The human species

by A. de Quatrefages

In the opinion of Sir John Lubbock, atheism is not “the negation of the existence of a God, but the absence of definite ideas upon this subject.” Here, like M. Barthélemy Saint-Hilaire, the English savant gives to the word atheism a very different sense to that which it has held hitherto. Moreover, he quotes elsewhere without comment several passages, the sense of which clearly implies a negation of all divinity, and sometimes himself makes use of expressions which seem to prove that such is his conviction, at least with regard to certain savages. Thus, the testimony which he makes use of, and his own words, are often employed in the support of the opinion which denies any religion to certain human groups.

The choice, moreover, of the quotations in question seems to me liable to a serious objection. When the writers, against whom I am now arguing, have to choose between two evidences, the one attesting, the other denying the existence of religious belief in a population, it is always the latter which they seem to think should be accepted. More often than not, they do not even mention the contrary evidences, however definite, however authentic they may be.

Now it is evidently much easier not to see than to discover that which may be in so many ways rendered inappreciable to our eyes. When a traveller states that he has proved the existence of religious sentiments in a population, which by others had been declared to be destitute of them, when he gives precise details upon such a delicate question, he has unquestionably at least probability in his favour. I see nothing to authorize this rejection of positive evidence and unconditional acceptance of negative evidence. This, however, is too often the case.

I might justify this imputation by taking, one by one, almost all the examples of so-called atheist populations pointed out by different authors. I shall confine myself to some of the most striking.

With reference to the Americans, Robertson is quoted, who states that several tribes have been discovered in America possessing no conception of a Supreme Being and no religious ceremonies. No mention is made of the information, for which we are indebted to D’Orbigny, although it is very precise. The author of l’Homme Américain deserves this neglect the less, since he directly contradicts the opinions held upon this subject by several writers, and by Robertson himself. “Although several authors,” he says, “have denied all religion to certain Americans, it is evident in our opinion that all the nations, even the most barbarous, possessed one of some kind.” D’Orbigny develops this opinion by giving details of the dogmas accepted by all the races of South America, and he proves in all the belief in another life, as attested by their funeral ceremonies. Is not this of more importance than the simple negative assertion borrowed from a traveller?

It may be objected that D’Orbigny spoke only of the tribes of South America, and that the atheist populations must be sought in the northern portion of this continent. The Californians have, in fact, been quoted, upon the authority of P. Baegert, as having neither government, religion, idols, temples, nor form of worship. But nothing is said of the facts observed by M. de Mofras, which directly contradict this assertion. The Californians, this traveller tells us, believe in a superior God. “This God has had neither father nor mother. His origin is entirely unknown; they believe that He is omnipresent; that He sees everything, even in the middle of the darkest nights; that He is invisible to all eyes; that He is the Friend of the good, and that He punishes the wicked.” The Californians build oval temples, or, perhaps, rather chapels, from 10 to 12 ft. in diameter, which are regarded as asylums, even in case of murder. Clearly, the Californians must be erased from the list of atheist populations, the conception which they have formed of their superior God being, on the contrary, a remarkably elevated one. In this respect these poor savages greatly surpassed the Greeks and Romans.

The Californians rank amongst those human tribes which are least elevated in the social scale; but there are some which are considered to stand far below them, the Mincopies, for example. Some writers, adopting the ideas of Mouat, regard them as atheists. They make no mention of the evidence of Major Michael Symes and Mr. Day. The former relates the information which he received from Captain Stocker, who lived for several years in the midst of these islanders; the latter relates what he saw. From their combined evidence, it appears that the Mincopies worshipped the sun as the primal source of all good; the moon as a secondary power; the genii of the woods, rivers, and mountains as agents of the first divinities. They believe that a malevolent spirit raises tempests, and they sometimes endeavour to pacify it by songs, sometimes menace it with their arrows. These Mincopies believe in another life, and keep a lighted fire under the platform which bears the corpse of a chief to appease his powerful spirit.

The evidence of Le Vaillant is accepted with reference to the absence of all religion in the Hottentots. No notice is taken of the contrary opinion held by Kolben, the accuracy and truth of which, though formerly doubted, are now placed above suspicion by the inquiry instituted by Walkenaer. Kolben, moreover, only confirmed the statements of his predecessors Saar, Tachard, and Boeving. He had also the advantage of having studied the aborigines before they were subdued and dispersed by the Europeans. Now Kolben tells us that the Hottentots believed in a God, the creator of all existing things, doing no harm to anyone, and living beyond the moon. They called Him Gounja Ticquoa, that is to say, God of Gods. They also recognized an evil divinity, called Touquôa. The moon was, in their opinion, an inferior gounja. They believed, moreover, in another life, for they were afraid of ghosts, and rendered a sort of adoration to their great men, by dedicating to them a field, a mountain, or a river, to which they made, in passing, some sign of respect. These details, given by the old Prussian traveller, agree with those which Campbell received from the lips of a Hottentot chief.

Burchell, it is stated, could discover no religion in the Bachapine Kaffirs. Nevertheless, and Lubbock allows it himself elsewhere, we find in the writings of this traveller that the Bachapines believed in a malevolent being called Mouliimo, to whom they attribute everything of an unpleasant nature which happens to them. To defend themselves against him they cover themselves with amulets, and they hold many other superstitions. It is evident that Burchell was not acquainted with everything which the Bachapines believed, either because he did not attach great importance to the investigation, or because he was prevented by the difficulty which Kolben has mentioned, and which I have pointed out above.

Thus the Bachapines believe in a superior, but evil being, in a kind of devil. It would be very singular if they did not believe in a species of God. Schweinfurth believes he has discovered something similar among the Bongos; but he himself insists several times upon the difficulty of determining exactly what to believe in questions of this kind. Let us admit, however, that this may be true in the case of these Negroes as also in that of the Bachapines. We can only regard it as an accidental and local phenomenon, and in no way as a character of race. I shall return later to the Negroes; I will now only add a few words with reference to the Bachapines.