[32-1] The significance of Carib is probably warrior. It may be the same word as Guarani, which also has this meaning. Tupi or Tupa is the name given the thunder, and can only be understood mythically.
[33-1] The Araucanians probably obtained their name from two Quichua words, _ari auccan_, yes! they fight; an idiom very expressive of their warlike character. They had had long and terrible wars with the Incas before the arrival of Pizarro.
[34-1] Since writing the text I have received the admirable work of Dr. von Martius, _Beiträge zur Ethnographie und Sprachenkunde Amerika's zumal Brasilians_, Leipzig, 1867, in which I observe that that profound student considers that there is no doubt but that the Island Caribs, and the Galibis of the main land are descendants from the same stock as the Tupis and Guaranis.
[35-1] _Comptes Rendus_, vol. xxi. p. 1368 sqq.
[35-2] The two best authorities are Daniel Wilson, _The American Cranial Type_, in _Ann. Rep. of the Smithson. Inst._, 1862, p. 240, and J. A. Meigs, _Cranial Forms of the Amer. Aborigs._: Phila. 1866. They accord in the views expressed in the text and in the rejection of those advocated by Dr. S. G. Morton in the Crania Americana.
[36-1] _Second Visit to the United States_, i. p. 252.
[37-1] Martius, _Von dem Rechtzustande unter den Ureinwohnern Brasiliens_, p. 80: Muenchen, 1832; recently republished in his _Beiträge zur Ethnographie und Sprachenkunde Amerika's_: Leipzig, 1867.
[38-1] _Athapaskische Sprachstamm_, p. 164: Berlin, 1856.
[38-2] Martius, _Von dem Rechtzustande unter den Ureinwohnern Brasiliens_, p. 77.
An intuition common to the species.--Words expressing it in American languages derived either from ideas of above in space, or of life manifested by breath.--Examples.--No conscious monotheism, and but little idea of immateriality discoverable.--Still less any moral dualism of deities, the Great Good Spirit and the Great Bad Spirit being alike terms and notions of foreign importation.
If we accept the definition that mythology is the idea of God expressed in symbol, figure, and narrative, and always struggling toward a clearer utterance, it is well not only to trace this idea in its very earliest embodiment in language, but also, for the sake of comparison, to ask what is its latest and most approved expression. The reply to this is given us by Immanuel Kant. He has shown that our reason, dwelling on the facts of experience, constantly seeks the principles which connect them together, and only rests satisfied in the conviction that there is a highest and first principle which reconciles all their discrepancies and binds them into one. This he calls the Ideal of Reason. It must be true, for it is evolved from the laws of reason, our only test of truth. Furthermore, the sense of personality and the voice of conscience, analyzed to their sources, can only be explained by the assumption of an infinite personality and an absolute standard of right. Or, if to some all this appears but wire-drawn metaphysical subtlety, they are welcome to the definition of the realist, that the idea of God is the sum of those intelligent activities which the individual, reasoning from the analogy of his own actions, imagines to be behind and to bring about natural phenomena.[44-1] If either of these be correct, it were hard to conceive how any tribe or even any sane man could be without some notion of divinity.