never did explain any phenomena beyond
those attested by his own senses. The others were declared not to
exist, or to be the result of imposture and mal-observation,--and
perhaps they were.

The truly diverting thing is that Home did not believe in the other
'mediums,' nor in anything in the way of a marvel (such as matter
passing through matter) which he had not seen with his own eyes.
Whether Home's incredulity should be reckoned as a proof of his
belief in his own powers, might be argued either way.

THE GHOST THEORY OF THE ORIGIN OF RELIGION

Evolutionary Theory of the Origin of Religion. Facts misunderstood
suggest ghosts, which develop into gods. This process lies behind
history and experience. Difficulties of the Theory. The Theory of
Lucretius. Objections Mr. Tyler's Theory. The question of abnormal
facts not discussed by Mr. Tylor. Possibility that such 'psychical'
facts are real, and are elements in development of savage religion.
The evidence for psychical phenomena compared with that which, in
other matters, satisfies anthropologists. Examples. Conclusion.

Among the many hypotheses as to the origin of religion, that which
we may call the evolutionary, or anthropological, is most congenial
to modern habits of thought. The old belief in a sudden, miraculous
revelation is commonly rejected, though, in one sense, religion was
none the less 'revealed,' even if man was obliged to work his way to
the conception of deity by degrees. To attain that conception was
the necessary result of man's reflection on the sum of his relations
to the universe. The attainment, however, of the monotheistic idea
is not now generally regarded as immediate and instinctive. A slow
advance, a prolonged evolution was required, whether we accept Mr.
Max Muller's theory of 'the sense of the Infinite,' or whether we
prefer the anthropological hypothesis. The latter scheme, with
various modifications, is the scheme of Epicurus, Lucretius, Hume,
Mr. Tylor, and Mr. Herbert Spencer. Man half consciously
transferred his implicit sense that he was a living and rational
being to nature in general, and recognised that earth, sky, wind,
clouds, trees, the lower animals, and so on, were persons like
himself, persons perhaps more powerful and awful than himself. This
transference of personality can scarcely be called the result of a
conscious process of reasoning. Man might recognise personality
everywhere, without much