Infantile sexual theory, 82
Interpretation summary, 79
Ion, 17
Iranese legends, 19, 36, 37
Isaac, 15
Isolde, 38, 39
Jesus, 47, 48, 49, et seq.
Judas myth, 19
Kaikaus, 36
Kaikhosrav, 35
Kamleyses, 25
Karna, 15
Krishna, 47
Kyros, 24, 89
Kyros myth, versions of, 24, 32, 33
Kunti, 16
Lohengrin, 55, 58
Lunar myths, 5
Mandane, 25
Migration theories, 2
Moses, 13, 79
Mother and hero, 61
Myth and hysterical fancy, 92
Myth and infantile psyche, 9, 10
Myths and paranoid mechanisms, 75
Myth and race, 11
Myth and sex, 65
Myth, complications of, 83
Myth contents, 4, 6
Myth displacements, 76
Myth distribution, 4
Myth, evolution of, 8
Myth formation and child psyche, 63
Myth ground plan, 61
Myth interpretation, 5
Myth of hero, summary of, 67
Myth, psychological significance of, 90
Myth structure and psychoneuroses, 63
Myth, type of, 61
Mythological theories, 1, 3
Neurotic family romance, 65
Neurotics, 64
Nightmares, 7
Œdipus, 74
Œdipus myth, 6, 18
Old age and youth, 64
Opposites, 70
Oriant, 56
Paranoid delusions, 91
Paranoid mechanism in myths, 75
Parental authority, 63
Parental criticism, 64
Parents, fancied, 73
Parents, real, 73
Paris, 20
Perseus, 22
Persian myths, 37
Persian war, 32
Pharaoh, 80
Priamos, 20
Pritha, 16
Proca, 42
Projection, 75
Psychological significance of myth, 90
Psychoneuroses and myth structure, 63
Psychoneurotics, 63
Races and myths, 81
Real parents, 73
Reformer, 93
Remus, 40
Replacement of father, 67
Retaliation and revenge, 66
Revenge and retaliation, 66
Reversals, 72
Revolt of hero, 82
Revolutionary, 93
River legends, 46
Romulus, 40
Romulus, modifications of, 42
St. Gregory, 19
Sam, 21
Sargon myth, 12
Scëaf, 60
Scild Scefing, 60
Senechoros, 24
Sex and myth, 65
Siegfried, 93
Split personalities, 84
Summary interpretation, 79
Symbolic expression, 69
Telephos, 21
Thebes, 43
Theories of myths, 1, 3
Tristan, 38, 39
True bride, 40
Twin myths, 44
Types of reversal, 77
Typical myth, 61
Tyrant and father, 76
Water dreams, 71
Water in myth, 34
Wieland, 55
Wolfdietrich, 54
Youth and old age, 64
Zal, 21
Zetos and Amphion, 43
Zoroaster, 51
FOOTNOTES:
[1] A short and fairly complete review of the general theories of
mythology and its principal advocates is to be found in Wundt’s
“Völkerpsychologie,” Vol. II, Myths and Religion. Part I [Leipzig,
1905], p. 527.
[2] “Das Beständige in den Menschenrassen und die Spielweise ihrer
Veränderlichkeit.” Berlin, 1868.
[3] “Die Kyros Sage und Verwandtes,” _Sitzb. Wien. Akad._, 100, 1882,
p. 495.
[4] Schubert. Herodots Darstellung der Cyrussage, Breslau, 1890.
[5] Compare E. Stucken, “Astral mythen,” Leipzig, 1896-1907, especially
Part V, “Moses.” H. Lessmann, “Die Kyrossage in Europe,” _Wiss. beit.
z. Jahresbericht d. städt. Realschule zu Charlottenburg_, 1906.
[6] “Naturgeschichte d. Sage.” Tracing all religious ideals, legends,
and systems back to their common family tree, and their primary root, 2
volumes, Munich 1864-65.
[7] Some of the important writings of Winckler will be mentioned in the
course of this article.
[8] _Zeitschrift f. d. Oesterr. Gym._, 1891, p. 161, etc. Schubert’s
reply is also found here, p. 594, etc.
[9] Lessmann, “Object and Aim of Mythological Research,” _Mythol.
Bibliot._, 1, Heft 4, Leipzig.
[10] Winckler, “Die babylonische Geisteskultur in ihren Beziehungen zur
Kulturentwicklung der Menschheit,” _Wissenschaft u. Bildung_, Vol. 15,
1907, p. 47.
[11] Of course no time will be wasted on the futile question as to what
this first legend may have been; for in all probability this never had
existence, any more than a “first human couple.”
[12] As an especially discouraging example of this mode of procedure
may be mentioned a contribution by the well-known natural mythologist
Schwartz, which touches upon this circle of myths, and is entitled:
“Der Ursprung der Stamm und Gründungssage Roms unter dem Reflex
indogermanischer Mythen” [Jena, 1898].
[13] Frobenius, Das Zeitalter des Sonnengotten, Berlin, 1904.
[14] Siecke, “Hermes als Mondgott,” _Myth. Bibl._, Vol. II, Pt. 1, p.
48.
[15] Compare for example, Paul Koch, “Sagen der Bibel und ihre
Ubereinstimmung mit der Mythologie der Indogermanen,” Berlin,
1907. Compare also the partly lunar, partly solar, but at any rate
entirely one sided conception of the hero myth, in Gustav Friedrich’s
“Grundlage, Entstehung und genaue Einzeldeutung der bekanntesten
germanischen Märchen, Mythen und Sagen” [Leipzig, 1909], p. 118.
[16] Translated by Dr. A. A. Brill. Macmillan Co.
[17] The fable of Shakespeare’s Hamlet also permits of a similar
interpretation, according to Freud. It will be seen later on how
mythological investigators bring the Hamlet legend from entirely
different view points into the correlation of the mythical circle.
[18] In JOURNAL OF NERVOUS AND MENTAL DISEASE, 1912. Also collected in
this Monograph Series, No. 15.
[19] Compare Lessmann (Mythol. Bibl., I, 4). Ehrenreich alone (loc.
cit., p. 149) admits the extraordinary significance of dream-life for
the myth-fiction of all times. Wundt does so likewise, for individual
mythical motives.
[20] Stucken [Mose, p. 432] says in this sense. The myth transmitted
by the ancestors was transferred to natural processes and interpreted
in a naturalistic way, not vice versa. “Interpretation of nature is
a motive in itself” [p. 633, annotation]. In a very similar way, we
read in Meyer’s History of Antiquity, Vol. V, p. 48: In many cases,
the natural symbolism, sought in the myths, is only apparently present
or has been secondarily introduced, as often in the Vedda and in the
Egyptian myths; it is a primary attempt at interpretation, like the
myth-interpretations which arose among the Greeks since the fifth
century.
[21] For fairy tales, in this as well as in other essential features,
Thimme advocates the same point of view as is here claimed for the
myths. Compare Adolf Thimme, “Das Märchen,” 2d volume of the Handbücher
zur Volkskunde, Leipzig, 1909.
[22] Volume II of the German translation, Leipzig, 1869, p. 143.
[23] Of this myth-interpretation, Wundt has well said that it really
should have accompanied the original myth-formation. (Loc. cit., p.
352.)
[24] See Ignaz Goldziher, “Der Mythus bei den Hebräern und seine
geschichtliche Entwickelung” [Leipzig, 1876], p. 125. According to the
writings of Siecke [“Hermes als Mondgott,” Leipzig, 1908, p. 39], the
incest myths lose all unusual features through being referred to the
moon, and its relation to the sun. The explanation being quite simple:
the daughter, the new moon, is the repetition of the mother [the old
moon], with her the father [the sun] [also the brother, the son]
becomes reunited.
[25] Is it to be believed? In an article entitled “Urreligion der
Indogermanen” [Berlin, 1897], where Siecke points out that the incest
myths are descriptive narrations of the seen but inconceivable process
of nature, he objects to a statement of Oldenburg [“Religion der Veda,”
p. 5] who assumes a primeval tendency of myths to the incest motive,
with the remark that in the days of yore the motive was thrust upon the
narrator, without an inclination of his own, through the forcefulness
of the witnessed facts.
[26] The great variability and wide distribution of the birth myths of
the hero results from the above quoted writings of Bauer, Schubert and
others, while their comprehensive contents and fine ramifications were
especially discussed by Husing, Lessmann, and the other representatives
of the modern direction.
Innumerable fairy tales, stories, and poems of all times, up to the
most recent dramatic and novelistic literature, show very distinct
individual main motives of this myth. The exposure-romance is known to
appear in the following literary productions: The late Greek pastorals,
as told in Heliodor’s “Aethiopika,” in Eustathius’ “Ismenias and
Ismene,” and in the Story of the two exposed children, Daphnis and
Chloe. The more recent Italian pastorals are likewise very frequently
based upon the exposure of children, who are raised as shepherds by
their foster-parents, but are later recognized by the true parents,
through identifying marks which they received at the time of their
exposure. To the same set belong the family history in Grimmelshausen’s
“Limplizissimus” (1665), in Jean Paul’s “Titan” (1800), as well as
certain forms of the Robinson stories and Cavalier romances (compare
Würzbach’s Introduction to the Edition of “Don Quichote” in Hesse’s
edition).
[27] The various translations of the partly mutilated text differ only
in unessential details. Compare Hommel’s “History of Babylonia and
Assyria” (Berlin, 1885), p. 302, where the sources of the tradition are
likewise found, and A. Jeremias, “The Old Testament in the Light of the
Ancient Orient,” II edition, Leipzig, 1906, p. 410.
[28] On account of these resemblances, a dependence of the Exodus tale
from the Sargon legend has often been assumed, but apparently not
enough attention has been paid to certain fundamental distinctions,
which will be taken up in detail in the interpretation.
[29] The parents of Moses were originally nameless, as were all persons
in this, the oldest account. Their names were only conferred upon them
by the priesthood. Chapter 6, 20, says: “And Amram took him Jocabed his
father’s sister to wife; and she bare him Aaron and Moses” [and their
sister Miriam, IV, 26, 59]. Also compare Winckler, “History of Israel,”
II, and Jeremias, l. c., p. 408.
[30] The name, according to Winckler (“Babylonian Mental Culture,” p.
119), means “The Water-Drawer” (see also Winckler, “Ancient Oriental
Studies,” III, 468, etc.), which would still further approach the Moses
legend to the Sargon legend, for the name Akki signifies I have drawn
water.
[31] Schemot Rabba, fol. 2, 4. Concerning 2, Moses 1, 22, says that
Pharaoh was told by the astrologers of a woman who was pregnant with
the Redeemer of Israel.
[32] The Hindu birth legend of the mythical king Vikramâdita must also
be mentioned in this connection. Here again occur the barren marriage
of the parents, the miraculous conception, ill-omened warnings, the
exposure of the boy in the forest, his nourishment with honey, finally
the acknowledgment by the father. (See Jülg, “Mongolian Fairy Tales,”
Innsbruck, 1868, p. 73, et seq.)
[33] “Hindu Legends,” Karlsruhe, 1846, Part II, pp. 117 to 127.
[34] “Hindu Legends,” l. c.
[35] See Röscher, concerning the Ion of Euripides. Where no other
source is stated, all Greek and Roman myths are taken from the
Extensive Dictionary of Greek and Roman Mythology, edited by Röscher,
which also contains a list of all sources.
[36] According to Bethe, “Thebanische Heldenlieder,” the exposure on
the waters was the original rendering. According to other versions, the
boy is found and raised by horse herds; according to a later myth, by a
countryman, Melibios.
[37] The entire material has been discussed by Rank in Das Inzest-Motiv
in Dichtung und Sage, 1912, Chapter X.
[38] I. In the version of Euripides, whose tragedies “Auge” and
“Telephos” are extant, _Aleos caused the mother and the child to be
thrown into the sea in a box_, but through the protection of Athene
this box was carried to the end of the Mysian River, Kaikos. There it
was found by Teuthras. who made Auge his wife and took her child into
his house as his foster son.
[39] Later authors, including Pindar, state that Danae was impregnated,
not by Zeus, but by the brother of her father.
[40] Simonides of Keos (fr. 37, ed. Bergk), speaks of a casement
strong as ore, in which Danae is said to have been exposed. (Geibel,
Klassisches Liederbuch, page 52.)
[41] According to Hüsing, the Perseus myth in several versions is
also demonstrable in Japan. Compare also, Sydney Hartland, Legend of
Perseus, 1894-96; 3 volumes. London.
[42] Claudius Aelianus, “Historia animalium,” XII, 21, translated by
Fr. Jacobs (Stuttgart, 1841).
[43] It was also told of Ptolemaös, the son of Lagos and Arsinoë, that
an eagle protected the exposed boy with his wings against the sunshine,
the rain and birds of prey (_loc. cit._).
[44] F. E. Lange, “Herodot’s Geschichten” (Reclam). Compare also
Duncker’s “History of Antiquity” (Leipsig, 1880), N. 5, page 256 et
sequitur.
[45] The same “playing king” is found in the Hindoo myth of
Candragupta, the founder of the Maurja dynasty, whom his mother exposed
after his birth, in a vessel at the gate of a cowshed, where a herder
found him and raised him. Later on he came to a hunter, where he as
cow-herder played “king” with the other boys, and as king ordered
that the hands and feet of the great criminals be chopped off. [The
mutilation motive occurs also in the Kyros saga, and is generally
widely distributed.] At his command, the separated limbs returned to
their proper position. Kanakja, who once looked on as they were at
play, admired the boy, and bought him from the hunter for one thousand
Kârshâpana; at home he discovered that the boy was a Maurja. (After
Lassen’s Indische Altertumskunde, II, 196, Annotation 1.)
[46] Justinus, “Extract from Pompeius Trogus’ Philippian History,” I,
4-7. As far as results from Justinus’ extract, Deinon’s Persian tales
(written in the first half of the fourth century before Christ) are
presumably the sources of Trogus’ narrative.
[47] The words in parenthesis are said to be lacking in certain
manuscripts.
[48] Nicol. Damasc. Frag. 66, Ctes.; Frag. Pers., 2, 5.
[49] This daughter’s name is Amytis (not Mandane) in the version of
Ktesias.
[50] On the basis of this _motive of simulated dementia_ and certain
other corresponding features Jiriczek (“Hamlet in Iran,” in the
_Zeitschrift des Vereins für Volkskunde_, Vol. X, 1900, p. 353) has
represented the _Hamlet Saga_ as a variation of the Iranese myth of
Kaikhosrav. This idea was followed up by H. Lessmann (“Die Kyrossage
in Europa”), who shows that the Hamlet saga strikingly agrees in
certain items, for example, in the simulated folly, with the sagas
of Brutus and of Tell. (Compare also the protestations of Moses.) In
another connection, the deeper roots of these relations have been more
extensively discussed, especially with reference to the Tell saga.
(See: Das Inzest-Motiv in Dichtung und Sage, Chapter VIII.) Attention
is also directed to the story of David, as it is told in the books
of Samuel. Here again, the royal scion, David, is made a shepherd,
who gradually rises in the social scale up to the royal throne. He
likewise is given the king’s (Saul’s) daughter in marriage, and the
king seeks his life, but David is always saved by miraculous means from
the greatest perils. He also evades persecution by simulating dementia
and playing the fool. The relationship between the Hamlet saga and the
David saga has already been pointed out by Jiriczek and Lessmann. The
biblical character of this entire mythical cycle is also emphasized by
Jiriczek, who finds in the tale of Siâvaksh’s death certain features
from the Passion of the Savior.
[51] The name Zohâk is a mutilation of the original Zend expression
Ashi-dahaka [Azis-dahaka], meaning pernicious serpent. (See “The Myth
of Feridun in India and Iran,” by Dr. R. Roth, in the _Zeitschrift
der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft_, II, p. 216.) To the
_Iranese Feridum_ corresponds the _Hindoo Trita_, whose Avestian
double is Thraetaona. The last named form is the most predominantly
authenticated; from it was formed, by transition of the aspirated
sounds, first Phreduna, then Frêdûn or Afrêdun; Feridun is a more
recent corruption. Compare F. Spiegel’s “Eranische Altertumskunde,” I,
p. 537 et seq.
[52] Compare Immermann, “Tristan und Isolde, Ein Gedicht in Romanzen,”
Düsseldorf, 1841. Like the epic of Gottfried of Strassburg, his poem
begins with the preliminary history of the loves of Tristan’s parents,
King Riwalin Kannlengres of Parmenia and Marke’s beautiful sister
Blancheflur. The maiden never reveals her love, which is not sanctioned
by her brother, but she visits the king, who is wounded unto death,
in his chamber, and dying he procreates Tristan, “the son of the most
daring and doleful love.” Grown up as a foundling in the care of Rual
and his wife, Florete, the winsome youth Tristan introduces himself
to Marke in a stag hunt, as an expert huntsman, is recognized as his
nephew by a ring, the king’s gift to his beloved sister, and becomes
his favorite.
[53] See translation by W. A. White, M.D.., Psychoanalytic Review, Vol.
I, No. 1, et seq.
[54] Compare the substitution of the bride, through Brangäne.
[55] Mommsen, Th., “Die echte und die falsche Acca Larentia”; in
Festgaben für G. Homeyer (Berlin, 1891), p. 93, et seq.; and _Römische_
_Forschungen_ (Berlin, 1879), II, p. 1, et seq. Mommsen reconstructs
the lost narrative of Fabius from the preserved reports of Dionysius
(I, 79-831, and of Plutarch (Romulus)).
[56] The Capitoline She Wolf is considered as the work of very ancient
Etruscan artists, which was erected at the Lupercal, in the year 296
B.C., according to Livy (X, 231). Compare picture on title page.
[57] All these renderings were compiled by Schwegler, in his Roman
History, I, p. 384, et seq.
[58] Some Greek twin sagas are quoted by Schubert (loc. cit., p. 13, et
seq.) in their essential content. Concerning the extensive distribution
of this legendary form, compare the somewhat confused book of J. H.
Becker, “The Twin Saga as the Key to the Interpretation of Ancient
Tradition. With a Table of the Twin Saga.” Leipsic, 1891. German text.
[59] Mommsen, “Die Remus Legende,” Hermes, 1881.
[60] After Preller, Greek Mythology (Leipzig, 1854, II, pp. 120 et
seq.).
[61] The same transformation of the divine procreator into the form
of the human father is found in the birth history of the Egyptian
queen, Hatshepset (about 1500 before Christ), who believes that the god
Amen cohabited with her mother, Aahames, in the form of her father,
Thothmes the First (see Budge: A History of Egypt, V; Books on Egypt
and Chaldea, Vol. XII, p. 21, etc.). Later on she married her brother,
Thothmes II, presumably the Pharaoh of Exodus, after whose dishonorable
death she endeavored to eradicate his memory, and herself assumed
the rulership, in masculine fashion (cp. the Deuteronium, edited by
Schrader, II ed., 1902).
[62] A similar mingling of the divine and human posterity is related
in the myth of Theseus, whose mother Aithra, the beloved of Poseidon,
was visited in one night by this god, and by the childless King Aigeus
of Athens, who had been brought under the influence of wine. The boy
was raised in secret, and in ignorance of his father (v. Roscher’s
dictionary, article Aigeus).
[63] Alkmene bore Herakles as the son of Zeus, and Iphikles as the
offspring of Amphitryon. According to Apollodorus, 2, 4, 8, they were
twin children, born at the same time; according to others Iphikles
was conceived and born one night later than Herakles (see Roscher’s
Lexicon, Amphitryon and Alkmene). The shadowy character of the twin
brother, and his loose connection with the entire myth, is again
evident. In a similar way, Telephos, the son of Auge, was exposed
together with Parthenopaüs, the son of Atalantis, nursed by a doe, and
taken by herders to King Korythos. The external subsequent insertion of
the partner is here again quite obvious.
[64] For the formal demonstration of the entire identity of the birth
and early history of Jesus with the other hero-myths, the author has
presumed to re-arrange the corresponding paragraphs from the different
versions, in the Gospels, irrespective of the traditional sequence
and the originality of the individual parts. The age, origin and
genuineness of these parts are briefly summarized and discussed in W.
Soltan’s Birth History of Jesus Christ (German text), Leipsic, 1902.
The transmitted versions of the several Gospels,—which according to
Usener (Birth and Childhood of Christ, 1903, in Lectures and Essays
(German text), Leipsic, 1907), contradict and even exclude each
other,—have been placed, or left, in juxtaposition, precisely for
the reason that the apparently contradictory elements in these birth
myths are to be elucidated in the present research, no matter if these
contradictions be encountered within a single uniform saga, or in its
different versions (as, for example, in the Kyros myth).
[65] Concerning the birth of Jesus in a cave, and the furnishing
of the birth place with the typical animals (ox and ass) compare
Jeremias, Babylonisches im Neuen Testament (Leipzig, 1905), p. 56, and
Preuschen, Jesu Geburt in einer Höhle, Zeitschrift für die Neutest.
Wissenschaften, 1902, P. 359.
[66] According to recent investigations, the birth history of Christ
is said to have the greatest resemblance with the royal Egyptian myth,
over five thousand years old, which relates the birth of Amenophis III.
Here again recurs the divine prophecy of the birth of a son, to the
waiting queen; her fertilization by the breath of heavenly fire; the
divine cows, which nurse the new born child; the homage of the kings,
and so forth. In this connection, compare A. Malvert, Wissenschaft
und Religion, Frankfort, 1904, pp. 49 et seq, also the suggestion of
Professor Idleib in Bonn (Feuilleton of Frankfurter Zeitung, November
8, 1908).
[67] Very similar traits are found in the Keltic saga of Habis, as
transmitted by Justin (44,4). Born as the illegitimate son of a king’s
daughter, Habis is persecuted in all sorts of ways by his royal
grandfather, Gargoris, but is always saved by divine providence, until
he is finally recognized by his grandfather, and assumes royal sway. As
in the Zarathustra legend, there occurs an entire series of the most
varied methods of persecution. He is at first exposed, but nursed by
wild animals; then he was to be trampled upon by a herd in a narrow
path; then he was cast before hungry beasts, but they again nursed him,
and finally he is thrown into the sea, but is gently lapped ashore and
nursed by a doe, near which he grows up.
[68] Compare August Rassmann: Die deutsche Heldensage und ihre Heimat,
Hanover, 1857-8, Vol. II, pp. 7 et seq; for the sources, see Jiriczek,
Die deutsche Heldensage (collection Göschen) and Piper’s introduction
to the volume: Die Nibelungen, in Kürschner’s German National
Literature.
[69] Compare: Deutsches Heldenbuch, Part III, Vol. I (Berlin, 1871),
edited by Amelung and Jaenicke, which also contains the second version
(B) of the Wolfdietrich saga.
[70] The motive of calumniation of the wife by a rejected suitor, in
combination with the exposure and nursing by an animal (doe), forms
the nucleus of the story of _Genovefa_ and her son Schmerzenreich, as
told, for example, by the Grimm brothers, in their German Sagas, II,
Berlin, 1818, pp. 280 et seq. Here, again, the faithless calumniator
proposes _to drown the countess with her child in the water_. For
literary and historical orientation, compare _L. Zacher_, Die Historic
von der Pfalzgräfin Genovefa, Koenigsberg, 1860, and _B. Seuffert_, Die
Legende von der Pfalzgräfin Genovefa, Würzburg, 1877. Similar sagas of
wives suspected of infidelity and punished by exposure are discussed in
the XI chapter of my investigation of “Das Inzestmotiv in Dichtung und
Sage” (The Incest Motive in Fiction and Legends).
[71] The same accentuation of the animal motive is found in the saga
of Schalû, the Hindoo wolf child; compare Jülg, Mongolische Märchen
(Mongolian fairy tales; Innsbruck, 1868).