I do not wish to allude more than slightly to a point which is -of too much importance to pass over in silence. Descartes was a -vivisector: so were the pious people at Port Royal who embraced his -teaching with enthusiasm, and liked to hear the howls of the dogs they -vivisected. M. Émile Ferrière, in his work “L’âme est la fonction du -cerveau,” sees in the “souls” of beasts exactly the same nature as in -the “soul” of man; the difference, he maintains, is one of degree; -though generally inferior, it is sometimes superior to “souls” of -certain human groups. Here is a candid materialist who deserves respect. -But there is a school of physiologists nowadays which carries on an -unflagging campaign in favour of belief in unconscious animal machines -which work by springs, while denying that there is a God to wind up the -springs, and in conscious human machines, while denying that there is a -soul, independent of matter, which might account for the difference. -“The wish is father to the thought.” _Non ragionam di lor ma guarda e -passa._ - -The strongest of all reasons for dismissing the machine theory of -animals is their variety of idiosyncrasy. It is said that to the -shepherd no two sheep look alike; it is certain that no two animals of -any kind have the same characters. Some are selfish, some are unselfish, -some are gentle, some irretrievably ill-tempered both to each other and -to man. Some animals do not show much regret at the loss of their -offspring, with others it is manifestly the reverse. Édouard Quinet -described how on one occasion, when visiting the lions’ cage in the -Jardin des Plantes, he observed the lion gently place his large paw on -the forehead of the lioness, and so they remained, grave and still, all -the time he was there. He asked Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, who was with -him, what it meant. “Their lion cub,” was the answer, “died this -morning.” “Pity, benevolence, sympathy, could be read on those rugged -faces.” That these qualities are often absent in sentient beings what -man can doubt? But they are not to be found in the best mechanical -animals in all Nuremberg! - -Nor do machines commonly act as did the dog in the following true story -which relates to something that happened during the earthquake of Ash -Wednesday, 1887. At a place called Ceriana on the Italian Riviera a poor -man who earned his living as a milk-carrier was supposed to have gone on -his ordinary rounds, on which he was used to start at four o’clock in -the morning. No one, therefore, thought of inquiring about him, but the -fact was, that having taken a glass or two of wine in honour of the last -night of the Carnival, he had overslept himself, and was still asleep -when his cottage fell down upon him. He had a large dog which drew the -little cart bearing the milk up the mountain paths, and the dog by -chance was outside and safe. He found out where his master lay and -succeeded in clearing the masonry so as to uncover his head, which was -bleeding. He then set to work to lick the wounds; but, seeing that they -went on bleeding, and also that he could not liberate the rest of the -body, he started in search of help, running up and down among the -surrounding ruins till he met some one, whom he caught hold of by the -clothes. The man, however, thought that the dog was mad and fled for his -life. Luckily, another man guessed the truth and allowed himself to be -guided to the spot. History repeats itself, at least the history of -devoted dogs. The same thing happened after the greater earthquake at -Messina, when a man, one of the last to be saved, was discovered through -the insistence of his little dog, who approached a group of searchers -and whined piteously till he persuaded them to follow him to the ruins -which concealed his master. - -Nor, again, do machines act like a cockatoo I heard of from a witness of -the scene. A lady was visiting the zoological gardens in a German town -with her daughter, when the little girl was seized with the wish to -possess a pretty moulted feather which was lying on the ground in the -parrots’ cage. She made several attempts to reach it, but in vain. -Seeing which, an old cockatoo hopped solemnly from the back of the cage -and taking up the feather in his beak, handed it to the child with an -air of the greatest politeness. - -One of the first upholders of the idea of legislative protection of -animals was Jeremy Bentham, who asked why the law should refuse its -protection to any sensitive being? Most people forget the degree of -opposition which was encountered by the earlier combatants of cruel -practices and pastimes in England. Cobbett made a furious attack on a -clergyman who (to his honour) was agitating for the suppression of -bull-baiting, “the poor man’s sport,” as Cobbett called it. That it -demoralised the poor man as well as tormented the bull never entered -into the head of the inimitable wielder of English prose, pure and -undefiled, who took it under his (happily) ineffectual protection. “The -common law fully sanctions the baiting of bulls,” he wrote, “and, I -believe, that to sell the flesh of a bull which has _not_ been baited is -an offence which is punishable by that very law to which you appeal” -(“_Political Register_,” June, 1802). - -Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals had, in their day, to -undergo almost as much criticism and ridicule in England as they now -meet with in some parts of the Continent. Even the establishment of the -Dogs’ Home in London raised a storm of disapproval, as may be seen by -any one who turns over the files of the _Times_ for October, 1860. If -the friends of humanity persevere, the change of sentiment which has -become an accomplished fact in England will, in the end, triumph -elsewhere. - -Unfortunately, humane sentiment and humane practice do not progress on a -level line. As long ago as 1782 an English writer named Soame Jenyns -protested against the wickedness of shooting a bear on an inaccessible -island of ice, or an eagle on the mountain’s top. “We are unable to give -life and therefore ought not to take it away from the meanest insect -without sufficient reason.” What would he say if he came back to earth -to find whole species of beautiful winged creatures being destroyed to -afford a barbarous ornament for women’s heads? - -The “discovery” of Indian literature brought prominently forward in the -West the Indian ideas of animals of which the old travellers had given -the earliest news. The effect of familiarity with those ideas may be -traced in many writers, but nowhere to such an extent as in the works of -Schopenhauer, for whom, as for many more obscure students, they formed -the most attractive and interesting part of Oriental lore. Schopenhauer -cannot speak about animals without using a tone of passionate vehemence -which was, without doubt, genuine. He felt the intense enjoyment in -observing them which the lonely soul has ever felt, whether it belonged -to saint or sinner. All his pessimism disappears when he leaves the -haunts of man for the retreats of beasts. What a pleasure it is, he -says, to watch a wild animal going about undisturbed! It shows us our -own nature in a simpler and more sincere form. “There is only one -mendacious being in the world, and that is man. Every other is true and -sincere.” It strikes me that total sincerity did not shine on the face -of a dog which I once saw trotting innocently away, after burying a -rabbit he had caught in a ploughed field near a tree in the hedge—the -only tree there was—which would make it easy for him to identify the -spot. But about that I will say no more. The German “Friend of the -Creature” was indignant at “the unpardonable forgetfulness in which the -lower animals have hitherto been left by the moralists of Europe.” The -duty of protecting them, neglected by religion, falls to the police. -Mankind are the devils of the earth and animals the souls they torment. - -Full of these sentiments, Schopenhauer was prepared to welcome -unconditionally the Indian conception of the Wheel of Being and to close -his eyes to its defects. Strauss, too, hailed it as a doctrine which -“unites the whole of Nature in one sacred and mysterious bond”—a bond in -which, he goes on to say, a breach has been made by the Judaism and -dualism of Christianity. He might have observed that the Church derived -her notions on the subject rather from Aristotle than from Semitic -sources. - -Schopenhauer came to the conclusion that the ill-treatment of animals -arose directly from the denial to them of immortality, while it was -ascribed to men. There is and there is not truth in this. When all is -said, the well-conditioned man always was and always will be humane; -“the righteous man regardeth the life of his beast.” And since people -reason to fit their acts rather than act to fit their reasoning, he will -even find a motive for his humanity where others find an excuse for the -lack of it. Humphry Primatt wrote in 1776: “Cruelty to a brute is an -injury irreparable because there is no future life to be a compensation -for present afflictions.” - -Mr. Lecky, in his “History of European Morals,” tells of a Cardinal who -let himself be bitten by gnats because “_we_ have heaven, but these poor -creatures only present enjoyment!” Could Jaina do more? - -Strauss thought that the rising tide of popular sentiment about animals -was the direct result of the abandonment by science of the -spiritualistic isolation of man from Nature. I suspect that those who -have worked hardest for animals in the last half-century cared little -about the origin of species, while it is certain that some professed -evolutionists have been their worst foes. The fact remains, however, -that by every rule of logic the theory of evolution _ought_ to produce -the effect which Strauss thought that it had produced. The discovery -which gives its name to the nineteenth century revolutionises the whole -philosophic conception of the place of animals in the Universe. - -Lamarck, whom Cuvier so cruelly attacked, was the first to discern the -principle of evolution. At one time he held the Chair of Zoology at the -University of Paris; but the opposition which his ideas met with crushed -him in body, though not in soul, and he died blind and in want in 1829, -only consoled by the care of an admirable daughter. His last words are -said to have been that it is easier to discover a truth than to convince -others of it. - -An Italian named Carlo Lessona was one of the first to be convinced. He -wrote a work containing the phrase, “The intelligence of animals”—which -work, by the rule then in force, had to be presented to the -ecclesiastical Censor at Turin to receive his permit before publication. -The canon who examined the book fell upon the words above mentioned, and -remarked: “This expression, ‘intelligence of animals,’ will never do!” -“But,” said Lessona, “it is commonly used in natural history books.” -“Oh!” replied the canon, “natural history has much need of -revision.”[12] - -Footnote 12: - - See Dr. F. Franzolini’s interesting monograph on animal psychology - from the point of view of science (“Intelligenza delle Bestie,” Udine, - 1899). - -The great and cautious Darwin said that the senses, intuitions, -emotions, and faculties, such as love, memory, attention, curiosity, -imitation, reason, of which man boasts, may be found in an incipient, or -even, sometimes, in a well-developed condition in the lower animals. -“Man, with all his noble qualities, his God-like intellect, still bears -in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin. Our -brethren fly in the air, haunt the bushes, and swim in the sea.” Darwin -agreed with Agassiz in recognising in the dog something very like the -human conscience. - -Dr. Arnold said that the whole subject of the brute creature was such a -painful mystery that he dared not approach it. Michelet called animal -life a “sombre mystery,” and shuddered at the “daily murder,” hoping -that in another globe “these base and cruel fatalities may be spared to -us.” It is strange to find how many men of very different types have -wandered without a guide in these dark alleys of speculation. A few of -them arrived at, or thought they had arrived at, a solution. Lord -Chesterfield wrote that “animals preying on each other is a law of -Nature which we did not make, and which we cannot undo, for if I do not -eat chickens my cat will eat mice.” But the appeal to Nature will not -satisfy every one; our whole human conscience is a protest against -Nature, while our moral actions are an attempt to effect a compromise. -Paley pointed out that the law was not good, since we could live without -animal food and wild beasts could not. He offered another justification, -the permission of Scripture. This was satisfactory to him, but he must -have been aware that it waives the question without answering it. - -Some humane people have taken refuge in the automata argument, which is -like taking a sleeping-draught to cure a broken leg. Others, again, look -for justice to animals in the one and only hope that man possesses of -justice to himself; in compensation after death for unmerited suffering -in this life. Leibnitz said that Eternal Justice _ought_ to compensate -animals for their misfortunes on earth. Bishop Butler would not deny a -future life to animals. - -Speaking of her approaching death, Mrs. Somerville said: “I shall regret -the sky, the sea, with all the changes of their beautiful colouring; the -earth with its verdure and flowers: but far more shall I grieve to leave -animals who have followed our steps affectionately for years, without -knowing for certainty their ultimate fate, though I firmly believe that -the living principle is never extinguished. Since the atoms of matter -are indestructible, as far as we know, it is difficult to believe that -the spark which gives to their union life, memory, affection, -intelligence, and fidelity, is evanescent.” - -In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, seven or eight small works, -written in Latin in support of this thesis, were published in Germany -and Sweden. Probably in all the world a number, unsuspectedly large, of -sensitive minds has endorsed the belief expressed so well in the lines -which Southey wrote on coming home to find that a favourite old dog had -been “destroyed” during his absence:— - - ... “Mine is no narrow creed; - And He who gave thee being did not frame - The mystery of life to be the sport - Of merciless man! There is another world - For all that live and move—a better one! - Where the proud bipeds, who would fain confine - Infinite Goodness to the little bounds - Of their own charity, may envy thee!” - -The holders of this “no narrow creed” start with all the advantages from -the mere point of view of dialectics. They can boast that they have -placed the immortality of the soul on a scientific basis. For truly, it -is more reasonable to suppose that the soul is natural than -supernatural, a word invented to clothe our ignorance; and, if natural, -why not universal? - -They have the right to say, moreover, that they and they alone have -“justified the ways of God.” They alone have admitted all creation that -groaneth and travaileth to the ultimate guerdon of the “Love which moves -the sun and other stars.” - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - INDEX - - - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - Abdâls, 261-262 - - Abu Djafar al Mausur, Caliph, 232 - - Abu Jail, 241-243 - - Achilles, 26-27, 298 - - Adi Granth, 201 - - _Æsop’s fables_, 25, 29-30, 80-81 - - Aethe, 26 - - Aethon, 26 - - Afghan ballad, 241-243 - - African pastoral tribes, 95 - - Agamemnon, 25-26, 29 - - Agassiz, 364 - - Agora Temple, 77 - - _Ahimsa_, 166-167, 172, 193 - - Ahriman, 124-126, 143, 145-146, 149-151, 158-159 - - Ahriman, hymn to, 125 - - Ahuna-Vairya, 138 - - Ahura Mazda, 116, 121-122, 136, 138-139, 143, 154, 158-159 - - Alberti, Leo Battista, 154, 158-159, 352 - - Albigenses, 346 - - Alexander the Great, 75, 133 - - Alfonso, King of Spain, 291-292 - - Alger, W. R., 286 - - Alhambra, 229 - - Al Rakîm, 230 - - Amatongo, 107-109 - - Amazulu, 107 - - _L’âme est la fonction du cerveau_, 357 - - Ammon, Temple of, 31 - - Amon Ra, 103 - - Amritsar, 201 - - Anaxandrides, 82 - - Anchorites, 179, 252-254 - - Andromache, 26 - - Animals, treatment of, in India, 19; - the purgatory of men, 21; - slaying of, by Greeks, 24-25; - naming of, 26; - prophetic powers of, 27-28; - talking, 29; - Roman treatment of, 45-46; - butchery of, at Colosseum, 51; - imported for arena, 51-52; - humanity of, 53-54; - performing, 54-55; - Plutarch on kindness to, 64-71; - Plutarch on animal intelligence, 67-71; - instances of discrimination of, 75-76; - domestication of, 90-91; - value of, 94-95; - excuses for killing, 100; - attitude of savages to, 107-108; - killing of, by priests, 148-150; - Zoroastrian treatment of, 147-157; - in sacred books, 188; - Hebrew treatment of, 212-220; - hunting of, by Moslems, 224-225, 232, 241-243; - musical instinct in, 245-246; - and the Messiah, 247-252; - and saints, 259; - stories of, 306-316; - theory of Celsus as to intelligence of, 340-344; - theory of Porphyry, 344; - the Church and humanity, 346; - animal prosecutions, 347-351; - Renaissance admiration of, 352-353; - animals and thought, 355; - automata - theory, 353-359, 365; - societies to protect, 359-360; - ill-treatment and immortality, 362; - principle of evolution, 363 - - Antelope, 240 - - Ants, wisdom of, 76-77; - killing of, 149-150; - Hebrew proverb, 216; - in the Koran, 227; - social economy of, 341-342 - - Apis, 102, 144 - - Apollo, 246 - - Apollonius of Tyana, 268-269; 337-340; 345 - - Apsarases, the, 279-280 - - Apuleius, 55 - - Archæological Congress, 95 - - Archetypes (_see_ Fravashi) - - Ardâ Vîrâf, 159-165 - - Arena, cruelties of the, 45-46 - - Ariosto, 297 - - Aristophanes, 28 - - Aristotle, 58, 78, 80, 269, 340, 362 - - Arnold, Dr., 364 - - Arnold, Sir Matthew, 302-303 - - Aryans, 13, 18, 113-115 - - Asceticism, 179-183 - - Astrachan, 258 - - Ataro, 162 - - Atharva-Veda, 208 - - Atman, 14 - - Augustus, 336 - - Automata theory, 353-359, 365 - - Avebury, Lord, 343 - - Avesta, 113, 116, 120, 123, 125, 128, 131, 133-140, 143, 145-148, 153, - 155, 159, 163, 233-234 - - - Bactria, 131 - - Baiardo, 297 - - Balaam’s ass, 212-213, 219 - - Balius, 26-27 - - Balkis, Queen, 229 - - Bankes’ horse, 283 - - Banyan deer, 327-230 - - Barbary, 296 - - Basan, Bulls of, 144 - - Basri, Hasan, 234 - - _Battle of the frogs and mice_, 29 - - Baudelaire, 18 - - Bavieca, 289-294 - - Bears, legends of, 88-89 - - Beast tales, 28, 317, 351 - - Beaver (_see_ Udra) - - Bedouins, 272 - - Behkaa, 104 - - Benares, 183 - - Benedict XII., 49 - - Bentham, Jeremy, 359 - - Bhagavad, Gita, 14 - - Bion, 64 - - Birds, in captivity, 56-57; - Plutarch’s views on, 78; - language of, 226-227; - and St. Francis, 259-260 - - Bismarck, 304 - - Bi’sm-illah, custom of saying, 224 - - Bivar, Ruy Diaz de, 289-294 - - Blackbird, White, 51 - - Blake, Wm., 251 - - Bleeck, 153 - - Blessing the beast, rite of, 347 - - Boccaccio’s falcon, 285 - - Bœotia, 62 - - Boëthius, 345 - - Bolingbroke, 296 - - Bosanquet, Dr. R. C., 95 - - Brahmans, 14, 21, 169, 175, 183, 309 - - _Breath from the veldt, A_, 240 - - British school at Athens, 95 - - Broca, Professor, 354 - - Browning, Robert, 138 - - Bruno, Giordano, 216, 260-261, 353 - - Bubastis, 81 - - Bucephalus, 75 - - Buddhism, 21, 105-106, 124, 130, 167-173, 187, 190-196, 261, 273, 308, - 321-328 - - _Buddhist India_, 328 - - Buffalo of Karileff, 254 - - Bull-baiting, 50, 359-360 - - Bull-fights, 32, 47-50 - - Bulls, 143-146 - - _Bundehesh_, 142-143 - - Burgundy, Duke of, 349 - - Burial, methods of, 123-124 - - Burkitt, Prof. F. C., 135-136 - - Burns and Oates, 346 - - Burns, Robert, 59 - - - Cæsar, Julius, 51, 53, 55, 296 - - Cagliari, 248 - - Callaway, Canon, 109 - - Cambaleth, 195 - - Cambyses, 144 - - Camels, 286 - - Canna, 333-334 - - Carbonaria, 49 - - Carlyle, Thos., 33 - - Cartesian philosophy, 353-355 - - Carthage, 211 - - Cassandra, 29 - - Cato, 45 - - Cats, 80-83, 155, 222, 258, 278, 314, 322 - - Celsus, 73, 339-344 - - Celts, 273-274 - - Ceriana, 358 - - Cervantes, 290 - - Chanet, 355 - - Chantal, Mdme. de, 178 - - Chariot-racing, 30 - - Charles, King (the Peace), 50 - - Chesterfield, Lord, 364 - - Childebert, 254-255 - - _China, religion of_, 327 - - Chinese, belief and folk-lore, 104-106; - saving of animal life, 194; - folk-lore stories, 306-308, 313-316, 326-330. - - Chinvat, 154, 158, 162 - - Choo-Foo-Tsze, 104 - - Christianity, approach of, 337-338 - - Cicada, 260 - - Cicero, 16, 50, 58-59, 128, 340 - - Cignani, 208 - - Cimon, 31 - - Circuses, 54-55 - - _Clothilde’s God_, 93 - - Clovis, 93 - - Clytemnestra, 29 - - Cobbett, 359 - - Cockatoo, Story of a, 359 - - Colonna, Cardinal, 49 - - Colosseum, Butchery at inauguration of, 51 - - Comte, Auguste, 133 - - Concha, 57-58 - - Confucianism, 104-105, 130 - - Constantinople, 233 - - Constantinople, Council at, 14 - - _Contemporary Review_, 6 - - Copenhagen National Museum, 47 - - Corinna, Parrot of, 56 - - Corsica, 347 - - Crete, 32, 77, 95 - - Cuvier, 363 - - Cyrus, 118, 121-122 - - - Daevas, 116 - - d’Alviella, Count Goblet, 5 - - Damascus, 231, 306 - - Dante, 13, 160, 162-163, 187 - - Darmesteter, James, 241 - - Darius, 119, 121-122 - - Darwin, Charles, 150-151, 206, 344, 363-364 - - Darwin, Francis, 175 - - Davids, Professor T. W. Rhys, 328 - - Deathlessness of souls, 91-92 - - Deer (_see_ Banyan deer) - - Dervishes, 234-235, 261 - - Descartes, 16, 353-357 - - Deucalion, dove of, 78 - - Diaz, Gil, 293 - - Digby, Sir Kenelm, 283 - - Dog, grave of a faithful, 314 - - Dogs, 57-59, 79-80, 114-115, 151-153, 158, 229-233, 244, 306-308, 312, - 314-316, 322-324, 358-359 - - Dog’s Grave, the, 79 - - Dolmen-builders, 92-93, 96 - - Domestication of animals, 90-91 - - Doughty, Charles M., 236 - - Doukhobors, 32 - - Downe, 283 - - Draupadi, story of, 322-324 - - Dravidians, 18-19, 163 - - Duperron, Anquetil, 135, 152 - - - Eden, Garden of, 208-209 - - Eden, Garden of (picture by Rubens), 247 - - Edkins, Joseph, D.D., 327 - - _l’Église et la Pitié envers les Animaux_, 346 - - Egyptian cosmogony, 103-104 - - El Djem, well at, 109 - - Elephants, legend of, 74-75, 77; - in Oriental books, 188; - white elephant killed by Rustem, 294 - - Eleusinian mysteries, 32 - - Elisha and the she-bears, 248-249 - - Elmocadessi, Azz’Eddin, 236 - - Empedocles, 14-15, 34, 72 - - Epictetus, 73-74 - - Epirus, 57 - - Erasmus, 16, 353 - - Eskimo, the, 88-89, 92 - - Euripides, 78, 190, 246, 340 - - Evolution, theory of, 363-365 - - - Falcon, Persian fable of a, 313 - - Faliscus, Gratius, 57 - - Fargard XIII., 152 - - Ferrière, Émile, 357 - - _Fioretti_, 74, 258 - - Firdusi, 141, 225, 240, 294, 296, 301-304 - - Flesh-eating, 24-25, 31-32, 61-64, 71, 85-86, 148, 193-194, 217-218 - - Folk-lore Association of Chicago, 102 - - _Folk-Songs of Southern India_, 17 - - Foxes, 106 - - Franzolini, Dr. F., 363 - - Fravashi, 117, 145, 162 - - - Games, Roman, 47-48, 51-52 - - Gargantuan feasts, 148 - - Garibaldi, 294, 298 - - Gâthâs, 134, 139, 144-145 - - Gautama, 308 - - Gayatri, 117-118, 138 - - Gayo Marathan, 143 - - Gellert, Beth, 306-307, 309, 312 - - Geus Urva, 143-144 - - Ghusni, 241 - - Giles, Dr., 105, 313, 316 - - Gladiators, importation of, 52-53 - - Gnostics, 346 - - Goat, Story of a, 245 - - Goethe, 333 - - Gover, Charles E., 17 - - Gray, Asa, 150-151 - - Gubernatis, Count de, 290 - - _Guillaume de Palerme_, 351 - - Gunádhya, 245 - - Guru, 168, 181, 345 - - Gymnosophists, 172 - - - Hall, 283 - - Hallal, custom of the, 224 - - Hatem, Tai, 285-286 - - Hatos, 290 - - Hawk and the pigeon, legend of, 317-321, 325 - - Haziûm, 296 - - Heber, Bishop, 231 - - Hebrews, the, 114, 145, 149, 159, 161, 207-208, 212-220, 284 - - Hector, 26 - - Hedgehog, appreciation of the, 79 - - Heine, 344 - - _Helena_, 190 - - Helps, Sir Arthur, 352 - - Henotheism, 118 - - Hera, 25-27 - - Heraclites, 72 - - Herakles, 24 - - Hermits (_see_ Anchorites) - - Herodotus, 31, 81, 128, 148-149, 301 - - Hero-worship, 299-300 - - Hidery, 102 - - Hinduism, 13, 17, 218-219, 265-266 - - _History of European Morals_, 362 - - Homa, 148-149 - - Homer, 23-26, 77, 79, 241 - - Homizd IV., 161 - - Honover, 138 - - Horace, 76 - - Horses, famous, 26-27; - sacrifice of, 114; - in Oriental books, 188; - St. Columba’s horse, 255; - in chivalrous age, 281-282; - thinking, 283; - Arab and his horse, 285-288; - Hatem’s horse, 285-286; - the Cid’s horse, 289-294; - horse of Rustem, 294; - talking, 298; - Bengal fable, 313; - Russian folk-lore tale, 322 - - Hugo, Victor, 19, 45, 57, 164 - - Humanitarianism, 145-147, 175, 198-200, 243, 308, 346 - - Húsheng, 141-142 - - Huxley, Professor, 354 - - - Iblís, 142 - - Ibsen, 186 - - Ichneumon, 311-312 - - “Iliad,” 25 - - Immortality, 159, 362 - - Improta, Leandro, 22 - - Indian doctrine of transmigration, 14-17 - - Indra, 116-117, 319-323 - - Insects, killing of, 149 - - _Intelligenza delle Bestie_, 363 - - Iranians, 113-134, 155 - - Isaiah, 249 - - Isis, 336 - - Islam, 160, 221 - - Issaverdens, Padre Giacomo, 209 - - Itongo, 107, 259 - - Itvara, 186 - - - Jacobi, Professor Hermann, 169, 199 - - Jaina hermit’s story, 332 - - Jainism, 168-193, 196-200 - - _Jātaka Book_, 328 - - Jebb, Sir Richard, 135 - - Jenyns, Soame, 360 - - Jesus Christ, 130, 145, 188, 216, 231, 244, 249-252, 320 - - Jews (_see_ Hebrews) - - Jinas, 170 - - Joghi, 181 - - John, Father, 338 - - John XXII., Pope, 49 - - Jones, Sir William, 135, 152, 225, 333 - - Jonson, Ben, 283 - - Joseph of Anchieta, 255-256 - - Josephus, 24 - - Julia Domna, Empress, 338 - - - Kálidása, 333 - - Kambôga, 188 - - Karileff, 254 - - Karman, 175-177 - - Kasi, King of, 330-331 - - Katmir, 230 - - Keats, John, 207 - - Kempis, Thomas à, 171 - - Keshub Chunder Sen, 25 - - Khordah Avesta, 134, 137, 159 - - Kirghis, the, 85 - - Koran, 136, 221-223, 226-230, 237, 261, 287 - - Koureen, 296 - - - Lahore Zoological Gardens, 236 - - Lake dwellers, 90 - - Lamarck, 363 - - Lamartine, 69 - - Lampus, 26 - - Lancelot, 296 - - Lane, 224 - - Language, definition of, 354-355 - - Laplander, the, 87-90 - - Lapwing, Solomon and the, 228-229 - - Lebid, 237-239 - - Lecky, 362 - - _Legenda Aurea_, 249, 258 - - Leibnitz, 365 - - Leland, C. G., 277 - - Leopardi, 59, 125, 187 - - Lesbia’s sparrow, 56 - - Lessona, Carlo, 363 - - Leveson, Major, 269 - - Lion, legend of a humane, 53; - Christ in the lions’ den, 250-251; - St. Jerome and the, 253; - lioness at Chartres, 262; - eating of monkeys and men by, 268-269; - love for his mate, 269-270; - legend of vulture and, 325; - sympathy of, 358 - - _Lion’s Kingdom_, 30 - - _Lives_, Plutarch’s, 65, 74 - - Lizard, sacredness of, 108-110 - - Lockhart, 291 - - Lombroso, 267 - - Long, Rev. J., 168 - - Lotus-flower, white, 176 - - Lucian, 15, 56, 278 - - Lucretius, 84, 206, 239 - - Lyall, Sir Alfred, 180 - - Lyall, Sir Chas., 238 - - Lycæus, Mount, 273 - - Lycanthropy, 274-275 - - - Maeterlinck, 331 - - Magians, the, 119, 124, 127-129, 148, 226 - - Magic, 273-280 - - Magpie, legend of a, 77-78 - - _Mahabharata_, 317, 322 - - Mahavira, 169-173, 197-198 - - Mahmoud, 241 - - _Malay Magic_, 224 - - Malebranche, 356 - - Man, ages of, 84 - - Mandeville, 196, 352 - - Man-eating animals, 268, 270-272 - - Manichæism, 127, 261 - - Manning, Cardinal, 347 - - Manu, Institutes of, 29 - - Marcellus, Theatre of, 55 - - Marcus Aurelius, 59 - - Mare, story of the creation of, 288 - - Marne, 254 - - Marriage in the East, 139-140 - - Martial, 58 - - Massaia, Cardinal, 262 - - Matreya, 170 - - Mazdaism, 116-119, 124, 129, 133-139, 155, 157-158, 159, 160-161, 225, - 233 - - Mecca, 231 - - Media, 129 - - Medina, 232 - - Melampus, 344 - - Melior, parrot of, 56-57 - - Menelek, Emperor, 229 - - Merodach, 122 - - Metempsychosis (_see_ Transmigration) - - Michelet, 364 - - Mill, J. S., 127 - - Millais, Guille, 240 - - Milton, John, 205 - - Minotaur legend, 30 - - Mithra, 120, 147, 158, 336 - - Mivart, 354 - - Modi, Jivanji Jamsedji, 45 - - Mohammedanism, 109, 130, 216-217, 221-222, 248 - - Monkeys, 306 - - Monotheism, 118-123, 128 - - Montaigne, 352 - - _Moral Philosophy_, 346 - - “Morocco,” 283 - - Moslemism, 221-236 - - Moti (tiger at Lahore), 236 - - Moufflons, 85 - - Muklagerri Hills, 171 - - Mule of the Parthenon, 66-67 - - Mungoose stories, 306-307, 309-311 - - Murad, Sultan, 223 - - - Nanak, Baba, 201 - - Napier, Lord, of Magdala, 316 - - Naples, gladiatorial shows at, 49 - - Natural History Museum, S. Kensington, 240 - - Natural History Society, Bombay, 45 - - Nedrotti, the, 98 - - Ne-kilst-lass, 102 - - Nemesianus, 57 - - Nennig, mosaic at, 47-48 - - Neolithic Age, 91-92 - - Neoplatonism, 344-346 - - Newman, Cardinal, 11 - - _Nibelungenlied_, 140 - - Nirvana, 178, 190-192 - - Nizami, 243-244 - - Nobarnus, 52 - - Non-killing (_see_ _Ahimsa_) - - - Oakesmith, Dr., 63 - - Octavius, 339 - - Odoric, Fra, 194-196, 351 - - _Odyssey_, 23, 25 - - Okubo, 122 - - Oppert, Prof. Jules, 118 - - _Oriental Proverbs_, 168 - - _Orientalists, Congress of_, 47, 168 - - Origen, 14, 339, 343 - - Origin of man and animals, 84-86 - - _Origin of Species_, 85 - - Ormuzd, 124, 126 - - Orpheus, 32, 246-247 - - Orphic sect, 31 - - Oseberg, 94 - - Ovid, 15 - - Owls, 112 - - - Pahlavi, 134-135 - - Paley, 364 - - Pallas Athene, 112 - - _Panchatantra_, the, 307, 311 - - Pandion, King of Athens, 345 - - _Paradise Lost_, 205 - - Paris, University of, 363 - - Parrots, 56-57, 359 - - Parsis, food of the, 119-120; - burial customs of, 124; - and the Avesta, 133-135; - and the Ardâ Vîrâf, 164-165 - - Parthenon, the, 66-67 - - Pascal, 356 - - Patmore, Coventry, 174 - - Patmos, Seer of, 160 - - Paul the Hermit, 254 - - Paulicians, 346 - - Pausanias, 50-51, 128, 273 - - Pavia, Corte da, 282 - - Peace in Nature, 210-212, 231-232, 332-333 - - Pelicans, legend of, 92 - - Pereira, Gomez, 354 - - Pericles, 30, 66 - - Persepolis, 121, 133 - - Persians of the eleventh century, 298 - - Petrarch, 49 - - Petronius, 51, 58 - - Philo, 346 - - Philostratus, 338 - - Piet, Om, 240 - - Pigs, 115, 232 - - Pinder, 294 - - Pius X., 346 - - Plato, 15-16, 20 - - Pliny, 66-67, 353 - - Plotinus, 344 - - Plutarch, 45, 62-69, 74, 353 - - Pluto, 20 - - Podarges, 26 - - _Political Register_ (1802), 360 - - Pompeii, mosaic at, 83 - - Porphyry, 28, 339, 344, 353 - - Portionuculo, 260 - - Primatt, Humphry, 362 - - Prometheus, 65 - - Prosecution of animals, 347-351 - - Provence, 90 - - Psalms, quotation from, 219-220 - - Punishment in the Ardâ Vîrâf, 163-164 - - Purgatory and animal incarnation, 21 - - Pythagoreanism, 14-15, 33-34, 59-60, 72, 175, 337, 346 - - - Quartenary Age, 86-88 - - Quinet, Édouard, 357-358 - - - Rakush, 294-300 - - Raleigh, Sir Walter, 283 - - Ravenna, mosaic at, 73 - - Ravens, 272 - - Reasoning power of animals, 158-159; - Plutarch’s views on, 67-69 - - Reinach, M. S., 80, 101 - - Reindeer hunters, 86-89, 96; - and the Lapps, 285 - - _Religion of Plutarch_, 63 - - Religions, Congress for History of, 120 - - Religious knowledge in animals, 72-74; - early religions, 93 - - Renan, 225 - - Reptiles, killing of, 149 - - Réville, Albert, 136 - - Rhinoceroses, 51 - - Rickaby, Father, 346 - - Rig-Veda, 113-115, 117, 139 - - Romanes, Professor, 356 - - “Rooh Allah,” 231 - - Rozinante, 290 - - Rustem, 294-305 - - - Sacerdotalism, 168 - - Sacontala, 233-234 - - Sacred birds, animals, and reptiles, 100-101, 104-110 - - Sacred carpet, 222, 227 - - Sacrifices, funeral, 12-13; - Greek, 24-25; - bloodless, 31; - belief in, 94; - of domestic animals, 95-96; - Gift and Pact, 96; - Totemism, 97-98; - of Persians, 119; - in the _Bundehesh_, 143; - to Homa, 148-149; - for Udra-killing, 156; - the “True Sacrifice” legend, 183-184; - apostolate for abolition of animal, 337 - - Sadi, 225 - - St. Anthony, 254, 259 - - St. Augustine, 273, 337 - - St. Bernard, 256-257 - - St. Columba, 255 - - St. Edward the Martyr, 274 - - St. Francis, 74, 167, 234, 257-263 - - St. François de Sale, 178 - - St. James, 54 - - St. Jerome, 253-254 - - St. Josephat, 261 - - St. Julien, town of, 349-350 - - St. Marculphe, 255 - - St. Martin, 259 - - St. Paul, 211-212 - - St. Philip Neri, 347 - - St. Teresa, 184 - - St. Thomas Aquinas, 275 - - Saint-Calais, 255 - - Saint-Hilaire, Geoffroy, 358 - - Sakya Muni, 129, 169, 197 - - Sama, Legend of, 330-332 - - Samengan, 299-301 - - Sásánians, 119, 139-140 - - _Satyricon_, 51 - - Schopenhauer, 206, 258, 361 - - Sebectighin, 240-241 - - Secundra Orphanage, 45 - - Semites (_see_ Hebrews) - - Seneca, 59-61, 82 - - _Sensitive Plant, The_, 174 - - Serapeum, 102 - - Serapis, 336 - - Serpent, the, 110-111 - - Sestius, 61 - - _Seven Sleepers of Ephesus_, 229-230 - - _Shah Nameh_, 141, 294, 301 - - Shakespeare, William, 256, 282-283 - - She-wolves of Rome, 44-45 - - Sheba, 228 - - Sheikh of Tús, 141 - - Shughdad, 303 - - Siam, 194 - - Siegemund and Siegelind, 140 - - Siegfried, 294 - - Siena, 208 - - Sikhs, 201 - - Simurghs, 298 - - Sivi, King, 321-322 - - Smith, Dr. H. P., 110 - - Snakes, in India, 265-266; - and the mungoose, 309-311 - - Societies to protect animals, 356-360 - - Socrates, 156, 162 - - Sohrab, 299-305 - - Solomon in the Valley of Ants, 227 - - Soma, 148 - - Somerville, Mrs., 100 - - Sophocles, 90 - - Sotio, 60-61 - - Southey, Robert, 365-366 - - Srosh, 162 - - Stable, a sanctuary, 305 - - Stag, fable of a, 326 - - Statius, 53, 56-57 - - _Stelæ_, 80 - - Stevenson, R. L., 196 - - Stoics, the, 65, 71 - - Stork, legend of a, 255 - - _Strange Stories from a Chinese Studio_, 313 - - Strauss, 362-363 - - Sufism, 225 - - Suicide in India, 186 - - “Sultan,” 312 - - Sumner, Charles, 281 - - Sutras, 11-12 - - Suttees, 12 - - Swan-maidens (_see_ Apsarases) - - Swine-flesh, forbidding of, 232 - - Sycamore-tree at Matarea, 248 - - Symmachus, 52-53 - - - Tahmineh, 301, 303 - - Taliumen, 142 - - Taoism, 105-106 - - _Tatchi-lou-lun_, 326 - - Taylor, John, 283 - - Taylor, Canon Isaac, 91 - - Temple, building, 121-122; - Jaina temples, 171 - - Tennyson, 296 - - Thaumaturgy, 181-183 - - Thebaid, 181 - - Theogony, 128 - - Theophrastus, 56 - - Theocritus, 83 - - Thomas, Pseudo-, 248 - - _Three Merchants, Parable of the_, 176 - - Tiberius, 61 - - Tigers in India, 265-268, 270-272 - - Tigress, fable of the, 327 - - _Times, The_, 360 - - Tirthakaras, 170-171 - - Titus, 52 - - Tobias, 92-93 - - Tobit’s dog, 114 - - Todas, 285 - - Torquemada, 151, 339 - - Totemism, 96-102, 107, 272 - - Transformation, 270-280 - - Transmigration, 11-21, 186-189, 261 - - Tribal system, 129 - - Triptolemus, 345 - - Troglodite Age, 88-89 - - _Trusty Lydia_, 58 - - - Udra, the 155-156 - - Ulemas, 234, 288 - - Upanishads, 12-13 - - Uruguay, 298 - - - Valencia, 292 - - Varro, 275 - - Varuna, 116 - - Vedas, 13-14, 20, 93, 117-178, 183, 279-280 - - Vegetarianism, 167, 172, 193 - - Velasquez’s horse, 284 - - Venidâd, 134, 152, 156-157 - - Vespasian, 55 - - Viking ship, 13, 94 - - Vinci, Leonardo da, 353 - - Virgil, 25, 275, 336 - - Vispered, 134 - - Vivisection, 29, 357 - - Voltaire, 247, 356 - - - Walaric, 255 - - Were-wolves, 274-277, 351 - - Wildebeest and Om Piet, 240 - - Witchcraft (_see_ Magic) - - Wolf, the, 149, 268, 273-277 - - Wolf of Agobio, 257-258 - - Women and Jainism, 184-186 - - Wordsworth, William, 65 - - Worms, Council of, 348 - - Wu-hu, 314-315 - - Wusinara, 317-319 - - - Xanthus, 26-28 - - Xantippus, 79 - - Xenocrates, 30 - - - Yama, 20, 158, 203, 324 - - Yasna, 134-135 - - Yogis, legend of two, 235 - - Yudishthira, story of, 322-324 - - - Zal, 294-296 - - Zarathustra (_see_ Zoroaster) - - Zechariah’s war-horse, 284 - - Zend (_see_ Avesta) - - Zoolatry, 144 - - _Zoological Mythology_, 290 - - Zoomorphism in Egypt, 102, 340 - - Zorák, 142 - - Zeus, 25, 273 - - Zoroaster, teaching of, 113, 118-125, 129-165, 225 - - - - UNWIN BROTHERS, LIMITED PRINTERS, WOKING AND LONDON - - - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -Transcriber’s note: - - ○ Missing or obscured punctuation was silently corrected. - - ○ Typographical errors were silently corrected. - - ○ Inconsistent spelling and hyphenation were made consistent only - when a predominant form was found in this book. - - ○ Unpaired double quotation marks were left intact if correction - was not obvious. - - - - - -***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE PLACE OF ANIMALS IN HUMAN -THOUGHT*** - - -******* This file should be named 65720-0.txt or 65720-0.zip ******* - - -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: -http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/6/5/7/2/65720 - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United -States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given -away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks -not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the -trademark license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt -Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to -date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - |