the strength of the emotional impression itself. Indeed the clutching force and violence of the emotion so far exceeds any iinpressiveness contributed by the circumstances of time and place that one can often scarcely speak of an ' impression' at all, but at most of an encounter, serving as cue or occasion for the felt experience. This experience of eerie shuddering and awe breaks out rather from depths of the soul which the circumstantial, external impression cannot sound, and the force with •which it breaks out is so disproportionate to the mere external stimulation that the eruption may be termed, if not entirely, at least very nearly, spontaneous. And with this we are brought to the third point which psychological analysis of the ' uncanny' experience brings to view ; meanings are aroused and awakened in it of a unique and special content, though altogether obscure, latent, and germinal, which are the real ground for the emotion of awe. For, if such meanings are not there at the start in some form or other, the mental and emotional disturbance could never take place. In the fourth place, the mental state we are discussing may, on the one hand, remain pure ' feeling', pursue its course and pass away without its obscure thought-content being rendered explicit. If in this implicit form it is summed up in a phrase, this will be merely some such exclamation as : ' How uncanny!' or ' How eerie this place is !' On the other hand, the implicit meaning may be rendered explicit. It is already a beginning of this explicative process—though still Iji merely negative terms— when a man says: 'It is not quite right here;' 'It is uncanny." The English ' This place is haunted' shows a transition to a positive form of expression. Here we have the obscure basis of meaning and idea rising into greater clarity and beginning to make itself explicit as the notion, however vague and fleeting, of a transcendent Something, a real operative entity of a numinous kind, which later, as the development proceeds, assumes concrete form as a ' numen loci', a daemon, an ' El', a Baal, or the like.
In Genesis xxviii. 17 Jacob says: 'How dreadful is this place! 1 his is none other than the house of Elohim.' This verse is very instructive for the psychology of religion; it exemplifies the point that has just been made. The first sentence gives plainly the mental impression itself in all its immediacy, before reflection has permeated it, and before the meaning-content of the feeling itself has become clear or explicit. It connotes solely the primal numinous au-e, which has been undoubtedly sufficient in itself in many cases to mark out holy ' or' sacred ' places, and make of them spots of aweful veneration, centres of a cult admitting a certain development. There is no need, that h for the experient to pass on to resolve his mere impression of the eerie and aweful into the idea of a 1 minien', a divine power, dwelling in the 'aweful' place, still less need the numcn become a nomen, a named power, or the 'nomen' become something more than a mere pronoun. Worship is possible without this farther explicative process. Rut Jacob's second statement gives this process of explication and interpretation; it is no longer simply an expression of the actual experience.
The German expression Es spukt hier (literal!y, it haunts here) is also instructive. It lias properly no true subject, or at least it makes 110 assertion as to what the es, the 'it', is which ■haunts'; m itself it contains no suggestion of the concrete representations of ' ghost', ' phantom ', ' spectre', or ' spirit' common to our popular mythology. Rather is the statement simply the pure expression of the emotion of 'eerieness' or ' uneanniness' itself when just on the point of detaching and disengaging from itself a first vaguely intimated idea of a numinous something, an entity from beyond the borders of ' natural' experience. It is to be regretted that the German language possesses no general word less vulgar than 'spuken', no word which instead of pointing us asid«, as this word does, to the domain of superstition and the impure offshoots of the numinous consciousness, should retain its fundamental meaning in an unperverted form.1 But even so we can feel by an effort of
1 The expression es geisttt ¡¡¡er may serve, but it has an artificial sound. The English 'to haunt' is a nobler expression than the German ' IT uken '. We might legitimately translate Ilalakkuk ii. 20 : ' \ahwch haunts His ho!y Tern, le.' Such a ' haunting ' is frequently the meaning of the Hebrew thSkan. And we get a fuller and truer rendering of
Was this article helpful?