the golden bough-第161节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


d。　Thus　in　the　island　of　Wetar　（between　New　Guinea　and　Celebes）　people　believe　themselves　to　be　variously　descended　from　wild　pigs；　serpents；　crocodiles；　turtles；　dogs；　and　eels；　a　man　may　not　eat　an　animal　of　the　kind　from　which　he　is　descended；　if　he　does　so；　he　will　become　a　leper；　and　go　mad。　Amongst　the　Omaha　Indians　of　North　America　men　whose　totem　is　the　elk；　believe　that　if　they　ate　the　flesh　of　the　male　elk　they　would　break　out　in　boils　and　white　spots　in　different　parts　of　their　bodies。　In　the　same　tribe　men　whose　totem　is　the　red　maize；　think　that　if　they　ate　red　maize　they　would　have　running　sores　all　round　their　mouths。　The　Bush　negroes　of　Surinam；　who　practise　totemism；　believe　that　if　they　ate　the　capia？　（an　animal　like　a　pig）　it　would　give　them　leprosy；　perhaps　the　capia？　is　one　of　their　totems。　The　Syrians；　in　antiquity；　who　esteemed　fish　sacred；　thought　that　if　they　ate　fish　their　bodies　would　break　out　in　ulcers；　and　their　feet　and　stomach　would　swell　up。　The　Chasas　of　Orissa　believe　that　if　they　were　to　injure　their　totemic　animal　they　would　be　attacked　by　leprosy　and　their　line　would　die　out。　These　examples　prove　that　the　eating　of　a　sacred　animal　is　often　believed　to　produce　leprosy　or　other　skin…diseases；　so　far；　therefore；　they　support　the　view　that　the　pig　must　have　been　sacred　in　Egypt；　since　the　effect　of　drinking　its　milk　was　believed　to　be　leprosy。

Again；　the　rule　that；　after　touching　a　pig；　a　man　had　to　wash　himself　and　his　clothes；　also　favours　the　view　of　the　sanctity　of　the　pig。　For　it　is　a　common　belief　that　the　effect　of　contact　with　a　sacred　object　must　be　removed；　by　washing　or　otherwise；　before　a　man　is　free　to　mingle　with　his　fellows。　Thus　the　Jews　wash　their　hands　after　reading　the　sacred　scriptures。　Before　coming　forth　from　the　tabernacle　after　the　sin…offering；　the　high　priest　had　to　wash　himself；　and　put　off　the　garments　which　he　had　worn　in　the　holy　place。　It　was　a　rule　of　Greek　ritual　that；　in　offering　an　expiatory　sacrifice；　the　sacrificer　should　not　touch　the　sacrifice；　and　that；　after　the　offering　was　made；　he　must　wash　his　body　and　his　clothes　in　a　river　or　spring　before　he　could　enter　a　city　or　his　own　house。　The　Polynesians　felt　strongly　the　need　of　ridding　themselves　of　the　sacred　contagion；　if　it　may　be　so　called；　which　they　caught　by　touching　sacred　objects。　Various　ceremonies　were　performed　for　the　purpose　of　removing　this　contagion。　We　have　seen；　for　example；　how　in　Tonga　a　man　who　happened　to　touch　a　sacred　chief；　or　anything　personally　belonging　to　him；　had　to　perform　a　certain　ceremony　before　he　could　feed　himself　with　his　hands；　otherwise　it　was　believed　that　he　would　swell　up　and　die；　or　at　least　be　afflicted　with　scrofula　or　some　other　disease。　We　have　seen；　too；　what　fatal　effects　are　supposed　to　follow；　and　do　actually　follow；　from　contact　with　a　sacred　object　in　New　Zealand。　In　short；　primitive　man　believes　that　what　is　sacred　is　dangerous；　it　is　pervaded　by　a　sort　of　electrical　sanctity　which　communicates　a　shock　to；　even　if　it　does　not　kill；　whatever　comes　in　contact　with　it。　Hence　the　savage　is　unwilling　to　touch　or　even　to　see　that　which　he　deems　peculiarly　holy。　Thus　Bechuanas；　of　the　Crocodile　clan；　think　it　hateful　and　unlucky　to　meet　or　see　a　crocodile；　the　sight　is　thought　to　cause　inflammation　of　the　eyes。　Yet　the　crocodile　is　their　most　sacred　object；　they　call　it　their　father；　swear　by　it；　and　celebrate　it　in　their　festivals。　The　goat　is　the　sacred　animal　of　the　Madenassana　Bushmen；　yet　to　look　upon　it　would　be　to　render　the　man　for　the　time　impure；　as　well　as　to　cause　him　undefined　uneasiness。　The　Elk　clan；　among　the　Omaha　Indians；　believe　that　even　to　touch　the　male　elk　would　be　followed　by　an　eruption　of　boils　and　white　spots　on　the　body。　Members　of　the　Reptile　clan　in　the　same　tribe　think　that　if　one　of　them　touches　or　smells　a　snake；　it　will　make　his　hair　white。　In　Samoa　people　whose　god　was　a　butterfly　believed　that　if　they　caught　a　butterfly　it　would　strike　them　dead。　Again；　in　Samoa　the　reddish…seared　leaves　of　the　banana…tree　were　commonly　used　as　plates　for　handing　food；　but　if　any　member　of　the　Wild　Pigeon　family　had　used　banana　leaves　for　this　purpose；　it　was　supposed　that　he　would　suffer　from　rheumatic　swellings　or　an　eruption　all　over　the　body　like　chicken…pox。　The　Mori　clan　of　the　Bhils　in　Central　India　worship　the　peacock　as　their　totem　and　make　offerings　of　grain　to　it；　yet　members　of　the　clan　believe　that　were　they　even　to　set　foot　on　the　tracks　of　a　peacock　they　would　afterwards　suffer　from　some　disease；　and　if　a　woman　sees　a　peacock　she　must　veil　her　face　and　look　away。　Thus　the　primitive　mind　seems　to　conceive　of　holiness　as　a　sort　of　dangerous　virus；　which　a　prudent　man　will　shun　as　far　as　possible；　and　of　which；　if　he　should　chance　to　be　infected　by　it；　he　will　carefully　disinfect　himself　by　some　form　of　ceremonial　purification。

In　the　light　of　these　parallels　the　beliefs　and　customs　of　the　Egyptians　touching　the　pig　are　probably　to　be　explained　as　based　upon　an　opinion　of　the　extreme　sanctity　rather　than　of　the　extreme　uncleanness　of　the　animal；　or　rather；　to　put　it　more　correctly；　they　imply　that　the　animal　was　looked　on；　not　simply　as　a　filthy　and　disgusting　creature；　but　as　a　being　endowed　with　high　supernatural　powers；　and　that　as　such　it　was　regarded　with　that　primitive　sentiment　of　religious　awe　and　fear　in　which　the　feelings　of　reverence　and　abhorrence　are　almost　equally　blended。　The　ancients　themselves　seem　to　have　been　aware　that　there　was　another　side　to　the　horror　with　which　swine　seemed　to　inspire　the　Egyptians。　For　the　Greek　astronomer　and　mathematician　Eudoxus；　who　resided　fourteen　months　in　Egypt　and　conversed　with　the　priests；　was　of　opinion　that　the　Egyptians　spared　the　pig；　not　out　of　abhorrence；　but　from　a　regard　to　its　utility　in　agriculture；　for；　according　to　him；　when　the　Nile　had　subsided；　herds　of　swine　were　turned　loose　over　the　fields　to　tread　the　seed　down　into　the　moist　earth。　But　when　a　being　is　thus　the　object　of　mixed　and　implicitly　contradictory　feelings；　he　may　be　said　to　occupy　a　position　of　unstable　equilibrium。　In　course　of　time　one　of　the　contradictory　feelings　is　likely　to　prevail　over　the　other；　and　according　as　the　feeling　which　finally　predominates　is　that　of　reverence　or　abhorrence；　the　being　who　is　the　object　of　it　will　rise　into　a　god　or　sink　into　a　devil。　The　latter；　on　the　whole；　was　the　fate　of　the　pig　in　Egypt。　For　in　historical　times　the　fear　and　horror　of　the　pig　seem　certainly　to　have　outweighed　the　reverence　and　worship　of　which　he　may　once　have　been　the　object；　and　of　which；　even　in　his　fallen　state；　he　never　quite　lost　trace。　He　came　to　be　looked　on　as　an　embodiment　of　Set　or　Typhon；　the　Egyptian　devil　and　enemy　of　Osiris。　For　it　was　in　the　shape　of　a　black　pig　that　Typhon　injured　the　eye　of　the　god　Horus；　who　burned　him　and　instituted　the　sacrifice　of　the　pig；　the　sun…god　Ra　having　declared　the　beast　abominable。　Again；　the　story　that　Typhon　was　hunting　a　boar　when　he　discovered　and　mangled　the　body　of　Osiris；　and　that　this　was　the　reason　why　pigs　were　sacrificed　once　a　year；　is　clearly　a　modernised　version　of　an　older　story　that　Osiris；　like　Adonis　and　Attis；　was　slain　or　mangled　by　a　boar；　or　by　Typhon　in　the　form　of　a　boar。　Thus；　the　annual　sacrifice　of　a　pig　to　Osiris　might　naturally　be　interpreted　as　vengeance　inflicted　on　the　hostile　animal　that　had　slain　or　mangled　the　god。　But；　in　the　first　place；　when　an　animal　is　thus　killed　as　a　solemn　sacrifice　once　and　once　only　in　the　year；　it　generally　or　always　means　that　the　animal　is　divine；　that　he　is　spared　and　respected　the　rest　of　the　year　as　a　god　and　slain；　when　he　is　slain；　also　in　the　character　of　a　god。　In　the　second　place；　the　examples　of　Dionysus　and　Demeter；　if　not　of　Attis　and　Adonis；　have　taught　us　that　the　animal　which　is　sacrificed　to　a　god　on　the　ground　that　he　is　the　god's　enemy　may　have　been；　and　probably　was；　originally　the　god　himself。　Therefore；　the　annual　sacrifice　of　a　pig　to　Osiris；　coupled　with　the　alleged　hostility　of　the　animal　to　the　god；　tends　to　show；　first；　that　originally　the　pig　was　a　god；　and；　second；　that　he　was　Osiris。　At　a　later　age；　when　Osiris　became　anthropomorphic　and　his　original　relation　to　the　pig　had　been　forgotten；　the　animal　was　first　distinguished　from　him；　and　afterwards　opposed　as　an　enemy　to　him　by　mythologists　who　could　think　of　no　reason　for　killing　a　beast　in　connexion　with　the　worship　of　a　god　except　that　the　beast　was　the　god's　enemy；　or；　as　Plutarch　puts　it；　not　that　which　is　dear　to　the　gods；　but　that　which　is　the　contrary；　is　fit　to　be　sacrificed。　At　this　later　stage　the　havoc　which　a　wild　boar　notoriously　makes　amongst　the　corn　would　supply　a　plausible　reason　for　regarding　him　as　the　foe　of　the　corn…spirit；　though　originally；　if　I　am　right；　the　very　freedom　with　which　the　boar　ranged　at　will　through　the　corn　led　people　to　identify　him　with　the　corn…spirit；　to　whom　he　was　afterwards　opposed　as　an　enemy。

The　view　which　identifies　the　pig　with　Osiris　derives　not　a　little　support　from　the　sacrifice　of　pigs　to　him　on　the　very　day　on　which；　according　to　tradition；　Osiris　himself　was　killed；　for　thus　the　killing　of　the　pig　was　the　annual　representation　of　the　killing　of　Osi