[287] F. Chapiseau, Le Folk-lore de la Beuce et du Perche (Paris, 1902), i. 172 sq.
[288] J. Perham, “Manangism in Borneo,” Journal of the Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society, No. 19 (1887), p. 100; H. Ling Roth, The Natives of Sarawak and British North Borneo, i. 280.
[289] Marcellus, De medicamentis, xv. 82.
[290] Marcellus, op. cit. xxxiv. 100.
[291] Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes of Central Australia, p. 176.
[292] Spencer and Gillen, op. cit. pp. 179 sqq.
[293] Spencer and Gillen, op. cit. pp. 184 sq.
[294] Spencer and Gillen, op. cit. pp. 193 sqq., 199 sqq., 206 sq. In the south of France and in the Pyrenees a number of caves have been found adorned with paintings or carvings of animals which have long been extinct in that region, such as the mammoth, the reindeer, and the bison. All the beasts thus represented appear to be edible, and none of them to be fierce carnivorous creatures. Hence it has been ingeniously suggested by M. S. Reinach that the intention of these works of art may have been to multiply by magic the animals so represented, just as the Central Australians seek to increase kangaroos and emus in the manner described above. He infers that the comparatively high development of prehistoric art in Europe among men of the reindeer age may have been due in large measure to the practice of sympathetic magic. See S. Reinach, “L’Art et la magie,” L’Anthropologie, xiv. (1903) pp. 257–266; id., Cultes, Myths et Religions, i. (Paris, 1905) pp. 125–136. Paintings and carvings executed in caves and on rocks by the aborigines have been described in various parts of Australia. See G. Grey, Journals of two Expeditions of Discovery (London, 1841), i. 201–206; R. Brough Smyth, The Aborigines of Victoria, i. 289–294, ii. 309; E. M. Curr, The Australian Race, ii. 476; Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes of Central Australia, pp. 614–618; J. F. Mann, in Proceedings of the Geographical Society of Australia, i. (1885) pp. 50 sq., with illustrations; W. E. Roth, Ethnological Studies among the North-west-central Queensland Aborigines, p. 116. We may conjecture that the Hebrew prohibition to make “the likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the heaven, the likeness of anything that creepeth on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the water under the earth” (Deuteronomy iv. 17 sq.), was primarily directed rather against magic than idolatry in the strict sense. Ezekiel speaks (viii. 10–12) of the elders of Israel offering incense to “every form of creeping things, and abominable beasts,” portrayed on the walls of their chambers. If hieroglyphs originated, as seems possible, in representations of edible animals and plants which had long been in use for the purpose of magically multiplying the species, we could readily understand why, for example, dangerous beasts of prey should be conspicuously absent from the so-called Hittite system of hieroglyphs, without being forced to have recourse to the rationalistic explanation of their absence which has been adopted by Professors G. Hirschfeld and W. M. Ramsay. See W. M. Ramsay, The Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, i. p. xv. On the relations of art and magic, see Y. Hirn, Origins of Art (London, 1900), pp. 278–297.
[295] Spencer and Gillen, Northern Tribes of Central Australia, pp. 291–294.
[296] Spencer and Gillen, Native Tribes of Central Australia, pp. 185 sq.