Sir Edward Burnett Tylor, FRAI, was the first Professor of Anthropology at Oxford University, and is considered the father of cultural anthropology via his publication of Primitive Culture in 1871. That same year he was elected a Fellow of the Riyal Society, and served as President of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 1879–80.
This second volume [Harper and Brothers, 1958] of a two volume study is primarily about animistic religious practices in non-developed cultures. In animism, the individual lives in a dual world. One is the tangible life as we know it; the other is the realm of spiritual beings. Spiritual beings have two forms. Individuals have a phantom existence that lives on after the body dies. These are our souls and those of our ancestors. Individuals also see the world populated with spirits in nature and that these spirits are very involved in our lives. Tylor provides extensive documentation of this spiritual world in primitive cultures across the world.
Similar to Volume One, Tylor believes that there’s an evolution of spiritual practices, from "savage" cultures that are concerned about personal welfare, to the more sophisticated religious practices of today where the focus is on ethical principles and a more generalized sense of moral virtue. Tylor asserts this thesis here and there throughout this book but only concentrates on it somewhat in his last chapter where I thought his arguments about the evolution of religion were weak. Part of Tylor’s argument is that animism is the foundation for mysticism (in which formless beings are too great to have form) and for some of our philosophical theories (he specifically mentions the doctrine of ideas -phantom images of objects) in this regard. A counter question for Tylor is whether there has been true evolution of religious phenomena as opposed to the expression of the same phenomena -- free-floating spiritual entities that exist outside of space and time -- in different forms.
In Volume One, Tylor suggests that myth and magic come from the need to explain the world and the self’s role in it. Religious practices and the narrative that goes along with animism are very much akin to myth and magic that way. In Volume Two, Tylor also sees savage animism as the product of the need for assistance in a troubling world (hence, prayer, supplication, sacrifice, etc.) to curry favor. It’s also interesting to speculate on the connection between Jungian-like archetypes and religion. For example, in monotheism is god an amalgam of Father (fear, protection) and Mother (nurturer) figures, and is “all that” out there that threatens the self the demon figure? Given our need for explanation and help, and our vulnerability and fear, could it be that there’s no substantial difference between who we are today and who we’ve always been?