244, REV. S. D. PEET ON THE TRADITIONS OF 
was overcome by his enemies, and retired. His return was 
hourly expected. He was the Christ of the American races. 
He was not Hercules, nor Dyonysus, nor Apollo, nor Mercury. 
He was more like Christ than any of these, but he was very 
mysterious. Some say that he was an historic personage, a 
Buddhist priest; others that he was a personification of the 
sun; others that he was a pure creation of the fancy ;—but, 
whatever he was, he bore a remarkable character. His moral 
attributes were, unlike those ascribed to the other di- 
vinities, certainly in contrast to those possessed by the other 
nature-divinities. Strangely enough this culture-hero was 
driven away, and the nature-gods took his place. Where did 
this idea which is so much like the Christ come from ? Was it 
brought in from another continent, or was it the product of 
the native thought and conscience? ‘lhe Bible idea was not 
totally unknown, for the Toltec divinity, in his life and 
character, has a wonderful resemblance to the promised 
Messiah. 
V. We now turn to the main question, and shall, by 
quoting the opinions of others, suggest an explanation. 
There are many writers who have given opinions upon this 
question which are worthy of regard. Some of these writers 
are mere speculative thinkers, but others have based their 
opinions upon facts, rather than upon theories. The ethnic 
religions of the earth have been studied attentively, and 
among them those of the native races of America have gained 
prominence. Perhaps they have not been treated as fully as 
they should have been, but they are at least taken into the 
account. 
The religious sentiment is the first object of thought. 
This is a mysterious power in nature. The question is, in 
what way this sentiment first expresses itself. 
On this point there seems to be a great diversity of 
opinion. Caspari says that ‘ Parents, chieftains, and sages 
were the first objects of religious reverence and homage.” 
Jules Baissac, on the other hand, concludes that the generative 
principle was the beginning. Motherhood was deified. Next 
to this the male principle, and after that the phallic worship 
was the form which the religious sentiment took. Comte 
takes the ground that the earliest attitude assumed by the 
mind in interpreting nature was a fetichistic one. Spencer, 
however, thinks that the very fact that the first man could 
easily distinguish animate from inanimate objects would refute 
this, and takes the position that animistic and_ fetichistic 
beliefs were not primary beliefs. De Brosses and Tiele assert 
