November 28, 1902.] 



SCIENCE. 



873 



rituals, and is often largely based on mytho- 

 logical conceptions, it seems plausible that it 

 should have developed as a more or less con- 

 scious attempt at systematizing the hetero- 

 geneous mass of beliefs and practices current 

 in the tribe. Whenever a certain ceremonial 

 came to be placed in charge of a small social 

 group, were they chiefs, priests or simply 

 men of influence, the conditions must have 

 been favorable for the development of an 

 esoteric doctrine. The thoughts of the men 

 charged with the keeping of sacred rites must 

 liave dwelt on philosophical or religious ques- 

 tions, and it would seem natural that in the 

 succession of generations the sacredness of 

 the rite grew, and its philosophic significance 

 increased in depth. 



If this view is correct, the esoteric doctrine 

 must have been evolved on the foundation of 

 the general culture of the tribe, and must be 

 considered as a secondary phenomenon the 

 character of which depends upon the exoteric 

 doctrine. 



The opposite view, that the exoteric doctrine 

 is a degenerate form of esoteric teaching, does 

 not seem to me equally plausible, because it 

 jiresupposes a highly complex system of ac- 

 tions and opinions originating spontaneously 

 in a selected group of individuals. It is diffi- 

 cult to conceive how, in tribal society, condi- 

 tions could have prevailed that would make 

 such a development possible. This theory 

 would seem to presuppose the occurrence of a 

 general decay of culture. There is no reason 

 that compels us to assume that such a decay 

 has taken place, although it may have oc- 

 curred in exceptional cases. If, on the other 

 hand, we assume that the esoteric doctrine 

 developed from popular beliefs, we do not 

 need to assume any cultural conditions ma- 

 terially difl^erent from those found at the 

 present time. It is quite evident that the 

 esoteric doctrine, after it was once established, 

 influenced, in its turn, popular belief, and 

 that, therefore, there is a mutual and probably 

 inextricable interrelation between the two doc- 

 trines. 



If these considerations are correct, then the 

 esoteric doctrine must, to a great extent, be 

 considered as the product of individual 



thought. It expresses the reaction of the 

 best minds in the community upon the gen- 

 eral cultural environment. It is their at- 

 tempt to systematize the knowledge that 

 underlies the culture of the community. In 

 other words, this doctrine must be treated 

 like any other system of philosophy, and its 

 study has the same aims as -the study of the 

 history of philosophy. 



Two characteristics of esoteric doctrine are 

 quite striking. The first is that at the bottom 

 of each doctrine there seems to be a certain 

 line of thought which is applied to the whole 

 domain of knowledge, and which gives the 

 whole doctrine its essential character. This 

 line of thought depends upon the general 

 character of the culture of the tribe, but 

 nevertheless has a high degree of individu- 

 ality in each tribe. The theory of the universe 

 seems to be based on its schematic applica- 

 tion. The second characteristic is that, not- 

 withstanding this systematization of knowl- 

 edge, there remain many ideas that are not 

 coordinated with the general system, and that 

 may be quite out of accord with it. In such 

 cases the contradiction between the general 

 scheme and special ideas often escapes en- 

 tirely the notice of the native philosophers. 

 This phenomenon is quite analogous to the 

 well-known characteristics of philosophic sys- 

 tems which bear the stamp of the thought of 

 their time. The philosopher does not analyze 

 each and every conclusion, but uneonscioiisly 

 adopts much of the current thought of his 

 environment ready-made. 



The theories regarding the origin of esoteric 

 doctrine may be proved or disproved by a care- 

 ful study of its relations to popular beliefs 

 and to esoteric doctrines found among neigh- 

 boring tribes. It is evident that the material 

 needed for the solution of the problem includes 

 both the esoteric teaching and the popular 

 forms of belief. 



What has been said before shows that, to 

 the ethnologist, the problem of the genesis of 

 exotery is of no less importance than that of 

 esotery. However we may consider the origin 

 of the latter, it must be admitted that it is 

 the expression of thought of the exceptional 

 mind. It is not the expression of thought - 



