I remember the shock, the combined shock of interest and almost of horror, with which The Golden Bough burst upon classical scholars like me when it first appeared in 1890. Of course it was not quite our first introduction to anthropology. We knew something of Tylor and Andrew Lang and perhaps Mannhardt, perhaps even of Robertson Smith's sacred camel which had to be eaten alive before sunrise. But Frazer, for one thing, overpowered us with his mass of carefully ordered facts. We had heard of "the beastly devices of the heathen" but had not realised their great number and variety, had not understood the method which underlay their madness.

What It Means

This is a placeholder explanation generated by the low-overhead model. It interprets "I remember the shock, the combined shock of interest and almost of horror, with which The Golden Bough burst upon classical scholars like me when it first appeared in 1890. Of course it was not quite our first introduction to anthropology. We knew something of Tylor and Andrew Lang and perhaps Mannhardt, perhaps even of Robertson Smith's sacred camel which had to be eaten alive before sunrise. But Frazer, for one thing, overpowered us with his mass of carefully ordered facts. We had heard of "the beastly devices of the heathen" but had not realised their great number and variety, had not understood the method which underlay their madness." in the context of "Gilbert Murray, 'The Author of ‘The Golden Bough’', The Listener, Vol. LI, No. 1297 (7 January 1954), p. 13" to mean that wisdom is timeless.