16 Social Scientist influenced by Darwinian Evolution, ethnologists such as E.B. Tyior, Andrew Lang, Robertson Smith, R.R. Marett, Sir James Frazer, etc. tended to combine their 'positivistic' approach with religious facts. Tyior described the unilinear evolution of religion from animism through polytheism and finally to the monotheism of more 'civilized* cultures.18 Tyior's animism as 'minimum definition of religion' evoked tremendous reaction and pre-animistic evolutionary and anti-evolutionary theories focusing on mana19 taboo, 20 magic,21 High God22, etc. were formulated. Regrettably, these reactions shared most of the assumptions of Tyior, particularly his 'negative' view of religion in which homo-religiosus was placed at the origin of the evolutionary process.23 To sum up, the philologists and ethnologists of the first phase of our survey claimed to have established an 'autonomous* discipline for the 'scientific' study of religion. It was, however, far from being so. Nevertheless, by accumulating 'religious facts' and looking for common elements or 'parallels', by locating and translating the 'original sources' and by assuming a critically 'rationalistic' attitude marked by personal detachment, they had certainly taken the first step in that direction.24 Phase II: 1910-1920s It is remarkable how a short span of less than two decades unleashed such forces in Western Europe as gave birth to a distinctive approach to the study of religion. These years of the early twentieth century saw the emergence of what has now come to be known as the 'Sociology of Religion'. Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) in France and Max Weber (1864-1920) in Germany were the real harbingers of this current. Both shared many common interests, though their raw materials and methodology differed a great deal, Weber's emphasis on the importance of bureaucratic organisations and rational legal authority relationships, his understanding of charismatic leadership, his analysis of 'disenchantment' of the modern world, his explanation of the 'Problem of Meaning' are such elements as easily enable us to draw parallels with Durkheim. The latter's concern with such themes as the major processes of social, economic and political specialisation relating to the division of labour; his notions of 'sacred' and 'profane' and his search for modern equivalents of the sacred beliefs and symbols and above all, his deep-rooted interests in the problems of group cohesion provide links with the German doctrinaire. It may, however, be pointed out that while both savants grappled with the problem of societies' management without religion, their ways of analysing it were dissimilar. While Weber was primarily interested in establishing links between specific social stratum distinctions and modes of religious expression, Durkheim concentrated upon general social significance of religious experience and belief. Both were, however, concerned with problems of how individuals and groups identify themselves in the