The Household Snake.
The belief in the influence of the guardian domestic or national snake is universal. When the Persians invaded Athens the people would not leave the city till they learned that the guardian snake had refused its food and abandoned the citadel. A snake at Lanuvium and at Epirus resided in a grove and was waited on by a virgin priestess, who entered naked and fed it once a year, when by its acceptance or refusal of the offering, the prospects of the harvest were ascertained. The Teutons and Celts had also their sacred guardian snake.
IMAGE OF THE HOUSEHOLD SNAKE.
In the Panjâb Hills, every householder keeps an image of the Nâga or harmless snake, as contrasted with the Sânp, which is venomous. This snake is put in charge of the householder’s homestead, and is held responsible that no cobra or dangerous serpent enters it. It is supposed to have the power of driving all cobras out of the place. Should rain drive the house snake out of his hole, he is worshipped. No image of a cobra or other venomous snake is ever made for purposes of worship. Ant-hills are believed to be the homes of snakes, and there the people offer sugar, rice, and millet for forty days.[147] These correspond to the benevolent domestic snakes, of whom Aubrey says that “the Bramens have them in great veneration; they keep their corne. I think it is Tavernier mentions it.”[148]
They are, in fact, as we have already seen, the representatives of the benevolent ancestral ghosts. Hence the deep-rooted prejudice against killing the snake, which is both guardian and god. “If,” says Mr. Lang,[149] “the serpent were the deity of an earlier race, we could understand the prejudice against killing it, as shown in the Apollo legend.” The evidence accumulated in this chapter will perhaps go some way to settle this question, as far as India is concerned.
[1] “Principles of Sociology,” i. 359.
[2] “Primitive Culture,” ii. 221, 89.
[3] “Golden Bough,” i. 39.
[4] Dalton, “Descriptive Ethnology,” 56, 40, 43, 283; Hislop, “Papers,” 10.
[5] “Brihatsanhita,” Rajendra Lâla Mitra, “Indo-Aryans,” i. 245.
[6] Campbell, “Notes,” 225.
[7] Forlong, “Rivers of Life;” Westropp, “Primitive Symbolism.”
[8] Groome, “Encyclopædia Britannica,” s.v. “Gypsies.”
[9] “Calcutta Review,” xxvi. 512.
[10] Tawney, “Katha Sarit Sâgara,” i. 174; ii. 181, 592, 286.
[11] Ibid., ii. 270.
[12] “North Indian Notes and Queries,” iii. 123; Grimm, “Household Tales,” ii. 429.
[13] Ibid., ii. 142.
[14] Grimm, “Household Tales,” ii. 596.
[15] Temple, “Wide-awake Stories,” 413.
[16] Knowles, “Folk-tales,” 184; Grimm, loc. cit., ii. 428.
[17] Tawney, “Katha Sarit Sâgara,” i. 153; ii. 387, 460.
[18] Dyer, “Popular Customs,” 467.
[19] Führer, “Monumental Antiquities,” 304; “North Indian Notes and Queries,” i. 4, 37; “Bombay Gazetteer,” ii. 355.
[20] “Golden Bough,” i. 61.
[21] “North Indian Notes and Queries,” ii. 112.
[22] Dalton, “Descriptive Ethnology,” 129, 132, 141, 186, 188.
[23] Hislop, “Papers,” 20.
[24] “Berâr Gazetteer,” 29, 31.
[25] Growse, “Mathura,” 70, 76 sqq., 83, 420, 470, 458.
[26] “Himâlayan Gazetteer,” iii. 47.
[27] Moorcroft, “Travels,” i. 211.
[28] “North Indian Notes and Queries,” iii. 16.
[29] Conway, “Demonology,” i. 315 sq.; Farrer, “Primitive Manners,” 309; Sir W. Scott, “Letters on Demonology,” 79; Gregor, “Folk-lore of North-East Scotland,” 116, 179; Henderson, “Folk-lore of the Northern Counties,” 278.
[30] “Oudh Gazetteer,” i. 566; Führer, “Monumental Antiquities,” 304. See instances collected by Hartland, “Legend of Perseus,” ii. 35 sqq.
[31] Henderson, loc. cit., 273.
[32] Campbell, “Notes,” 221 sq.
[33] “Calcutta Review,” lxix. 364 sq.
[34] Campbell, “Notes,” 237.
[35] Haug, “Aitareya Brâhmanam,” ii. 486 sq.
[36] Cunningham, “Bhilsa Topes,” 24; “Archæological Reports,” i. 5 sq.; Ferguson, “Eastern Architecture,” 69; Führer, “Monumental Antiquities,” 127.
[37] “Himâlayan Gazetteer,” ii. 783.
[38] Campbell, “Notes,” 238.
[39] Tod, “Annals,” i. 611.
[40] See instances collected by Wake, “Serpent Worship,” 18.
[41] Tawney, “Katha Sarit Sâgara,” ii. 293.
[42] Ibbetson, “Panjâb Ethnography,” 118; “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” ii. 55; O’Brien, “Multâni Glossary,” 82.
[43] “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” ii. 74; Elliot, “Supplementary Glossary,” 26.
[44] Dalton, “Descriptive Ethnology,” 148, 281, 283; Rousselet, “India and its Native Princes,” 369 sq.
[45] Tawney, “Katha Sarit Sâgara,” i. 162.
[46] Sleeman, “Rambles and Recollections,” ii. 18; Tylor, “Primitive Culture,” ii. 225.
[47] “Quarterly Review,” cxiv. 226; “Folk-lore,” iii. 88.
[48] Hunt, “Popular Romances,” 420.
[49] Temple, “Legends of the Panjâb,” i. 473.
[50] Campbell, “Notes,” 234.
[51] Mullaly, “Notes on Madras Criminal Tribes,” 20.
[52] “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” iii. 38.
[53] i. 287.
[54] Ward, “Hindus,” ii. 13, quoted by Campbell, “Notes,” 229.
[55] Lâl Bihâri Dê, “Folk-tales,” 280.
[56] Campbell, loc. cit., 229.
[57] “North Indian Notes and Queries,” i. 207.
[58] Dalton, “Descriptive Ethnology,” 189.
[59] “Sirsa Settlement Report,” 154.
[60] Wilson, “Works,” iii. 68.
[61] Campbell, “Notes,” 248.
[62] Rhys, “Lectures,” 359.
[63] Kelly, “Curiosities,” 159; Conway, “Demonology,” i. 126; Gubernatis, “Zoological Mythology,” i. 225; Dyer, “Popular Customs,” 274; Brand, “Observations,” 616.
[64] Tawney, “Katha Sarit Sâgara,” i. 439.
[65] Campbell, “Santâl Folk-tales,” 54.
[66] Campbell, “Notes,” 239.
[67] Dalton, “Descriptive Ethnology,” 109, 220, 234.
[68] Campbell, loc. cit., 232.
[69] Ibbetson, “Panjâb Ethnography,” 119.
[70] “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” ii. 42; “North Indian Notes and Queries,” ii. 27.
[71] “Eastern India,” iii. 555.
[72] “North Indian Notes and Queries,” ii. 151 sq.
[73] “Notes,” 461.
[74] “Bombay Gazetteer,” vii. 61.
[75] Risley, “Tribes and Castes,” ii. 201.
[76] Dalton, “Descriptive Ethnology,” 194.
[77] Ibid., 319.
[78] Atkinson, “Himâlayan Gazetteer,” ii. 912.
[79] Wright, “History of Nepâl,” 33.
[80] “Settlement Report,” 38.
[81] “Archæological Reports,” x. 177.
[82] “North Indian Notes and Queries,” i. 15.
[83] “Settlement Report,” 167.
[84] “Bombay Gazetteer,” iii. 221.
[85] Oppert, “Original Inhabitants,” 73.
[86] “Totemism,” 33 sqq.
[87] Campbell, “Notes,” 250.
[88] Manning, “Ancient India,” ii. 330 sq.; Tawney, “Katha Sarit Sâgara,” i. 185.
[89] “Primitive Culture,” ii. 239.
[90] Monier-Williams, “Brâhmanism and Hinduism,” 319 sqq.
[91] Wheeler, “History of India,” i. 148; “Gazetteer Central Provinces,” lxiii.; lxxii.; Campbell, “Notes,” 269; Ferguson, “Tree and Serpent Worship,” Appendix D; Elliot, “Supplementary Glossary,” s.v. “Gaur Taga”; Tod, “Annals,” i. 38; Atkinson, “Himâlayan Gazetteer,” ii. 280 sqq., 297; Temple, “Legends of the Panjâb,” i. 414 sq.
[92] Bhekal Nâg is perhaps the Sanskrit bheka, “frog.” It has been suggested that the gypsy Beng or Devil is connected with Bheka, and thus allied to serpent-worship (Groome, “Encyclopædia Britannica,” Art. “Gypsies”). Sir G. Cox (“Introduction,” 87, note) makes out Bheki, or “the squatting frog,” to be an old name for the sun. For the Himâlayan snake shrines see Atkinson, loc. cit., ii. 374 sq.
[93] Oldham, “Contemporary Review,” April, 1885.
[94] Oldfield, “Sketches,” ii. 204; Wright, “History,” 85.
[95] Tawney, “Katha Sarit Sâgara,” ii. 173, 544.
[96] “Calcutta Review,” li. 304 sq.; liv. 25 sq.; Ferguson, “Eastern Architecture,” 289; “Central Provinces Gazetteer,” 86.
[97] Tawney, loc. cit. i. 577.
[98] Ibid., i. 312; ii. 225.
[99] “Archæological Reports,” vii. 4.
[100] “Settlement Report,” 121.
[101] Beal, “Travels of Fah Hian,” 67 sq.
[102] “Archæological Reports,” i. 274.
[103] Wright, “History of Nepâl,” 85, 141.
[104] Henderson, “Folk-lore of the Northern Counties,” 289; “Gloucestershire Folk-lore,” 23.
[105] Führer, “Monumental Antiquities,” 144.
[106] Beal, loc. cit., 90.
[107] “Eastern India,” ii. 149.
[108] Growse, “Mathura,” 55, 58.
[109] Ibid., 71.
[110] “Reports,” xxi. 2, “Academy,” 23rd April, 1887.
[111] Sherring, “Sacred City,” 75, 87 sqq.; Führer, “Monumental Antiquities,” 211. For weather snakes see Tawney, “Katha Sarit Sâgara,” i. 438.
[112] “Brâhmanism and Hinduism,” 323.
[113] Tawney, loc. cit., i. 32, 55, 538; ii. 568.
[114] Gangadatta, “Folk-lore of Kumaun,” Introduction, vii.
[115] Ibbetson, “Panjâb Ethnography,” 114; “Legends of the Panjâb,” i. 426.
[116] “Principles of Sociology,” i. 345; Gubernatis, “Zoological Mythology,” ii. 407 sq.; Wake, “Serpent-worship,” 105; Tylor, “Primitive Culture,” ii. 240.
[117] Leland, “Etruscan Roman Remains,” 132.
[118] “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” i. 2.
[119] Tod, “Annals,” i. 777 sqq.
[120] Clouston, “Popular Tales,” i. 127; Grimm, “Household Tales,” ii. 405; Tawney, “Katha Sarit Sâgara,” ii. 454; Jacobs, “English Fairy Tales,” 207, 251.
[121] Gubernatis, “Zoological Mythology,” ii. 407; Clouston, loc. cit., i. 126.
[122] “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” ii. 91.
[123] Conway, “Demonology,” i. 353 sq.
[124] Miss Frere, “Old Deccan Tales,” 33; Lâl Bihâri Dê, “Folk-tales,” 19.
[125] “Oriental Memoirs,” ii. 19, 385.
[126] Knowles, “Folk-tales,” 492.
[127] Tawney, “Katha Sarit Sâgara,” i. 182.
[128] Tawney, loc. cit., ii. 99; Temple, “Legends of the Panjâb,” i. Introduction, xv.; “Wideawake Stories,” 193, 331.
[129] Atkinson, “Himâlayan Gazetteer,” ii. 851.
[130] Tod, “Annals,” i. 614; Wright, “History,” 37.
[131] Rousselet, “India and its Native Princes,” 28.
[132] “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” iii. 75.
[133] “Eastern India,” ii. 481.
[134] Grierson, “Bihâr Peasant Life,” 405; “Maithili Chrestomathy,” 23 sqq., where examples of the songs are given; “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” iii. 38.
[135] Atkinson, “Himâlayan Gazetteer,” ii. 836.
[136] “Settlement Report,” 120 sq.
[137] “Natural History,” xxxvii. 10.
[138] “Gazetteer,” xi. 36.
[139] “Popular Tales,” ii. 385.
[140] Führer, “Monumental Antiquities,” 28.
[141] Hardy, “Manual of Buddhism,” 146.
[142] “Oudh Gazetteer,” i. 597.
[143] “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” i. 15.
[144] Tawney, “Katha Sarit Sâgara,” i. 564; ii. 315.
[145] Temple, “Wideawake Stories,” 304, 424; “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” i. 15, 76.
[146] Sleeman, “Rambles,” i. 42; Conway, “Demonology,” i. 354.
[147] “Panjâb Notes and Queries,” iii. 92, 59.
[148] “Remaines,” 39. He perhaps refers to Tavernier, “Travels,” Ball’s Edition), i. 42; ii. 249.
[149] “Custom and Myth,” ii. 197.
CHAPTER III.
TOTEMISM AND FETISHISM.
Olim truncus eram ficulnus, inutile lignum,
Cum faber incertus scamnum faceretne Priapum,
Maluit esse deum.
Horace, Sat. I. viii. 1–3.
“A totem is a class of material objects, which a savage regards with superstitious respect, believing that there exists between them and every member of the class an intimate and altogether special relation.”[1] As distinguished from a fetish, a totem is never an isolated individual, but always a class of objects, generally a class of animals or plants, rarely a class of inanimate objects, very rarely a class of artificial objects.