agitation, and after he had been seduced from the pursuits of philosophy into the turmoil of party politics. But not even the extraordinary propositions then put forward can detract from the excellence of works published under happier auspices. Mr. Mill is, then, of opinion that three conditions are necessary to the success of a federation. Firstly, There should be a sufficient amount of sympathy among the populations.' Now this evidently does not exist. In England the ignorant classes have no sympathy with the Irish. The Conservative reaction in Lancashire was owing to the jealousy of or dislike to the Irish labourer. In Ireland it is unfortunately abundantly certain that there is a feeling of chronic opposition towards everything English as English. As to the educated classes in England, they are inclined to be just to Ireland, as they have frequently shown; but they are certainly not sympathetic, the aforesaid sympathy being a matter of sentiment and not of reason. Perhaps the average Englishman of any class is of all persons the most incapable of bringing his feelings really en rapport with those of any foreigner. The Englishman of the last century did not love the Scotch, but, on the whole, he treated them justly. Secondly, It is necessary that 'the separate States be not so powerful as to be able to rely for protection against foreign encroachment on their individual strength.' Here again the canon is clearly not fulfilled. Thirdly, 'There must not be a very marked inequality of strength among the several contracting States. They cannot, indeed, be exactly equal in resources the essential is that there should not be any one State so much more powerful than the rest as to be capable of vying in strength with many of the combined. If there be such a one, and only one, it will insist on being master of the

...

joint deliberations; if there be two, they will be irresistible when they agree; and whenever they differ, everything will be decided by a struggle for ascendency between the rivals.' (Considerations on Representative Government, ch. xvii.) The writer had the German Bund chiefly in view when he wrote this, but it applies with far greater force to Mr. Butt's scheme. To the fertile brain of Mr. Mill such a scheme must have suggested itself to be dismissed instantly as too impracticable to be worth considering.

If any optimist should be tempted to assume that the parties to the proposed federation would have no grounds of quarrel, let him consider what happened no longer ago than last year. The sympathy with France was so strong that any Parliament sitting in Dublin would have assuredly been forced to intervene in her favour. The position of a minister who understood foreign politics going to the country on that question would have been disagreeable indeed. Any thinking man who was in Ireland at the time can have no doubt upon this point. To be sure, there might have been a small civil war in Ulster, but that would not mend matters much. The people were told that it was a religious war, and they believed it. The leaders of opinion who could popularise such a monstrous fallacy as this could do almost anything. There were old ties to France, too, though she never treated our refugees overwell; and the Hessian mercenaries of 1798 have left a bad traditional feeling towards Germany. But the chief reason of all for French sympathisers was that England at that time was favourable to the Germans.

During the seventeenth century Scotland was federated with England. But Scotland was in no sense a constitutional country. The Crown, during the greater part of the time, was nearly all-powerful on both sides of the Tweed. Besides, Scotch

independence had great historic foundations. Her peculiar laws, her religious tendencies, her local institutions, her Parliament, and her Lords of Articles, were all the natural growth of the soil. Finally, it was her king that came to reign over both nations. What possible comparison can there be between her case and that of modern Ireland? Nor must it be forgotten that the struggle which ended in the great disaster of Dunbar was a war between England and Scotland. The Scotch were originally called in by an English party. When they attempted to act independently, they were ruthlessly and finally crushed. Much as he hated Cromwell, Clarendon as an Englishman cannot conceal his delight. When the 'auld sang' came to an end at last, it cannot be doubted that the smaller country was the one which gained most by the change.

There is a class of Irish politicians who much affect everything American. Putting aside the number of the States and the immense natural resources of the country, which alone would render their example useless for Ireland, to what has the Union chiefly owed its stability? Without doubt to the Supreme Court. The Dred Scott case damaged the institution a little, and a recent financial decision gives grave cause for apprehension. Still the Supreme Court has worked well. The Americans have an almost superstitious admiration for this great tribunal. Clad in wisdom and justice, as it sprang from the brains of Hamilton and Madison, so it has on the whole remained to this day.

Now, how are Imperial matters

to fare in Federal Ireland? In old times the Crown was nearly absolute by means of a standing army, and not unfrequently exercised the right of ultimate appeal to brute force. In what some people think the great era of Irish parliamentary independence the same result was obtained by chicane and bribery. The letters of Lord Chesterfield and Lord Castlereagh, the works of Swift, and periodical effusions like Baratariana, all concur upon this point. The system of mere force or of mere trickery would hardly do in modern times. We must invent some arbitrator to decide between the pretensions of local and Imperial authority. Anyone who knows Ireland knows that it would be utterly impossible to devise any tribunal which would give satisfaction in both islands, or indeed in the four provinces of the smaller one. With the existing materials the task must be abandoned in despair. Recent events show clearly enough that where a great majority of Irishmen have made up their minds that there is a grievance the Imperial Parliament will apply a remedy. Every great reform has been made since the Union and through the Union. Formerly statesmen could only govern Ireland through an Irish party, to whose worst excesses they were perforce blind. Besides, if we would abrogate the constitution, we could not; the thing is manifestly impossible. Let those who are temporarily allured by this new phantom reflect impartially, and they can scarcely fail to conclude that any form of Repeal would be disastrous, and that of all forms Federalism would be by far the worst.

A

NIMAL worship cannot be said to have been prevalent among the Scandinavians in the same sense, or to the same extent, as it was among the ancient Egyptians and many nations of the East. No entire species of animals was to them an object of worship; no temples were consecrated to them; their images were not placed along with the images of the gods and goddesses. At the same time we must remember that our information of the Scandinavians does not go farther back than about a century prior to the introduction of Christianity in the North; and as far as true history is concerned, even this may be a too early date. It cannot therefore be concluded from the scanty information about animal worship at this late date that it never prevailed to any great extent in Scandinavia. On the contrary, the hints of animal worship found there even so late as the ninth and tenth century may be thought to indicate the universality of its existence in former times; and at all events they are in themselves very curious.

In the Scandinavian mythology many animals are associated with the gods and other superhuman beings as their special messengers and officers. Thus two ravens are the special messengers of Óðinn; wolves are called his dogs, and are his particular pets. Thórr's chariot is drawn by two he-goats, Freyja's car by cats; and Freyr drives with the boar Gullinbursti (golden bristles). Gods and goddesses very often assume the shape of birds on their journeys throughout the world, and Óðinn himself is even called by the name of a bird.

When Sigrdrífa taught Sigurðr Fáfnisbani' all the world's wisdom,' she told him that the runes containing the mysterious lore were graven 'on the bear's paw, on the wolf's claws, on the eagle's beak, and the owl's neb.' When we remember that the knowledge here imparted was no ordinary knowledge, but the highest and most mysterious wisdom, by which he who knew it became master of this world, so to speak, its association with so many animals must be looked upon as very significant. It would indeed be very difficult to explain Sigrdrífa's words unless it were admitted that they were founded on a belief in their supernatural qualities. And how are we to

explain the many superstitions concerning animals to be found at the present day in Scandinavia and Iceland, unless we look upon them as remains of ancient animal worship?

Now let us turn to the facts as find them in the Icelandic records of old Scandinavia.

we

1. The Bear.-It is said of Eiríkr (the red), the first discoverer of Greenland, that he worshipped a large white bear, which made great havoc among the sheep; he could not be induced by his neighbours to kill it; and when the bear was slain without his knowledge, he was much displeased with the deed.' This is about the only record of actual bear worship in the Icelandic sagas.

On the other hand, we find the bear endowed with human faculties. Thus a bear, killed by a man called Finnbogi (the strong), is presented as possessing human reason and understanding human speech. The

saga says: Finnbogi discovered the bear lying on a sheep which he had killed. The former addressed the latter in the following words: 'Rise, Bruin, and meet me; it becomes thee more than gnawing at this scrag of mutton.' The bear sat up, looked at his enemy, and lay down again. Whereupon Finnbogi said: 'If thou thinkest I am too fully armed, I will do this;' and he took off his helmet and laid down his shield. Then he said: Now arise, if thou darest.' The bear arose, looked at him, shook his head, and lay down again. Finnbogi said: I see thou wishest us to meet on equal terms,' and flung away his sword: 'Now stand up, if thou art not the most cowardly of all beasts.'

This taunt the bear could not stand, and ran at Finnbogi; they had a long struggle, in which, how ever, Finnbogi came off the conqueror. In the same saga it is said of another bear (set on Finnbogi by Earl Hákon) that he could speak like

a man.

A bear is in Icelandic called björn, and Björn has been a common name all over Scandinavia down to the present day. It is also frequently used in compound names: for instance, Ásbjörn (God's bear), Thorbjörn (Thórr's bear), Sveinbjörn (a male bear)-this is the English name Swinburne. One of the names of Thórr is Björn.

We sometimes find mighty warriors assume the shape of a bear in the battle, and in that shape they were able to inflict a much greater injury on their enemies than if they retained the human form. Thus it is said of one Böðvarr that he fought with the enemy in the shape of a bear, while his body lay in a kind of stupor in his seat in the hall. While in this shape he not only destroyed more of his enemies than when in his human form, but

he was also able to check the witchcraft of the enemy. One of Böðvarr's companions missed him in the battle, and found him in his seat; he roused him and made him go into the battle; but no sooner had he done so than the bear disappeared, and after this the leader of the enemy was able to revive his dead by witchcraft.2

There is a strange tale about the parentage of this Böðvarr, for he was in a certain sense the son of a bear. His father's name was Björn (bear), who was changed into a bear by his step-mother, and in this shape he ran about the woods in the day-time, but in the night he was a man. Böðvarr's mother was called Bera (a she-bear), yet she was an ordinary woman according to the saga. She visited her husband in the night, and she had by him besides Böðvarr two other sons; one of them became king of Gothland, in Sweden.3

The belief is still found in Iceland that the bear is in reality a spell-bound man; he is born a man, but as soon as the child is born the bear-mother puts her paw over it, and then it becomes a bear-cub instantly.

An Icelandic peasant once found a female polar bear in great distress, and took her into his barn and gave her cow's milk to drink. Later in the evening he went out, and found her in the act of bringing forth her young ones. The man caught one just as it was born, and it was an ordinary female child. He took her into the house and brought her up till she was several years of age; she grew well, and nothing extraordinary was noticed about her except this, that she always wanted to get out and down to the sea. At last she succeeded in getting away, and when she was on the ice, her mother the bear was seen to meet her, and strike the girl

3 Ibid. i. p. 77, &c.

with her paw, and the child was instantly turned into a bear.'

In Iceland we still find the belief that every man has a familiar spirit, called 'follower,' because it goes with him to whom it belongs wherever he goes, sometimes after him and sometimes before him, and it can be seen by those that are gifted with second sight. The most distinguished of those 'followers' is the bear, for it follows those only that are, in one way or another, superior to their fellow men. This belief is also mentioned in the Icelandic oldest sagas. It is further said of the bear that he never attacks his namesake; that is, a man by the name of Björn. Perhaps the saying, 'One bear will not bite another,' was founded on some such belief as this.

2. The Wolf.—Although it is nowhere expressly mentioned in the sagas that wolves were worshipped, they were believed to be in close connection with the gods. Thus we are told in Snorra Edda that Óðinn gives the meat which is set before him to two wolves, called Geri (voracious) and Freki (greedy).' Wolves were called the dogs of Óðinn, and seemed to be his special pets. The skalds in describing a battle very often introduce wolves prowling about the battle-field in expectation of feasting on the slain. They were probably supposed to have special permission from Óðinn for this, as the killed belonged to him.

'There are two wolves,' says Snorra Edda (ch. xii.): 'the one called Sköll pursues the sun, and it is he that she fears, for he shall one day overtake her and devour her; the other, called Hati (hater), pursues the moon, that will one day devour him. A hag dwells in a wood to the eastward of Miðgarðr, called

Járnviðr (ironwood or stonewood), which is the abode of a race of witches, called Járnviðjur. This old hag is the mother of many giants, who are all of them shaped like wolves, two of whom are the wolves in question. There is one of that race who is said to be the most formidable of all, called Mánagarmr (moon's dog); he will be filled with the life-blood of men who draw near their end, and will swallow up the moon, and stain the heavens and earth with blood.' We say in Iceland at the present day, when parhelions are observed round the sun, that it is surrounded by wolves.'

6

We may presume that Loki was the father of those monsters, and the hag is probably the same as Angrboða (grief-boding), with whom he had Hel, the Miðgarðsormr (serpent), and Fenrisúlfr (wolf); for in the strophe of Völuspá which describes Mánagarmr, he and his brothers are called Fenrir's kinsmen, that is, the sons of Fenrir, another of Loki's names. The third of these children, the Fenrisúlfr, the wolf, the son of Fenrir, or Loki, was a formidable monster, and the gods were so afraid of him that they had to apply to the Dark Elves for a fetter that could hold him. At length they were able to bind him, but at the end of the world he will become loose, and devour Óðinn himself.3

Loki and all his children belonged to the hereditary enemies of the gods, the giants; yet he is himself reckoned one of the gods. Frequently he is the companion of Óðinn, and does the gods great services: for instance, when he helped Thórr to recover his hammer. More frequently, however, we see him in league with his relatives, the giants,

* Snorra Edda, ch. xxiii. &c.

VOL. IV.-NO. XIX. NEW SERIES.