Part 27
[51.3] Codrington, 124-5. Father Joseph Meier denies that the Melanesian population of the Gazelle Peninsula of New Britain possesses the concept of _mana_ in the sense of a universal impersonal, magical power. Yet he goes on to say: “The sorcerer (_Zauberer_) himself derives the inherent power of his spells (_Zauber-mitteln_) from two different sources of energy. First, he relies on the might of the spirits to whom he is indebted for his spells, or on the might of his forefathers who have practised magic before him, and have handed down to him their spells. In his incantation therefore the magician (_Hexenmeister_) will always name a spirit, or the name of a deceased sorcerer, or at least silently presume his assistance. A second source of energy for the sorcerer is his own soul. By associating this with natural objects he enhances their powers. Everything the sorcerer does he conceives under the aspect of these two sources of energy. The originator of an enchantment (_Zauberei_)--be it an unembodied spirit, or the ghost of a deceased person, or a spirit residing in a living being (for example, a bird)--operates in his spell and makes it always and everywhere effective. Or else only the sorcerer’s own soul is considered for magical purposes. Beyond this there is no other power” (_Anthropos_, viii. 8, 9). This seems to resemble the concept of _mana_, as set forth by Dr Codrington. Later Father Meier remarks: “The enquiry into the witchcraft (_Zauberwesen_) of the coast-dwellers of the Gazelle Peninsula is not yet closed. So far we only know a small fragment of all their enchantments” (_ibid._, 11). Our knowledge of the social elements and cultural history of Melanesia as a whole, and of New Britain in particular, is still very imperfect.
[54.1] E. Tregear, _The Maori-Polynesian Comparative Dictionary_, Wellington, N.Z., 1891, 203-6, _s.vv._ _Cf._ Marett, _Trans. Oxford Cong._, i. 48 _sqq._ It is perhaps worth while to note “that the Samoan New Testament was translated from the Greek and uses _mana_ as the equivalent of the Greek δύναμις, whilst _pule_ is used for the Greek ἐξουσία” (Haddon, _Torres Str. Rep._, v. 329, quoting communication from S. H. Ray).
[55.1] Ellis, _Polyn. Res._, iii. 108. A specimen of the girdle was sent by John Williams, the missionary afterwards killed at Eramanga, to England, probably to the London Missionary Society. See his _Miss. Enterprises_, 144.
[56.1] Ellis, _op. cit._, i. 338.
[57.1] Taylor, 164 _sqq._
[58.1] De Acosta, 378.
[58.2] Sébillot, _F. L. France_, ii. 235.
[58.3] Ploss, _Weib_, i. 504, quoting Bonnemère, but as usual without the exact reference.
[59.1] Seligmann, _Veddas_, 207.
[60.1] Tozer, i. 216.
[60.2] Dr M. Hoefler, _Am Urquell_, ii. 101.
[60.3] Rev. H. E. Mabille, _Journ. Afr. Soc._, v. 352.
[62.1] Van Gennep, _Tabou_, 184.
[62.2] Turner, _Samoa_, 186. Compare a number of similar taboos on the previous and subsequent pages.
[62.3] Codrington, 215.
[63.1] W. Bogoras, _Amer. Anthr._, N.S., iii. 97.
[64.1] See _Golden Bough_3, _passim_, especially the volume on Taboo. It is needless to say that Professor Frazer does not write from the point of view here adopted, and that his interpretations frequently diverge from those which I should be inclined to.
[65.1] _F. L._, xii. 186. Elsewhere Mr Weeks says: “No stigma attaches to the man who is proved guilty [of witchcraft] by the ordeal, for ‘one can have witchcraft without knowing it’” (_Cannibals_, 189). Presumably _likundu_ is here included under the general term of witchcraft. In another place he says: “The general belief is that only one in the family can bewitch a member of the family” (_ibid._, 311). Hence the evil influence of the possessor of _likundu_ extends no further.
[67.1] Jevons, _Introd._, 178, 7, 390 _sqq._
[67.2] Tylor, _Prim. Cul._, i. 383.
[67.3] Avebury, _Marriage_, 142. I cannot find that he commits himself to a definition of religion, though his view may perhaps be inferred from the above quotation (_cf._ his _Origin of Civilization_, 205 _sqq._).
[68.1] Frazer, _Magic Art_, i. 222, 223.
[68.2] Durkheim, _Formes Élémentaires_, 65. M. Salomon Reinach in a recent brilliant work on the history of religions proposes as a definition: “An assemblage (_ensemble_) of scruples which stand in the way of the free exercise of our faculties.” This reduces religion to a system of taboos. But he subsequently qualifies it by saying: “Animism on one side, taboos on the other, these are the essential factors of religions” (_Orpheus_, 4, 10). Thus qualified, however, it excludes Buddhism; and with or without the qualification it does not express the social side of religion. M. Reinach is quite conscious of these omissions. They are an illustration of the extreme difficulty found by the most able and learned enquirers in formulating an adequate definition of religion, a definition at once all-embracing and exact.
[69.1] Durkheim, 323.
[69.2] Frazer, _Magic Art_, i. 220.
[70.1] Frazer, _op. cit._, 52.
[70.2] _Ibid._, 221, 237 _sqq._
[70.3] _Ibid._, 233. Frazer has worked out the theory more completely than anyone else; but it has been more or less anticipated, or shared, by others, such as Sir Edward Tylor, Sir Alfred Lyall, and Professor Jevons.
[72.1] The above is a brief summary (partly borrowed from my review in _F. L._, xv. 359) of a portion of the argument elaborated by MM. Hubert and Mauss in their “Esquisse d’une Théorie Générale de la Magie,” _L’Année Soc._, vii. 1-146.
[76.1] Durkheim, _op. cit._, 61.
[77.1] Spencer and Gillen, _C. T._, 549, 476.
[77.2] _Ante_, p. 50.
[77.3] Codrington, 133. Another example is cited subsequently, p. 144, from Borneo.
[78.1] Weeks, 189; see _ante_, p. 65 note.
[78.2] Junod, _S. A. Tribe_, ii. 467; i. 441.
[78.3] Durkheim, _op. cit._, 63 note.
[79.1] All this indictment holds good in a lesser degree of the witch-hunts of Europe and New England.
[80.1] Gregor, 197.
[80.2] This, however, is not exactly what Marillier says. “A ‘natural’ act (and that is its sole difference from a magical act) only reaches bodies, or at least it only reaches the soul through the object it animates. A magical practice, which may, however, be a purely material act, acts in some way from within outwards (_agit en quelque sorte du dedans au dehors_); it only kills or fecundates the man, animal, or plant to which it is applied, by exercising first of all its beneficent or calamitous action on the soul, which, like that of the sorcerer, is the principle of his life” (_Rev. Hist. Rel._, xxxvi. 343).
[80.3] Doutté, 328, 330.
[81.1] Doutté, 340, 334, 343, 338. Compare what the schoolboy called their “conjuring tricks,” performed before Pharaoh by Moses and Aaron, and by the magicians (Ex. vii. 8 _sqq._).
[82.1] Marett, _Anthrop._, 209. Dr Marett might have omitted the words “of evil” after “supernormal powers.” They do not strengthen his argument. In savage communities a hard and fast line is not usually drawn between supernormal powers of evil and supernormal powers of good.
[82.2] _Ibid._, 210.
[83.1] Marett, _Anthrop._, 211.
[84.1] P. E. Goddard, _Univ. Cal. Pub._, i. 87.
[84.2] Marett, _Anthrop._, 213.
[84.3] Westermarck, _Ceremonies_, 67 note, quoting Destaing.
[85.1] Reference may be made here to Mr Ernest Crawley, who writes like Professor Jevons from a distinctly theological standpoint. I can find no formal definition of religion in his book on the subject. He says: “The vital instinct, the feeling of life, the will to live, the instinct to preserve it, is the source of, or rather is identical with, the religious impulse, and is the origin of religion” (_Tree of Life_, 214). But, as Professor Leuba has rightly observed, “the love and lust of life is the source of all human conduct and not of religion alone” (_Psychol. Study_, 48). Elsewhere Mr Crawley observes that religion is not a department, like law or science, having a special subject-matter; it is “a tone or spirit.” It “chiefly concerns itself with elemental interests--life and death, birth and marriage are typical cases” (_op. cit._, 204 _sq._). Nor can I find any definition of magic, though he maintains in opposition to Professor Frazer that “it seems impossible to separate magic and religion in their early forms.” “Indeed,” he adds, “the practical meaning of magic, when worked in connection with religion, is control of the supernatural, which is thus not superior to man” (186). What is magic when not “worked in connection with religion”? He identifies _mana_ with the force “which underlies magical processes generally,” but apparently not religious processes. A religious process he defines as “that of making a thing sacred” (231 _sq._). He opposes magic to sacredness. “Sacredness is a result of the application of religious impulse and of nothing else” (208 _sq._). Compare Professor Durkheim’s definition of religion (_supra_, p. 68). Mr Crawley takes insufficient account of the social aspect of religion.
[87.1] Southey, _The Curse of Kehama_, preface.
[87.2] Augustine, _Civ. Dei_, x. 11, citing Porphyry.
[91.1] Marett, _Threshold_, 44 _sqq._
[92.1] J. M. M. van der Burgt, 55.
[92.2] Hewitt, _Am. Anthr._, N.S., iv., 40.
[93.1] E. H. Man, _J. A. I._, xii. 161, 163, 353, etc.
[95.1] Codrington, 192.
[98.1] The primary authority on the Arunta and neighbouring tribes is Messrs Spencer and Gillen, _C. T._ and _N. T._, and _Rep. Horn Exped._, but Strehlow’s researches (_Aranda- und Loritja-stämme_) are important. The results of the latter are divergent to some extent from those of the former, but in most respects are not irreconcilable. See, _e.g._, Professor Durkheim’s valuable discussion of the different versions of reincarnation, _op. cit._, 357 _sqq._ I have stated above in a summary manner what seems to be the result of the criticism of both authorities.
[99.1] Spencer and Gillen, _N. T._, 498; Strehlow, ii. 1. _Cf._ _Rep. Horn Exped._, iv. 183.
[99.2] Strehlow, i. 1.
[100.1] Spencer and Gillen, _N. T._, 227, 232, 238.
[100.2] _Ibid._, 227.
[100.3] _Ibid._, 252.
[101.1] For the Mongolian practice see _Amer. Anthr._, N.S., xv. 370. The Pueblo Indian practice has been recorded by every scientific enquirer among the tribes.
[102.1] Spencer and Gillen, _C. T._, 249. Note also the threat which follows.
[102.2] M. Durkheim contends, and I think with justice, that the association of the _churinga_ with individual ancestors, and therefore with their descendants, or rather reincarnations, is secondary (_op. cit._, 173). But _cf._ Spencer and Gillen, _N. T._, 281.
[102.3] Strehlow, ii. 78. He resisted the temptation and avoided the mistake made so often by missionaries of translating by native words Christian terms of fundamentally different content.
[103.1] Spencer and Gillen, _N. T._, 259 _sqq._
[103.2] _Ibid._, 293.
[104.1] Spencer and Gillen, _C. T._, chaps. v. and vi. _passim_; _N. T._, chap. viii. _passim_; Strehlow, ii. 75 _sqq._
[105.1] Strehlow, iii. 6.
[105.2] Spencer and Gillen, _C. T._, chap. xvi.; _N. T._, chap. xv.; _Rep. Horn Exped._, 180.
[106.1] Spencer and Gillen, _C. T._, 534, 553. _Cf._ 480, 538.
[107.1] _Arch. Rel._, viii. 463, 467. Compare the account of the initiation by the Devil of a Lapp wizard quoted from Tornæus, Scheffer, 136.
[107.2] _Jesup. Exped._, vi. 47.
[109.1] Junod, _S. A. Tribe_, ii. 450, 471, 473. M. Junod’s work is concerned with the Thonga, but it is true in general terms of other tribes.
[109.2] Merensky, 135; Shooter, 191; Callaway, _Rel. Syst._, 259 _sqq._
[109.3] Johnston, _Grenfell_, ii. 659 note, quoting Rev. W. H. Stapleton. He is obviously reporting a statement by a native.
[110.1] Jones, _Ojebway_, 269.
[110.2] A. L. Kroeber, _Univ. Cal. Pub._, iv. 328.
[110.3] G. A. Dorsey, _Trad. Skidi Pawnee_, 185, 189, 194, 199, 206, 210, 219, 221, 231.
[110.4] Roth, _Sarawak_, i. 266.
[111.1] Skeat, _Magic_, 60.
[113.1] Seligmann, _Veddas_, 128 _sqq._, 190 _sqq._, 207. See _supra_, p. 59.
[114.1] E. H. Man, _J. A. I._, xii. 96.
[115.1] Kolben, 97.
[116.1] Dorsey, _Wichita_, 99.
[116.2] _R. B. E._, xxvii. 197.
[117.1] There appears to be no detailed account of the Buffalo Dance of the Pawnees. See Dorsey, _Skidi Pawnees_, xxi. 46; Grinnell, 369. The latest stage, perhaps contaminated with European notions, is in part described, _Id._, 270.
[121.1] W. J. M‘Gee, _R. B. E._, xvii. 168* _sqq._
[121.2] Durkheim, 295.
[124.1] Durkheim, 305.
[124.2] _Ibid._, 134, 135.
[124.3] _Ibid._, 343, 355, 378.
[125.1] Seligmann, 30, 126, 130, 170 _sqq._, 149.
[126.1] _Cens. Ind. Rep._, 1901, iii. 62. _Cf._ the papers by E. H. Man, _J. A. I._, xii.
[127.1] Koch-Grünberg, _passim_; von den Steinen, _passim_, especially 350 _sqq._
[130.1] Westermarck, _Moral Ideas_, ii. 585.
[132.1] Marten, _Ind. Cens. Rep._, 1911, x. 80.
[132.2] Laws of Manu, _Sac. Bks._, xxv. 5. I am indebted for this reference and the further explanation above to my friend Mr William Crooke.
[132.3] _Supra_, p. 62.
[132.4] Dr Frazer, _Psyche’s Task_, 25 _sqq._, has made a collection of these rites and signs. See also Westermarck, _Moral Ideas_, ii. 63 _sqq._
[133.1] F. B. Jevons, _Oxford Cong. Rep._, ii. 131; _Id._, Græco-Italian Magic, _Anthrop. Class._, 106. See also Rouse, _Greek V. O._, 337.
[133.2] I described one such leaden tablet, found at Dymock, Gloucestershire, in _Reliquary_, N.S., iii. 140. Another was subsequently found at Lincoln’s Inn, and reported on by Mr W. Paley Baildon to the Society of Antiquaries (_Proc. Soc. Anti._, 2nd ser., xviii. 141). Others have also been found elsewhere, among them two on Gatherley Moor in Yorkshire. If the identification of the persons against whom the tablets on Gatherley Moor and at Lincoln’s Inn were directed be conclusively established, they antedate by more than half a century the translation above referred to of Agrippa’s book. This of course is by no means impossible, or indeed improbable, for the practitioners of occult science in the reign of Queen Elizabeth were frequently men of learning.
[134.1] _Fasc. Malay_, ii. 41.
[135.1] Alan H. Gardiner, _Oxford Cong. Rep._, i. 210.
[135.2] Budge, _Archæologia_, lii. 421 _sqq._, transliterating, translating, and commenting on a papyrus in the British Museum, which belonged to a priest of Ra about the year B.C. 305, and contains the ritual for the purpose.
[135.3] Wiedemann, 94.
[136.1] Wiedemann, 279.
[136.2] _Ibid._, 99.
[136.3] Budge, _Archæologia_, lii. 425, 440, 539 _sqq._ The Egyptian gods merged into one another like the dissolving pictures of a lantern. This was probably in part the result of the union in one kingdom of a number of petty states, which were centres of worship of disparate though cognate divinities, and the consequent effort to synthesize these divinities and their worship, and in part the issue of philosophical speculation, itself doubtless influenced by political events.
[136.4] Wiedemann, 54; Budge, _Egypt. Magic_, 137. Dr Frazer’s version, _Taboo_, 387, is formed on a comparison of these and other texts.
[137.1] Wiedemann, 273. More personal threats are often employed. See, for examples, _Arch. Rel._, xvi. 85.
[137.2] Plato, _Rep._, ii. 364.
[137.3] There are of course plenty of magical Greek texts, but they are much later. The papyri unearthed in such numbers during recent years contain many; and they often imply that the deity invoked is compelled to perform his votary’s wishes. He is addressed in terms of command, adjured by names of power and bidden to be quick about his work. Such spells, however, are not purely Greek. They are produced under foreign influence, and the gods or demons invoked bear alien names. The texts are frequently _defixiones_. Simaitha’s incantation in the second idyll of Theocritus, so far as it is addressed to the Moon, to Hecate or Artemis, is not couched in terms of command. The goddesses, if they grant the damsel’s desires, are accomplices who cannot plead _vis major_. Yet threats and insults to the gods were, it seems, sometimes made use of, probably in the hope of driving them by taunts to do what was wanted (see below, p. 190). The dividing line here is very thin.
[139.1] Hodson, _Naga_, 139, 141; _cf._ 102, 164.
[139.2] Parker, _Tales_, i. 97.
[140.1] Brett, _Ind. Tribes_, 401.
[140.2] _Anthropos_, viii. 3. For the belief in and cult of the Kaya, see _ibid._, iii. 1005; and of the Inal, _ibid._, v. 95.
[140.3] Shakespear, _Lushai_, 109 (_cf._ 61).
[141.1] W. G. Aston, _F. L._, xxiii. 187 _sq._
[141.2] Wiedemann, 227. On Thoth as magician and the words of power which he uttered and wrote down compare Budge, _Egypt. Magic_, 128 _sqq._
[142.1] Morris, _Heimskringla_, i. 18, 19.
[143.1] Levit. xvi. 8. On the Scapegoat in general see Dr Frazer’s volume bearing that title.
[144.1] Hose, ii. 29 note.
[145.1] Hose, 56, 117.
[146.1] Rivers, _Todas_, 257, 450. For an alternative translation of the third clause of the spell, see pp. 195, 271. For another form of the spell, see p. 259.
[147.1] J. H. Weeks, _J. A. I._, xl. 377, 378.
[148.1] J. H. Weeks, _J. A. I._, xl. 383. Surely in the face of these examples Mr Weeks’ statement--“Nor did we find any form of prayer among them, no worship and no sacrifices” (_ibid._, 376)--needs some qualification. As to the _mongoli_, see _ibid._, 368.
[149.1] Werner, 56, 76.
[151.1] A. M. Tozzer, _Putnam Vol._, 304. _Cf._ Matthews, _Navaho Leg._, 40.
[151.2] Tozzer, _op. cit._, 303. On the rites and beliefs of the Dene, see Father Jetté, _J. A. I._, xxxvii. 157 _sqq._
[154.1] Exod. xxii. 18.
[154.2] Deut. xviii. 9 _sqq._
[154.3] Num. v. 11 _sqq._
[155.1] Hos. iii. 4, 5. _Cf._ T. W. Davies, _Magic_, 36; and _Encyc. Bibl._, _s.v._
[159.1] Weeks 177.
[161.1] Ælian, _Var. Hist._, xii. 23. Philo (_Dreams_, ii. 17) attributes the same practice to the Germans.
[161.2] O’Grady, ii. 518. Professor Whitley Stokes also gives it, _F. L._, iv. 488, from an Edinburgh MS. I quote his translation, which is to the same effect as Mr O’Grady’s.
[162.1] Skeat, _Magic_, 10.
[163.1] Vinson, 20. According to this story there were two cabin-boys, one of whom overheard the plot and the other struck the blow, but this appears to be a literary embellishment.
[163.2] Strackerjan, i. 324, 325; Hansen, 38. The Norse tale (by Asbjoernsen) is referred to, _Mélusine_, ii. 201. I have not seen it. Analogous tale in Ireland, _Ant._, xlv. 371.
[163.3] _Tylor Essays_, 138. Roscher (_Ephialtes_, 38) thinks it was “a quite obvious nightmare.”
[164.1] Gregor, 66.
[164.2] Gregor, _loc. cit._
[166.1] Thorpe, _N. Myth._, ii. 78.
[167.1] Hibbert, _A Description of the Shetland Islands_ (Edinburgh, 1822), 569; _Zeits. des Ver._, ii. 15, 17; Rogers, 218; Lehmann-Filhés, ii. 16; Maurer, 173.
[168.1] Natesa Sastri, 148.
[168.2] _Bibl. Trad. Pop. Espan._, i. 187
[168.3] Castrén, 172.
[168.4] Boas, _Ind. Sagen_, 86.
[169.1] Miller, _Scenes and Leg._, 287.
[170.1] Shakespear, _Lushei_, 66.
[170.2] Grimm, _Teut. Myth._, iii. 924.
[171.1] Ovid, _Fasti_, iii. 285.
[171.2] Pausanias, i. 4, 5; Ovid, _Metam._, xi. 90; Herod., viii. 138; Ælian, _Var. Hist._, iii. 18.
[171.3] _Iliad_, v. 370 _sqq._
[172.1] _R. E. E. S._, i. 338.
[172.2] As an example the Nattu Malayans of Cochin in the south of India may be cited. “When questioned as to their ideas of gods, they say that they are like men themselves, but invisible, yet all-powerful” (Anantha Krishna, i. 34).
[173.1] Herod., ii. 122. Gods, like men, were addicted to gambling. According to Plutarch (_De Iside_), Hermes in Egyptian legend played with the moon and won the seventieth part of each of her light periods, wherewith he made the last five days of the year and added them to the calendar.
[173.2] Herod., vii. 35.
[173.3] Bérenger-Feraud, _Superst._, i. 473. The author has collected in the chapter from which this is cited numerous other instances of the punishment of the recalcitrant god.
[173.4] Herod., ii. 111.
[174.1] Williams, _Burmah_, 91.
[174.2] _Ind. Cens. Rep._, 1911, x. 61.
[174.3] Herod., iv. 94. Rohde (_Psyche_, ii. 28 note) suggests that the personage against whom the arrows and threats were aimed was not strictly a god, but an evil spirit or a magician. This, however, does not follow. Philo (_l.c._) states that Xerxes, when his bridge across the Hellespont was destroyed, aimed his arrows at the sun, and regards the action with pious horror as a symptom of insanity.
[175.1] Herod., iv. 184.
[175.2] _J. A. I._, xxxvi. 51.
[175.3] Moffat, 261, 265.
[175.4] Chapman, i. 213. The word translated by Chapman as “God” is doubtless Morimo. _Cf._ _ibid._, 46, “All Bechuanas believe in God (Morimo), whom they laud or execrate as good or bad luck attends them.”
[176.1] Callaway, _Rel. Syst._, 404.
[176.2] Hahn, 46, 51, 59, 94. _Cf._ 99, where the practice of the Urjangkut, a tribe of Black Tartars, to scold the thunder and lightning is cited from Bastian.
[177.1] Lloyd, 397. According to another account, “when it thunders the Bushmen are very angry and curse bitterly, thinking that the storm is occasioned by some evil being” (Thunberg, ii., 163).
[177.2] Hollis, _Nandi_, 9, 99.
[177.3] _J. A. I._, xliii. 49.
[177.4] _Jes. Rel._, xii. 25.
[177.5] J. A. Mason, _Univ. Cal. Pub._, x. 185.
[178.1] Lozano, _Desc. Chorographica del Gran Chaco_ (1733), 71, quoted Payne, i. 391 note.
[178.2] Payne, _l.c._
[178.3] _Int. Arch._, Suppl., xiii. 88.
[179.1] Neuhauss, iii. 157. I may refer also to the account of a young Kayan brave in Borneo taking his arms and sallying forth to fight the Thunder-god (_Int. Arch._, xxi. 139). But further examples are unnecessary.
[180.1] Frazer, _Magic Art_, i. 327 _sqq._
[180.2] Von Alpenburg, 262, 365. Many such knives are to be found in peasants’ houses in the Lower Inn valley. In the Netherlands these whirlwinds are held to be “the Travailing Mother,” who seems to be a woman dead in childbirth unconfessed of mortal sin. She cannot be received into heaven. She is equally denied a place in hell, since her sufferings and death have already provided a sufficient penance. Hence she wanders about, seeking an abiding-place (Wolf, _Niederl. Sag._, 616). Women who die in childbirth are commonly considered very dangerous ghosts. See below, p. 213.
[181.1] Farnell, _Evol._, 43. _Cf._ Miss Harrison, _Prolegomena_, 101.
[181.2] I have discussed similar practices, _Prim. Pat._, i. 102. See also Mannhardt, _Myth. Forsch._, 113 _sqq._; Frazer, _Scapegoat_, 255. These contain a large collection of examples, which put the magical and purificatory purpose beyond doubt.
[182.1] _Mélusine_, ii. 187, quoting the passage.
[182.2] _Journ. Am. F. L._, xxiii. 416, 418.
[182.3] Lumholtz, ii. 342, 422.
[183.1] _Rev. Trad. Pop._, xi. 663. Vâlmiki, the Indian epic poet, author of the _Rámáyana_, is said to have owed his birth to a similar blunder by a saint who was the object of prayers by two sisters-in-law, and mistook the maiden for the married woman (Harikishan Kaul, _Ind. Cens. Rep._, 1911, xiv. 131, citing Vaman Shiva Ram Apte’s _Sanskrit Dictionary_).
[184.1] Turner, _R. B. E._, xi. 194.
[184.2] M. Friedrich, _Anthropos_, ii. 101.
[185.1] _Anthropos_, vii. 74.
[185.2] Thurston, _Castes_, vi. 85.
[186.1] Dr H. ten Kate, _Anthropos_, vii. 396. _Cf._ Aston, _Shinto_, 189.