DISCUSSION. 31 



stock of nations to another is now and then discredited as " un- 

 scientific," but the objection only rests on dogmatic subtleties. I 

 concur in the opinion that primeval polytheism was in some 

 measure based on faint monotheistic notions, while the manifesta- 

 tions of distinct forces of nature would likewise help to foster 

 deifications. It is obvious that in some idolati'ous quarters the 

 god of the locality may have been supposed to be the Ruler-in- 

 Chief ; but on the occurrence of successful wars and conquests the 

 victorious tribes and nations would allot the supremacy to one or 

 more of their own newly-imported deities, and then the tribal and 

 national deities of the subjected people would be placed in a co- 

 ordinate or more likely in a subordinate rank. 



' The treatment of the final ea, as equal to the Jehovistic ending 

 iuh (Lord) in Hebrew names, opens the door to new researches in 

 the diffusion of religious ideas ; and also this suggestion of Mr. 

 Pinches merits the best thanks of unbiassed students. (Applause.) 



Mr. D. Howard, F.C.S. — I hardly like to venture into a discus- 

 sion without special knowledge of the subject, but might I suggest 

 that the curious attitude of the mind of Balak when taking 

 Balaam from hill-top to hill-top contained the idea, that somehow 

 or other, the god that he worshipped might alter his mind by a 

 change of place. It is curious how sim-l.ir ideas are found in the 

 Indian worship of their gods who were ( ne and many; and it is 

 most diflScult to shake their faith because of this strange mixture 

 — this double frame of mind — a belief in one god, and yet in many 

 gods. This strange confusion is well deserving of study by those 

 who are brought into contact with the heathen ; for it is a fact 

 that they worship many gods with a much less definite idea of 

 distinct personality than we attribute to them. 



The Chairman. — Perhaps Mr. Pinches will now reply. 



The Author. — I will reply to the discussion as briefly as I can. 

 I am very much obliged to you, I need not say, for your kind 

 attention, and to Dr. Lowy and the other speakers for their very 

 interesting remarks. I do not think, however, that many of them 

 require an answer on my part. What Dr. Lowy has said is veiy 

 suggestive, and I shall note it for future consideration and exam- 

 ination. With regard to Lahmu and Lahamu, I must confess that 

 I do not know the meaning of these words, nor do I know of any 

 meaning having been .sus'gestod (but I am not certain on that 



