40 JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS PSYCHOLOGY 



amount of falsehood. The ethical boundaries of veracity have 

 never been exactly defined.&quot; (41: 5; italics mine.) 



We may consider here briefly a phase which is of special 

 importance in connection with their religious and social life, 

 namely the honesty of the magicians or angakoks in their rela 

 tions with the people and with the spirit-world. Some, like 

 Crantz, believe that &quot;the coarse imposture of the whole process 

 is palpably manifest;&quot; &quot;the great majority of the angakoks are 

 doubtless mere jugglers ; although he admits that 



&quot;the class includes a few persons of real talent and penetration and 

 perhaps a greater number of genuine phantasts, whose understanding has 

 been subverted by some impression strongly working on their fervid 

 imagination.&quot; (16. 1: 196.) 



He tells us that with regard to their own practices, they readily 

 admit that their intercourse is merely pretense to deceive the 

 simple.&quot; (16. 1:197.) Now this is a grave charge to bring 

 against a class and a system, as central in Eskimo life as that 

 of the angakoks. The affinity of this view with the priestcraft- 

 theory of the origin of religions might suffice to show its un- 

 tenability. But there is direct evidence from Eskimo life itself. 

 Holm tells us of angakoks freely expressing unbelief in their 

 powers. (30:127.) But, he says in another place (30:135): 

 It is not impossible that their confession of their own impotence as 

 angakoks is only an expression of the extraordinary modesty, with which 

 the Eskimo speak of themselves. . . It is very possible that the 



angakoks in reality believe in their own relations with the spirit-world.&quot; 



He notes the significant fact that while denying his own powers, 

 an angakok always expresses faith in his fellow-magicians. 

 (30: 127, sqq.) Even more positive testimony of the same effect 

 is given by Rasmussen. After relating his encounter with an 

 angakok who was exclaiming, * all foolery, silly humbug ! Noth 

 ing but lies ! &quot; he states : 



&quot;A magician always precedes his conjurations with a few depreciating 

 words about himself and his powers, and the more highly esteemed he 

 is, the more anxious he is to pretend that his words are lies.&quot; (50: 17 sq.) 



Our conclusion, I think, must be that expressed by 

 Rasmussen when he declares : 



The magicians themselves are undoubtedly self -deceived in the con 

 duct of their incantations; I do not believe that they consciously lie. 

 Otherwise, why should they, when they themselves fall ill, seek the help 

 of the spirits?&quot; (50: 156.) 



