criticism inconsistent with the conviction that these books give
us a fairly trustworthy account of Israelitic life and thought
in the times which they cover; and, as such, apart from the
great literary merit of many of their episodes, they possess the
interest of being, perhaps, the oldest genuine history, as apart
from mere chronicles on the one hand and mere legends on the
other, at present accessible to us.

But it is often said with exultation by writers of one party,
and often admitted, more or less unwillingly, by their
opponents, that these books are untrustworthy, by reason of
being full of obviously unhistoric tales. And, as a notable
example, the narrative of Saul's visit to the so-called "witch
of Endor" is often cited. As I have already intimated, I have
nothing to do with theological partisanship, either heterodox or
orthodox, nor, for my present purpose, does it matter very much
whether the story is historically true, or whether it merely
shows what the writer believed; but, looking at the matter
solely from the point of view of an anthropologist, I beg leave
to express the opinion that the account of Saul's necromantic
expedition is quite consistent with probability. That is to say,
I see no reason whatever to doubt, firstly, that Saul made such
a visit; and, secondly, that he and all who were present,
including the wise woman of Endor herself, would have given,
with entire sincerity, very much the same account of the
business as that which we now read in the twenty-eighth chapter
of the first book of Samuel; and I am further of opinion that
this story is one of the most important of those fossils, to
which I have referred, in the material which it offers for the
reconstruction of the theology of the time. Let us therefore