62 _ PHE AUSTRALIAN NATURALIST. 
ing that was everywhere, the mysteries of nature were 
explained by supernatural powers, good and evil. Primi- 
tive tree worship is, we are assured, found almost every- 
where in the earliest stages of civilisation. Amongst the 
Greeks there was a relation between the trees and flowers 
and living spirits; the explanation of growth and life was 
the presence and birth of nymphs, with whom grew up the 
trees of the forest and flowers of the field, and the pro- 
cesses of decay were explained by the death of the 
‘nymphs. The phenomena of life and growth, of age and 
decay were accounted for by supernatural agencies. These 
explanations themselves militated against investigation 
into the world of nature, because. to do so was to inter- 
fere with spiritual beings who would visit upon the offend- 
ing heads of such transgressors punishment of an undesir- 
able character. All beliefs in supernatural agencies have led 
to some kind of worship, with its accompanying priesthood 
and ritual. Any interference with these beliefs infringes 
on the rights of the priesthood, and meets with its fierce 
opposition, or is strenuously opposed by those who honestly — 
think that any attempt to destroy accepted beliefs will re- 
sult in the decay of morals and the downfall of society. 
More often trouble arises, as Paul found to his cost at 
iS ‘Ephesus, because the new thought is in conflict with vested 
interests. Some believed in the transmigration of souls 
into mulberry and laurel trees, or into the mint plant or — 
the hyacinth. It was a beautiful supernatural world that 
those enquirers into the phenomena of nature built up 
for themselves in those far-off days. The shape and colour 
of leaves and flowers they accounted for by the busy weay- 
ing of forest nymphs, and the colour of the grape as the 
work of some gracious member of that great body of en- 
chanters of another world. Those who were strikingly in 
fove with Nature were termed by the Greeks Nympholepti, 
as if the spirit of the nymphs had intoxicated them. Per- 
haps this feeling has not changed, but exhibits itself in 
other ways, even in this twentieth century of progress and 
supposed diffusion of knowledge. Is not the Naturalist 
- to-day still regarded in many unexpected quarters as a 
trifle strange, as a rather peculiar individual amongst his 
fellows? Once the fascinating call comes to an individual 
he enters into love and communion with Nature, feels its 
throbbing life, is sensitive to its moods and its varied 
