CHAPTER VII

MYTHS

+819+. Myths represent the savage and half-civilized science of origins,

the imaginary construction of the world. From the earliest times men

have shown curiosity respecting the origin of the things that lie about

them. In the presence of plains and mountains, trees and rivers, sun,

moon, and stars, beasts and human beings, they have felt the necessity

of accounting for the beginning of all these objects.[1413] This attempt

at giving a natural history of the world is in itself a scientific

procedure, but in the earlier periods of humanity it naturally attached

itself to the hypothesis of superhuman Powers--the production of this

variety of mysterious things appeared to demand capacity above that of

man. The science and the fancy of early man combined to produce a great

mass of theories and stories which to their inventors seemed to be a

satisfactory account of the origin of all things.[1414]

+820+. Myths thus furnish an important contribution to the history of

early opinion, scientific and religious; in the absence of written

records they often offer our only means of information concerning early

thought. They describe the origin not only of the physical world but

also of communities and social organizations and institutions. They have

a noteworthy vitality, lasting from the beginning of human communal life

into periods of advanced civilization; and, when adopted by great

religious organizations and interwoven into their theories of salvation,

they perpetuate to civilized times the ideas of the crude period in

which they originated. In many cases they stand side by side, and in

sharp contrast, with elevated moral conceptions of the deity, and then

have to be harmonized, usually with a great expenditure of exegetical

ingenuity, with the higher ideas of society.

+821+. The mythopoeic age, in the widest sense of the term, embraces

the whole period in which appeal is made, for the explanation of

phenomena, to other than natural agencies; but it is generally

understood to extend only up to the time when, though a general divine

Power is invoked for creation, this is regarded as working solely

through the laws of nature.[1415] And within this period the myth-making

impulse lasted longer in some directions than in others. In general, the

mythical theories concerning the larger processes, as, for example, the

creation of the world, received no addition after the establishment of a

settled civilization; but after this time even well-advanced communities

continued to invent mythical accounts of the origin of customs,

institutions, genealogies, and similar facts. Throughout the whole

myth-making period a progression may be recognized in the character of

the myths: from the earlier animal and human creators we pass to the

higher anthropomorphic forms, the great gods; there is increased

literary excellence, a molding and a remolding of the old crude stories,

with a combination of them into well-ordered histories; they are

constantly modified by the growing acquaintance with the laws of nature

and by the higher intellectual conceptions of the deity; and they are

more and more infused with ethical significance.

+822+. An examination of myths all over the world shows that the most of

them, especially those relating to creation and to the histories of the

gods, originated at a period when men stood intellectually and morally

on a very low plane.[1416] The first myth-makers were savages, with all

the well-known characteristics of savage life. Having next to no

knowledge of natural law, and holding to a practical identity of nature

among men, beasts, and physical things, they had no difficulty in

imagining all sorts of transformations and creative procedures. No limit

was conceived of for the power of beasts and men--there was no object in

heaven or earth which, according to the current ideas, could not have

been produced by some procedure which was similar to the procedures of

ordinary life. The ethical character of the creators and of the

introducers of general culture was that of the communities that imagined

them; naturally the stories were full of ethical barbarities and

violations of all the moral rules recognized at a later period; and, as

is remarked above, these stories continued into civilized times, and had

to be interpreted by various devices.

+823+. One of the most noteworthy facts in the history of mythology is

the general similarity of the myths that are found all over the world.

Allowing for continuous moral and intellectual progress and for local

differences of surroundings, it may be said that the theories of the

production of the earth and the heavenly bodies, of man and other

objects, of customs and institutions, show substantially the same types

everywhere. The question has been raised whether this virtual identity

is to be explained by the supposition of independent origination at

various points, or is to be attributed to a borrowing by one community

from another. The question of the migration of myths is a part of the

larger question of the migration of culture, and is attended with all

the difficulties that attach to this latter. It is not possible at

present to give an answer which shall embrace all the phenomena.

Obviously any satisfactory solution of the problem must be preceded by a

thorough examination of all particular myths, all social

characteristics, and all geographical and migratory relations affecting

the early communities; and on these points there is yet much to learn.

+824+. It is well known that customs and beliefs have sometimes passed

from one tribe or nation to another, when there has been close social

intercourse between the two. It is known also that early men were

capable of long journeys by land and by water: the migration legends of

various peoples are full of the details of such movements; in

comparatively recent times there have been great migrations of large

bodies of people, as, for example, from the Arabian desert to the north

and northwest, and from the central Asiatic steppes westward and

eastward; and the tribes of the Pacific Ocean appear to have traversed

long distances in their canoes. And when we consider the great lapse of

time, many thousands of years, that preceded the formation of the human

society with which we are acquainted, it appears to be impossible to

assign any limit to the possibility of tribal movements on the face of

the earth. On the other hand, we do not know whether, or how far, such

migrations issued in social fusion; and all the well-attested cases of

borrowing of customs and ideas have sprung from long-continued social

union.

+825+. Further, a distinction must be made between general resemblances

and minute agreement or complete identity; there may be a similarity so

great as to force on us the hypothesis of imitation, and there may be

general similarities that may be ascribed to ordinary human thought

working in different places under similar conditions. In fact, the

conditions of existence have not varied very greatly over the globe.

There are differences of climate and soil and surface-configuration, but

everywhere there have been the sky with the heavenly bodies, the

sequence of day and night, sunshine and rain, hunting and fishing,

trees, rivers, beasts and birds, and the cultivable soil; and as man's

problem was everywhere the same--namely, how to put himself into good

relation with his surroundings--and as his intellectual equipment was

everywhere substantially the same, it would not be surprising if he

should fall on similar methods of thought and procedure independently in

various parts of the world. It was natural to early man to think of the

sun as a ball of fire which had somehow been thrown up into the sky, and

of the moon as associated with the sun as sister or wife or husband, and

of the stars as children of these two. For creative agents early man had

to look to the beings about him, particularly to beasts, birds, and

insects. The process of creation was simple--the story usually amounts

merely to saying that such and such a beast or other being made this or

that object; and there is very rarely, if ever, a conception of an

absolute beginning; almost always a reconstruction of existing material

is assumed.

+826+. Both explanations of the resemblances in myths, it thus appears,

are reasonable in themselves, and every case must be considered

separately. That a community has borrowed one story does not prove

borrowing in the case of any other story; and that a people has been a

center of distribution of certain myths does not prove that it was the

originator of all myths. These two propositions appear to be

self-evident, but they have often been ignored in discussions of the

provenance of mythical material.[1417]

+827+. The similarities in myths all over the world extend over the

whole domain of religion. Myths may be divided into those which deal

with the creation of the world and of man (cosmogonic), those which deal

with the origins of tribes and nations (ethnogonic), those which refer

to the origin of customs and institutions (sociogonic), and those which

are based on the forms and movements of the heavenly bodies, clouds,

winds, and so forth (solar, lunar, procellar, and so forth).

+828+. _Cosmogonic myths._[1418] Among early tribes the creators are

very often familiar animals, such as the coyote, the raven, the hare

(North America), the wagtail (among the Ainu), the grasshopper (among

the Bushmen)--in general, whatever animals appear to the men of a

particular tribe to show skill and power. Reference is made above to the

reasons which led early men to pay such high regard to the lower

animals.[1419] But in more advanced savage communities the creative

function is ascribed to a man, as among the Thompson River Indians and

in Southeast Australia; in Central Australia the authors of creation or

of the arrangement of things are beings who are indifferently men or

animals, but are regarded as the ancestors of the tribes. In the higher

religions the creators are nature gods and great gods, and finally the

one God stands alone as creator.

+829+. The act of creation is commonly represented as a process. Mud is

brought up from a pool, or an island is raised from the sea (the

Maoris, the Redmen), and these are stretched out so as to meet the needs

of men; or a dragon or a giant is cut to pieces and the various parts of

the universe are made from the pieces (Babylonia, India, Scandinavia);

or, in still later times, an unformed mass of water is conceived of as

the original state out of which all things are fashioned (Babylonians,

Hebrews, Hindus, Greeks); or the universe issues from an egg (the origin

of the egg being left unexplained),[1420] or the earth is represented as

the mother of all things (California). Elaborate cosmogonies are found

in New Zealand (the Maoris), in North America (the Pawnees, the Lenâpé,

and so forth), in Australia, and elsewhere. An interesting example is

the Californian Achom[=a]wi cosmogony. In the beginning, according to

this scheme, were only the sea and the sky, and from the sky came down

the Creator; or a cloud, at first tiny, grew large, condensed, and

became the Silver-Gray Fox, the Creator, and out of a fog, which in like

manner was condensed, came the Coyote, and these two made the earth and

man.[1421]

+830+. In all these cases the creation is out of already existing

material[1422] and the creator is really a culture-hero or transformer,

a character that clings to deities in the most advanced religions, as

the Egyptian, Babylonian, and Greek. The character of these early

transformers and creators is that of the communities in which they

originate. Morally they represent both the higher and the lower sides of

life, and this is true in all periods--the Hindu Indra is as tricksy and

unmoral as the North American Coyote, and the early form of Zeus

resembles these and other savage figures.[1423] The conceptions of the

creator grew more and more ethically good, but the lower representations

continued to exist side by side with the higher.[1424]

+831+. It is not altogether strange that the two sorts of creative

Powers should be early thought of as mutually antagonistic. The Maidu

bad creator is constantly opposing and bringing to naught the work of

his good rival, and their collision produces the actual state of things

on the earth.[1425] It is probably by way of explanation of the evil in

the world that in this myth the bad Coyote finally overcomes his rival.

The resemblance of this scheme to the Mazdean dualism, except in the

outcome, is obvious. For a full account of these systems we must await

further information; but at present there is no ground for holding that

the similarity is due to borrowing.

+832+. In various early cosmogonies the representation is found of an

earlier race or an early world that had been destroyed, sometimes by a

flood (Babylonia, India, Greece, Polynesia, North America, South

America), sometimes in other ways.[1426] Flood stories probably arise

from local inundations, and may therefore have been constructed

independently in various regions. In some cases the general conditions

favor the supposition of distribution from one point: it seems probable,

for example, that the Babylonian flood story was adopted by the

Canaanites and from them by the Hebrews (the supposition of common

descent from an original Semitic myth is made improbable by the

closeness of resemblance between the Babylonian and Hebrew forms); it

may have passed to India, but the Hindu story may be accounted for from

local conditions. But we know of no such intercourse between the

Americas, Polynesia, and Western Asia, as would suggest a migration of

the myth from the latter to the two former, though this is conceivable.

+833+. The origin of man is included in that of the world. He is made

from clay or wooden figures or stones, or, as in Australia, out of a

shapeless mass. The conception found in various parts of the world, that

the present race of men was preceded by another, appears to be due

sometimes to a real, though often confused, tradition of an earlier

population, sometimes to a vague conception of the conflict and

incompleteness in the world. Traditions of predecessors are found in

various parts of the world. In North America--as, for example, among the

Navahos--a part of the early history is the conflict with certain mighty

and evil beings who made good life impossible--a semidualistic

scheme.[1427] This view comes from the general disposition to conceive

of the past as the time of mightier agencies, good and bad, than now

exist.

+834+. A not uncommon representation is that man was originally not

mortal, or that it was a question whether or not he should be mortal

(death being generally regarded by early man as an abnormal event,

produced by supernatural agency). In such cases mortality is brought

about by an accident or an error: among the Maoris by a mistake of the

hero Maui;[1428] among the Hebrews by the disobedience of the first man,

or by his failure to eat of the tree of life; in South Africa by the

accident that the messenger who was to announce immortality was outrun

by one who announced mortality.[1429]

+835+. The belief that the earliest men were longer-lived and of larger

stature than their successors is found among certain peoples.[1430] Of

the origin of this belief in ancient times we have no accounts. It may

have been suggested by various objects supposed to be remains of men, or

it may have been due simply to a tendency to conceive of the beginners

of human society as superior beings (dedivinized gods). The Hebrew

tradition ascribed great age to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, and

Moses, on a generally descending scale; the longevity of the

antediluvians is perhaps a speculative continuation of the series back

of Abraham on an ascending scale, though special mythical traits here

come in.

Connected with the general belief in the superiority of early conditions

of life is the belief in a primitive earthly paradise; the history of

this conception is not clear, but in some cases the paradise appears to

have been the delightful abode of a deity, into which human beings were

for various reasons admitted, or the primeval fair and happy

earth.[1431]

+836+. The belief that the world or the existing order is to be

destroyed appears to be connected with the conception of history as

involving a cycle of ages, and the theory of ages may have arisen from

the tradition or the knowledge of social and political revolutions, the

rise of each new phase of civilization involving the destruction of its

predecessor. Traditions of past cataclysms may have helped toward the

formulation of an expectation of coming destruction. This expectation,

generalized under the influence of belief in a final judgment of men by

God, would lead to the announcement of a final destruction of the

present world. This destruction, which ushers in a new age, is

accomplished in various ways, sometimes by water, wind, or fire,[1432]

sometimes by supernatural enemies.[1433] The Hindu and the Persian

schemes of successive ages are relatively late theological

constructions, but they are based on the older idea that present things

must have an end.[1434] The Navaho series of five worlds represents,

apparently, nothing but traditions of social changes, interspersed with

minor ætiologic myths.[1435]

+837+. Many other cosmogonic details, common to various peoples, might

be added. Transformation from human to animal or mineral forms and the

reverse are to be found, as we have seen, everywhere. The slaying of

dragons by gods or heroes is often connected with creation, but belongs

sometimes in the category of cultural or nature myths. Abnormal forms of

birth and generation may be sometimes products of savage fancy, or they

may be attempts to set forth the mysterious or the supernatural in

certain beings, or they may be nature myths: in various mythologies a

god or a hero is born from the side or the thigh or the head of the

mother or the father; fecundation by other means than sexual union

appears in North America, Egypt, Greece, and generally in savage

tribes.[1436] The representation of the primeval parents, Heaven and

Earth, as having been originally united in a close embrace and then

separated, Heaven being lifted up and Earth remaining below, is so

remarkable that it might be doubted whether it arose independently in

different places; yet, as it is found in New Zealand,[1437] in

Egypt,[1438] in India,[1439] among the Masai of Eastern Central

Africa,[1440] and as the supposition of borrowing for these widely

separated communities would be difficult (except, perhaps, as between

Egypt and the Masai land), it is simpler to regard the myth as a natural

effort of early science.[1441] It need hardly be added that with all the

similarities in the various cosmogonic systems the diversities among

different peoples are as numerous as the differences of surroundings and

character.

+838+. Among most early communities the great figures of the past

(creations of imagination) to whom are ascribed the introduction of the

arts of life and the general betterment of society are regarded as

demigods, descended from parents one of whom is divine and the other

human; it is sometimes the father, sometimes the mother, that is

divine.[1442] This conception is a simple and natural explanation of the

supposed extraordinary powers of the personages in question. A more

refined conception represents man as receiving life from the breath of

God,[1443] whence easily comes the idea that man is the child of God and

has in him a spark of divinity.

+839+. _Ethnogonic myths._ Early science has to account not only for

the origin of the world and the human race, but also for the origin of

particular tribes and their surroundings. The area involved is the known

world, which among savage peoples is small in extent but increases with

knowledge, the general method of accounting for social division

remaining, however, the same. As a rule, the center of the distribution

of mankind is the territory of the particular tribe in which the myth

originates. There is always the conviction, expressed or implied, that

the tribe in question is the center of the world and the favorite of the

creative Power;[1444] it being established in its place, the rest of the

world is divided among other tribes--a conception that survives among

civilized peoples of antiquity.[1445]

+840+. The ethnogonic history generally takes the form of a

genealogy--every tribe or other group is derived from a mythical

ancestor, who among savages is frequently a beast, or half-beast

half-human, or even in some cases a rock or a stone. Familiar examples

are the genealogical systems of the Australians, the Maoris of New

Zealand, the Samoans, the American Indians;[1446] but the conception

appears to be universal. There was indeed no other natural way of

accounting for the origin of a tribe: as an existing family would reckon

its beginning from the grandfather, so the tribe would come from some

remote person, and so at a later time the nation, and then finally the

human race. As there were no historical records of such beginning, the

scientific imagination of early peoples constructed the first parents in

various ways, often by personifying the tribe and transferring its name

to the mythical ancestor. It is in this way that the genealogical lists

of the post-Mohammedan Arabians arose; it is certain that they had no

records of the past extending further than a few generations, and in

some cases the origins of the names in genealogical lists may be fixed.

The Greek method of naming ancestors is simple and obvious: the sons of

Hellen are Dorus, Xuthus, Æolus; the sons of Xuthus are Achæus and Ion;

and these are all descended from Deucalion. In like manner the

Pelasgians are carried back to the ancestor Pelasgus, and the

Peloponnesians to Pelops. The Roman Romulus, Remulus, Remus, are natural

inventions based on the name of the city.

+841+. Genealogical elaboration was carried out more fully by the

Hebrews than by any other ancient people. Not only were tribal names,

Jacob, Israel, Judah, Joseph, Ephraim, and the rest, personified, but

they were arranged in a well-shaped family system; and, the same method

being applied to all the nations known to them, these were carried up to

the three sons of Noah, and finally through Noah up to the first man,

whose Hebrew name, Adam, means simply man.[1447] The table of nations in

Genesis x is a remarkable example of ethnographic organization. As it is

based on geographical relations, it does not in all particulars accord

with modern ethnological schemes, but it is a noteworthy attempt to

embrace the whole world in a family picture. The view that the division

of the earth among the various peoples revolved around the Israelite

territory is expressed in the poem cited above,[1448] which is of the

seventh century B.C., and it may be inferred that this large

genealogical unification was completed among the Israelites at a time

when they felt the influence of the great Assyrian civilization, with

which they seem to have come into somewhat intimate contact. Later

examples are found in Vergil's Æneid and Milton's "History of Britain"

(in which he adopts early attempts at genealogical construction).

+842+. _Sociogonic myths._ Most of the customs and institutions of early

peoples go back to a time when there were no records, and their

introduction was naturally referred, so soon as reflection thereon

began, to gods and heroes of primeval time.

+843+. The arts of life are commonly explained in this mythical way.

The beginnings of agriculture are referred in Melanesia to the Little

One or to Qat, in Mexico to the god or culture-hero Quetzalcoatl, in

Peru to Viracocha or Pachacamac, or to Manco Capac and his wife. For the

Algonkins Michabo, the Great Hare, was the teacher of fishing and of

other pursuits.[1449] The Babylonian god Ea was the instructor of his

people in all the arts of civilization.[1450] In the Old Testament

Cainite (Kenite) genealogy the originators of pastoral life, of

metal-working, and of music, are the ancient ancestors.[1451] In the

Book of Enoch the employment of metals, the use of writing, and in

general all the early arts of civilization are ascribed to the fallen

angels, whose children are represented in the Book of Genesis[1452] as

the culture-heroes of the olden time. The introduction of writing into

Greece is ascribed by the Greeks to the mythical hero or demigod

Cadmus.[1453] Fire is in India the production of the god Agni[1454] (who

is simply fire elevated to the rank of a personal divinity); in the

Greek myth it is stolen and given to men by the demigod Prometheus[1455]

against the will of the gods, who are jealous of human progress.[1456]

Among various savage tribes there are similar histories of the

derivation of the use of fire from superhuman beings.[1457]

+844+. Early ceremonies, as we have seen,[1458] are universally

connected with religion, and their origin is ascribed to divine or

semi-divine figures of the past. In Australia the initiation ceremonies,

which take up a great part of the tribal life, are regarded as having

been established by the mythical ancestors.[1459] Among the Hebrews

when circumcision, an early initiation ceremony,[1460] became

religiously important, its establishment was referred to the ancestor

Abraham, who is said to have acted by direct command of God,[1461] but

in earlier documents there are hints of other origins for the

rite.[1462] The ritual dances of the North American Indians, which are

very elaborate, are accompanied by explanations in which the origin of

every detail is referred to some event or person in the supernatural

past;[1463] and similar explanations are given of the dances of

Mexico.[1464] In many cases the restrictions of food and other things

are ascribed to the experiences of the ancestors or to the commands of

deities: the Hebrew usage of not eating a certain sinew is connected

with the story of the struggle between Jacob and a divine being.[1465]

+845+. Festivals also were treated in this manner as soon as men began

to reflect on the origin of society. As one feature in the festival

sacred to Mars (March 1) was the dancing of the priests who carried

curious shields, it was narrated, to account for this, that the shield

of Mars fell down from heaven;[1466] and the goddess Maia, according to

one conjecture, was invented to explain the name of the month of

May.[1467] A Greek explanation of the fact that children at a later

period were not called by the mother's name was that in the contest

between Poseidon and Athene for the control of the city of Athens the

latter deity prevailed by the votes of the women, who were in the

majority, and to appease the wrath of Poseidon this rule was then made

by the men.[1468] The Gileadite festival in which maidens lamented the

death of the daughter of Jephthah[1469] was doubtless an old rite in

which the death of some divinity was bewailed. The Greek Boedromia was

referred to the succor given by Theseus against the Amazons,[1470] and

in the celebration of the Eleusinian mysteries ætiological myths

connected with Demeter, Kore, and Dionysos formed the central part of

the proceedings.[1471] In the Old Testament the spring festival

(Passover) is connected with the departure of the people from Egypt, and

the autumn festival (Tabernacles) with the sojourn in the wilderness;

and by the later Jews the midsummer festival (the Feast of Weeks,

Pentecost) was similarly brought into connection with the giving of the

law on Mount Sinai.

+846+. _Relation between myth and ritual._ The question whether myth

comes from ritual or ritual from myth has been much discussed. Obviously

universal precedence cannot be allowed to either of the two. There are

cases in which primary mythical beliefs determine the form of religious

procedure: the belief, for example, that a god, as anthropomorphic

divine patron, must be placated and provided with all the accessories of

a potentate, leads to the offering of food and other gifts and to the

establishment of abodes and attendants; the sense of his aloofness and

of his powerful and dangerous qualities induces cautionary rules for

approach to his presence; because he has manlike intellectual and

emotional limitations his favor must be secured by prayers and praises;

if he has a son, this latter may act as mediator between his father and

a suppliant, or one god may mediate with others in behalf of men.[1472]

On the other hand, there are many examples of myths that arise as

explanation of ritualistic details.[1473] It is sometimes hard to say on

which side the precedence in time lies. In general, it seems, it is from

broader and fundamental mythical conceptions that ritual arises, while

mythical narratives spring from particular ritualistic observances.

+847+. Important religious changes which have come to pass through

natural changes of thought, usually by the movement toward greater

refinement, are explained as having been introduced by some great

reformer. The abrogation of human sacrifice was a reform of great

moment: in Mexico it is ascribed to the god Quetzalcoatl,[1474] and in

the Old Testament to Abraham acting by command of God.[1475] One of the

Incas of Peru is said to have reached monotheistic views by a process of

reasoning, and the post-Biblical Jewish myths ascribed the same

achievement to Abraham.[1476]

+848+. As a rule sacred places were connected with stories of the

presence of divine personages or mythical ancestors. In Samoa, the

Hawaian group, and other Pacific Islands many stones are connected with

stories of heroes, spirits, or gods.[1477] In Central Australia every

stone, rock, or tree has its myth of the half-bestial ancestors.[1478]

In Greece, as Pausanias relates, there was hardly a place that did not

have its story of the origin of some sacred spot or thing due to a

god.[1479] In the earlier books of the Old Testament the sacred places,

which were Arabian or Canaanite shrines adopted by the Hebrews, are

generally connected with the presence of the patriarchs or other great

men. The magical qualities of springs, pools, and other bodies of water

are explained by stories in which a god or other divine person descends

into them, or in some other way communicates power.[1480]

+849+. _Myths of heavenly bodies, winds, and vegetation._ As the sun,

the moon, and other objects of nature were regarded as anthropomorphic

persons and naturally came into relation with men, their imagined

adventures have produced a great mass of stories in all parts of the

world. These stories are partly attempts to account for phenomena and

partly are simply products of fancy; the myth-maker is very often a mere

story-teller. The sun, conceived of usually as an old man, is supposed

to live in a house up in the sky, to have his wife and children, to

receive visitors, and to interfere to some extent in human affairs. An

eclipse was obviously to be regarded as the work of an enemy of the sun,

usually a dragon (so in many low tribes, and in India). A great excess

of heat on the earth might be explained by the supposition that the

chariot of the sun had been driven too near the surface.[1481] The

waning of the moon was supposed to be due to her sorrow at the loss of

her children, the stars, which were devoured by the sun. The moon might

be a fair woman who becomes enamored of a human being. At a later time

in the progress of astronomical knowledge the planets and certain of the

stars were individualized--they became actors in human history or, still

later, the abode of supernatural beings.[1482]

+850+. The beginnings of astrological theory are probably to be

recognized at a very early period. The height of the sky above the

earth, the persistence with which the stars seem to look down on men,

the invariability of their courses, the mysteriousness of their origin

would naturally lead to the belief that they had some control over human

affairs. Meteors, regarded as falling stars, have always been objects of

dread. The development of astrology has been due to the increase of

astronomical knowledge and to the tendency to organize religion in its

aspect of dependence on the supernatural Powers.[1483]

+851+. Winds have played a less prominent part in theistic history than

the heavenly bodies, but have given rise to not a few myths in

religions of different grades of culture and in different parts of the

world.[1484] In the Scandinavian myths the storm wind as a

representative of the prevailing climatic condition has assumed special

prominence. In the Iliad when a messenger is dispatched to the abode of

the winds to secure their aid, these are found feasting like a human

family.[1485] Later, winds are, of course, subordinated to the great

gods.

+852+. From time to time theories have arisen explaining many deities

and heroes as representatives of the heavenly bodies, and many stories

of gods and heroes as reflecting the phenomena of the sky or the air.

Such theories have been carried so far sometimes as to explain

everything in mythology as a solar or lunar or astral myth. These

constructions leave much to the fancy, and it is not difficult to find

in mythical narratives references to the movements of the sun or the

moon or the stars or the winds. It is possible that such reference

really exists in certain stories. It is probable also that simple myths

representing such phenomena have been in later times elaborated and

brought into connection with a more detailed astronomical knowledge. The

same principles of interpretation should guide us here as are referred

to above.

+853+. There are doubtless cases in which a hero or a god represents the

sun or the moon, the correspondence between the adventures of the hero

and the movements of the heavenly bodies being plain. The twelve labors

of Heracles may represent the passage of the sun through the twelve

signs of the zodiac; but if this be the case, it is certain that such

construction was relatively late, and that the separate adventures must

be referred to some more simple facts. If Heracles slays the Hydra, it

is more natural to regard this as having represented originally some

mundane phenomenon of nature or some simple conflict of the savage life.

The same thing is probably true of the adventures of the Babylonian

hero Gilgamesh, who is sometimes considered to be the original of

Heracles. Nothing is easier than to expound the story of Samson in the

Old Testament as a series of solar and other phenomena,[1486] but the

probability is that he embodies the vague recollections of early tribal

adventures, and, notwithstanding his name (which means 'solar,' that is,

devoted to the sun), there is no good ground for supposing that his

history has been astronomically worked over. A similar remark applies to

many discussions respecting various deities, Hindu (as Indra), Egyptian

(as Osiris), Semitic (as Nergai, Marduk, Nabu), and Greek (as Apollo).

In all such cases it is necessary to inquire first whether the

explanation of the myth may not be found naturally in some ordinary

human experience or some very simple natural phenomenon, and a line of

demarcation must be drawn between original forms of the myth and later

learned constructions.

+854+. Another source of mythical narration is the history of

vegetation, which at the present time has largely supplanted the solar

theory. The amazing spectacle of the decay and revival of vegetation,

naturally referred to superhuman power, and the importance of plants for

human life, have led to the construction of stories (sometimes founded

on ritual) in which the adventures of the spirit of vegetation are

recounted. Obviously there is a sound basis for this view. The earth was

necessarily regarded as the mother from whom came the corn and wine that

supported human life. The study of the relatively modern European

ceremonies[1487] has brought out the persistence of such an idea, and

the similarity between the new ceremonies and the old may be said to

have demonstrated the existence of an early cult of the divine Power

controlling vegetation.

+855+. The Asian Magna Mater and the Greek Mother (Demeter) or Maiden

(Kore, Persephone) are identical in function with the corn maiden of

modern times, and the latter figure may be a degraded or socialized

descendant of an early deity. When we add that ancient local deities all

took account of the products of the soil, it will not seem improbable

that a great mass of stories should have arisen describing the

adventures of the Spirit of Vegetation.[1488] The descent of a hero or a

god into Hades may be explained as the passage of the sun from its

summer warmth to its winter feebleness, or as the annual death and

revival of vegetation. Which of these views shall be adopted will depend

in any case on the particular coloring of the story, on the

signification of the names involved, or on the ceremonies accompanying

the worship. It is not now possible to frame a theory that shall embrace

all possible phenomena.

+856+. Certain great myths have in the course of time taken on elaborate

literary form, and in this form show traces of advanced thought on some

fundamental questions. Such myths occur among half-civilized peoples.

There is, for example, the great mythical cosmogony of the Maoris of New

Zealand--a scheme seemingly so philosophic in form that it excites

wonder as to how it could have arisen in such a place.[1489] The story

of the adventures of Maui, a general Polynesian figure, constitutes a

Polynesian history of the rise of civilization. Among the North American

Indians the mythological systems of the Algonkins, the Pawnees, and

other tribes, include the origin of all forms of natural objects and all

institutions of society. The histories of the Great Hare of the Lenâpé,

the Thunder Bird of the West, and the various transformers or

culture-heroes, are scarcely less elaborate than the New Zealand

stories. The mythologies of the Finns also (given in the Kalevala) are

noteworthy. Passing to higher forms, it is sufficient to note the

suggestive story of Balder among the Scandinavians, and, in the ancient

world, the Egyptian Osiris myth, the Great Dragon myth of the Babylonian

cosmogony, the various forms of the story of a primeval paradise, and

the ceremonies and ideas that have arisen in connection with the death

of a god.

+857+. The motif of the _antagonism between light and darkness_ appears

to be attached to or involved in certain myths, especially the great

cosmogonies and stories in which solar deities figure prominently. The

original unformed mass of matter is often, perhaps generally, conceived

of as being in darkness, and its transformation is attended with the

appearance of light[1490]--light is an essential element in the

conditions that make earthly human life possible; in contrast with the

Upperworld the Underworld is dark. The diffusion of light is a main

function of the sun, and the high gods dwell in continual

brightness.[1491] Light is the symbol of right, security, and happiness.

But it is doubtful whether the expression of the antithesis and conflict

of light and darkness is the immediate object of the early portraitures

of deities and the mythical narratives of creation and the future of the

world. The Egyptian Ra has no conflict with darkness, and the struggle

between Osiris (and Horus) and Set, while it may be and often is

interpreted in this sense, is susceptible of other interpretations. The

motif in the Babylonian cosmogony is the bringing of order out of

disorder, in which work the creation of light is an incident. In

ethically advanced religious systems, such as the Hindu and the Persian,

the good Powers are connected with light and the wicked Powers with

darkness, but a conflict between these adjuncts is not brought out

clearly. No such conflict appears in Greek mythology. Where a

supernatural being intervenes in defense of light (as when a god

destroys a dragon-creature who attempts to swallow the sun), this is

simply an explanation of a physical phenomenon, and not a conflict

between light and darkness.

+858+. The theory, widely held, that a great body of early myths,

including the conception of the characters and functions of many

deities, represent the struggle between light and darkness, is,

therefore, not sustained by the facts. Such a generalization is found in

late philosophic systems, but it does not belong to early religious

thought, which deals with concrete personal agents.[1492] A conflict

between two gods is often to be explained as the rivalry of two

districts or of two forms of culture. Attacks on luminous bodies, or

defenses of them, are common as ætiological myths, and an antagonism

between light and darkness then naturally appears, as is observed above,

as an accessory or incident, but not as an immediate object of mythical

portraiture. The closeness of the relation between the

light-and-darkness theory and the solar theory of myths is obvious.

+859+. _Myth and legend._ In the course of the formulation of myths they

have naturally become mingled with legend. As they narrate the

achievements of the great supernatural figures of the past, these

achievements have often become blended in the twilight of tradition with

actual (though embellished) experiences of the clan or tribe and of the

great men therewith connected.[1493] In such cases it is generally

difficult to decide where legend ends and myth begins, and every story

must be investigated separately, and its nature determined from what is

known of the real history of the time and of the development of mythical

ideas. Familiar examples of this combination of legend and myth appear

in connection with the Homeric poems, certain Asian and Greek cults, and

the early histories of Greece and Rome and Israel.[1494] The elucidation

of such narratives must be left to the technical investigator in the

various historical periods. In general, it may be said, there is enough

historical material to enable us to trace the development of tribes and

nations with a fair degree of certainty; and the caution already

expressed against excessive mythological interpretation is especially in

place in such researches.[1495]

The material published under the general title of "folk-lore" consists

of various elements--purely religious usages and ideas, mythical and

legendary narratives, and fanciful stories. As the term, defined

precisely, refers only to popular survivals from defunct religious

systems, its material shows a constant process of modification from

generation to generation by newer ideas. The mythical element,

extricated from the general mass, must be treated in accordance with the

general principles of the criticism of myths.[1496]

+860+. _Mythical biographies._ As gods and heroes are the actors in

mythical constructions of society, the stories in such constructions

generally assume the form of anecdotal biographies of these personages.

Such sketches gather fresh material from generation to generation, are

gradually worked up into literary shape, and, being brought into

connection with historical traditions, assume historical form, and are

then sometimes accepted in their homes and elsewhere as

historical.[1497] As they embody the ideas of the times in which they

originate, they have, in so far, historical and psychological value.

Charm of style has given some of these stories literary value, and they

have been accepted as part of the literary treasure of the world. They

are sometimes combinations or fusions of myth and legend, and these two

elements are not always easily distinguishable the one from the

other.[1498]

+861+. In questions that touch the original nature of a god the possible

difference between earlier and later conceptions of him must, of course,

be borne in mind. When a deity has been definitely shaped and has become

a patron of a community, he may be identified by the people, or

particularly by poets and priests, with any object or idea that is of

special interest to the community. The baals of the agricultural

Canaanites presided over irrigation, but were not specifically

underground gods;[1499] they were rather general divine patrons

interested in all that interested the people. A solar deity, becoming

the favorite god of an agricultural community, may be regarded as

connected with vegetation; or a god of vegetation may be associated, in

astronomical circles, with the sun. A divine figure is often composite,

the product of the coalescence of several orders of ideas. In general it

may be said that the simplest and least socially refined function of a

god is likely to indicate his original character. We must go behind the

conceptions of cultivated times to the hints given in popular

observances and poetry.

+862+. _Interpretation of myths._ For savage and half-civilized

communities, and for the masses in civilized times, the stories of the

achievements and adventures of gods, heroes, and ancestors, accepted as

history, have been and are sources of enjoyment and of intellectual

impulse. Narrated by fathers to their families, and recited or sung by

professional orators and poets to groups and crowds throughout the

land,[1500] they have been expanded and handed down from generation to

generation, receiving from every generation the coloring of its

experiences and ideas, and in the course of time have taken literary

shape under the hands of men of genius, and have been committed to

writing. For the early times they not only formed a body of historical

literature, but also, since they described relations between men and

gods, came to be somewhat vague yet real sacred scriptures of the

people.[1501] As such, being regarded simply as statements of facts,

they needed no outside interpretation; and being molded by human

experience, they carried with them such moral and religious instruction

as grew naturally out of the situations described. A more highly

cultivated age, dissatisfied with bald facts, desired to find in the

stories the wisdom of the fathers, and the imagination of poets and

philosophers was long occupied with discovering and expounding their

deeper meanings till further research set aside such attempts as

useless. The treatment of mythical material thus shows three stadia: the

acceptance of myths as genuine history; esoteric explanations of their

assumed profound teachings; and finally, return to their original

character as primitive science, having their origin in crude conceptions

of life. A brief sketch may show how the interpretation of myths has

come to be regarded as an historical and sociological science.

+863+. _Ancient interpretations of myths._ When the progress of thought,

especially in Greece, made it impossible to accept the current beliefs

concerning gods and their doings, it was felt necessary to put some

higher meaning into them--they were rationalized and spiritualized by a

process of allegorization. This process seems to have begun in Greece as

early as the sixth century B.C.[1502] It was the philosophers who

undertook to reinterpret the Homeric mythical material, and the extent

to which this procedure had been carried in the time of Plato is

indicated by the fact that he ridicules these modes of dealing with the

poet.[1503] But Homer maintained his place in literature, and the demand

for a spiritualizing of his works increased rather than diminished. A

science of allegory was created, Pergamus became one of its chief

centers,[1504] and the Alexandrian Jew Philo applied the method to the

interpretation of the Pentateuch. It was speedily adopted in the

Christian world, and has there maintained itself, though in diminishing

extent, up to the present day.[1505] As a serious interpretation of

ancient myths, outside of the Old Testament, it is no longer employed.

Myths are, indeed, important as reflecting early opinions, religious and

other--good doctrinal matter may be extracted from them, but this must

not be ascribed to the intention of their authors and reporters. In the

Old Testament itself the Jewish editors have socialized the mythical

material (weaving it into the history, as in Genesis), or have brought

it under the work of the national deity.

+864+. _Recent interpretations._ In recently proposed interpretations we

may note first certain attempts at a _unification_ of some body of myths

or of all known mythical material. These attempts, almost without

exception, take the sky and the heavenly bodies as their basis.

At the end of the eighteenth century, when the theory of human unity

had taken hold of the French revolutionists, C. F. Dupuis[1506]

undertook to explain all the cults of the world as having come from the

worship of the universe--a conception broad enough to cover everything;

but he practically reduces it to the worship of the heavenly bodies,

particularly the sun, and derives all myths from stellar objects. His

work is ingenious, learned, and suggestive, but in his day the facts of

ancient mythology were insufficiently known.

+865+. In the next century the study of Sanskrit and Old Persian widened

the field of knowledge, the science of Indo-European grammar was

created, and on this followed attempts at the construction of an

Indo-European mythology. The first definitely formulated unification was

the theory of F. Max Müller,[1507] which derived all Aryan

(Indo-European) myths from phenomena of the sun and the dawn, largely,

he held, through misunderstandings of the meaning of old descriptive

terms (myths as a "disease of language"). It is conceivable that a word,

originally used simply as descriptive of an actual fact, may have passed

into a proper name and become personalized and the center of adventures;

but the character of early man's thought, as we now know it, makes it

impossible to regard such a view as a probable explanation of the mass

of mythological material. Müller's services to the science of the

history of religions were great, but his theory of the origin of myths

has now been generally abandoned.[1508]

+866+. The great discoveries of literary material made in Egypt and

Babylonia since the middle of the nineteenth century have aroused

special interest in the religions of these countries. Leadership in

ancient civilization is claimed by Egyptologists and Assyriologists,

each party for its own land. It is, however, Babylonia that has given

rise to the largest theories of the unity of myths--a fact due in part

to its development of astronomy, in part, perhaps, to the resemblance

between the Babylonian mythical material and that of the Old Testament.

Dupuis[1509] had observed that the ancient Chaldeans taught that the

heavenly bodies controlled mundane destinies, and, according to

Diodorus, that the planets were the interpreters of the will of the

gods. This is substantially the point of view of E. Stucken,[1510] who,

in common with Dupuis (though, apparently, independently), holds to the

unity of ancient religions and the astral origin of all myths. From

Babylonia, he thinks, myths passed to all parts of the world, Egypt,

Asia, Europe, Polynesia, and America--in such migrations, however, it

was the motif that passed; the personages might vary in different

lands.[1511] Finally he traces all sagas of all peoples to the creation

myth.[1512] This supreme unification is reached by arguments so

far-fetched as to deprive them of force.

Stucken's position was adopted and elaborated by H. Winckler, who was

followed by A. Jeremias and some others.[1513] Winckler attempts to show

that a single religion existed in the ancient Oriental world (with a

single system of myths), and that this was dominated by the conception

that there was a correspondence between the heavenly world and the lower

world in such wise that all earthly affairs were indicated by the

movements of the heavenly bodies, whence arose the whole religious

system of Western Asia and Greece.

+867+. What is true in this theory (to which the name of

"Panbabylonianism" has been given) is that Semitic mythology is a unit,

with Babylonia as its birthplace, and that certain elements are common

to the Egyptian, Semitic, Greek, and other mythological systems. The

substantial identity of Babylonian, Aramean (Syrian), and Canaanite

myths is generally acknowledged:[1514] the Old Testament dragon-myth

(which occurs also in the New Testament Apocalypse) is found in full

shape only in Babylonian material;[1515] the Syrian Adonis myth is at

bottom the Babylonian story of Tammuz and Ishtar. The probability is

that all early Semitic schemes of creation and prehistoric life are

essentially one. Further, such conceptions as the origin of the world

from an unshaped mass of matter and the origin of man from the earth are

widely distributed over the earth.

+868+. Babylonia, then, is the chief mythopoeic center for the Semitic

region, but we are not warranted in extending its influence as

myth-maker beyond this region. The myths of the Indo-European peoples

have in general the stamp of independent creation. Loans there may be

(as, for example, in the myths connected with Aphrodite and Heracles,

and perhaps others), but these do not affect the character of the whole.

The relation between the Semitic and the Egyptian mythologies is still

under discussion.

+869+. The astral element of the theory, based on arbitrary parallelisms

carried out without regard to historical conditions, is an unauthorized

extension of the generally accepted fact that certain myths are astral.

Winckler's assumption of an astral "system" that obtained throughout the

Western world is supported only by unproved assertions of the sort just

referred to.

+870+. Jensen's contention that all myths come from the Babylonian

Gilgamesh story[1516] exhibits the same general method as the theories

of Stucken and Winckler (giving assertion in place of proof), differing

from them only in the material of comparisons.

+871+. The fundamental vice of these theories (apart from the arbitrary

character of the assertions made by their authors) is the failure to

take into account the historical development of mythical conceptions,

their beginnings in the rudest periods of human thought, and their

gradual elaboration and distinct formulation in the great communities,

in which process, along with the varieties of local conditions, certain

fundamental resemblances remain throughout.[1517]

+872+. Besides these more prominent or more definitely formulated

theories there has been in some quarters a disposition to insist too

strongly on lines of mythical development connected with the plant

world, particularly with the death and revival of vegetation. All that

we know of the history of mythical material among existing savages and

in the earliest forms of belief of civilized nations forbids the

limitation of the origin of myths to any one department of nature or to

any one part of the world. Myths, like gods, may be composite: of this

nature, probably, are some cosmogonic histories,[1518] and the stories

of Gilgamesh, Heracles, Perseus, and many others. The lines of origin

mentioned above have, naturally, in some cases, coalesced, and their

combination into single coherent narratives has been spread over long

periods of time. For this reason there is always need of detailed

investigations of particular myths as a preparation for a general

history of mythology.[1519]

+873+. _Modern critical methods in the interpretation of myths._ The

treatment of myths has followed the general course of the development of

thought in the world. In the old national religions they were

incorporated in the substance of the religious beliefs. The reformers of

thought either ignored them (so, for example, Confucius and Buddha), or

denounced their absurdities (so Plato and others), or allegorized or

rationalized them (so many Greek philosophers); the early Christian

writers treated Old Testament myths as history, and ridiculed the myths

of Greece and Rome. During the long period when the European peoples

were assimilating the ideas of Christianity the study of myths remained

in abeyance. After the classical revival there was a return to the

allegorizing method, the fondness for which has not yet completely died

out.[1520]

+874+. The extension of knowledge in the eighteenth century gave an

impetus to the study of religion, the results of which for mythological

investigation appear in the works of Dupuis and others.[1521] These

authors were necessarily ignorant of many important facts, but they

have the merit of having collected much material, which they treated as

something that had to be explained in accordance with the laws of human

thought.

+875+. The turning-point in the development of mythological science was

the rise of the modern critical study of history, begun by Voltaire and

Gibbon and carried on by Niebuhr and others. A vigorous group of writers

arose in Germany. Creuzer,[1522] indeed, holding that the myths of the

ancients must embody their best thought, and falling back on symbolism,

cannot be said to have advanced his subject except by his collection of

materials; there is some basis for his position if the ancient myths are

taken in the sense given them by the later poets and philosophers, but

the supposition of a primary symbolism in myths is set aside by an

examination of the ideas of undeveloped races. Creuzer's theory was

effectively combated by Voss.[1523] Other writers of the time adopted

exacter methods of inquiry,[1524] and K. O. Müller,[1525] particularly,

laid the foundation for a scientific treatment of myths by

distinguishing between their real and their ideal elements, between the

actual phenomenon and the imaginative (the true mythical) explanation of

it.

+876+. The next generation witnessed two retrograde movements in the

interpretation of myths. F. Max Müller, dazzled by the wealth of

Sanskrit mythological material, revived the solar theory, with a

peculiar appendage;[1526] the defects of his theory must not blind us to

the great service he performed in arousing interest in the comparative

study of myths and leading the way to a formulation of the conception of

the general history of religion. On another side the vast accumulation

of the religious ideas and usages of lower tribes led Herbert Spencer to

his euhemeristic view.[1527] Neither of these theories has seriously

affected the growth of the science of mythology.

+877+. A saner direction was given to investigation by the great

biological and sociological studies made in the second half of the

nineteenth century.[1528] E. B. Tylor definitely stated the view that

the origin of myths is to be found in all the ideas of early man. By a

very large collection of facts[1529] he showed that the same

representations that are familiar in Egyptian, Semitic, Hindu, Greek,

Roman, and other ancient myths occur also in the systems of

half-civilized and savage communities; and he pointed out how such

representations had their basis in the simple ideas of undeveloped men

and how their survival is to be traced through all periods of history.

This fruitful view has been illustrated and developed by later

writers,[1530] and much light has been thrown on the genesis and growth

of myths by studies of existing popular customs in civilized

communities.[1531]

+878+. Interest in the subject has now become general, and collections

of material are being made all over the world.[1532] At the same time it

is recognized that every local mass of myths must be studied first by

itself and then in connection with all other known material, and that

great caution must be exercised in dealing with questions of origin,

transmission, and survival. Archæological and geographical discoveries

have widened the known area of human life on earth; it is seen that the

history of man's development is more complicated than was formerly

supposed.

+879+. We are still without a general survey of myths arranged in some

orderly fashion.[1533] The material for such a collection is scattered

through a great number of publications, in which the mythical stories

are not always treated critically. The most useful principle of

tabulation, perhaps, would be an arrangement according to motifs, under

which geographical or ethnological and geographical relations might be

noted. At the present time it would be possible only to make a beginning

in such a work, since the obtainable material is not all recorded, and

the complicated character of many myths makes an arrangement by place

and motif difficult. Still, even an incomplete digest would be of

service to students of mythology and would pave the way for a more

comprehensive work. The importance of the study of mythology for the

general history of religions is becoming more and more manifest. This

study, in its full form, includes, of course, psychological

investigation as well as collections of statistics; but the psychology

finds its material in the facts--we must first know what men believe,

and then explain why they believe.

+880+. It must, however, be added that myths have influenced mainly the

dogmas and ceremonies of religion--their part in more intimate or

spiritual worship, the converse of the worshiper with the deity, has

been comparatively slight. Religious ceremonies are ordinary social

customs and forms transferred to dealings with supernatural Powers.

Dogmas are quasi-philosophical expressions of conceptions concerning the

nature of these Powers and their relations with men, and sometimes

contain mythical material which is then introduced into worship; if, for

example, a man is divinized and worship is paid him, the tone of the

worship is affected by the divine character thus ascribed to him. But in

general, as men, in worship proper, approach a deity to get some

advantage from him, the appeal is to him directly without regard to

ceremonies or minute dogmas. Savages, though in theory they may make a

god to be an animal or a plant, come to him devoutly as a superior being

who can grant their requests. In higher religions the deity addressed is

for the moment an omnipotent friend standing apart from the stories told

of him. Rival sects lose sight of their differences in the presence of

needs that drive them to God for help. Prayer is a religious

unifier--communion with the Deity is an individual experience in which

all men stand on common ground, where ritual and dogmatic accessories

tend to fade or to disappear.

+881+. Long after myths in their original forms have ceased to be

believed they persist in the form of "fairy tales," which retain

something of the old supernatural framework, but sink into mere stories

for amusement.[1534]

But fairy tales are not the only form in which ancient myths persist.

Myths have played their prominent part in the history of religion for

the reason that they embody the conception of the tangible supernatural

in a vivid and dramatic way. To this personalization and socialization

of the supernatural men have continued to cling up to the present time;

the mass of men demand not only the presence of the supernatural as

protection and guidance, but also the realization of it in objective

form. This objectiveness was useful and necessary in early times, and

the demand for it remains in periods of advanced civilization. In the

reigning religions of the world at the present day myths continue to

hold their place and to exercise their influence,[1535] the more that in

the course of time they become fused with the constantly advancing

ethical and spiritual thought of the communities in which they exist.

The tendency appears to be to minimize, under the influence of general

enlightenment, the crude supernatural parts of such combinations, to

exalt the moral and spiritual, and to allegorize or rationalize the

rest. But along with such process of rationalization the mythical form

is maintained and continues to be a powerful element in the general

structure of religious opinion and life.

Introduction to the History of Religions Handbooks on the History of Religions, Volume IV · 第 10 / 18 章