The times., 1897-08-27
The Original Snake.


II one could only see it, the unwritten
history OF evolution might be as grand
and p0etical as any tradition that ever
arose iii days when evolution was
an unknown word among the learned.
The students OF folklore and OF zoology
may yet solve some of the deep mys teres
of literatUre and ethnology, as the ma
tions OF the earth are induced one By
one to give up their pet secrets
Among these immemOrial traditions III
three or four nations In opposite quar-
Ucrs OF the globe Jewish, Aztec and Jap
anese. and to some extent the Saxon
is found the myth of the serpent as the
origin OF evil. 1t is imposs ible that the
legends OF all of these other nations
could have taken color from the Hebrew
tradition. One is forced to look for some
thing deeper.
theory has been suggested which
agrees with evolution as we know it, and
1t seems at least plausible. II, as the
scientists prove, our ancestors were ar
boreal creatures or tie ape kind, evolving
thence into the tree-dweIling or rock
dwelling savage, and thence into the tribes
man, and thence by slow degrees into the
civilized man, they must, in the days OF
their Inonkeyhood, have been reasonably
safe from every sort OF enemy except the
snake. The panther and the bear could
not follow the ape into the higher branches:
| there W a. no bird w hich co uld swoop down
/ and snatch him from the wilderness OF
! leaves; the four-footed animals were for
! the most part not climbers. and the ape him
| self was not a swimmer; so he had no
! cause to dread aquatic dangers; but the
snake, with it's silent progress and 1.-the,
reaching neck and his venonous tongue.
could go wherever the monkey could and
consequently was most intensely feared by
/ the whole monkey tribe. Add to this the
| fact that the snake was old-blooded and
Of a different nature in every way from
the other animals of the forest that he
came in contact with the other tree-dwen
eTs as an enemy and only as an enemy
and you have sufficient ground Tor a deep
rooted and instructive hereditary horror
of the snake in all his forms, transmitted
for very good reasons, by the tree e-climb-
! ing and rock-dwelling savage.
Notice that the hatred of mankind for
! the snake is usually hatred and fear
of the snake per Sc, not because he is ven
omous. 1t is different from the dislike
| felt for any poisonous thing of another
sort. There is ID reason for this, too.
| The tree-clinlbing serpent of tropical
forests usually is not venomous, He kills
10y strangling his victim. and in this imme
mortal and instructive war between snake
and man there is enough reason for any
traditions making the serpent the enlbodt-
ment OF evil, and also of wisdom, since
the snakes subtlety is of a sort that no
warm-blooded creature ever did or ever
can understand.
The snake is master OF the art OF de
| ception The fer-delance of the West
Indies can be mistaken for rotten tree
branch or a bit of fungus a little more
easily than not. If there were to be a
creature in the semi-articulate traditions
Of the ptimeval savage who should EN-
body to him all evil in the world, and all
deception, and all danger, that creature
was surely the serpent.
This theory may be disproved, but it is
worth considering. And it suggests that
the serpent myth may be the growth Of
centuries of struggle, fear and victory, in
the nwTitten history of the world-wars
which forced the furry tree-dwellers with
hands and feet and brains to develop all
their resources and become thinking be-
ings instead OF unreasoning animals, so
that they might once for all bruise the
head OF their enemy. There is an ethical
teaching in the thought as much as In the
traditional history; but it lies deeper.