SUPPLEMENT. 



DAWN OF CREATION AND OF WOESHIP. 



REPLY TO DR. RtVILLE. 

 By WILLIAM E. GLADSTONE. 



AMONG recent works on the origin and 

 history of religions by distinguished 

 authors, a somewhat conspicuous place may 

 be awarded to the " Prolegom^nes de I'llis- 

 toire des Religions," by Dr. Reville, Pro- 

 fessor in the College of France, and Hibbert 

 Lecturer in 1884. The volume has been 

 translated into English by Mr. Squire, and 

 the translation* comes forth with all the 

 advantage, and it is great, which can be 

 conferred by an introduction from the pen 

 of Professor Max Miiller. It appears, if I 

 may presume to speak of it, to be charac- 

 terized, among other merits, by marked in- 

 genuity and acuteness, breadth of field, 

 great felicity of phrase, evident candor of 

 intention, and abundant courtesy. 



Whether its contents are properly 

 placed as prolegomena may at once be ques- 

 tioned ; for surely the proper office of pro- 

 legomena is to present preliminaries, and 

 not results. Such is not, however, the aim 

 of this work. It starts from assuming the 

 subjective origin of all religions, which are 

 viewed as so many answers to the call of a 

 strong human appetite for that kind of food, 

 and are examined as the several varieties of 

 one and the same species. The conclusions 

 of opposing inquirers, however, are not left 

 to be confuted by a collection of facts and 

 testimonies drawn from historical investiga- 

 tion, but are thrust out of the way before- 

 hand in the preface (for, after all, prole- 

 gomena can be nothing but a less homely 

 phrase for a preface). These inquirers are 

 so many pretenders, who have obstructed 

 the passage of the rightful heir to his throne, 

 and they are to be put summarily out of the 

 way, as disturbers of the public peace. The 

 method pursued appears to be not to allow 

 the facts and arguments to dispose of them, 



♦ In his " Prolegomena to the History of Relig- 

 ions." My references throughout are to the trans- 

 lation by Mr. Squire (Williams & Norgate, 18*1). 

 VOL. XXVin. — 55 



but to condemn them before the cause is 

 heard. I do not know how to reconcile 

 this method with Dr. R6ville's declaration 

 that he aims (p. vi) at proceeding in a 

 " strictly scientific spirit." It might be 

 held that such a spirit required the regular 

 presentation of the evidence before the de- 

 livery of the verdict upon it. In any case I 

 venture to observe that these are not truly 

 prolegomena, but epilegomena to a History 

 of Religions not yet placed before us. 



The first enemy whom Dr. Reville dis- 

 patches is M. de Bonald, as the champion 

 of the doctrine that " in the very beginning 

 of the human race the creative power re- 

 vealed to the first men by supernatural 

 means the essential principles of religious 

 truth," together with " language and even 

 the art of writing " (pp. 35, 36). 



In passing. Dr. Reville observes that 

 " the religious schools, which maintain the 

 truth of a primitive revelation, are guided 

 by a very evident theological interest " 

 (ibid.) : the Protestant, to fortify the au- 

 thority of the Bible ; and the Roman Cath- 

 olic, to prop the infallibility of the Church. 



It is doubtless true that the doctrine of 

 a primitive revelation tends to fortify the 

 authority of religion. But is it not equally 

 true, and equally obvious, that the denial 

 of a primitive revelation tends to undermine 

 it? and, if so, might it not be retorted 

 upon the school of Dr. Reville that the 

 schools which deny a primitive revelation 

 are guided by a very evident anti-theological 

 interest ? 



Against this antagonist Dr. Reville ob- 

 serves, inter alia (p. 37), that an appeal to 

 the supernatural is per se inadmissible; 

 that a divine revelation, containing the 

 sublime doctrines of the purest inspiration, 

 given to man at an age indefinitely remote, 

 and in a state of " absolute ignorance," is 

 " infinitely hard " to imagine ; that it is not 



